Issuu

2026 applicant survey Summary

report

Rosie Burrells & Tim Harrison-Byrne

June 2026

Key findings summary (1 of 2)

• The landscape for applicants: Service demand remains high across both fundees’ and unsuccessful applicants’ organisations, with limited signs of easing since 2024. There are encouraging signs of growing financial resilience in both groups, though fundees remain in a stronger position overall.

• Personality and values: Both fundees and unsuccessful applicants continue to see Esmée as a forward-thinking and innovative funder. Fundees most often describe the Foundation as supportive and collaborative, and strongly associate it with all five organisational values. Unsuccessful applicants associate these values less strongly, particularly ‘works together’, and are more likely to characterise Esmée by its size and the difficulty of accessing funding.

• Relationships with fundees: Fundees’ perceptions of how well Esmée understands them have improved significantly

since 2024. Esmée continues to score above the benchmark on most relational measures, including partnership, approachability and understanding. Appetite for Funding Plus is at a high level, with many fundees valuing the wider support, while also calling for more, particularly a stronger convening and leadership role.

• The application process: Fundees’ experiences of the application process are highly positive and have continued to improve, while unsuccessful applicants are more likely to rate it as just OK. Esmée also reaches decisions more quickly than the benchmark average. Accessibility is a clear point of difference: most unsuccessful applicants find the process accessible, but considerably less so than fundees, with unclear priorities, eligibility confusion and the EOI word limit commonly cited as challenges.

Key findings summary (2 of 2)

• The views of unsuccessful applicants: Unsuccessful applicants rate Esmée above the benchmark on process, particularly the speed and ease of applying, but below on relational measures such as approachability and understanding. On feedback Esmée fares worse than the benchmark, with applicants being more likely to say they received none at all and less likely to find it useful when they do, a picture that has worsened since 2024. Applicants want specific, personalised reasons for rejection, clarity on strategic alignment and guidance on whether it is worth reapplying.

• What Esmée does well and where it could improve:

Fundees hold Esmée in very high regard. The Foundation’s partnership approach and the quality of its relationships are real standouts, rated well above the benchmark, and many would value an even closer relationship. Unsuccessful applicants recognise Esmée’s strengths as a funder, particularly the clarity and ease of the staged application process, but many feel let down by their own experience, citing weaker approachability, limited feedback on rejection and a lack of clarity on what Esmée wants to fund.

• Actions on DEI and climate: Esmée’s DEI work is widely recognised and praised by fundees, though some unsuccessful applicants raise concerns about seeing the same set of organisations funded time and again, and would like to see more organisations being funded for the first time. They also note that the thresholds for being categorised as ‘by’ and ‘for’ can feel too high, excluding otherwise worthy organisations. The Foundation’s climate change work is viewed positively by those who are aware of it, but awareness is more limited, and fundees in particular would welcome greater visibility of this work.

The landscape for applicants

Service demand remains high across both fundees’ and unsuccessful applicants’ organisations, with limited signs of easing since 2024. There are encouraging signs of growing financial resilience in both groups, though fundees remain in a stronger position overall.

Compared to 2024, Esmée’s fundees are feeling more financially stable, despite sustained demand

"Esmée Fairbairn Foundation wants to understand more about the context within which you are operating –what are your priorities and challenges? The next question asks about your organisation’s experiences during the past 12 months. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?"

Strongly agree + Agree

Fundees

Demand for our services has increased in the last 12 months

We’re making more progress towards our aims than we were 12 months ago

The financial stability of our organisation is stronger now than it was 12 months ago

We have been less able to meet our reserves policy during the last 12 months

Our staff team has reduced over the last 12 months

We have found it harder to recruit and retain staff during the last 12 months

Our charity is at greater risk of closure compared to 12 months ago

Unsuccessful applicants face ongoing pressures and are less positive overall, but financial stability has improved since 2024

Strongly agree + Agree

Unsuccessful applicants

Demand for our services has increased in the last 12 months

We’re making more progress towards our aims than we were 12 months ago

Our staff team has reduced over the last 12 months

We have been less able to meet our reserves policy during the last 12 months

Our charity is at greater risk of closure compared to 12 months ago

We have found it harder to recruit and retain staff during the last 12 months

The financial stability of our organisation is stronger now than it was 12 months ago

Esmée’s personality and values

Both fundees and unsuccessful applicants continue to see Esmée as a forward-thinking and innovative funder. Fundees most often describe the Foundation as supportive and collaborative, and strongly associate it with all five organisational values. Unsuccessful applicants associate these values less strongly, particularly 'works together', and are more likely to characterise Esmée by its size and the difficulty of accessing funding.

Fundees strongly associate all five values; unsuccessful applicants are less likely to associate 'works together’ with Esmée

"To what extent do you associate the following values with Esmée Fairbairn Foundation?"

Strongly associate +

Somewhat associate

Is equitable - strives for fair opportunities and outcomes for the people they work with

Has integrity - acts with honesty, transparency and accountability

Is kind - shows empathy and consideration in how they treat people

Is ambitious - uses the opportunity of their endowment to be bold, proactive, and take risks

Works together - shows respect, empathy and humility in collaborating with others

Relationships with fundees

Fundees’ perceptions of how well Esmée understands them have improved significantly since 2024. Esmée continues to score above the benchmark on most relational measures, including partnership, approachability and understanding. Appetite for Funding Plus is at a high level, with many fundees valuing the wider support, while also calling for more, particularly a stronger convening and leadership role.

Esmée's understanding of its fundees is rated well above the benchmark average

"How well do you feel Esmée Fairbairn Foundation understands your organisation and its aims?"

Fundees' perceptions of how well Esmée understands them have improved significantly since the last survey – the proportion selecting ‘very well’ has increased by 10 percentage points compared to 2024.

Esmee Fairbairn Foundation

Esmée continues to score significantly above the benchmark on key relational measures with fundees

"When you think about your experience of applying for and getting funding from Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, how would you say they compare with other grantmakers?"

Much better + Better

Approachability of Esmée Fairbairn Foundation overall

The ease of the application process

Understanding us as fundees

Information about funding and application process

Treating us as partners

The speed of decision

Appropriate monitoring

How long it takes to make an application

Restrictiveness of funding programmes

Esmee Fairbairn Foundation

Fundees’ appetite for Funding Plus is at a high level

"Has your organisation accessed Esmée Fairbairn Foundation’s Funding Plus offer during the period of your funding?"

Yes and it was helpful

We have not accessed it yet but plan to do so in the future

No because we didn’t need to

Can’t remember / Not sure

No and we would have found it helpful

No because we were not eligible

Yes but it wasn’t very helpful

Many fundees believe Esmée has a lot to offer beyond funding: Selection of comments relating to perceptions of Esmée’s wider work

Recognised and valued:

"Your learning network is excellent. By far the best of any funder we have."

Fundee, £251k - £500k, Arts, culture, heritage

"I went to the lived experience leadership convening at Esmee's offices and I thought it was great. We had some challenging and productive conversations."

Fundee, £501k - £1m, Social justice

Appetite for more:

"Could play a bigger convening role in bringing together funded projects."

Fundee, £501k - £1m, Environment and nature

In answer to ‘how else could funders better support you or the wider sector?’: "Connecting grantees in a yearly gathering to improve connections between funded organisations.“

Fundee, £251k - £500k, Arts, culture, heritage

"There were a couple of very useful convenings during the last strategy review and we'd welcome an annual meeting of grantees […] to learn from each other and to scope emerging issues."

Fundee, £501k - £1m, Environment and nature

Calls for more leadership and advocacy:

"It would be good to see EFF in a leadership role in bringing together other donors and educating them towards being good funders collectively as a donor sector."

Fundee, £251k - £500k, Social justice

In answer to ‘how else could funders better support you or the wider sector?’: "Advocacy on public stages and in closed rooms for issues they are passionate about."

Fundee, £1m - £5m, Arts, culture, heritage

The application process

Fundees’ experiences of the application process are highly positive and have continued to improve, while unsuccessful applicants are more likely to rate it as just OK. Esmée also reaches decisions more quickly than the benchmark average. Accessibility is a clear point of difference: most unsuccessful applicants find the process accessible, but considerably less so than fundees, with unclear priorities, eligibility confusion and the EOI word limit commonly cited as challenges.

Fundees rate their experience of the application process highly; unsuccessful applicants

are more likely to rate it as just OK

Fundees

Unsuccessful applicants

"How would you rate your experience of the application process?"

Esmée is perceived to make decisions more quickly than the benchmark average

Fundees

Unsuccessful applicants

"How long did it take for a decision to be made on your funding request / grant application?"

Most unsuccessful applicants find the process accessible, but they are considerably less likely to than fundees

"Looking back at your experience of applying for funding from Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, did you find it accessible or were there challenges? Please select the answer option that best fits your experience."

Unclear priorities, eligibility confusion and the EOI word limit are the most cited challenges

"If applicable, please tell us more about any challenges you faced."

Coded themes

Unclear priorities and guidance

Eligibility and fit confusion

EOI word limit too short

High competition and low odds securing funding

Managers unavailable for contact/support/feedback

Lack of feedback on rejections

Too time-intensive writing full proposals

Lengthy timelines and delays for decisions

Post-application info requests

Regional or theme bias concerns

Positive staff interactions

Perceived closed shop culture

More support/accessibility for neurodiversity

Website and portal usability issues A/o answers

"Ifapplicable, pleasetellusmore aboutany challengesyou faced."

Comments relating to top themes of unclear priorities and eligibility confusion

“Sometimes it can be a struggle to meet the exact aims, outcomes and indicators guidance. It takes quite a long time to understand what is expected.”

Fundee, £501k - £1m, Other sector

“We struggled with the criteria information - it was very complicated and restrictive. It was really hard to pick apart how we did or didn't fit in the criteria.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £51k - £100k, Environment and nature

“Phrases and terms often not clear in what the foundation is actually looking for. Sometimes feel the foundation is looking for something extraordinary rather than supporting what charities actually need.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £251k - £500k, Children and young people

“The guidelines is very vague in terms of expectations, we have applied 7 times, all unsuccessful. There is no feedback, no clarity. Esmee is such an important funder […], but it doesn't feel everyone has the same chance to get the funding.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £501k - £1m, Social justice

“You know what you want to fund - and that's good - but even more clarity would be great. Be more explicit in terms of what you're NOT interested in funding.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £501k - £1m, Children and young people

“When only 5% of EOIs go on to be successful, it suggests that more guidance is needed to avoid charities thinking they might be successful when the chances are small.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £251k - £500k, Social justice

“It was not clear to us that Esmee Fairbairn's funding priorities had changed based on the information on the website until I had met one of your employees at a conference.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £501k - £1m, Community development

The

views

of unsuccessful applicants

Unsuccessful applicants rate Esmée above the benchmark on process, particularly the speed and ease of applying, but below on relational measures such as approachability and understanding. On feedback, Esmée fares worse than the benchmark, with applicants being more likely to say they received none at all and less likely to find it useful when they do, a picture that has worsened since 2024. Applicants want specific, personalised reasons for rejection, clarity on strategic alignment and guidance on whether it is worth reapplying.

Unsuccessful applicants rate Esmée above the benchmark on process, but below for approachability

and understanding

"When you think about your experience of applying for and NOT getting getting funding from Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, how would you say they compare with other grant-makers?"

Much better + Better

Compared to previous waves of this survey, unsuccessful applicants are increasingly likely to rate Esmée as better than other funders on the speed of decision.

Unsuccessful

applicants are more likely than the benchmark to receive no feedback, and less likely to find it useful when they do

"Did you receive any feedback on why your proposal was unsuccessful?"

Compared to the 2024 survey results, fewer unsuccessful applicants now report receiving feedback.

Average

Esmee Fairbairn Foundation Benchmark

Unsuccessful applicants want more specific feedback and greater clarity on (lack of) strategic alignment

"Please explain why you chose this answer."

Coded themes

Desire for specific guidance/more detailed feedback

Strategy alignment unclear

Generic feedback frustration

Desire to reapply with learnings

Positive but limited feedback

Perceived good fit rejected

Process transparency concerns

Oversubscription cited

No feedback received

Change criteria/definitions

Feedback timing and delays

Request for scoring or calls

Geographic or bias concerns A/o answers

"Did you receive any feedback on why your proposal was unsuccessful?

Please explain why you chose this answer."

Comments relating to top themes

Answered “Yes but it wasn’t very useful”:

“More specific, application-focused feedback would be especially valuable for smaller organisations like ours, as it would help us learn, improve, and better align our work with funder priorities in future submissions.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £101k - £250k, Other sector

“We were told our work wasn't the best fit for Esmee's strategy but no further detail than that.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £101k - £250k, Social justice

“Felt rather generic. 'not the strongest fit with strategy'. It wouldn't help me to understand how the decision was made or how things may change over time.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £5m - £10m, Community development

“The feedback felt generic and made me question if my application was even read. There was no specific reference to our project.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £251k - £500k, Community development

Answered “No and I would have found it useful”:

“We would like to apply again at some point and guidance on how to improve our proposal would have been helpful.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £51k - £100k, Social justice

“I'd like more understanding on what they're looking for so that we can show how our work relates to it, or know in advance if we are not the right fit. […] We could pitch a project that speaks to the Foundation’s interests if we knew what they were looking for.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £501k - £1m, Community development

Actions on DEI and climate

Esmée’s DEI work is widely recognised and praised by fundees, though some unsuccessful applicants raise concerns about seeing the same set of organisations funded time and again, and would like to see more organisations being funded for the first time. They also note that the thresholds for being categorised as ‘by’ and ‘for’ can feel too high, excluding otherwise worthy organisations. The Foundation’s climate change work is viewed positively by those who are aware of it, but awareness is more limited, and fundees in particular would welcome greater visibility of this work.

Esmée’s DEI work is widely known and praised by fundees, but some unsuccessful applicants raise concerns about bias and exclusion

"Are you aware of the actions Esmée Fairbairn Foundation are taking on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)?"

"Do you have any comments on Esmée’s work on DEI?

(E.g., what they’re doing well, or what could be improved)."

Coded themes

Source: Esmée Fairbairn Foundation

Fundee Unsuccessful applicant

Positive DEI commitment praise

Support for small grassroots orgs

Funding bias and exclusion concerns

Racial justice focus gaps

Transparency and feedback needed

Application process positive

Concerns about lived experience quotas

Disability inclusion gaps

Youth participation and inclusion

Application process to be more accessible

Unaware or not enough info

A/o answers

Esmée’s climate change work is broadly praised, but many applicants have limited awareness

"Are you aware of the actions Esmée Fairbairn Foundation are taking on climate change?"

"Do you have any comments on Esmée’s work on climate change? (E.g., what they’re doing well, or what could be improved)"

Coded themes

Fundee Unsuccessful applicant

Praise and strong commitment

Prefer practical on-the-ground work

More communication and visibility

Support for grassroots action

Too restrictive funding / broaden focus

Keep peatland and nature focus

Clarify accessibility for small orgs

Integrate climate with justice

Unaware or no comment

A/o answers

What Esmée does well and where it could improve

Unsuccessful applicants recognise Esmée’s strengths as a funder, particularly the clarity and ease of the staged application process, but many feel let down by their own experience, citing weaker approachability, limited feedback on rejection and a lack of clarity on what Esmée wants to fund.

For fundees, Esmée's partnership approach and relationship quality stand out as the greatest strengths

"What does Esmée Fairbairn Foundation do well?"

Coded – top 10 themes

“WhatdoesEsmée FairbairnFoundation dowell?”

General themes

“Expert knowledge of our organisation, mission, and team, as well as of our challenges. They have worked with us to pivot our approach in response to market conditions.”

Fundee, Less than £10k, Community development

“Clear application process and guidelines. EOI is great as it means less time wasted on an ineligible application. Prompt communication around decisions. Asking for feedback (e.g. this survey).”

Unsuccessful applicant, £251k - £500k, Children and young people

“Esmee Fairbairn Foundation backs organisations that are deeply rooted in communities and tackling some of society's most long-term and difficult, complex and overlooked challenges. Their approach combines trustbased support with a willingness to create space for organisations to 'experiment' and learn.”

Fundee, £51k - £100k, Social justice

“Incredibly accessible funder and staff. Genuinely feel like they care about the work they fund. They understand organizational challenges and are supportive of the work organisations do. Easy reporting that does not feel like an inquisition.”

Fundee, £251k - £500k, Arts, culture, heritage

“The range of areas the foundation is able to support and its willingness to fund difficult and/or under funded work, supporting and encouraging structural change not just management of the symptoms.”

Unsuccessful applicant, £10m - £50m, Social justice

“Trusting your fundees and recognising that the operating environment changes rapidly and therefore grants need to be flexible. Providing core funding is extremely valuable to charities.”

Fundee, £1m - £5m, Environment and nature

Unsuccessful applicants want more transparent decisions and for Esmée to broaden its reach

"Where might Esmée Fairbairn Foundation need to improve?"

Coded – top 10 themes