Template pack
The documents you attach to an application.
One payment of $49. Twelve editable files you download and keep, with no subscription and no account.
Files
12 files
Formats
Word and Markdown
Method included
None. That is the course.
Licence
One person, your own work product
5 of these 10 have a free counterpart published on this site, linked further down so you can take it. What the paid version adds is set out beside each one.
For someone at a small nonprofit who already knows what belongs in a proposal and is tired of rebuilding the same set of documents in Word for every application.
It does not teach. There is no guidance note, no worked example and no method in any of these files. If you are not sure what belongs in a needs statement, this pack gives you a correctly structured page and nothing else.
Assemble one foundation application from ten correctly structured documents, with the nine shared values reading the same way in every one of them.
Each one is listed with what it does and, more usefully, what its structure forces you to supply. An empty cell in a funder document is a question you have not answered yet.
application-cover-sheet.docx
Word
The front sheet: applicant, request and authorization, as three field tables.
Fourteen facts a reviewer logs before reading anything, including the EIN, the fiscal sponsor and the total organization budget beside the total program budget.
proposal-summary.docx
Word
The one-page summary, five blocks in the order a reviewer reads them.
The organization, the need, the program, the outcomes and the request each get their own box, so a summary cannot be four paragraphs about the organization.
letter-of-inquiry.docx
Word
The five-paragraph letter with the address block, the salutation and the signature block.
One placeholder per paragraph, each naming what that paragraph is for: the problem, the program, the fit, the ask and the close.
needs-statement.docx
Word
The needs statement as its own document, six components in the order most funders expect.
Each factual slot asks for a source and a data year beside the figure, so an unsourced number is visibly missing something rather than quietly fine.
program-description.docx
Word
Activities, staffing, partners and the participant path, across two pages.
Every activity names who delivers it, how often, where and for how many. Every partner row asks whether the commitment is in writing, and on what date.
one-page-logic-model.docx
Word
The five-column model on a single landscape page you can attach as an appendix.
Inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impact each keep their own column, so a program description cannot quietly stand in for an outcome.
project-timeline.docx
Word
Ten phase rows and four milestone rows, with dates, owners and dependencies.
A phase with no owner and a milestone with no evidence column filled in are both visibly incomplete, which is what a reviewer checks a work plan for.
budget-narrative.docx
Word
The narrative table, one row per budget line, plus a sustainability block.
Four positions on every line: what it buys, how it was calculated, and why it is necessary. A line with no calculation has an empty cell showing.
evaluation-plan.docx
Word
The eight-column indicator table on a landscape page, plus reporting rhythm and use of results.
Every promised outcome carries an indicator, a baseline, a target, a collection method, an owner and a schedule. A promise with no owner has a hole in the row.
letter-of-support.docx
Word
For a partner to complete on their own letterhead, four paragraphs and a signature block.
One paragraph for the commitment and one for the basis of it, so a partner states what they will actually provide rather than only that they are enthusiastic.
Passages quoted from the files in the pack, not rewritten for this page. This is the standard the whole set is written to.
“This funder's own current guidelines govern. Where they differ from this document, follow them.”
The line on every document
All ten documents, in this pack
“[Who experiences the problem, where they live, and how many people. Source and data year for each figure.]”
Population and place
Statement of need, in this pack
“[The commitment: what [Partner organization name] will provide to [Program name], at what scale, during [Grant period].]”
The second paragraph
Letter of support, in this pack
“For your partner to complete on their own letterhead.”
The line above the address block
Letter of support, in this pack
Take these first. If they are enough, you have what you need and you should not buy the pack.
Each one downloads directly from this site. No account, no email, no excerpt: the complete working file.
The honest boundary
What you get instead: ten correctly structured Word documents, empty, with the nine shared values named the same way in each one that carries them.
A funder reading three of your files notices when the same number is written three different ways.
Three products, one subject. The difference is how much you already know about what goes on the page.
Ten empty documents, correctly structured, in one field vocabulary. It assumes you know what goes in them.
The eight-module course and workbook: what belongs in each document, how funders read, and what makes an outcome defensible.
See the courseThe course plus five of these documents annotated with their drafting guidance, the assembled full proposal, a ten-sheet working spreadsheet and three worked demonstrations.
See the courseOne named person may use these templates for their own work, including paid work, on as many applications as they like. The licence covers the work you produce, not the files themselves, so passing the blank templates to a colleague or another organisation is not included. The full wording is on the terms page.
The letter of inquiry, statement of need, one-page logic model, budget narrative and evaluation plan each have a free worksheet here, and on drafting guidance several of those go further than anything in the pack. Take those first, and if they are enough, keep your money. The other half is what the pack adds: an application cover sheet, a proposal summary, a program description, a project timeline and a letter of support, none of which this site gives away, plus one field vocabulary so the same figure reads the same way in all ten.
No, and that is deliberate rather than an oversight. No pack document contains a sentence that decides anything for you, and that is checked before every release. The method is the Nonprofit Grant Proposal System.
Professional is the course, and inside it five of these documents keep their drafting guidance and cross-references, alongside the assembled full proposal, a ten-sheet working spreadsheet and three worked demonstrations. The pack is submission paperwork with nothing that decides anything for you, and the five it adds are not in any tier.
No. The working spreadsheet with live budget formulas belongs to Professional, and funder research belongs to a separate tracker. This pack is ten Word documents and two short notes.
Only partly, and every document says so on its face. Funders set their own format, length and section order, and their current guidelines override anything here. Treat these as a correct starting structure, not as a form to submit unchanged.
Not the template files. You may use them for your own work and send the finished applications you produce. A second person, or another organisation, needs their own licence.
$49
One payment of $49. Twelve editable files you download and keep, with no subscription and no account.
Secure checkout by Lemon Squeezy. Instant digital delivery. One-time payment, files you keep.
Questions before buying? Write to hello@thedigitalkit.co and a human answers.
Your privacy choices
We use optional analytics to improve the site and understand how people find us. Change your choice any time from the footer. Read our privacy policy.
