Case for Support: The Template That Actually Converts

A case for support is supposed to do one thing: move a thoughtful person from interest to gift. Most do not. Most read like a charity annual report with a budget table glued to the back. The donor finishes politely, says they will think about it, and is never quite available for the follow-up meeting.

The case for support that actually converts shares a structure, a voice and an evidence pattern. None of it is brilliantly creative. All of it is the result of editorial discipline most charities never quite apply. The template below is the one I rebuild with charities again and again, with quietly consistent results.

What the case is, and is not

The case for support is not a marketing brochure. It is the document that tells a serious donor what your charity does, why it matters, what specific change a gift would buy, and why your organisation is the right one to deliver it. It rewards seriousness, specificity and honesty.

Two versions, used together:

• A master case (12 to 20 pages) used internally and as a base document.
• A tailored one-page summary for each prospect, derived from the master and matched to the donor's known interests.

The master case structure

1. Opening: the problem in your geography (1 page)

Two short paragraphs that name the problem in local, specific language. Numbers from your service data and one or two authoritative sources. Resist the temptation to describe the global scale of the issue; the donor cares about whether you understand the place you work in.

2. The work you do (2 to 3 pages)

Specific programmes, in specific places, for specific people. Avoid umbrella descriptions. "We run a Tuesday-evening welcome group for newly arrived families in two libraries across Wakefield" is a sentence the donor can hold. "We deliver wraparound community support" is not.

3. Evidence the work changes things (2 pages)

Your own data first, external evaluation if available, lived experience to humanise. Be specific about what changed and how you know. Acknowledge what you cannot yet evaluate. Donors trust acknowledged gaps; they distrust suspiciously clean stories.

4. What the funding will buy (3 to 4 pages)

Costed options at different giving levels. "£5,000 funds the Tuesday welcome group for one school year. £15,000 funds it plus a part-time family support worker. £45,000 funds the full Wakefield programme across both libraries with embedded evaluation." Specificity here is the difference between a donor offering and a donor declining.

5. Why this charity (2 pages)

Track record, leadership, governance, financial health. A page on the people, a page on the structure and stewardship. Donors want to know the gift is well-stewarded; this is where you reassure them.

6. Risks and what you would not promise (1 page)

Honest paragraph on the risks to the work and what you cannot guarantee. The hardest page to write and the page that most distinguishes a case worth funding from one that is not. Most cases skip this; the ones that include it convert better.

7. The ask (1 page)

Specific, costed, with named recognition options and stewardship commitments. The ask is rarely the surprising part of the case for a serious donor; the case has already prepared them. The ask just confirms what they expected.

The voice that earns trust

Three principles, applied throughout:

• Specificity over abstraction: places, people, numbers, dates.
• Honesty over performance: gaps named, limitations acknowledged, failures referenced.
• Restraint over enthusiasm: serious tone, language donors use, no exclamation marks.

Cases that read like marketing copy underperform with the donors who write the largest cheques. Cases that read like a thoughtful trustee writing for another thoughtful trustee outperform consistently.

The one-page tailored summary

Built per prospect or funder, derived from the master case. Four sections:

1. The aspect of the problem most relevant to the donor's known interests (one paragraph).
1. The specific programme or outcome the gift would support (one paragraph).
1. The ask, costed, with what it buys (three bullets).
1. Why your charity, in two sentences.

The one-pager is what the donor actually reads first. The master case sits behind it for the second meeting, the trustee conversation, the partner consultation. Both need to exist; neither replaces the other.

What to leave out

• Stock-photo imagery that could be any cause. Use your own photographs (with proper consent) or none.
• Mission and vision statements written in management language.
• Bullet lists of values without explanation.
• Generic celebration of recent campaigns that have no connection to the proposal.

Each of these signals an organisation that has not yet decided what it wants this specific case to do.

A good case for support is harder to write than a good brochure, partly because it requires the charity to be specific about what it can and cannot do. That specificity is also what makes it persuasive.

The 30-day rebuild plan

1. Week 1: Gather the underlying evidence, programme costings and impact data. Decide the funding options at three giving levels.
1. Week 2: Draft the master case, one section at a time. Read each aloud before moving on.
1. Week 3: Test with two trustees and one peer fundraiser outside the charity. Rewrite based on what confused them.
1. Week 4: Produce a tailored one-pager for the top three live prospects. Use both documents in the next meetings and capture feedback.

Thirty focused days. A case for support that takes seriously the donors who take you seriously. The single editorial investment most charities can make that produces the largest fundraising lift across the rest of the year.

Further reading

Peer-to-Peer Fundraising That Actually Converts | Thank-You Emails That Actually Feel Thankful | Legacy Giving for Small Charities: Start Honestly, Start Small