Types of Funding Mechanisms

When someone says they’ve “gotten a grant,” it’s easy to picture a straightforward financial award supporting a noble cause, research project, or programmatic effort. But in the world of research administration and sponsored projects, the term “grant” is often used as a catch-all for a variety of funding mechanisms, each with its own set of rules, expectations, and implications.

Whether you’re applying for funding, managing it, or simply trying to make sense of a budget, understanding the differences between grants, gifts, cooperative agreements, and contracts (both fixed price and cost-reimbursable) is crucial. Here’s a breakdown to help demystify the terminology.

Grant

Grants are the most common and widely recognized form of external funding, typically awarded to support a specific project or public purpose. They are generally more flexible and come with fewer strings attached than contracts. The sponsor (often a federal or state agency, foundation, or nonprofit) provides funding with the expectation that the recipient will carry out the proposed work.

Key characteristics:

  • Funds are awarded for a proposed project or activity.
  • There is little to no substantial involvement from the sponsor.
  • The recipient is responsible for programmatic direction and implementation.
  • Reporting requirements vary but are generally less rigid than contracts.

Gift

Gifts are contributions made to an institution with no expectation of direct benefit to the donor. They often come from individuals, foundations, or corporations and are used to support scholarships, capital improvements, or general operations.

Key characteristics:

  • No deliverables or formal reporting required.
  • The donor does not direct how the funds are spent beyond broad intent.
  • Usually managed by a university’s development or advancement office, not the research administration office.

Tip: If someone is expecting results or deliverables, it’s probably not a gift.

Cooperative Agreement

A cooperative agreement falls somewhere between a grant and a contract. While it’s similar to a grant in purpose (supporting a public good), it differs in the level of involvement the sponsor expects to have throughout the project.

Key characteristics:

  • Substantial involvement by the sponsor is expected.
  • Often used by federal agencies like the National Institute of Health (NIH) or the Department of Defense (DoD) to maintain oversight or collaborate on project activities.
  • Reporting and collaboration may be more intensive than a standard grant.

Contracts

Contracts are formal procurement mechanisms used when the sponsor is purchasing a specific service or deliverable. They come with tighter requirements, and failure to meet those expectations can have significant consequences.

There are two common types:

Fixed-Price Contract

The organization receives a set amount regardless of the actual cost incurred.

Any cost savings belong to the organization—but so do any overruns.

Less administrative burden, but higher financial risk.

Cost-Reimbursable Contract

The sponsor reimburses actual project costs, often up to a specified ceiling.

More detailed budgeting and financial reporting are required.

Audits and compliance reviews are common.

Why This Matters

Misunderstanding the type of funding mechanism you’re working with can lead to compliance issues, financial risk, or reputational harm. It’s not just about the money—it’s about the responsibilities that come with it.

If you’re unsure whether your award is a gift, grant, cooperative agreement, or contract, ask yourself:

  • Is the sponsor expecting specific deliverables?
  • Is there a defined scope of work?
  • Will the sponsor be involved in the execution of the project?
  • What are the reporting requirements?

Understanding the answers to these questions can help ensure your team is aligned with expectations and compliant with terms.

At the end of the day, not all funding is created equal, and while we may casually refer to them all as “grants,” the distinctions matter. Whether you are working in a university, nonprofit, or private sector, knowing what kind of funding you’re dealing with is essential for managing it responsibly.

2 responses to “Types of Funding Mechanisms”

  1. Freddy Colindres Avatar
    Freddy Colindres

    Hi Samantha,

    This was such a helpful and eye-opening post—thank you for breaking down the nuances between grants, gifts, cooperative agreements, and contracts! I’ve definitely heard the word “grant” used as a blanket term, and I never realized how different each funding mechanism can be in terms of expectations, reporting, and sponsor involvement.

    What really stood out to me was your explanation of cooperative agreements. I hadn’t fully grasped the difference between those and traditional grants before, especially regarding the level of sponsor involvement. That clarity is going to be so valuable when reviewing or managing funding sources in the future.

    I also appreciated the tips for how to identify what type of funding you’re working with—those guiding questions at the end really brought everything together in a practical way.

    Out of curiosity:

    • Have you seen any common pitfalls or misunderstandings that organizations frequently run into when handling these different types of funding?
    • And do you have any recommendations for tools or processes that help teams stay compliant and organized once they’ve secured funding?

    Thanks again for sharing your insights—this is definitely a resource I’ll be referring back to!

    Like

    1. Samantha Ellithorpe Avatar

      Hi Freddy,

      Great questions! In the granting world, there is very little that is truly black and white, and we often find ourselves operating in the gray. This is largely due to the wide range of varying sponsor requirements and expectations. Even when working with the same sponsor across multiple projects, no two awards are managed exactly the same way. That’s why it is absolutely critical to refer back to the specific terms and conditions outlined in each individual contract. These documents are our guiding light when it comes to determining what is allowable and how to proceed with project management decisions.

      In our office, we use InfoEd as our grant management software, which has been instrumental in helping us stay on top of each project’s unique requirements. For every awarded Principal Investigator (PI), we also set up a custom award management workspace that includes a calendar of reporting deadlines, reporting templates tailored to the award, a distilled summary of the award’s terms and conditions, and copies of the full contract, awarded proposal, and budget. We house these workspaces in Microsoft Teams, which allows for seamless communication, document sharing, and collaboration.

      To help PIs manage their awards long-term, we conduct an initial award kickoff meeting with each PI to walk them through the essentials of managing their award. Follow-up meetings are then scheduled monthly or quarterly based on the complexity of the award and the PI’s needs. We also provide monthly fund reviews to each PI so that it is clear how much money is remaining and in what categories.

      However, even with these monthly fund reviews, one of the most common pitfalls we encounter is PIs not adhering to their approved budgets. We understand that project needs can evolve and materials may change, or travel expenses might be less than anticipated—but any deviation from the approved budget must be communicated with our office first. As the Office of Research Administration, we are responsible for reviewing and approving all proposed purchases. If a PI wants to shift funds between categories, we will work with the sponsor to request a formal budget revision according to the contract, as we cannot authorize any expenditures outside of what was contractually agreed upon without sponsor approval.

      To help stay compliant and organized, aside from InfoEd and Microsoft Teams, we also provide in-person grant management trainings and ongoing support through our resource site: go.wcu.edu/research. Having a centralized system, a clear process for communication and approvals, and regular check-ins has made a huge difference in reducing confusion and ensuring compliance.

      Like

Leave a comment