Cutting Through the Fog: Avoiding Weasel Words with Trusts and Foundations
When you apply to a Trust or Foundation, every word counts. Trustees and grant officers have limited time and limited funds, and they’re constantly scanning applications, websites and other sources of information for clarity, confidence, and credibility. Yet many cases for support are weighed down by vague, overblown, or hedged language, what writing experts call weasel words. These words give the impression of substance, but when you stop to examine them, they say very little.
Avoiding weasel words isn’t just good writing practice; it’s the difference between sounding like you hope for funding and sounding like you deserve it.
What Are Weasel Words?
Weasel words are phrases that sound impressive but reveal little. They fill space without adding substance, expressions like ‘world-class,’ ‘innovative solutions’ or ‘transformative impact’ that can appear in almost any proposal. In funding applications, they blur rather than build understanding. Trustees are not looking for grand claims, but for evidence: what was achieved, how it was measured, and why it matters.
Weasel words are vague, non-committal phrases that let writers avoid being pinned down. They often creep in when we want to sound impressive but don’t have (or haven’t included) the evidence.
Some common examples in funding applications and on websites:
- ‘Many’, ‘numerous’, ‘a significant number of’
- ‘Impactful’. ‘transformative’, ‘innovative’
- ‘It is believed that’, ‘it seems’, ‘research suggests’
- ‘Support’, ‘help’, ‘contribute to’ (without showing how)
They’re called ‘weasel’ words because, like the animal slipping into a henhouse, they suck the substance out of a sentence while leaving the shell intact.
Why They Weaken Your Application
Trusts and foundations are looking for:
- Specifics: Who will benefit? How many? In what timeframe?
- Evidence: Why does your programme work? Who says so?
- Accountability: How will you measure success?
Weasel words get in the way of all three. Compare these two sentences:
- Weak: ‘Our programme aims to significantly improve young people’s literacy’.
- Strong: ‘Our programme will raise reading ages by an average of 18 months for 120 young people in South London within a year’.
The second gives trustees something to grasp: a number, a location, a timeframe, a measurable outcome. That’s credibility.
Real-World Funder Insights
The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation emphasises clarity and evidence. As featured in the NCVO Members Quick Guide:
‘Keep it factual and back things up with well-chosen evidence’.
This reflects the Foundation’s broader approach: their guidance emphasises aligning with their strategy, and their application process includes reading your website and assessing impact efficiently and clearly.
Wellcome Trust advises, ‘Prepare, Be Precise, Be Confident’. While Wellcome doesn’t explicitly define ‘weasel words’, their guidance underscores the need for applicants to be precise, structured, and clear:
- Their ‘Prepare to Apply’ section guides applicants on writing proposals that align with eligibility, clarity, and funder expectations.
- They detail rigorous assessment stages, initial checks, written expert review, committee evaluation, and interviews, where vague claims can cost credibility.
This high-stakes, multi-step review process rewards applications that are specific, evidence-backed, and confidently stated.
How to Spot and Replace Weasel Words
Here’s a quick guide to replacing vagueness with clarity:
Weasel Word/Phrase
Stronger Alternative
Many young people
420 young people aged 14–19 in South London
Research suggests
According to the 2023 Ofsted report…
It is believed
We believe, based on five years of delivering…
Impactful outcomes
90% of participants secured employment within 6 months
Support communities
Provide 250 families with free legal advice on housing
The shift is simple: move from abstract to concrete, from claims to evidence.
Stronger Alternative
Why It Works for Funders
‘Possibly’, ‘may’
‘We will…’ or ‘By April 2026 we expect to…’
Shows confidence and a timeline, closer to what Wellcome expects
‘Helps to reduce…'
‘Reduces absenteeism by 15% among 200 students in six months’
Concrete metric, aligns with Esmée's need for evidence
‘Some’ or ‘many’
‘75% of participants across 10 sessions achieved…’
Specific scope and scale, helps clarity for both funders
Tips for Writing with Clarity
- Use numbers whenever you can. They anchor your claims
- Name your sources. If you’re leaning on research, cite it
- Own your statements. Avoid ‘it is believed, show confidence.
- Define success. Don’t say ‘positive impact’. Say what will change, for whom, and how you’ll know.
- Read like a trustee. Ask: If I didn’t know this organisation, would I trust this claim?
Why It Matters: Trust in Language
Avoiding weasel words isn't just about style, it’s about credibility.
Esmée Fairbairn wants factual, evidence-based language. Wellcome assesses proposals in rigorous review stages. Both reward clarity, backed claims, and confident framing.
Speak precisely, anchor claims in evidence, and match your writing to what funders actually expect. Your applications will feel authoritative, compelling, and worthy of funding.
Final Thoughts
Weasel words might sound polished, but they actually weaken applications. Trustees don’t fund puffery; they fund organisations that show they know exactly who they serve, what they deliver, and how it makes a difference.
The best applications aren’t the ones that sound grand — they’re the ones that are grounded, specific, and confident.
Checklist
Have I replaced vague terms with numbers or examples?
Do I back up claims with evidence or citations?
Have I removed phrases like ‘it is believed’ or ‘research suggests’ without a source?
Can a trustee picture what will happen if we’re funded?
Does every sentence earn its place?
The Importance of Review
Building strong, trusting relationships with Trusts and Foundations draws on multiple skills, not least the ability to stand back and objectively review copy, whether that is the content of a funding application or the information on your website.
- Always give yourself time to leave the final draft for a few days. Come back to it from a refreshed perspective
- Ask for the support of colleagues and peers in proof-reading
- If the stakes are high, it is worth bringing in external expertise to provide a funder’s eye
Can AI Help?
It is interesting to note that AI generated content is often easily identified because of its use of weasel words, and it is not unusual to see inaccurate citing of information. So, beware.
However, AI can be helpful in terms of proof reading, as long as you train it well. It cannot replace skilled reading and writing, but can be a useful tool to help stand back from your work.
Check out our YouTube channel for helpful videos and tutorials on funding support, crm consultation and funder-friendly websites
https://www.youtube.com/@skyhighsolutioning25