Motivation letter & project description for grants
The heart of every funding application — not the artist statement, but the answer to a concrete question: what do you want to do with exactly this funding, and why now?
Motivation letter, project description, statement — what's the difference?
Three text types that are often confused but answer different questions:
- Artist statement: who are you artistically, what shapes your practice in general? Stays relatively stable across applications.
- Motivation letter: why are you applying to this funder, for this programme, now? Changes with every application.
- Project description: what concretely will be made with the funding — goal, process, outcome. The factual core juries orient themselves by.
Many calls ask for both in one document. The lines are fluid, but the function stays: the statement shows who you are — motivation and project description show why this funding fits exactly this moment in your practice.
The structure that works
- Occasion: one sentence explaining why this project is due now — not "I want to develop further", but a concrete trigger: research to be continued, a material to be tested, a collaboration coming up.
- Project description: what will be made, in what form, with what approach. Concrete enough that a jury can picture the finished (or at least the interim) result.
- Why this funder: what about this specific programme fits the project — funding focus, network, place, audience. A generic paragraph that would fit any call weakens the whole application.
- Timeline: rough phases with a realistic time frame — research, realisation, completion/presentation. Precise enough to show feasibility without scheduling every day.
- Outcome: what stands at the end — an exhibition, a publication, a performance, a finished body of work. Funders want to know where their money becomes visible.
The most common mistakes
- Goals too vague. "Exploring new artistic directions" says nothing — what exactly is being explored, with what material, in what form?
- Copy-paste between applications. A motivation letter that would fit any call fits none of them particularly well. Juries read many applications per round — repetition shows.
- Making the project bigger than the funding period allows. A six-week working grant cannot carry a life's-work project — a clearly bounded milestone convinces more than an overambitious vision.
- Ignoring the funding purpose. A programme for emerging artists reads differently from one for established positions — the text should visibly engage with the funding logic, not only with your own project.
A sample outline
For a classic working grant with a 300–500-word project description, this weighting has proven itself: one fifth occasion/motivation, half project description, the rest timeline and outcome. For longer formats (1,500+ words, e.g. larger project funding) the ratio barely shifts — what grows is detail on the realisation, not pathos in the motivation.
Frequently asked questions
How long should a motivation letter be?
Usually 300–600 words for a classic working grant, more for larger project funding with its own financing plan. The call often specifies a word or page count — the explicit requirement always beats any rule of thumb.
Do I have to write it in the language of the call?
Usually yes — international programmes normally state the required language explicitly in the conditions. If in doubt, ask the funder before investing time in the wrong language version.
What if my project changes during the funding period?
That is normal and usually unproblematic as long as the core remains — larger deviations should be communicated to the funder, especially if a proof of use is due at the end.
Should I mention earlier rejections in the motivation letter?
Usually not necessary — the text should stand on its own and present the current project convincingly, independent of your application history.
Never miss a deadline: subscribe to the deadline calendar (.ics) — it works in any calendar app. Our monthly email newsletter is currently German-only.