Why funders fund organisations
Most media and media-development funders – whether foundations, public donors, or international institutions – are accountable for how money is spent. Funding organisations, rather than individuals, helps them manage that responsibility.
At a practical level, organisations offer:
- Legal accountability, including contracts, liability, and safeguarding obligations
- Financial management, such as accounting systems, audits, and reporting capacity
- Continuity, ensuring that a project can continue even if key individuals move on
For funders, these are not abstract requirements. They are often tied to legal frameworks, public procurement rules, or donor oversight mechanisms that leave little room for flexibility.
This does not mean funders distrust freelancers. In fact, many funders actively value freelance expertise and rely on it. But the systems they operate within are designed to work through entities that can absorb administrative and legal risk.
Freelancers are already part of funded work
Despite the barriers to applying directly, freelancers are already deeply embedded in funded media projects. They are commissioned by grantee organisations, subcontracted as trainers or researchers, hired as editors or developers, and sometimes lead entire editorial or technical workstreams. In many cases, the most visible outputs of a funded project are produced by freelancers whose names never appear on the grant agreement.
The challenge, then, is not whether freelancers are relevant to funders. It is whether freelancers have visibility, leverage, and fair terms within the funding structures that already rely on their work.
Understanding how those structures function — and where freelancers can enter them — is key.
Three common pathways to funding without a newsroom
There is no single solution for freelancers seeking funding. Instead, most navigate a small number of well-established pathways, each with its own advantages and trade-offs.
1. Partnering with an organisation or newsroom
The most common route is to work through an organisation that applies for and manages the grant. This might be a newsroom commissioning freelance reporting, a media NGO running a project that relies on external experts or a university, lab, or training centre acting as the formal grant holder.
Advantage: For freelancers, this model offers access to funding, administrative support, and often credibility with donors. For organisations, it provides flexibility and specialised expertise.
Trade-off: control. Freelancers may have limited influence over budgets, reporting, or funder relationships. Clarifying expectations early — around editorial independence, payment schedules, credit, and ownership of outputs — is essential.
2. Fiscal sponsorship and umbrella arrangements
Fiscal sponsorship allows an individual or informal group to run a project under the legal and financial umbrella of an established organisation. In this model, the sponsor receives and administers the grant, handles compliance and reporting and takes a management fee for its role.
Advantage: For freelancers leading a defined project, fiscal sponsorship can offer a middle ground between working entirely alone and creating a new organisation. It is particularly common in cross-border journalism, innovation projects, and experimental media initiatives.
Trade-off: However, sponsorship comes with constraints. Sponsors may set conditions on how funds are used, require approval for changes, or limit direct contact with the donor. Not all organisations are equipped – or willing – to act as sponsors, and fees can be significant.
3. Temporary collectives and consortia
Increasingly, freelancers collaborate in temporary or semi-formal collectives to pursue funding. These groups may designate one member or partner organisation as the lead applicant, share roles and responsibilities through clear agreements or dissolve once the project is complete.
Advantage: Funders are often open to this model, particularly for investigative, cross-border, or innovation-focused work. What matters most is not the legal form, but the clarity of governance, financial responsibility, and decision-making.
Trade-off: Without clear agreements, however, collectives can struggle with internal disputes, uneven workloads, or unclear accountability – issues that funders are quick to notice.
When applying solo may not make sense
Not every funding opportunity is appropriate for individual freelancers, even with workarounds. Recognising these limits is not a failure of ambition. It is often a matter of sustainability — both for the freelancer and for the project itself.
Avoid projects that involve:
- Large budgets or long timeframes
- Complex compliance requirements
- Staff management or duty-of-care responsibilities
- Operations in high-risk environments
What funders look for when freelancers are involved
When freelancers play a central role in a funded project, funders tend to look for the same fundamentals they expect from any grantee:
- Clarity: Who is responsible for what, and how decisions are made
- Capacity: How financial and administrative obligations will be met
- Realism: Timelines and outputs that reflect actual working conditions
- Credibility: A host, partner, or structure that reassures the donor
Strong projects do not hide the role of freelancers — they explain it clearly and position freelance expertise as an asset rather than a risk. Freelancers do not need to become organisations to access funding. But they do need to understand how organisational funding works.
Across media and media development, funding without a newsroom is already the norm rather than the exception. The challenge now is to make these arrangements more transparent, more equitable, and better aligned with the realities of freelance work.
For funders, that means designing programmes that acknowledge how work is actually done. For organisations, it means treating freelancers as partners rather than line items. And for freelancers, it means navigating funding systems strategically — without losing sight of why they do the work in the first place.
Five non-EU funds freelancers should know
While much European funding for freelancers is channelled through Journalismfund.eu, IJ4EU and similar mechanisms, a range of non-EU funds support freelance journalists and media practitioners directly, often without requiring a formal organisation.
Global | Reporting & engagement
Supports in-depth reporting on under-reported global issues, with grants frequently awarded to individual freelancers and small teams.
Why it matters: Strong editorial support and comparatively light administrative requirements make this one of the most accessible global funds for freelancers.
Global | Reporting, safety & resilience
Provides reporting grants, emergency funds, and fellowships for women and non-binary journalists worldwide.
Why it matters: Designed with freelance realities in mind, including safety and wellbeing — not just story production.
Global | Investigative & impact-driven journalism
Funds journalism that addresses systemic injustice and accountability, often in the Global South.
Why it matters: Open to individuals and small teams, with flexibility around structure if impact and accountability are clear.
Global | Reporting & training (non-investigative)
Supports solutions-focused reporting through fellowships, collaborations, and funded newsroom partnerships.
Why it matters: A strong option for freelancers working beyond investigations, including explanatory and constructive journalism.
Global | Fellowships, innovation & collaboration (non-investigative)
Runs funded programmes focused on innovation, leadership, and cross-border collaboration.
Why it matters: Freelancers often participate as fellows or project leads, making this a useful entry point into funded media-development work.