Regranting: grants through intermediary organisations

Regranting (sub-granting, cascade funding) is an arrangement in which a donor does not distribute money to hundreds of small organisations directly but awards one large grant to an operator. The operator announces its own calls, selects projects, signs contracts and collects reports. In EU terms this is financial support to third parties (FSTP); in US federal grants the related concept is the subaward, which has its own specifics.

Why donors use an intermediary

For a large donor it is costly and risky to administer hundreds of small agreements in a country where it has no team. The operator knows the local context, works in the local language, can check an organisation on the ground and support it during implementation. The donor gets one accountable counterpart, and small organisations get access to money they could not have applied for themselves.

For EU grants the conditions are set by Article 207 of Financial Regulation 2024/2509. The grant agreement must define in advance the maximum amount per recipient, a fixed list of activity types, and the categories of recipients with the criteria for selecting them. The amount per recipient may not exceed EUR 60,000. The threshold may be exceeded for humanitarian aid, emergency support, civil protection operations, crisis management aid, or where the objectives of the action would otherwise be impossible or overly difficult to achieve. The actual ceiling is stated in each operator's call.

What it looks like in Ukraine

The operators are large Ukrainian foundations and programmes that receive money from the EU, governments and private foundations. Examples of operator types running calls in 2026: ISAR Ednannia, East Europe Foundation, the International Renaissance Foundation, and in culture the House of Europe programme, funded by the EU and implemented by the Goethe-Institut. The list is not exhaustive: sectoral and regional organisations run regranting schemes too.

An operator's call works like any other call for proposals: announcement, conditions, application form, evaluation, contract. Under the EU scheme the recipient is not a party to the grant agreement with the Commission, so registering on the EU portal and obtaining a PIC is normally not needed for such a grant.

How the terms differ from a direct grant

• The application is simpler, often in Ukrainian, with no consortium and no complex budget forms.
• Amounts are smaller, durations shorter, and decisions usually faster.
• The original donor's rules do not go away. The operator answers to the donor for every euro, so it carries the donor's requirements into your contract: which costs are eligible, how to procure, how to acknowledge the donor, how long to keep records, who has the right to audit.
• You cannot pass the money further on. Under EU rules the support goes from the beneficiary directly to the final recipient unless the call conditions allow otherwise.

What to look for in the call conditions

• Who may apply: legal form, time since registration, geography, experience.
• Which costs are eligible: whether salaries, administrative costs and equipment are covered, and whether an own contribution is required.
• How payment works: in advance, in instalments, or as reimbursement of costs already incurred.
• Whether the organisation is checked before the contract. Operators often run a capacity assessment and may change the terms based on its result.
• Whether this is a project grant or institutional support: that decides what exactly can be funded.

Reporting to the operator

You report to the operator, which consolidates your data into its own report to the donor. That is why the requirements for supporting documents are as strict as in a direct grant, even when the amount is small. Typical mistakes: costs outside the contract period, purchases without comparing offers, budget changes without approval, no acknowledgement of the donor in materials. Read the reporting forms and deadlines before signing the contract, not before the first report.