Nonprofit Grant Revenue: Conditional vs. Unconditional

Unconditional Contributions

An unconditional promise to give is the most straightforward form of contribution revenue. When a donor commits a grant or pledge without requiring the nonprofit to first clear a significant hurdle, the organization has a right to the asset. Therefore, the revenue must be recorded immediately. For instance, a donor pledging $50,000 to be paid next month is an unconditional contribution. The payment is certain, and the time delay is the only variable. Nonprofits must be careful to properly value these promises, sometimes requiring the use of present value techniques if the cash receipt is expected far in the future, a key aspect of managing long-term donor pledges.

The Complexity of Conditional Contributions

The challenge lies in contributions that are deemed conditional. A promise is conditional if it contains both a right of return (the donor can demand the funds back if the condition isn’t met) and a performance barrier that the nonprofit must substantially overcome. Common examples of performance barriers include specific matching requirements, achieving a set number of beneficiaries served, or securing regulatory approval for a project.

For example, a grant might stipulate that the funds are available only if the nonprofit raises an equal amount from other sources. Until the organization achieves the match, the revenue cannot be recognized. It is held as a refundable advance liability on the balance sheet. Once the matching requirement is fulfilled, the condition is met, and the nonprofit recognizes the contribution revenue. Accurately identifying the presence of a true barrier—and not just a routine administrative stipulation—is the most difficult judgment call in this area of nonprofit contribution accounting.

Key Accounting Standards ASC 958 and ASC 606

The distinction between conditional and unconditional contributions is codified primarily within FASB ASC 958 (Nonprofit Entities). However, the complexity increased when FASB issued ASU 2018-08 to clarify how nonprofits should apply the guidance from the new revenue standard, ASC 606, to grants and contracts. This clarification directed organizations to first determine if the agreement is a reciprocal exchange transaction (i.e., a contract for goods or services covered by ASC 606) or a nonreciprocal contribution (covered by ASC 958).

Most traditional grants and pledges are nonreciprocal contributions, leading accountants back to the conditional/unconditional criteria in ASC 958. This updated guidance ensures that nonprofits, even those receiving government grants or contracts, are using consistent criteria to determine when performance-based conditions are met, thus ensuring consistent revenue recognition timing.

Best Practices for Compliance

To manage this complex area, nonprofits should adopt robust policies. They must carefully review all grant agreements and pledge documents, focusing on the specific wording around performance stipulations and clawback clauses. Accounting teams should establish clear internal controls for tracking progress against specified barriers. Misclassifying a conditional contribution as unconditional—or vice versa—can significantly distort the reported financial health of the organization, affecting ratios, budgets, and public perception of nonprofit grant recognition.

Brady Ware Nonprofit Advisors want to help you fulfill your mission with financial health and compliance services and a network of nonprofit consultants who specialize in strategic decision-making.