Softwr

Nonprofits · head to head

Foundant Technologies vs Network for Good

Foundant Technologies logo

Foundant Technologies

Nonprofits

Grant lifecycle management for foundations, with public subscription bands and a two-year term

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Network for Good logo

Network for Good

Nonprofits

Fundraising software for nonprofits

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Foundant Technologies the Basic licence tier omits eligibility quizzes and advanced automation and caps file sizes, so foundations with conditional application logic must buy up rather than configure around it.; Network for Good no pricing information available; vendor directs to quote request form
  • They diverge on capability: Foundant Technologies covers Grant Lifecycle Manager, Network for Good covers Online donations.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Foundant Technologies and Network for Good actually diverge.

Attributes where Foundant Technologies and Network for Good differ
AttributeFoundant TechnologiesNetwork for Good
Pricing modelquotesubscription
PlatformsWebWeb, Mobile-responsive
FoundedUnknown2000

Identical on both: starting price (On request), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Nonprofits).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Foundant Technologies

  • Grant Lifecycle Manager
  • CommunitySuite
  • Scholarship Lifecycle Manager
  • Candid integration
  • Evaluator portal
  • Grantee portal

Only in Network for Good

  • Online donations
  • Donor management
  • Peer-to-peer campaigns
  • Email marketing
  • Analytics
  • Stripe
  • PayPal
  • Salesforce

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Foundant Technologies

  • A private foundation making 50 to 500 grants a year that wants a defined process rather than a configuration projectnot Network for Good
  • A community foundation needing donor-advised fund accounting and grantmaking from the same vendornot Network for Good
  • Running a scholarship programme with volunteer review committees who should not have full staff loginsnot Network for Good
  • A foundation that needs charity status verification against Candid data before every payment goes outnot Network for Good

Network for Good

  • Business operationsnot Foundant Technologies
  • Productivitynot Foundant Technologies
  • Automationnot Foundant Technologies

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Foundant Technologies

  • The Basic licence tier omits eligibility quizzes and advanced automation and caps file sizes, so foundations with conditional application logic must buy up rather than configure around it.
  • The standard contract is two years, which removes the option of a one-year trial period and locks you in before you know whether the process fits.
  • The annual subscription excludes implementation, and the setup fee is a meaningful additional first-year cost that quotes do not always foreground.
  • It is deliberately less configurable than enterprise grants systems, so a funder with unusual multi-stage workflows will hit walls that require process change rather than software change.
  • Pricing above the standard bands switches to an assets under management basis, meaning a well-endowed foundation making few grants can be quoted far more than its grant volume would suggest.

Network for Good

  • No pricing information available; vendor directs to quote request form
  • Quote-only model with no public pricing transparency
  • Website redirects to demo/consultation request rather than pricing page

Pricing, plan by plan

Foundant Technologies

On request
  • Grant Lifecycle Manager$undefined/year
    • Three licence tiers gating automation and eligibility quizzes
    • Two-year contract standard
    • Reported range of roughly 4,250 to 9,500 USD per year
  • CommunitySuite$undefined/year
    • Fund accounting and donor-advised funds
    • Priced for community foundations by fund count and complexity
  • Scholarship Lifecycle Manager$undefined/year
    • Scholarship application and review workflows
    • Sold alongside or independently of GLM

Network for Good

On request
  • Essential$70/month
    • Online donations
    • Donor management
  • Professional$150/month
    • Peer-to-peer campaigns
    • Email marketing
    • Reports

Which should you pick?

Choose Foundant Technologies if

  • You need grant lifecycle manager.
  • You also want communitysuite.
Foundant Technologies review

Choose Network for Good if

  • You need online donations.
  • You work on Web, Mobile-responsive.
  • You also want donor management.
Network for Good review

Questions people ask

Is Foundant Technologies or Network for Good better?
Neither clearly leads. Foundant Technologies starts at On request and Network for Good at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Foundant Technologies or Network for Good?
Foundant Technologies starts at On request and Network for Good at On request.
Does Foundant Technologies or Network for Good run on more platforms?
Foundant Technologies runs on Web. Network for Good runs on Web, Mobile-responsive.
What is Foundant Technologies best used for?
Foundant Technologies is most often used for a private foundation making 50 to 500 grants a year that wants a defined process rather than a configuration project, a community foundation needing donor-advised fund accounting and grantmaking from the same vendor, running a scholarship programme with volunteer review committees who should not have full staff logins, a foundation that needs charity status verification against candid data before every payment goes out. Of those, a private foundation making 50 to 500 grants a year that wants a defined process rather than a configuration project and a community foundation needing donor-advised fund accounting and grantmaking from the same vendor are not what Network for Good is typically brought in for.
What can Foundant Technologies do that Network for Good cannot?
Foundant Technologies covers Grant Lifecycle Manager, CommunitySuite, Scholarship Lifecycle Manager, Candid integration. Network for Good covers Online donations, Donor management, Peer-to-peer campaigns, Email marketing.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Foundant Technologies: What does Grant Lifecycle Manager cost?

Sector guides report roughly 4,250 to 9,500 US dollars a year on a two-year contract, with larger foundations priced on assets under management. Foundant does not publish these figures itself.

Network for Good: How does Network for Good price its offerings?

Network for Good does not publish pricing; interested customers must request a demo or contact sales directly for custom quotes.

Source
Foundant Technologies: Is implementation included?

No. Setup is billed separately from the annual subscription.

Network for Good: What products does Network for Good offer?

Network for Good provides fundraising, donor management, and event management solutions for nonprofit organizations.

Source
Foundant Technologies: Is the Candid integration extra?

It is included in the GLM subscription and free for up to 1,000 charity checks a year.

Network for Good: Is there a free trial available?

Trial information is not available on the public website; customers must contact sales to discuss options.

Source
Foundant Technologies: Is there a discount for small funders?

Some sector associations, including Exponent Philanthropy, negotiate a discount off the initial licence for members.

Network for Good: What support is included?

Support details are not published online; customers should contact Network for Good to discuss service levels and support options.

Source
Share

Related pages

More on Foundant Technologies

More on Network for Good

Keep looking

Other head to heads