Nearly every NGO eventually hits the same wall. The comms officer writes one way, the programme lead writes another, and the volunteer who helped with the annual report uses something different. No one is wrong. No one is consistent. Then there is AI and unclear or non-existent usage rules. And the organisation looks, on paper, like a committee that has never met.
We are writing this in UK English to show how consistency is crucial. While we primarily use American English as the Editricity standard, we do edit and produce in UK English. The rules are essentially the same.
A style guide fixes this. Not by policing creativity, but by making decisions once so nobody has to make them again. Here are ten rules that actually matter for human writers and, probably more so, for AI-generated copy that lands on your desk looking polished but ready to embarrass you in print.
A note on AI before we start
AI writing tools are useful. They are also wrong in ways that are hard to spot. They default to formal British English or American English depending on the tool and the prompt, they capitalise things arbitrarily, they use exclamation marks the way a new intern does, and they have never heard of your organisation’s preferred terminology for the communities you serve.
The rule is simple: nothing AI-generated goes out without an edit pass against your style guide. AI output is a first draft. Your style guide is what makes it yours.
Rule 1: Decide your English and write it down
American or British? This matters more than people think. “Programmes” or “programs”? “Organise” or “organize”? “Whilst” or “while”? If your organisation works internationally or was founded with ties to a particular country, there is probably a natural answer. Write it down, commit to it, and apply it to every document, including whatever comes out of ChatGPT or Claude, or whatever model you use..
Further reading: AP Stylebook (US) or New Oxford Style Manual (UK)
Rule 2: Kill the exclamation mark
This one is non-negotiable. AI tools are particularly bad offenders: they use exclamation marks to signal enthusiasm the way a robot waves a flag. “We’re excited to announce!” “Join us!” “Thank you for your support!”
In NGO communications, exclamation marks undermine credibility. If you are writing about clean water access or displacement, an exclamation mark at the end of a sentence is not warm; it’s tone-deaf. Have a goo dlook through an NGO’s social media. If nearly each piece has an exclamation mark, it sets a bad tone for the organisation. Reserve them for truly exceptional contexts (a genuine celebration, a direct quote from a child saying something joyful), and even then, ask whether the sentence is doing enough work without one.
One exclamation mark per newsletter is generous. Zero is better.
See also: Mailchimp Content Style Guide on Punctuation
Rule 3: Decide on the Oxford comma and enforce it
The Oxford (or serial) comma is the one that comes before “and” in a list: “food, shelter, and dignity” versus “food, shelter and dignity.” Neither is wrong. Both are right in their respective traditions. The problem is inconsistency.
Pick one. Write it down. Apply it to every list in every document, including the lists AI tools generate, which will flip between styles mid-document with complete confidence.
Most NGOs working in formal advocacy or grant writing benefit from the Oxford comma because it eliminates ambiguity. “We work with survivors, local authorities and legal experts” could mean the local authorities and legal experts are the same people. “We work with survivors, local authorities, and legal experts” does not.
Further reading: Grammarly’s Oxford Comma explainer
Rule 4: Standardise how you name who you serve
This is the rule most style guides skip, and it is the most important one for an NGO. How you refer to the people your organisation exists to serve is not a stylistic preference — it is a statement of values.
Do you say “beneficiaries” or “participants” or “community members”? Do you use “refugee” or “person with refugee status”? “Disabled people” or “people with disabilities”? “The poor” or “people living in poverty”?
These are not interchangeable. Pick the language that reflects your organisation’s approach, check it against guidance from the communities themselves where possible, and apply it consistently. AI tools will use whatever was most common in their training data, which may not match your values at all.
Useful resource: GLAAD Media Reference Guide for inclusive language; your sector’s own published guidance
Rule 5: Establish your capitalisation rules
AI capitalises randomly and with conviction. “The Programme,” “our Donors,” “the Board of Directors,” “sustainable Development Goals” — capital letters scatter across AI copy like confetti.
Decide: do you capitalise job titles when they stand alone (“the Executive Director attended”) or only before names (“Executive Director Jane Smith attended”)? Do you capitalise “government” when referring to a specific one? “Programme” when it refers to one of yours?
Write it down. A single page of capitalisation rules will save an editor two hours on every long document.
See: Chicago Manual of Style on Capitalisation
Rule 6: Agree on numbers, dates, and money
“£1,200” or “1,200 GBP”? “12 July 2024” or “July 12, 2024”? “10 years” or “ten years”? These decisions seem minor until you have a report where all three variants appear on the same page.
Standard practice: spell out numbers one through nine, use numerals for 10 and above. But that rule has exceptions (always use numerals for percentages, ages, statistics, money). Whatever you decide, write the exceptions down too — because AI will spell out “fifteen million” in one paragraph and write “$15M” in the next.
Currencies deserve special attention for international organisations. Decide whether you always convert to a single currency for reports, and if so, at what exchange rate and date.
Rule 7: Set rules for your headings and sub-headings
Sentence case (“Our approach to food security”) or title case (“Our Approach to Food Security”)? AI defaults to title case because it looks more formal. Many style guides, including GOV.UK’s (one of the best in existence), use sentence case for digital content because it reads more naturally and is less likely to introduce inconsistency about which words get capitalised.
Pick one and apply it across documents, web pages, social posts, and slide decks. Yes, even slide decks.
GOV.UK Content Design guide: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/content-design
Rule 8: Define your tone — and what it rules out
“Professional but warm” is not a tone guide. It is a direction, not a destination. Be specific. Does your tone include humour? If so, what kind — dry, gentle, self-deprecating? Does it include urgency? Does it use second person (“you can help”)? Does it address the reader directly or keep a slight distance?
More usefully: what does your tone rule out? Jargon? Acronyms without explanation? Passive voice? Sentences over 30 words? Slang? These exclusions are often more actionable than aspirations.
AI tools default to a vaguely corporate warmth that sounds like no one in particular. Tone rules give your editor the criteria to catch that and fix it.
Rule 9: Manage your acronyms and internal terminology
Every NGO develops its own vocabulary: programme names, internal acronyms, shorthand for donor relationships, technical terms from the sector. AI has no idea what any of it means. It will guess, and it will guess wrong.
Your style guide should include a glossary. At minimum: how you refer to your organisation on first and subsequent mentions, which acronyms you use and how you introduce them (“the World Food Programme (WFP)”), which sector terms you use and which you avoid, and what you call specific initiatives.
This section of a style guide takes about an afternoon to write and pays for itself the first time an AI draft uses “WFO” instead of “WFP” and almost gets sent to a funder.
Rule 10: Make someone responsible for the guide
A style guide nobody enforces is a document nobody reads. Assign ownership. This does not mean a dedicated editorial staff member at small organisations — it means one named person whose job includes keeping the guide updated and who reviews significant outgoing documents against it.
Review the guide once a year. Language changes. Your programme areas change. The communities you serve may update their preferred terminology. An outdated guide is almost as bad as no guide, because it creates the illusion of consistency while encoding old mistakes.
The table: common mistakes and how to avoid them
| Mistake | Why it happens | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Exclamation marks in serious content | AI enthusiasm, intern enthusiasm | Ban them by default; one per newsletter maximum |
| Using just | Feels like common speech | Avoid – acts as a filler word that diminishes authority, minimises effort, and conveys insecurity |
| Using absolutisms (everyone, all, no one) | Inclusion does not mean all at the same time | Quantify (nearly everyone, almost no one) or avoid them altogether |
| Inconsistent Oxford comma | Mixed style guides, mixed writers | Decide once, add to style guide, check every list |
| Mixed British/American spelling | AI tools, copy-paste from external sources | Set a spell-checker language; add to editorial checklist |
| Random capitalisation | AI defaults, contributor habits | Write a one-page cap rules sheet; share it with every contributor |
| Vague beneficiary language (“the vulnerable”) | Training data defaults | Specify preferred terminology in a glossary |
| Numbers written inconsistently | No rule in place | Add a numbers rule (spell out 1–9, numerals for 10+) with stated exceptions |
| Dates in different formats | Regional habits of contributors | Decide one format (“12 July 2024”) and stick to it |
| Unexplained acronyms | Writers assume shared knowledge | Require spell-out on first use; maintain an acronyms list |
| Title case in headings (“Our Key Partners”) | AI defaults, looks formal | Pick sentence case or title case; enforce it everywhere |
| Passive voice overuse | Formal writing habits, AI defaults | Flag passive constructions in editing; rewrite where possible |
| Tone drift between sections | Multiple writers, AI-assisted drafts | Review all documents for tone consistency before publication |
| Currency and financial figure inconsistency | International teams, multiple sources | Agree on a single currency presentation rule for reports |
| Outdated terminology | Old style guide, evolving language | Annual guide review; assign an owner |
| Missing organisation name rules | No one thought to write it down | First mention in full, subsequent mentions as agreed short form |
One final thought
A style guide is not a wall. It is a shortcut. The decisions are made so your writers — human and AI-assisted — can concentrate on what they are actually trying to say, instead of arguing about commas.
The best style guide is the one your team will actually use. Start with ten rules. Add to it when you find a gap. Review it when the language your sector uses changes. And edit every AI draft against it before it goes anywhere near a funder, a journalist, or the people your organisation serves.
Editricity helps NGOs and nonprofits communicate with clarity and consistency. For editorial support, style guide development, and copy editing, contact us.
Resources referenced in this piece:
