grant application for research

The Ultimate Grant Writing Guide (and How to Find and Apply for Grants)

Securing grants requires strategic planning. Identifying relevant opportunities, building collaborations, and crafting a comprehensive grant proposal are crucial steps. Read our ultimate guide on grant writing, finding grants, and applying for grants to get the funding for your research.

Updated on February 22, 2024

Embarking on a journey of groundbreaking research and innovation always requires more than just passion and dedication, it demands financial support. In the academic and research domains, securing grants is a pivotal factor for transforming these ideas into tangible outcomes. 

Grant awards not only offer the backing needed for ambitious projects but also stand as a testament to the importance and potential impact of your work. The process of identifying, pursuing, and securing grants, however, is riddled with nuances that necessitate careful exploration. 

Whether you're a seasoned researcher or a budding academic, navigating this complex world of grants can be challenging, but we’re here to help. In this comprehensive guide, we'll walk you through the essential steps of applying for grants, providing expert tips and insights along the way.

Finding grant opportunities 

Prior to diving into the application phase, the process of finding grants involves researching and identifying those that are relevant and realistic to your project. While the initial step may seem as simple as entering a few keywords into a search engine, the full search phase takes a more thorough investigation.

By focusing efforts solely on the grants that align with your goals, this pre-application preparation streamlines the process while also increasing the likelihood of meeting all the requirements. In fact, having a well thought out plan and a clear understanding of the grants you seek both simplifies the entire activity and sets you and your team up for success.

Apply these steps when searching for appropriate grant opportunities:

1. Determine your need

Before embarking on the grant-seeking journey, clearly articulate why you need the funds and how they will be utilized. Understanding your financial requirements is crucial for effective grant research.

2. Know when you need the money

Grants operate on specific timelines with set award dates. Align your grant-seeking efforts with these timelines to enhance your chances of success.

3. Search strategically

Build a checklist of your most important, non-negotiable search criteria for quickly weeding out grant options that absolutely do not fit your project. Then, utilize the following resources to identify potential grants:

• Online directories
• Small Business Administration (SBA)
• Foundations

4. Develop a tracking tool

After familiarizing yourself with the criteria of each grant, including paperwork, deadlines, and award amounts, make a spreadsheet or use a project management tool to stay organized. Share this with your team to ensure that everyone can contribute to the grant cycle.

Here are a few popular grant management tools to try: 

• Jotform : spreadsheet template
• Airtable : table template
• Instrumentl : software
• Submit : software

Tips for Finding Research Grants

Consider large funding sources : Explore major agencies like NSF and NIH.

Reach out to experts : Consult experienced researchers and your institution's grant office.

Stay informed : Regularly check news in your field for novel funding sources.

Know agency requirements : Research and align your proposal with their requisites.

Ask questions : Use the available resources to get insights into the process.

Demonstrate expertise : Showcase your team's knowledge and background.

Neglect lesser-known sources : Cast a wide net to diversify opportunities.

Name drop reviewers : Prevent potential conflicts of interest.

Miss your chance : Find field-specific grant options.

Forget refinement : Improve proposal language, grammar, and clarity.

Ignore grant support services : Enhance the quality of your proposal.

Overlook co-investigators : Enhance your application by adding experience.

Grant collaboration 

Now that you’ve taken the initial step of identifying potential grant opportunities, it’s time to find collaborators. The application process is lengthy and arduous. It requires a diverse set of skills. This phase is crucial for success.

With their valuable expertise and unique perspectives, these collaborators play instrumental roles in navigating the complexities of grant writing. While exploring the judiciousness that goes into building these partnerships, we will underscore why collaboration is both advantageous and indispensable to the pursuit of securing grants.

Why is collaboration important to the grant process?

Some grant funding agencies outline collaboration as an outright requirement for acceptable applications. However, the condition is more implied with others. Funders may simply favor or seek out applications that represent multidisciplinary and multinational projects.

To get an idea of the types of collaboration major funders prefer, try searching “collaborative research grants” to uncover countless possibilities, such as:

• National Endowment for the Humanities
• American Brain Tumor Association

For exploring grants specifically for international collaboration, check out this blog:

• 30+ Research Funding Agencies That Support International Collaboration

Either way, proposing an interdisciplinary research project substantially increases your funding opportunities. Teaming up with multiple collaborators who offer diverse backgrounds and skill sets enhances the robustness of your research project and increases credibility.

This is especially true for early career researchers, who can leverage collaboration with industry, international, or community partners to boost their research profile. The key lies in recognizing the multifaceted advantages of collaboration in the context of obtaining funding and maximizing the impact of your research efforts.

How can I find collaborators?

Before embarking on the search for a collaborative partner, it's essential to crystallize your objectives for the grant proposal and identify the type of support needed. Ask yourself these questions: 

1)Which facet of the grant process do I need assistance with:

2) Is my knowledge lacking in a specific: 

• Population?

3) Do I have access to the necessary:

Use these questions to compile a detailed list of your needs and prioritize them based on magnitude and ramification. These preliminary step ensure that search for an ideal collaborator is focused and effective.

Once you identify targeted criteria for the most appropriate partners, it’s time to make your approach. While a practical starting point involves reaching out to peers, mentors, and other colleagues with shared interests and research goals, we encourage you to go outside your comfort zone.

Beyond the first line of potential collaborators exists a world of opportunities to expand your network. Uncover partnership possibilities by engaging with speakers and attendees at events, workshops, webinars, and conferences related to grant writing or your field.

Also, consider joining online communities that facilitate connections among grant writers and researchers. These communities offer a space to exchange ideas and information. Sites like Collaboratory , NIH RePorter , and upwork provide channels for canvassing and engaging with feasible collaborators who are good fits for your project. 

Like any other partnership, carefully weigh your vetted options before committing to a collaboration. Talk with individuals about their qualifications and experience, availability and work style, and terms for grant writing collaborations.

Transparency on both sides of this partnership is imperative to forging a positive work environment where goals, values, and expectations align for a strong grant proposal.

Putting together a winning grant proposal

It’s time to assemble the bulk of your grant application packet – the proposal itself. Each funder is unique in outlining the details for specific grants, but here are several elements fundamental to every proposal:

• Executive Summary
• Needs assessment
• Project description
• Evaluation plan
• Team introduction
• Sustainability plan 

This list of multi-faceted components may seem daunting, but careful research and planning will make it manageable. 

Start by reading about the grant funder to learn:

• What their mission and goals are,
• Which types of projects they have funded in the past, and
• How they evaluate and score applications.

Next, view sample applications to get a feel for the length, flow, and tone the evaluators are looking for. Many funders offer samples to peruse, like these from the NIH , while others are curated by online platforms , such as Grantstation.

Also, closely evaluate the grant application’s requirements. they vary between funding organizations and opportunities, and also from one grant cycle to the next. Take notes and make a checklist of these requirements to add to an Excel spreadsheet, Google smartsheet, or management system for organizing and tracking your grant process.

Finally, understand how you will submit the final grant application. Many funders use online portals with character or word limits for each section. Be aware of these limits beforehand. Simplify the editing process by first writing each section in a Word document to be copy and pasted into the corresponding submission fields.

If there is no online application platform, the funder will usually offer a comprehensive Request for Proposal (RFP) to guide the structure of your grant proposal. The RFP: 

• Specifies page constraints
• Delineates specific sections
• Outlines additional attachments
• Provides other pertinent details

Components of a grant proposal

Cover letter.

Though not always explicitly requested, including a cover letter is a strategic maneuver that could be the factor determining whether or not grant funders engage with your proposal. It’s an opportunity to give your best first impression by grabbing the reviewer’s attention and compelling them to read further. 

Cover letters are not the place for excessive emotion or detail, keep it brief and direct, stating your financial needs and purpose confidently from the outset. Also, try to clearly demonstrate the connection between your project and the funder’s mission to create additional value beyond the formal proposal.

Executive summary

Like an abstract for your research manuscript, the executive summary is a brief synopsis that encapsulates the overarching topics and key points of your grant proposal. It must set the tone for the main body of the proposal while providing enough information to stand alone if necessary.

Refer to How to Write an Executive Summary for a Grant Proposal for detailed guidance like:

• Give a clear and concise account of your identity, funding needs, and project roadmap.
• Write in an instructive manner aiming for an objective and persuasive tone
• Be convincing and pragmatic about your research team's ability.
• Follow the logical flow of main points in your proposal.
• Use subheadings and bulleted lists for clarity.
• Write the executive summary at the end of the proposal process.
• Reference detailed information explained in the proposal body.
• Address the funder directly.
• Provide excessive details about your project's accomplishments or management plans.
• Write in the first person.
• Disclose confidential information that could be accessed by competitors.
• Focus excessively on problems rather than proposed solutions.
• Deviate from the logical flow of the main proposal.
• Forget to align with evaluation criteria if specified

Project narrative

After the executive summary is the project narrative . This is the main body of your grant proposal and encompasses several distinct elements that work together to tell the story of your project and justify the need for funding. 

Include these primary components:

Introduction of the project team

Briefly outline the names, positions, and credentials of the project’s directors, key personnel, contributors, and advisors in a format that clearly defines their roles and responsibilities. Showing your team’s capacity and ability to meet all deliverables builds confidence and trust with the reviewers.

Needs assessment or problem statement

A compelling needs assessment (or problem statement) clearly articulates a problem that must be urgently addressed. It also offers a well-defined project idea as a possible solution. This statement emphasizes the pressing situation and highlights existing gaps and their consequences to illustrate how your project will make a difference.

To begin, ask yourself these questions:

• What urgent need are we focusing on with this project?
• Which unique solution does our project offer to this urgent need? 
• How will this project positively impact the world once completed?

Here are some helpful examples and templates.

Goals and objectives

Goals are broad statements that are fairly abstract and intangible. Objectives are more narrow statements that are concrete and measurable. For example :

• Goal : “To explore the impact of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance in college students.”
• Objective : “To compare cognitive test scores of students with less than six hours of sleep and those with 8 or more hours of sleep.”

Focus on outcomes, not processes, when crafting goals and objectives. Use the SMART acronym to align them with the proposal's mission while emphasizing their impact on the target audience.

Methods and strategies

It is vitally important to explain how you intend to use the grant funds to fulfill the project’s objectives. Detail the resources and activities that will be employed. Methods and strategies are the bridge between idea and action. They must prove to reviewers the plausibility of your project and the significance of their possible funding.

Here are some useful guidelines for writing your methods section that are outlined in " Winning Grants: Step by Step ."

• Firmly tie your methods to the proposed project's objectives and needs assessment.
• Clearly link them to the resources you are requesting in the proposal budget.
• Thoroughly explain why you chose these methods by including research, expert opinion, and your experience.
• Precisely list the facilities and capital equipment that you will use in the project.
• Carefully structure activities so that the program moves toward the desired results in a time-bound manner.

A comprehensive evaluation plan underscores the effectiveness and accountability of a project for both the funders and your team. An evaluation is used for tracking progress and success. The evaluation process shows how to determine the success of your project and measure the impact of the grant award by systematically gauging and analyzing each phase of your project as it compares to the set objectives.

Evaluations typically fall into two standard categories:

1. Formative evaluation : extending from project development through implementation, continuously provides feedback for necessary adjustments and improvements. 

2. Summative evaluation : conducted post-project completion, critically assesses overall success and impact by compiling information on activities and outcomes.

Creating a conceptual model of your project is helpful when identifying these key evaluation points. Then, you must consider exactly who will do the evaluations, what specific skills and resources they need, how long it will take, and how much it will cost.

Sustainability

Presenting a solid plan that illustrates exactly how your project will continue to thrive after the grant money is gone builds the funder's confidence in the project’s longevity and significance. In this sustainability section, it is vital to demonstrate a diversified funding strategy for securing the long-term viability of your program.

There are three possible long term outcomes for projects with correlated sustainability options:

• Short term projects: Though only implemented once, will have ongoing maintenance costs, such as monitoring, training, and updates.

(E.g., digitizing records, cleaning up after an oil spill)

• Projects that will generate income at some point in the future: must be funded until your product or service can cover operating costs with an alternative plan in place for deficits.

(E.g., medical device, technology, farming method)

• Ongoing projects: will eventually need a continuous stream of funding from a government entity or large organization.

(E.g., space exploration, hurricane tracking)

Along with strategies for funding your program beyond the initial grant,  reference your access to institutional infrastructure and resources that will reduce costs.

Also, submit multi-year budgets that reflect how sustainability factors are integrated into the project’s design.

The budget section of your grant proposal, comprising both a spreadsheet and a narrative, is the most influential component. It should be able to stand independently as a suitable representation of the entire endeavor. Providing a detailed plan to outline how grant funds will be utilized is crucial for illustrating cost-effectiveness and careful consideration of project expenses. 

A comprehensive grant budget offers numerous benefits to both the grantor , or entity funding the grant, and the grantee , those receiving the funding, such as:

• Grantor : The budget facilitates objective evaluation and comparison between multiple proposals by conveying a project's story through responsible fund management and financial transparency.
• Grantee : The budget serves as a tracking tool for monitoring and adjusting expenses throughout the project and cultivates trust with funders by answering questions before they arise.

Because the grant proposal budget is all-encompassing and integral to your efforts for securing funding, it can seem overwhelming. Start by listing all anticipated expenditures within two broad categories, direct and indirect expenses , where:

• Direct : are essential for successful project implementation, are measurable project-associated costs, such as salaries, equipment, supplies, travel, and external consultants, and are itemized and detailed in various categories within the grant budget.
• Indirect : includes administrative costs not directly or exclusively tied to your project, but necessary for its completion, like rent, utilities, and insurance, think about lab or meeting spaces that are shared by multiple project teams, or Directors who oversee several ongoing projects.

After compiling your list, review sample budgets to understand the typical layout and complexity. Focus closely on the budget narratives , where you have the opportunity to justify each aspect of the spreadsheet to ensure clarity and validity.

While not always needed, the appendices consist of relevant supplementary materials that are clearly referenced within your grant application. These might include: 

• Updated resumes that emphasize staff members' current positions and accomplishments. 
• Letters of support from people or organizations that have authority in the field of your research, or community members that may benefit from the project.
• Visual aids like charts, graphs, and maps that contribute directly to your project’s story and are referred to previously in the application. 

Finalizing your grant application

Now that your grant application is finished, make sure it's not just another document in the stack Aim for a grant proposal that captivates the evaluator. It should stand out not only for presenting an excellent project, but for being engaging and easily comprehended . 

Keep the language simple. Avoid jargon. Prioritizing accuracy and conciseness. Opt for reader-friendly formatting with white space, headings, standard fonts, and illustrations to enhance readability.

Always take time for thorough proofreading and editing. You can even set your proposal aside for a few days before revisiting it for additional edits and improvements. At this stage, it is helpful to seek outside feedback from those familiar with the subject matter as well as novices to catch unnoticed mistakes and improve clarity.

If you want to be absolutely sure your grant proposal is polished, consider getting it edited by AJE .

How can AI help the grant process?

When used efficiently, AI is a powerful tool for streamlining and enhancing various aspects of the grant process.

• Use AI algorithms to review related studies and identify knowledge gaps.
• Employ AI for quick analysis of complex datasets to identify patterns and trends.
• Leverage AI algorithms to match your project with relevant grant opportunities.
• Apply Natural Language Processing for analyzing grant guidelines and tailoring proposals accordingly.
• Utilize AI-powered tools for efficient project planning and execution.
• Employ AI for tracking project progress and generating reports.
• Take advantage of AI tools for improving the clarity, coherence, and quality of your proposal.
• Rely solely on manual efforts that are less comprehensive and more time consuming.
• Overlook the fact that AI is designed to find patterns and trends within large datasets.
• Minimize AI’s ability to use set parameters for sifting through vast amounts of data quickly.
• Forget that the strength of AI lies in its capacity to follow your prompts without divergence.
• Neglect tools that assist with scheduling, resource allocation, and milestone tracking.
• Settle for software that is not intuitive with automated reminders and updates.
• Hesitate to use AI tools for improving grammar, spelling, and composition throughout the writing process.

Remember that AI provides a diverse array of tools; there is no universal solution. Identify the most suitable tool for your specific task. Also, like a screwdriver or a hammer, AI needs informed human direction and control to work effectively.

Looking for tips when writing your grant application? 

Check out these resources:

• 4 Tips for Writing a Persuasive Grant Proposal
• Writing Effective Grant Applications
• 7 Tips for Writing an Effective Grant Proposal
• The best-kept secrets to winning grants
• The Best Grant Writing Books for Beginner Grant Writers
• Research Grant Proposal Funding: How I got $1 Million

Final thoughts

The bottom line – applying for grants is challenging. It requires passion, dedication, and a set of diverse skills rarely found within one human being.

Therefore, collaboration is key to a successful grant process . It encourages everyone’s strengths to shine. Be honest and ask yourself, “Which elements of this grant application do I really need help with?” Seek out experts in those areas.

Keep this guide on hand to reference as you work your way through this funding journey. Use the resources contained within. Seek out answers to all the questions that will inevitably arise throughout the process.

The grants are out there just waiting for the right project to present itself – one that shares the funder’s mission and is a benefit to our communities. Find grants that align with your project goals, tell your story through a compelling proposal, and get ready to make the world a better place with your research.

The AJE Team

See our "Privacy Policy"

Grant Proposals (or Give me the money!)

What this handout is about.

This handout will help you write and revise grant proposals for research funding in all academic disciplines (sciences, social sciences, humanities, and the arts). It’s targeted primarily to graduate students and faculty, although it will also be helpful to undergraduate students who are seeking funding for research (e.g. for a senior thesis).

The grant writing process

A grant proposal or application is a document or set of documents that is submitted to an organization with the explicit intent of securing funding for a research project. Grant writing varies widely across the disciplines, and research intended for epistemological purposes (philosophy or the arts) rests on very different assumptions than research intended for practical applications (medicine or social policy research). Nonetheless, this handout attempts to provide a general introduction to grant writing across the disciplines.

Before you begin writing your proposal, you need to know what kind of research you will be doing and why. You may have a topic or experiment in mind, but taking the time to define what your ultimate purpose is can be essential to convincing others to fund that project. Although some scholars in the humanities and arts may not have thought about their projects in terms of research design, hypotheses, research questions, or results, reviewers and funding agencies expect you to frame your project in these terms. You may also find that thinking about your project in these terms reveals new aspects of it to you.

Writing successful grant applications is a long process that begins with an idea. Although many people think of grant writing as a linear process (from idea to proposal to award), it is a circular process. Many people start by defining their research question or questions. What knowledge or information will be gained as a direct result of your project? Why is undertaking your research important in a broader sense? You will need to explicitly communicate this purpose to the committee reviewing your application. This is easier when you know what you plan to achieve before you begin the writing process.

Diagram 1 below provides an overview of the grant writing process and may help you plan your proposal development.

Applicants must write grant proposals, submit them, receive notice of acceptance or rejection, and then revise their proposals. Unsuccessful grant applicants must revise and resubmit their proposals during the next funding cycle. Successful grant applications and the resulting research lead to ideas for further research and new grant proposals.

Cultivating an ongoing, positive relationship with funding agencies may lead to additional grants down the road. Thus, make sure you file progress reports and final reports in a timely and professional manner. Although some successful grant applicants may fear that funding agencies will reject future proposals because they’ve already received “enough” funding, the truth is that money follows money. Individuals or projects awarded grants in the past are more competitive and thus more likely to receive funding in the future.

Some general tips

• Begin early.
• Apply early and often.
• Don’t forget to include a cover letter with your application.
• Answer all questions. (Pre-empt all unstated questions.)
• If rejected, revise your proposal and apply again.
• Give them what they want. Follow the application guidelines exactly.
• Be explicit and specific.
• Be realistic in designing the project.
• Make explicit the connections between your research questions and objectives, your objectives and methods, your methods and results, and your results and dissemination plan.
• Follow the application guidelines exactly. (We have repeated this tip because it is very, very important.)

Before you start writing

Identify your needs and focus.

First, identify your needs. Answering the following questions may help you:

• Are you undertaking preliminary or pilot research in order to develop a full-blown research agenda?
• Are you seeking funding for dissertation research? Pre-dissertation research? Postdoctoral research? Archival research? Experimental research? Fieldwork?
• Are you seeking a stipend so that you can write a dissertation or book? Polish a manuscript?
• Do you want a fellowship in residence at an institution that will offer some programmatic support or other resources to enhance your project?
• Do you want funding for a large research project that will last for several years and involve multiple staff members?

Next, think about the focus of your research/project. Answering the following questions may help you narrow it down:

• What is the topic? Why is this topic important?
• What are the research questions that you’re trying to answer? What relevance do your research questions have?
• What are your hypotheses?
• What are your research methods?
• Why is your research/project important? What is its significance?
• Do you plan on using quantitative methods? Qualitative methods? Both?
• Will you be undertaking experimental research? Clinical research?

Once you have identified your needs and focus, you can begin looking for prospective grants and funding agencies.

Finding prospective grants and funding agencies

Whether your proposal receives funding will rely in large part on whether your purpose and goals closely match the priorities of granting agencies. Locating possible grantors is a time consuming task, but in the long run it will yield the greatest benefits. Even if you have the most appealing research proposal in the world, if you don’t send it to the right institutions, then you’re unlikely to receive funding.

There are many sources of information about granting agencies and grant programs. Most universities and many schools within universities have Offices of Research, whose primary purpose is to support faculty and students in grant-seeking endeavors. These offices usually have libraries or resource centers to help people find prospective grants.

At UNC, the Research at Carolina office coordinates research support.

The Funding Information Portal offers a collection of databases and proposal development guidance.

The UNC School of Medicine and School of Public Health each have their own Office of Research.

Writing your proposal

The majority of grant programs recruit academic reviewers with knowledge of the disciplines and/or program areas of the grant. Thus, when writing your grant proposals, assume that you are addressing a colleague who is knowledgeable in the general area, but who does not necessarily know the details about your research questions.

Remember that most readers are lazy and will not respond well to a poorly organized, poorly written, or confusing proposal. Be sure to give readers what they want. Follow all the guidelines for the particular grant you are applying for. This may require you to reframe your project in a different light or language. Reframing your project to fit a specific grant’s requirements is a legitimate and necessary part of the process unless it will fundamentally change your project’s goals or outcomes.

Final decisions about which proposals are funded often come down to whether the proposal convinces the reviewer that the research project is well planned and feasible and whether the investigators are well qualified to execute it. Throughout the proposal, be as explicit as possible. Predict the questions that the reviewer may have and answer them. Przeworski and Salomon (1995) note that reviewers read with three questions in mind:

• What are we going to learn as a result of the proposed project that we do not know now? (goals, aims, and outcomes)
• Why is it worth knowing? (significance)
• How will we know that the conclusions are valid? (criteria for success) (2)

Be sure to answer these questions in your proposal. Keep in mind that reviewers may not read every word of your proposal. Your reviewer may only read the abstract, the sections on research design and methodology, the vitae, and the budget. Make these sections as clear and straightforward as possible.

The way you write your grant will tell the reviewers a lot about you (Reif-Lehrer 82). From reading your proposal, the reviewers will form an idea of who you are as a scholar, a researcher, and a person. They will decide whether you are creative, logical, analytical, up-to-date in the relevant literature of the field, and, most importantly, capable of executing the proposed project. Allow your discipline and its conventions to determine the general style of your writing, but allow your own voice and personality to come through. Be sure to clarify your project’s theoretical orientation.

Develop a general proposal and budget

Because most proposal writers seek funding from several different agencies or granting programs, it is a good idea to begin by developing a general grant proposal and budget. This general proposal is sometimes called a “white paper.” Your general proposal should explain your project to a general academic audience. Before you submit proposals to different grant programs, you will tailor a specific proposal to their guidelines and priorities.

Organizing your proposal

Although each funding agency will have its own (usually very specific) requirements, there are several elements of a proposal that are fairly standard, and they often come in the following order:

• Introduction (statement of the problem, purpose of research or goals, and significance of research)

Literature review

• Project narrative (methods, procedures, objectives, outcomes or deliverables, evaluation, and dissemination)
• Budget and budget justification

Format the proposal so that it is easy to read. Use headings to break the proposal up into sections. If it is long, include a table of contents with page numbers.

The title page usually includes a brief yet explicit title for the research project, the names of the principal investigator(s), the institutional affiliation of the applicants (the department and university), name and address of the granting agency, project dates, amount of funding requested, and signatures of university personnel authorizing the proposal (when necessary). Most funding agencies have specific requirements for the title page; make sure to follow them.

The abstract provides readers with their first impression of your project. To remind themselves of your proposal, readers may glance at your abstract when making their final recommendations, so it may also serve as their last impression of your project. The abstract should explain the key elements of your research project in the future tense. Most abstracts state: (1) the general purpose, (2) specific goals, (3) research design, (4) methods, and (5) significance (contribution and rationale). Be as explicit as possible in your abstract. Use statements such as, “The objective of this study is to …”

Introduction

The introduction should cover the key elements of your proposal, including a statement of the problem, the purpose of research, research goals or objectives, and significance of the research. The statement of problem should provide a background and rationale for the project and establish the need and relevance of the research. How is your project different from previous research on the same topic? Will you be using new methodologies or covering new theoretical territory? The research goals or objectives should identify the anticipated outcomes of the research and should match up to the needs identified in the statement of problem. List only the principle goal(s) or objective(s) of your research and save sub-objectives for the project narrative.

Many proposals require a literature review. Reviewers want to know whether you’ve done the necessary preliminary research to undertake your project. Literature reviews should be selective and critical, not exhaustive. Reviewers want to see your evaluation of pertinent works. For more information, see our handout on literature reviews .

Project narrative

The project narrative provides the meat of your proposal and may require several subsections. The project narrative should supply all the details of the project, including a detailed statement of problem, research objectives or goals, hypotheses, methods, procedures, outcomes or deliverables, and evaluation and dissemination of the research.

For the project narrative, pre-empt and/or answer all of the reviewers’ questions. Don’t leave them wondering about anything. For example, if you propose to conduct unstructured interviews with open-ended questions, be sure you’ve explained why this methodology is best suited to the specific research questions in your proposal. Or, if you’re using item response theory rather than classical test theory to verify the validity of your survey instrument, explain the advantages of this innovative methodology. Or, if you need to travel to Valdez, Alaska to access historical archives at the Valdez Museum, make it clear what documents you hope to find and why they are relevant to your historical novel on the ’98ers in the Alaskan Gold Rush.

Clearly and explicitly state the connections between your research objectives, research questions, hypotheses, methodologies, and outcomes. As the requirements for a strong project narrative vary widely by discipline, consult a discipline-specific guide to grant writing for some additional advice.

Explain staffing requirements in detail and make sure that staffing makes sense. Be very explicit about the skill sets of the personnel already in place (you will probably include their Curriculum Vitae as part of the proposal). Explain the necessary skill sets and functions of personnel you will recruit. To minimize expenses, phase out personnel who are not relevant to later phases of a project.

The budget spells out project costs and usually consists of a spreadsheet or table with the budget detailed as line items and a budget narrative (also known as a budget justification) that explains the various expenses. Even when proposal guidelines do not specifically mention a narrative, be sure to include a one or two page explanation of the budget. To see a sample budget, turn to Example #1 at the end of this handout.

Consider including an exhaustive budget for your project, even if it exceeds the normal grant size of a particular funding organization. Simply make it clear that you are seeking additional funding from other sources. This technique will make it easier for you to combine awards down the road should you have the good fortune of receiving multiple grants.

Make sure that all budget items meet the funding agency’s requirements. For example, all U.S. government agencies have strict requirements for airline travel. Be sure the cost of the airline travel in your budget meets their requirements. If a line item falls outside an agency’s requirements (e.g. some organizations will not cover equipment purchases or other capital expenses), explain in the budget justification that other grant sources will pay for the item.

Many universities require that indirect costs (overhead) be added to grants that they administer. Check with the appropriate offices to find out what the standard (or required) rates are for overhead. Pass a draft budget by the university officer in charge of grant administration for assistance with indirect costs and costs not directly associated with research (e.g. facilities use charges).

Furthermore, make sure you factor in the estimated taxes applicable for your case. Depending on the categories of expenses and your particular circumstances (whether you are a foreign national, for example), estimated tax rates may differ. You can consult respective departmental staff or university services, as well as professional tax assistants. For information on taxes on scholarships and fellowships, see https://cashier.unc.edu/student-tax-information/scholarships-fellowships/ .

Explain the timeframe for the research project in some detail. When will you begin and complete each step? It may be helpful to reviewers if you present a visual version of your timeline. For less complicated research, a table summarizing the timeline for the project will help reviewers understand and evaluate the planning and feasibility. See Example #2 at the end of this handout.

For multi-year research proposals with numerous procedures and a large staff, a time line diagram can help clarify the feasibility and planning of the study. See Example #3 at the end of this handout.

Revising your proposal

Strong grant proposals take a long time to develop. Start the process early and leave time to get feedback from several readers on different drafts. Seek out a variety of readers, both specialists in your research area and non-specialist colleagues. You may also want to request assistance from knowledgeable readers on specific areas of your proposal. For example, you may want to schedule a meeting with a statistician to help revise your methodology section. Don’t hesitate to seek out specialized assistance from the relevant research offices on your campus. At UNC, the Odum Institute provides a variety of services to graduate students and faculty in the social sciences.

In your revision and editing, ask your readers to give careful consideration to whether you’ve made explicit the connections between your research objectives and methodology. Here are some example questions:

• Have you presented a compelling case?
• Have you made your hypotheses explicit?
• Does your project seem feasible? Is it overly ambitious? Does it have other weaknesses?
• Have you stated the means that grantors can use to evaluate the success of your project after you’ve executed it?

If a granting agency lists particular criteria used for rating and evaluating proposals, be sure to share these with your own reviewers.

Example #1. Sample Budget

Jet travel $6,100 This estimate is based on the commercial high season rate for jet economy travel on Sabena Belgian Airlines. No U.S. carriers fly to Kigali, Rwanda. Sabena has student fare tickets available which will be significantly less expensive (approximately $2,000).

Maintenance allowance $22,788 Based on the Fulbright-Hays Maintenance Allowances published in the grant application guide.

Research assistant/translator $4,800 The research assistant/translator will be a native (and primary) speaker of Kinya-rwanda with at least a four-year university degree. They will accompany the primary investigator during life history interviews to provide assistance in comprehension. In addition, they will provide commentary, explanations, and observations to facilitate the primary investigator’s participant observation. During the first phase of the project in Kigali, the research assistant will work forty hours a week and occasional overtime as needed. During phases two and three in rural Rwanda, the assistant will stay with the investigator overnight in the field when necessary. The salary of $400 per month is based on the average pay rate for individuals with similar qualifications working for international NGO’s in Rwanda.

Transportation within country, phase one $1,200 The primary investigator and research assistant will need regular transportation within Kigali by bus and taxi. The average taxi fare in Kigali is $6-8 and bus fare is $.15. This figure is based on an average of $10 per day in transportation costs during the first project phase.

Transportation within country, phases two and three $12,000 Project personnel will also require regular transportation between rural field sites. If it is not possible to remain overnight, daily trips will be necessary. The average rental rate for a 4×4 vehicle in Rwanda is $130 per day. This estimate is based on an average of $50 per day in transportation costs for the second and third project phases. These costs could be reduced if an arrangement could be made with either a government ministry or international aid agency for transportation assistance.

Email $720 The rate for email service from RwandaTel (the only service provider in Rwanda) is $60 per month. Email access is vital for receiving news reports on Rwanda and the region as well as for staying in contact with dissertation committee members and advisors in the United States.

Audiocassette tapes $400 Audiocassette tapes will be necessary for recording life history interviews, musical performances, community events, story telling, and other pertinent data.

Photographic & slide film $100 Photographic and slide film will be necessary to document visual data such as landscape, environment, marriages, funerals, community events, etc.

Laptop computer $2,895 A laptop computer will be necessary for recording observations, thoughts, and analysis during research project. Price listed is a special offer to UNC students through the Carolina Computing Initiative.

NUD*IST 4.0 software $373.00 NUD*IST, “Nonnumerical, Unstructured Data, Indexing, Searching, and Theorizing,” is necessary for cataloging, indexing, and managing field notes both during and following the field research phase. The program will assist in cataloging themes that emerge during the life history interviews.

Administrative fee $100 Fee set by Fulbright-Hays for the sponsoring institution.

Example #2: Project Timeline in Table Format

Example #3: Project Timeline in Chart Format

Some closing advice

Some of us may feel ashamed or embarrassed about asking for money or promoting ourselves. Often, these feelings have more to do with our own insecurities than with problems in the tone or style of our writing. If you’re having trouble because of these types of hang-ups, the most important thing to keep in mind is that it never hurts to ask. If you never ask for the money, they’ll never give you the money. Besides, the worst thing they can do is say no.

UNC resources for proposal writing

Research at Carolina http://research.unc.edu

The Odum Institute for Research in the Social Sciences https://odum.unc.edu/

UNC Medical School Office of Research https://www.med.unc.edu/oor

UNC School of Public Health Office of Research http://www.sph.unc.edu/research/

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Holloway, Brian R. 2003. Proposal Writing Across the Disciplines. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Levine, S. Joseph. “Guide for Writing a Funding Proposal.” http://www.learnerassociates.net/proposal/ .

Locke, Lawrence F., Waneen Wyrick Spirduso, and Stephen J. Silverman. 2014. Proposals That Work . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Przeworski, Adam, and Frank Salomon. 2012. “Some Candid Suggestions on the Art of Writing Proposals.” Social Science Research Council. https://s3.amazonaws.com/ssrc-cdn2/art-of-writing-proposals-dsd-e-56b50ef814f12.pdf .

Reif-Lehrer, Liane. 1989. Writing a Successful Grant Application . Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Wiggins, Beverly. 2002. “Funding and Proposal Writing for Social Science Faculty and Graduate Student Research.” Chapel Hill: Howard W. Odum Institute for Research in Social Science. 2 Feb. 2004. http://www2.irss.unc.edu/irss/shortcourses/wigginshandouts/granthandout.pdf.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER COLUMN
• 01 September 2023

A funding adviser’s guide to writing a great grant application

• Mireille Consalvey 0

Mireille Consalvey was until recently a senior research-funding adviser at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

After almost nine years working in a university research office, shepherding approximately 1,000 applications through to submission, I have witnessed many researchers make the same mistakes, time and time again. Drawing on these lessons, I present a checklist on how to maximize the chances of success with your application.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 621 , 883-884 (2023)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02756-6

This is an article from the Nature Careers Community, a place for Nature readers to share their professional experiences and advice. Guest posts are encouraged .

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Related Articles

‘I saw that discrimination wasn’t hearsay or rumours — it really did exist’

Career Q&A 05 JUN 24

Need a policy for using ChatGPT in the classroom? Try asking students

Career Column 05 JUN 24

Why China has been a growing study destination for African students

Nature Index 05 JUN 24

CERN’s $17-billion supercollider in question as top funder criticizes cost

News 06 JUN 24

China’s big-science bet

China’s research clout leads to growth in homegrown science publishing

I was denied tenure — how do I cope?

Career Feature 06 JUN 24

Racing across the Atlantic: how we pulled together for ocean science

Career Feature 03 JUN 24

How I run a virtual lab group that’s collaborative, inclusive and productive

Career Column 31 MAY 24

Faculty Positions in School of Engineering, Westlake University

The School of Engineering (SOE) at Westlake University is seeking to fill multiple tenured or tenure-track faculty positions in all ranks.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Westlake University

High-Level Talents at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University

For clinical medicine and basic medicine; basic research of emerging inter-disciplines and medical big data.

Nanchang, Jiangxi, China

The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University

Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor/Senior Lecturer/Lecturer

The School of Science and Engineering (SSE) at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK-Shenzhen) sincerely invites applications for mul...

Shenzhen, China

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK Shenzhen)

Faculty Positions& Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Optical and Electronic Information, HUST

Job Opportunities: Leading talents, young talents, overseas outstanding young scholars, postdoctoral researchers.

Wuhan, Hubei, China

School of Optical and Electronic Information, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Sample Grant Applications

On this page:

• Research Project Grants (R01): Sample Applications and Summary Statements 
• Early Career Research (ECR) R21 Awards: Sample Applications and Summary Statements 

Exploratory/Developmental Research Grant (R21) Awards: Sample Applications and Summary Statements

Preparing a stellar grant application is critical to securing research funding from NIDCD. On this page you will find examples of grant applications and summary statements from NIDCD investigators who have graciously shared their successful submissions to benefit the research community.

You can find more details about the NIDCD grants process from application to award on our  How to Apply for a Grant, Research Training, or Career Development Funding page.

For more examples of applications for research grants, small business grants, training and career awards, and cooperative agreements, please visit Sample Applications & More  on the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases website.

Always follow your funding opportunity’s specific instructions for application format. Although these samples demonstrate stellar grantsmanship, time has passed since these applications were submitted and the samples may not reflect changes in format or instructions.

The application text is copyrighted. You may use it only for nonprofit educational purposes provided the document remains unchanged and the researcher, the grantee organization, and NIDCD are all credited.

Section 508 compliance and accessibility: We have reformatted these sample applications to improve accessibility for people with disabilities and users of assistive technology. If you have trouble accessing the content, please contact the NIDCD web team .

Research Project Grants (R01): Sample Applications and Summary Statements

Investigator-initiated  Research Project Grants (R01)  make up the largest single category of support provided by NIDCD and NIH. The R01 is considered the traditional grant mechanism. These grants are awarded to organizations on behalf of an individual (a principal investigator, or PI) to facilitate pursuit of a research objective in the area of the investigator's research interests and competence.

Leora R. Cherney, Ph.D., & Allen Walter Heinemann, Ph.D., Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago

"Defining trajectories of linguistic, cognitive-communicative and quality of life outcomes in aphasia"

• Full Application (5.59MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (336KB PDF)

Robert C. Froemke, Ph.D., New York University Grossman School of Medicine

“Synaptic basis of perceptual learning in primary auditory cortex”

• Full Application (5.3MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (608KB PDF)

Rene H. Gifford, Ph.D., & Stephen Mark Camarata, Ph.D., Vanderbilt University Medical Center

"Image-guided cochlear implant programming: Pediatric speech, language, and literacy"

• Full Application (9.63MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (485KB PDF)

Stavros Lomvardas, Ph.D., Columbia University Health Sciences

"Principles of zonal olfactory receptor gene expression"

• Full Application (6.37MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (183KB PDF)

Christopher Shera, Ph.D., University of Southern California

"Understanding otoacoustic emissions"

• Full Application (6.9MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (447KB PDF)

Early Career Research (ECR) R21 Awards: Sample Applications and Summary Statements

The NIDCD Early Career Research (ECR) R21 Award supports both basic and clinical research from scientists who are beginning to establish an independent research career. The research must be focused on one or more of NIDCD's  scientific mission areas . The NIDCD ECR Award R21 supports projects including secondary analysis of existing data; small, self-contained research projects; development of research methodology; translational research; outcomes research; and development of new research technology. The intent of the NIDCD ECR Award R21 is for the program director(s)/principal investigator(s) to obtain sufficient preliminary data for a subsequent R01 application.

Ho Ming Chow, Ph.D., University of Delaware

“Neural markers of persistence and recovery from childhood stuttering: An fMRI study of continuous speech production”

• Full Application (7.64MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (736KB PDF)

Brian B. Monson, Ph.D., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

"Auditory experience during the prenatal and perinatal period"

• Full Application (3.74MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (525KB PDF)

Elizabeth A. Walker, Ph.D., University of Iowa

“Mechanisms of listening effort in school age children who are hard of hearing”

• Full Application (10.2MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (622KB PDF)

The NIH Exploratory/Developmental Research R21 grant mechanism encourages exploratory and developmental research by providing support for the early and conceptual stages of project development. NIH has standardized the Exploratory/Developmental Grant (R21) application characteristics, requirements, preparation, and review procedures in order to accommodate investigator-initiated (unsolicited) grant applications. Projects should be distinct from those supported through the traditional R01 mechanism. The NIH Grants & Funding website explains the scope of this program .

Taylor Abel, M.D., University of Pittsburgh, & Lori Holt, Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin

“Flexible representation of speech in the supratemporal plane”

• Full Application (11.5MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (1.01MB PDF)

Melissa L. Anderson, Ph.D., MSCI, UMass Chan Medical School

“Deaf ACCESS: Adapting Consent through Community Engagement and State-of-the-art Simulation”

• Full Application (1.34MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (354KB PDF)

Lynnette McCluskey, Ph.D., Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University

“Ace2 in the healthy and inflamed taste system”

• Full Application (6.05MB PDF)

Benjamin R. Munson, Ph.D., University of Minnesota

“Race, ethnicity, and speech intelligibility in normal hearing and hearing impairment”

• Full Application (1.35MB PDF)
• Summary Statement (378KB PDF)

(link is external) .

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Funding at NSF

The U.S. National Science Foundation offers hundreds of funding opportunities — including grants, cooperative agreements and fellowships — that support research and education across science and engineering.

Learn how to apply for NSF funding by visiting the links below.

Finding the right funding opportunity

Learn about NSF's funding priorities and how to find a funding opportunity that's right for you.

Preparing your proposal

Learn about the pieces that make up a proposal and how to prepare a proposal for NSF.

Submitting your proposal

Learn how to submit a proposal to NSF using one of our online systems.

How we make funding decisions

Learn about NSF's merit review process, which ensures the proposals NSF receives are reviewed in a fair, competitive, transparent and in-depth manner.

NSF 101 answers common questions asked by those interested in applying for NSF funding. 

Research approaches we encourage

Learn about interdisciplinary research, convergence research and transdisciplinary research.

Newest funding opportunities

Sbir/sttr phase iib supplemental funding requests, cyber-physical systems (cps), nsf small business innovation research / small business technology transfer phase ii programs (sbir/sttr phase ii), nsf small business innovation research / small business technology transfer phase i programs (sbir/sttr phase i).

• How to write a Wellcome grant application

We know that preparing funding applications is time-consuming and can be stressful, so we’ve put together some tips to help you write your Wellcome grant application. 

This advice applies to people applying to our Early-Career Awards , Career Development Awards and Discovery Awards .

• Share with Facebook
• Share with X
• Share with LinkedIn
• Share with Email

Before you start to write  

Check you are eligible.

Read all the guidance on the specific funding scheme page on our website . You’ll find information about eligibility and suitability, what we offer, how to apply and deadlines.

Make sure your research proposal is within our funding remit .

Gather all the information you need

If you want to get an idea of the information you’ll need to provide in your application, you can download a sample application form on a scheme page or look at the application on the  Wellcome Funding platform. 

There’s general funding information in the funding guidance section . If you can’t find the answer to your question, you can contact our funding information advisers .

If you are disabled or have a long-term health condition, find out how we can support you .

Get as much advice as you can – ask other people if they are willing to share their successful and unsuccessful applications with you.

Contact the research support office at your administering organisation early in the application process, so they can give you advice and let you know when they need to receive your application.

"Ideally researchers need to contact me when they first have the idea of applying – the earlier the better. We can check eligibility – if they’re not eligible they’ll lose a lot of time. We can also put them in contact with previous applicants who might be willing to share their application."

Silvia Maretto, Research Support Officer, NUI Galway

Make sure your proposal is competitive

Discuss your ideas with your sponsor, mentor, and/or senior colleagues. Get input from colleagues who are inside and outside your research field.

You should think about the following, and take it into account when you write your application:

Your research proposal

• Importance of the research question(s) : Will your proposal generate significant shifts in understanding in your field?
• Quality and feasibility : Is your proposal well-designed? Do you have evidence to support your approach? Is there a clear rationale? What are the potential pitfalls and your contingency plans? Is the timescale realistic? Does your research team have the necessary skills and expertise?
• Creativity :  Is your proposal just a direct continuation of existing work? Will it develop and test new concepts, methods or technologies? Will your proposal combine existing ideas and approaches in a new way? Does it have the potential to stimulate new and innovative research?
• Knowledge : Can you show a breadth and depth of knowledge about your research area? Are other people doing similar research? Are you familiar with existing literature on the topic?
• Teamwork : If you are applying with coapplicants, explain why a collaborative approach is necessary for this project.

You as an applicant

• Experience : Can you demonstrate relevant experience and your ability to deliver what you propose? How do you plan to develop your research skills and experience of different methodologies?
• Your contributions to research :  How have you contributed to developing new ideas, tools or techniques? Which of your research outputs   is most relevant to your proposed research and what was your role in developing these outputs? How have you contributed to the wider research community? For example, contributions to conferences, to knowledge sharing activities or to improving research culture.
• Career development : How will you use continuing professional development training to develop yourself and any staff employed on your grant? Have you demonstrated a commitment to developing your leadership and management skills?
• Autonomy : Will you have intellectual ownership of the project? Will you be driving its development?

Your research environment

• Research environment :  How will your chosen research environment support you to undertake your research? Do you have appropriate facilities? Have you identified sponsors, mentors or collaborators  with the right expertise to support you and to make sure your project is a success?
• Opportunities for development :  How will your administering organisation support you to develop as a researcher? Which skills will you have the opportunity to build?  
• Your contribution to research culture :  How will you help to develop and maintain a positive and inclusive research culture within your administering organisation?  How will you support the development of other researchers?

"Successful applications provide answers to two key questions typically asked in review panels. First, how is this a new direction or approach that goes beyond the 'same-old' in the field? Second, how is the applicant positioned to do the work? Reviewers are excited when something new and exceptional is proposed that draws on a unique expertise of the applicant."

Professor Peter Robin Hiesinger, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience Expert Review Group at Wellcome

Writing your application  

Give yourself plenty of time.

It’s really important that you avoid rushing your application. Allow plenty of time ahead of the deadline.

Check the specific funding scheme page for advice about your application, including deadlines and submissions.

Other timings that matter

Allow enough time for your application to be approved and submitted by the 'authorised organisational approver' at your administering organisation. Make sure you’re aware of any deadlines at your organisation that could delay this.

Also check that anyone involved in your application, such as your sponsor, mentor or coapplicants, can meet the scheme deadline.

Make your application easy to read and understand

• Aim your proposal at people who have specific expertise in your field as well as those who have broader research experience.
• Provide a balanced overview of the background, rationale and supporting evidence. Refer to appropriate studies by others and use preliminary data, pilot studies and/or scoping research to support your research question(s).
• Give enough detail that reviewers can understand what you’re proposing, how it will be carried out and whether it’s feasible.
• Request research costs that are necessary for your project. Make sure you’re aware of what you can and cannot ask for – this information is available on the scheme page.
• Use a title that is specific and reflects the importance of your proposal. Structure your writing with clear headings and subheadings.
• Write in plain language and avoid technical jargon where possible. Keep abbreviations and acronyms to a minimum – define them when they’re first used.
• List all references consistently, using the format requested.
• Use diagrams and figures where appropriate.

"A well-written grant reflects appreciation for both the larger context and attention to detail. The relevance in a larger context should be highlighted in a few clear and concise statements that reviewers outside the field can pick up on. Attention to detail is important when it comes to a thoughtful presentation of potential outcomes and alternative approaches."

Professor Peter Robin Hiesinger, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience Expert Review Group at Wellcome

"Include sub-headings in your main research statement, and make sure it is clearly laid out using the same font, text size and paragraph justification throughout. Reviewers have a lot of applications to read – make it easy for them to see what you want to do!"

Dr Alex Mold, Investigator Award grantholder in Humanities and Social Science

Using our online application system  

You’ll need to log in to our online application system Wellcome Funding  to apply. We reccomend doing this at an early stage so that you can familiarise yourself with the system.

When you’re filling in the application:

• Read the instructions carefully. Don’t forget to look at the pop-up help text which offers additional information.
• Complete every field on the form and upload any relevant supporting documents and figures.

You can save your online application as you go along and return to it at any time before the deadline.

And finally, ask your sponsor, mentor and/or senior colleagues to read your application critically before you submit it.

Related content  

• Disability-related support for applicants
• Discretionary Awards: funding outside of Wellcome’s schemes and funding calls
• Embedding lived experience expertise in mental health research
• Funding scheme application deadlines
• How to complete an outputs management plan
• How to prepare for a Wellcome funding interview
• Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID)
• Roles and responsibilities of people involved in Wellcome funding applications

Updates --> Prepare for Grant Application and Review Changes Impacting Due Dates on or After January 25, 2025 NIH Guide Notices  •   Websites  •   Webinars Learn about the latest updates to the peer review framework of most RPG applications and how these changes will impact existing and new funding opportunities. --> Learn More

• How to Apply

Guidance on preparing and submitting a grant application to NIH. Learn about required registrations, submission options, formatting rules, field-by-field form instructions, and submission policies.

Find Grant Funding

NIH offers funding for many types of grants, contracts, and even programs that help repay loans for researchers. Learn about these programs, NIH funding strategies, and more.

Funded Research (RePORT)

Access reports, data, and analyses of NIH research activities, including information on NIH expenditures and the results of NIH-supported research.

Navigate the NIH grants process.

• Grants Process Overview
• Get Started
• Application Referral and Review
• Pre-Award and Post-Award Processes
• Forms Directory

Learn about obligations of your grant award.

• NIH Grants Policy Statement
• Notices of Policy Changes
• Compliance and Oversight
• Select Policy Topics
• Other Support

Find key resources just for you.

• Researchers
• Research Administrators
• Small Businesses
• Foreign Applicants
• Media and the Public

This page last updated on: March 20, 2024

• Bookmark & Share
• E-mail Updates
• Help Downloading Files
• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility
• National Institutes of Health (NIH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
• NIH... Turning Discovery Into Health

• Insights & Analysis
• Nonprofit Jobs

Grant Research Tools

Have you found it challenging to navigate the many grant research tool options? Unless your nonprofit has a multi-person development shop with dedicated staff members doing research and writing proposals, grant research will always pose a challenge. How can you make sure you’re finding all the grants you’re eligible for, and exclude the grants you have little chance of winning?

There are several different grant research tools with different strengths and weaknesses and dramatically different costs. To help nonprofits navigate the confusing world of grant research databases, we explored some of the available tools.

In the chart below, we compare a few of them to help readers hone in on which one might be the best match for their organization. We don’t assess the quality of support, "extra" features (such as calendars or grant tracking), or educational resources offered by each organization. However, this chart does take a look at the databases themselves, and in some cases notes our opinion of their strengths and weaknesses. We try to keep the lists of features and pricing up to date; feel free to share any updated information with our staff .

This resource also does not address how to write grant proposals, read foundation 990s, or qualify, cultivate, approach, or steward funder prospects; if you need that kind of education, you could tap into educational programs offered by  state associations of nonprofits , the  Foundation Center , or  GrantStation , among others. Make sure you check out the resources on our  Fundraising  page as well.

There are other reasons to make sure you connect with your  state association of nonprofits  before you tackle the chart. In addition to offering educational programs, many state associations provide links to state-specific grant databases and member discounts on grant research tools. Some send regular grant alerts to their members. The benefits to your organization – in capacity-building, in connecting with others in your sector, and in amplifying your voice to advocate for the sector in your state – are tremendous.

One other way to locate prospective funders is to check the member list of your  regional association of grantmakers . Membership lists published by these organizations often include links to foundation websites – or, you can search on the internet for specific funders and/or their IRS Form 990s.

This chart is a work in progress. We welcome your  feedback  about the chart. (Note that the National Council of Nonprofits does not provide assistance with grant research itself.) Click here to download the chart .

Additional Resources

• Article from Idealware via TechSoup  (slightly dated but very good)
• Article from Nonprofit Quarterly's "Nonprofit Whisperer " on building a culture of philanthropy
• Foundation Directory Online (FDO)
• Funding Information Network locations
• GrantAdvisor , an anonymous review site of foundations
• GrantStation
• Instrumentl
• Regional Associations of Grantmakers
• Submit feedback, suggestions, or questions about the chart

Disclaimer: Information on this website is provided for informational purposes only and is neither intended to be nor should be construed as legal, accounting, tax, investment, or financial advice. Please consult a professional (attorney, accountant, tax advisor) for the latest and most accurate information. The National Council of Nonprofits makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or timeliness of the information contained herein.

Research Grant Program

Application Status

Target Audience

Independent researchers and public research institutions

The Internet Society Foundation’s Research Program supports global research collaborations that advance understanding of the Internet and its value for all.

Program Objectives

• Promote novel methodologies that generate solutions to Internet-related challenges
• Identify and support a diverse and collaborative group of researchers and research institutions
• Facilitate access to intersectional research that can be applied to decision-making in government and industry

This program is intended for research that is applied and open, meaning the research seeks to answer a real-world question and should be openly published and made available to the scientific community at no cost. The Foundation supports research involving human or animal subjects when the project has been certified by a responsible body to be ethical and in compliance with local law. It is the responsibility of the Principal Investigator of the project to obtain these certifications.

Areas of Focus

Statements of interest and subsequent proposals should address topics related to one of the following thematic areas:

Greening the Internet

The Internet both affects and is affected by the environment and climate change. Having a critical awareness of this impact is key to the Internet’s resilience and ensures its sustainability for generations to come. This awareness may include an assessment of energy consumption by the Internet, or the toxins and waste generated by its use.  It may consider the enabling effect the Internet has on other sectors to limit greenhouse gas emissions. It may examine the ways in which climate change and extreme weather threatens Internet infrastructure and limits connectivity. Research focusing on Greening the Internet should promote an awareness of these and other issues concerning the Internet’s environmental footprint and the sustainability measures needed for it and the planet to thrive.

The Internet Economy 

New and emerging Internet-based activities have the power to disrupt our economic landscapes and lead to unpredictable economic futures. Having a firm grasp of the interactions that create the Internet Economy has the potential to reshape this uncertainty. Unpacking how the Internet transforms traditional ideas about competition, production, and consumption of goods and services could be useful in allowing for equitable and gainful participation of everyone in a rapidly digitizing global economy. Research proposals focusing on the Internet Economy should present an analysis of past or present ecosystems that yields insight into the future of the Internet and its dependent market(s).

A Trustworthy Internet

The Internet is completely trustworthy if and only if it is completely resilient, reliable, accountable, and secure in a way that consistently meets users’ expectations for information and services. The Internet is only worthy of trust when it conforms with what people expect will happen regardless of whether or not those expectations are reasonable. Further, trustworthiness is not a matter of only one layer in the network, and it is possible that some parts of the Internet are trustworthy while other parts are not. For example, while the application layer may be reliable or secure, there may be gaps in the logic or infrastructure, or there may be mistrust in the content. Research engaging the idea of A Trustworthy Internet should attempt to explain how the Internet does or does not meet user expectations and what should or shouldn’t be done about it.

Decolonizing the Internet

We acknowledge that the Internet’s development depended on industrial societies that, by their nature, used resources from lands dispossessed from Indigenous people and communities throughout the world. We acknowledge that the Internet can proliferate inequality and injustice, perhaps especially when its design is not inclusive nor its designers diverse. We acknowledge that the Internet can invalidate and make obsolete traditional forms of knowledge production and knowledge sharing and has the power to erase languages and cultures. But it also doesn’t have to. Instead the Internet can be a site of restorative, liberating, and transformational practices that bridge the past to a more just future or bring those at the margins closer to the center. Research on Decolonizing the Internet should explore these practices and other methods toward an Internet for everyone. 

Eligibility

• Independent researchers should have a postgraduate research degree (PhD, Masters) and peer reviewed publications, patents, academic or independently published work in the relevant area.
• Public research institutions should be 501c3 or equivalent and should have a mission that is aligned to that of the Foundation. (Private institutions are not eligible entities to receive funding).

Additional eligibility requirements for all Foundation grants are outlined  here . All applicants must ensure that they meet these basic requirements. Underrepresented groups in the research world are highly encouraged to apply.

Application Process

Applications will be accepted between April 2nd and May 14th, 2024. The application period closes at 21:00 UTC on May 14th, 2024.

Applicants are required to submit their application through Fluxx . Please note that the registration process can take up to two days to complete after creating an account. We encourage you to register in the Fluxx portal at the earliest.

Applications are reviewed by staff to ensure proposals are aligned with thematic areas and eligibility requirements. If there are any questions staff will reach out to applicants through the provided contact information.

Those that are in alignment will move forward to a second stage where proposals are reviewed by independent External Reviewers. The External Reviewers recommend which proposals should be considered for funding to the Program Officer. The Program Officer engages in the final review, negotiation, and determination of grant awards with successful partners. The whole process will take about two months.

View application template .

Selection Criteria

Researchers are encouraged to submit a full application to be reviewed by the independent External Reviewers. Final submissions will be selected based on the following criteria:

• Is the research in line with one of the Foundation’s thematic areas?
• Is the research novel?
• Is the research applied and can inform decision making?
• Is the research collaborative?
• Is the research intersectional in its approach?

See more information on the independent External Reviewers.

The program provides for two levels of funding:

• Independent researchers may apply for funding up to US$200,000. Grants will be awarded directly to individuals who are identified as the principal investigator on the project and he/she will be responsible for grant management including all reporting requirements during the life of the grant.
• Organizations and institutions may apply for funding up to US$500,000. One or more awards in each of the thematic areas are anticipated subject to fiscal year funding.

You can learn more about current and past Research grants on  Our Projects  page.

How to apply

Only applications submitted in the Foundation’s grants management system, Fluxx, will be considered. Incomplete submissions that do not meet eligibility requirements will not be considered (see Eligibility Requirements ).

This year, we have two different registration forms, one for organizations and universities, and one for individual applicants.

Organizations can sign up and register on Fluxx here . Individual researchers can sign up and register on Fluxx here .

Read the 2023 Program Impact Report

If you have questions about this program or the application process, please email [email protected] .

Due to limited staff capacity, we cannot guarantee a response to questions about the application process received after the end of the working day, one day before the application window closes.

The Internet is for Everyone

The Internet Society Foundation supports the vision of the Internet Society and its work for an open, globally-connected, secure, and trustworthy Internet for everyone.

• Student Success
• Academic Life

Program Innovations: Promoting Success in Student Research

To enhance the student experience and increase access to experiential learning, colleges and universities have gotten creative with undergraduate research experiences.

By  Ashley Mowreader

You have / 5 articles left. Sign up for a free account or log in.

Undergraduate research can provide students with hands-on experience in a lab environment, as well as help them determine career opportunities they might not otherwise consider.

sanjeri/E+/Getty Images Plus

Undergraduate research opportunities are one way to provide experiential learning in many disciplines, introducing learners to research methods under the supervision of a faculty member and providing experience for a résumé.

A 2021 study from the University of Central Florida found student researchers are more likely to have higher grade point averages and graduation rates, and higher matriculation into graduate school, as well as life skills such as analyzing literature critically, observing and collecting data and communication.

However, not every student has equal access to undergraduate research opportunities. The study found non-STEM students, transfer students and part-time students are less likely to participate in research compared to their peers.

To increase student participation in undergraduate research and boost skill development among student researchers, institutions have created innovative models of work. Here are seven examples.

Survey Says

Around three in 10 students say they are required to participate in undergraduate research, according to a winter 2023 Student Voice survey from Inside Higher Ed , and a slightly smaller number (27 percent) believe that undergraduate research should be required in their program.

Four-year students are more likely to say undergraduate research is required in their program (32 percent) compared to their two-year peers (15 percent).

First-year research opportunities—University of Missouri

Career exposure in the first year can help students feel confident about their paths throughout college and provide a head start in building their résumés.

Mizzou is known for its Interdisciplinary Plant Group that hosts research scholars exploring innovations in plant biology and a first-year program that provides young researchers a leg up in their work, giving them research time with more experienced researchers and mentorship.

FRIPS, short for Freshman Research in Plants , supports 10 to 15 students annually, who work alongside a faculty member and their research group on plant biology. Students also meet regularly with their FRIPS scholars cohort and gain professional development training.

Each student’s work is funded by grant dollars from the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Graduates of FRIPS often go on to become Goldwater Scholars and NSF graduate research fellows. The program also creates a place of belonging and community for new students to the university.

Underrepresented minority students—Davidson College

Some students face systemic disadvantages in participating in co-curricular experiences because they may lack the social capital or be unfamiliar with the norms of higher ed to identify and participate in a faculty-led research experience.

At Davidson College in North Carolina, rising sophomores can participate in a four- to six-week summer intensive research fellowship program called RISE (Research in Science Experience) . This program is designed for students from historically marginalized groups including low-income and first-generation students.

The goal of RISE is to equip students to take on larger, more intensive academic-year and summer experiences for later in their college career. Each student receives $2,500 in scholarships and funds to cover on-campus housing, which the college arranges for all participants.

Jacquelline Nyakunu , a rising junior at Davidson, spent the summer with chemistry professor Cindy Hauser researching hookah, studying the smoking of shisha and the chemical composition of the tobacco. Nyakunu wrote in a blog post that the experience taught her about her passion for chemistry, built her research skills and solidified her career path as a pre-medicine student.

Editors’ Picks

• Can University of the Arts Be Saved?
• ‘Unprecedented Steps’: Board Pulls Plug on Columbia Law Review Website
• Faculty Power on the Line in Kentucky

Transfer students—University of California, Los Angeles

Transferring into a new institution can be a challenge for many students, and finding ways to get plugged in and connected to one’s field of interest can be just as hard.

UCLA offers an initiative exclusively for transfer students to both promote their academic success at the university and expose them to undergraduate research opportunities, the Transfer Research Entry Program (TREP).

To participate, each student must be an incoming transfer student with at least two years remaining at UCLA and be considering a career in research. Participants attend a one-week virtual bootcamp about research, which covers careers in research and how to write a cover letter and curriculum vitae. The program also provides networking opportunities for transfer students and academic survival skills for the transition to UCLA.

There’s no obligation to take a research role after the bootcamp, but students are encouraged to do so and given guidance on how to find their areas of interest, the application and interview process as well.

Financial support—University of Texas at El Paso

Financial need can be a barrier to participation for some students. The University of Texas at El Paso is a Hispanic Serving Institution (84 percent Hispanic), commuter school with a large population of Pell-eligible students (60 percent) and first-generation learners. Many students are working to support themselves and their families, explains Lourdes E. Echegoyen, director of the Campus Office of Undergraduate Research Initiatives.

As a result, UTEP staff realized a need to provide financial assistance through employment to give students high-impact activities.

University staff have identified grant funding from federal agencies, including the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Education, and private foundations.

Students can receive financial support through stipends or tuition scholarships. The university’s student employment program also provides employment positions for undergraduate researchers across disciplines.

“Generally, full time students are supported to conduct research during the academic year from 10 to 19 hours per week—depending on the program—thus allowing students to remain on campus and be mentored as research trainees,” Echegoyen says.

UTEP leaders have seen the benefits of undergraduate research on retention and persistence among students, with one program focused on biomedical research having a 98 percent retention rate among students across four years, compared to a 37 percent retention rate among their peers who did not participate.&

Community partnerships—Roosevelt University

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Roosevelt University in Chicago partnered with The Field Museum to digitize and analyze data collected at the museum. Visitors had measured specimens of liverworts, but the data needed to be sorted and inaccurate measurements eliminated from the set to be most useful to scientists.

Students wrote code to screen and clean the data, helping set the researchers up for success and teaching students firsthand about research processes in a remote setting.

Career development—Elon University

At Elon in North Carolina, returning students can participate in undergraduate research over the summer in between academic terms, funded by the university. While career readiness is a natural component of research experiences, leaders at the university wanted to bolster student skills beyond the laboratory, says Eric Hall, professor of exercise and director of undergraduate research at Elon.

Now, student researchers attend regular professional-development workshops that inform and establish career competencies. The workshops are co-led by other campus partners, including the writing center, career services, the fellowships office and librarians, Hall says.

For the 2024 session, workshops include a session on LinkedIn on how the fellowships office can support student goals, professional writing for graduate school and industry, and navigating academic publishing.

The new initiative is still being evaluated, with formal data collection underway, but anecdotal evidence from post-assessments shows students enjoy and learn from the experiences.

Research in the classroom—California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

Cal Poly Pomona leaders wanted to expose more learners to undergraduate research, understanding that first-generation, Pell-eligible or historically underserved students have lower access to research opportunities, says Winny Dong, faculty director for the office of undergraduate research.

Rather than asking students to squeeze an additional responsibility into their schedules, faculty members brought research to the classroom, embedding experiences into required general education courses.

The initiative makes it so all students are exposed to research and required to participate in some capacity, helping build their skills and pique interest for those who may consider a career in research.

Librarians Grapple With Diverse Archiving in a Digital World

Librarians know more diversity is needed in archiving but it’s a work in progress.

Share This Article

More from academic life.

Report: Grade Inflation Highlighted in Developmental Course Placement

A new study from ACT finds students who completed high school during the COVID-19 pandemic were placed in development

Positive Partnership: Streamlining and Speeding Up Transfer Completion

A partnership between George Mason University and Northern Virginia Community College promotes timely degree completi

Alternate Angles of Higher Ed Equity: Seven Insights Gained From European Universities

Setting aside affordability in the conversation about equity allows for a broader range of insight that could benefit

• Become a Member
• Sign up for Newsletters
• Learning & Assessment
• Diversity & Equity
• Career Development
• Labor & Unionization
• Shared Governance
• Academic Freedom
• Books & Publishing
• Financial Aid
• Residential Life
• Free Speech
• Physical & Mental Health
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Socioeconomics
• Traditional-Age
• Adult & Post-Traditional
• Teaching & Learning
• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Publishing
• Data Analytics
• Administrative Tech
• Alternative Credentials
• Financial Health
• Cost-Cutting
• Revenue Strategies
• Academic Programs
• Physical Campuses
• Mergers & Collaboration
• Fundraising
• Research Universities
• Regional Public Universities
• Community Colleges
• Private Nonprofit Colleges
• Minority-Serving Institutions
• Religious Colleges
• Women's Colleges
• Specialized Colleges
• For-Profit Colleges
• Executive Leadership
• Trustees & Regents
• State Oversight
• Accreditation
• Politics & Elections
• Supreme Court
• Student Aid Policy
• Science & Research Policy
• State Policy
• Colleges & Localities
• Employee Satisfaction
• Remote & Flexible Work
• Staff Issues
• Study Abroad
• International Students in U.S.
• U.S. Colleges in the World
• Intellectual Affairs
• Seeking a Faculty Job
• Advancing in the Faculty
• Seeking an Administrative Job
• Advancing as an Administrator
• Beyond Transfer
• Call to Action
• Confessions of a Community College Dean
• Higher Ed Gamma
• Higher Ed Policy
• Just Explain It to Me!
• Just Visiting
• Law, Policy—and IT?
• Leadership & StratEDgy
• Leadership in Higher Education
• Learning Innovation
• Online: Trending Now
• Resident Scholar
• University of Venus
• Student Voice
• Health & Wellness
• The College Experience
• Life After College
• Academic Minute
• Weekly Wisdom
• Reports & Data
• Quick Takes
• Advertising & Marketing
• Consulting Services
• Data & Insights
• Hiring & Jobs
• Event Partnerships

4 /5 Articles remaining this month.

Sign up for a free account or log in.

• Create Free Account

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

White   House Shares Government, Private Sector, Academic, and Non-Profit Actions to Accelerate Progress on Mental Health   Research

The United States is facing an unprecedented mental health crisis impacting Americans of all ages. To tackle this crisis, the Biden-Harris Administration has taken bold steps to transform how mental health is understood, accessed, and treated. Under President Biden’s Unity Agenda, the Biden-Harris Administration released a comprehensive mental health strategy and mental health research priorities . These steps aim to make mental health care more affordable and accessible and improve health outcomes for all Americans.  

As a part of Mental Health Awareness Month, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy called on government agencies, the private sector, nonprofit organizations, and academia to share the actions they are taking to expand and improve mental health research in the United States. These actions address key research priorities and move us closer to a future where every American has access to the best available care when and where they need it.

Government Actions

• The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Common Fund’s Community Partnerships to Advance Science for Society (ComPASS) Program announced 25 community-led research awards. The ComPASS program provides an unprecedented opportunity for communities to lead innovative intervention projects that study ways to address the underlying structural factors that affect health and health equity. Awards include research focused on addressing stigmatization of behavioral health and services and improving access to behavioral health services in Hispanic, low-income, rural, and LGBTQ+ communities.
• Accelerating Medicines Partnership® Program for Schizophrenia (AMP SCZ) released its first research data set — AMP SCZ 1.0 —through a collaboration of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the Foundation for NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, and multiple public and private partners. To improve the understanding of schizophrenia and to identify new and better targets for treatment, AMP SCZ established a research network that examines trajectories for people who are at clinical high risk for psychosis. The network also develops psychosis prediction algorithms using biomarkers, clinical data, and existing clinical high risk-related datasets.
• NIMH’s Individually Measured Phenotypes to Advance Computational Translation in Mental Health program is a new initiative focused on using behavioral measures and computational methods to define novel clinical signatures that can be used for individual-level prediction and clinical decision making in treating mental disorders . As one example of research supported through this initiative, researchers at the University of Washington are applying computational modeling strategies to behavioral data collected through a smartphone app, with the goal of predicting and preventing serious negative outcomes for people who experience hallucinations.
• NIMH awarded research grants to develop and test innovative psychosocial interventions to prevent suicide. Researchers at San Diego State, one of the grant recipients, are combining an existing intervention—the Safety Planning Intervention—with patient navigator services, and testing the effectiveness of this novel combined intervention in reducing suicide risk among sexual and gender minority youth and young adults.
• NIMH and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development funded 11 new studies focused on understanding bidirectional relationships between social media use and adolescent mental illness, psychiatric symptoms, and risk or resilience for psychopathology . Collectively, this research aims to address important questions about the short-term and long-term interactions between social media behavior and youth mental health, as well as the mechanisms contributing to risk and resilience.

Private Sector, Academic, and Non-Profit Actions

• The University of California, Somos Esenciales, and Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital are conducting the Supporting Peer Interactions to Expand Access study, which examines digital mental health solutions in resource-limited settings, emphasizing cultural and linguistic inclusivity. This study examines a cognitive-behavioral therapy intervention for depression or anxiety for Latino patients with limited-English proficiency and tests implementation strategies, including support from community peers, to integrate this intervention into primary care.
• Headspace is launching a participatory research approach to better understand mental health needs. Headspace is partnering with the city of Hartford, Connecticut to provide mental health resources to all Hartford residents including free access to the Headspace app. This public-private partnership is the first of its kind to improve community-wide mental wellness while researching engagement with the Headspace app and the associated mental health outcomes.
• The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) established a Mental and Behavioral Health Awards Program to champion integrated behavioral health (IBH) patient care models. The inaugural funding was awarded to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Georgetown University Medical Center, Texas A&M School of Medicine, and the University of California Davis School of Medicine for their innovative approaches to IBH team training and patient care, as well as their commitment to accessible and equitable whole person care. AAMC will summarize and disseminate lessons learned from these institutions to advance IBH across the health care delivery system.
• Unity Health Care established the $2.3 million J. Willard and Alice S. Marriott Foundation’s Behavioral Health Development Fund to train the next generation of IBH fellows. This program allows Unity to recruit and train the next generation of mental health providers, with a focus on models of care that expand access, improve outcomes, and drive health equity through IBH. The behavioral health providers work seamlessly with primary care providers to address unmet critical and looming mental health challenges with a culturally congruent approach.
• The American Association of Psychiatric Pharmacists is providing up to $500,000 to study the impact of integrating Board-Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists (BCPPs) into health care teams. BCPPs are advanced practice clinical pharmacists who provide Comprehensive Medication Management within team-based care focusing on medication optimization, evidence-based practices, and patient-centered goals. These research grants fund multiple sites and expand the number and quality of studies involving BCPPs.
• The Healthy Brains Global Initiative (HBGI), the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, and initially three counties in California, are implementing performance-based pilot programs to improve outcomes for people living with serious mental illnesses. These pilots are testing reimbursement for achieving health, housing, and wellbeing outcomes while strengthening the performance management of existing Full Service Partnership (FSP) services. FSP programs intend to be comprehensive services for individuals who are unhoused and who are experiencing severe mental illness.
• The NIH-funded RAND-USC Schaeffer Opioid Policy Tools and Information Center (OPTIC) is building evidence to guide policy responses to the opioid crisis. RAND and the University of Southern California lead OPTIC, a collaboration of eight research institutions, to create national resources to guide policy responses to the opioid crisis. OPTIC develops and disseminates information on policy effectiveness overall and in diverse, structurally disadvantaged communities, improved tools and methods for assessing policy effects, and strategies for addressing the opioid crisis.
• Insight is opening a new medical-psychiatric hospital to serve the community disproportionately burdened by the Flint Water Crisis with a $2.5 million grant from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. The hospital and services are being designed to transform how behavioral health is understood, accessed, treated, and integrated with medical and community services. Research at the hospital will focus on advancing equity in access to behavioral health services, developing treatments for serious illnesses, and supporting youth mental health.
• RAND and Active Minds are evaluating how Send Silence Packing®, the country’s largest traveling campus-based mental health literacy and suicide prevention exhibit, affects college students’ knowledge, behaviors, and stigma around mental health. Findings will guide scalability, resource allocation and decision-making on college campuses and efforts to optimize peer-informed actions to support student mental health and well-being.
• The Child Mind Institute (CMI) is leveraging over $150M from partnerships with the Stavros Niarchos Foundation and the State of California to expand mental health care access for youth in marginalized communities worldwide. CMI utilizes evidence-based, culturally adapted educational resources, provider training, and scalable, innovative, open-source digital technologies for mental health assessment and intervention. The Youth Mental Health Academy recruits a diverse workforce by providing educational and internship experiences to 2,500 high school students from under-represented communities. The Healthy Brain Network openly shares diverse brain and behavior data from >7,000 participants for pediatric mental health and learning research.

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

• Health Tech
• Health Insurance
• Medical Devices
• Gene Therapy
• Neuroscience
• H5N1 Bird Flu
• Health Disparities
• Infectious Disease
• Mental Health
• Cardiovascular Disease
• Chronic Disease
• Alzheimer's
• Coercive Care
• The Obesity Revolution
• The War on Recovery
• Adam Feuerstein
• Matthew Herper
• Jennifer Adaeze Okwerekwu
• Ed Silverman
• CRISPR Tracker
• Breakthrough Device Tracker
• Generative AI Tracker
• Obesity Drug Tracker
• 2024 STAT Summit
• Wunderkinds Nomination
• STAT Madness
• STAT Brand Studio

Don't miss out

Subscribe to STAT+ today, for the best life sciences journalism in the industry

NIH will bring clinical research into primary care offices with $30 million pilot

By Annalisa Merelli June 7, 2024

F or many Americans, health care means going to a local primary care office. But the vast majority of clinical research is conducted inside the walls of large, specialized academic health centers. Millions of patients are left out of those studies, which often fail to capture the population in all its diversity.

Now, for the first time, the National Institutes of Health is investing in the creation of a national primary care research network to try to address this issue. Its $30 million pilot program, called Communities Advancing Research Equity for Health and announced on Thursday, will fund and support a small number of primary care sites as they participate in a range of clinical trials.

advertisement

“This is an incredibly exciting opportunity,” said Diane Harper, a primary care physician and professor in family medicine at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Instead of running individual, siloed research projects out of specialized sites, the program will allow network members to participate in several trials — choosing between 20 to 30 studies — to match their local population’s health needs.

“A person is not a disease, and most of the NIH is organized around diseases,” said Harper. “This is the first time that NIH is recognizing that people are complex, and have many factors that pertain to their health care…that cannot be teased out and separated to be studied in a single, particular line.”

Related: NIH-funded clinical trials often miss racial, gender diversity enrollment goals, report finds

The pilot is an opportunity to better understand how research can serve the needs of patients outside traditional settings, said NIH director Monica Bertagnolli. “We know that every community is different, and we cannot just assume that a rural community in Alabama is going to be the same as a rural community in Montana or that their health issues are the same,” she said. “What we want to do is to be able to offer any community a whole bunch of different research opportunities,” learning through experience what they find most meaningful.

The research projects will go beyond drug trials to emphasize issues that are acutely experienced by communities facing health disparities, including substance abuse, mental health disorders, and obesity.

The timeline is tight: NIH hopes to award funding very soon, and hold its first investigator meeting by the winter. The focus on a speedy start, said Harper, is not giving primary care sites sufficient time to apply for the funding deadline, which is set for next week. As a result, she worries the first round of research will be led by academic networks with links to primary care. “These are not primary care networks,” she said. “These are PhDs with ideas about what it means to be in primary care, it’s not the people who practice.”

The accelerated timeline was put in place to support a launch by the end of fiscal year 2024, said NIH spokesperson Renate Myles, while still allowing the application period to be open for about six weeks. “We expect more opportunities in future years for potential applicants who were unable to participate this year,” she said.

This isn’t the first experiment with primary care research networks. “There’s many folks who’ve worked for a long time to help the NIH get to this point where they’re ready to take their research out of the academic medical center into rural and frontier and underserved community practices,” said Jack Westfall, a rural primary care physician and retired professor at the University of Colorado.

In the late 1990s, Westfall helped establish the High Plains Research Network, a research network of all the primary care practices in eastern, rural, and frontier Colorado towns — most with just a few thousand residents each. He’s found that community-based studies can pay dividends for researchers, too.

“The NIH research needs to move outside of the academic medical centers, out into the community, out into the primary care practices, both for finding study subjects, but also for finding research ideas,” said Westfall. “Many times there are clinical questions that come up out of the community, from the patients, from their interactions with their physicians that could generate ongoing ideas for research.”

Related: Inside a push to create an NIH office for post-infection chronic illness

The NIH also sees the program as an opportunity to gain trust from communities that are skeptical of the medical establishment. “We are here to understand what people need and to earn their trust by delivering for them,” said Bertagnolli. “Trust is not automatic, it has to be earned.”

To build that trust, the network will have to be careful not to treat patients and their local providers like cogs in a machine. “The risk is that this will just be extractive, not collaborative,” said Westfall. “We want to make sure that this is not just an extraction of study subjects out of primary care and NIH, but a bidirectional flow of resources, of ideas, of topics, of power.”

“Making studies available closer to where people are actually getting treated, that’s the first step,” said Andrew Trister, chief medical and scientific officer at Verily, an Alphabet company that builds tools for clinical research. But it raises a number of important questions, he said: “What’s the chain of the trust chain? Who is trusted in the community? Who could be able to help people understand more about what the clinical study is about? Why participate in research?”

Down the line, the network could help primary care sites to mobilize more effectively in case of national health emergencies. “The Covid pandemic did not use primary care at all efficiently,” said Harper. But if the pilot is successful and expands to create a nationwide network, it could eventually enable a faster, more effective public health response — and clinical trials, to boot.

About the Author Reprints

Annalisa merelli.

General Assignment Reporter

Annalisa (Nalis) Merelli is a general assignment reporter at STAT. Her interests are ever-expanding, but she is especially drawn to the coverage of reproductive and maternal health, and their intersection with health equity.

Clinical trials

STAT encourages you to share your voice. We welcome your commentary, criticism, and expertise on our subscriber-only platform, STAT+ Connect

To submit a correction request, please visit our Contact Us page .

Recommended

Recommended Stories

Smoke exposure from California’s wildfires linked to 52,000 early deaths, study says

Vanda Pharmaceuticals has another suitor

STAT Plus: Elevance PBM’s president out as customers complain of prescription chaos

STAT Plus: Which hospital systems will join Kaiser’s Risant next?

STAT Plus: FDA advisory panel votes overwhelmingly against MDMA therapy for PTSD

• Solar Energy Technologies Office
• Fellowships
• Contact SETO
• Funding Programs
• National Laboratory Research and Funding
• Solar Technical Assistance
• Prizes and Challenges
• Cross-Office Funding Programs
• Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power Basics
• Photovoltaic Technology Basics
• Soft Costs Basics
• Systems Integration Basics
• Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power
• Manufacturing and Competitiveness
• Photovoltaics
• Systems Integration
• Equitable Access to Solar Energy
• Solar Workforce Development
• Solar Energy Research Database
• Solar Energy for Consumers
• Solar Energy for Government Officials
• Solar Energy for Job Seekers
• Solar Energy for Professionals
• Success Stories

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) Solar Energy Evolution and Diffusion Studies 4 (SEEDS 4) funding program provides $9.5 million for social science research that generates actionable insights to improve large-scale solar siting processes and outcomes for host communities—particularly those that are disadvantaged—as well as the solar industry and other stakeholders.

DOE announced the funding opportunity on December 14, 2023, and announced the four selected projects on June 4, 2024.

Siting large-scale solar projects is a complex process that requires stakeholders to consider many factors including zoning and land use, economic opportunities, potential environmental impacts, and other benefits or burdens to host communities. Understanding the social dynamics of large-scale solar siting and permitting processes is critical to develop innovative practices that speed deployment while producing meaningful benefits for host communities.

Research supported by this funding program studies community acceptance and opposition to large-scale solar projects, permitting and land use planning for large-scale solar deployment, and best practices for engaging with communities during the siting process.

The actionable insights generated through these projects will help to develop strategies that speed large-scale solar deployment to achieve a carbon-free electricity sector by 2035. 

– Award and cost share amounts are rounded and subject to change pending negotiations –

Michigan State University

Project Name: Fast and (or?) Fair: Are Rapid and Equitable Processes for Large-scale Solar Development Mutually Exclusive?  Location: East Lansing, MI DOE Award Amount: $2.5 million  Awardee Cost Share: $620,000  Principal Investigator: Douglas Bessette Project Description:  This project evaluates the potential to speed up large-scale solar siting and permitting processes while also reducing community burdens and improving procedural justice and energy equity. The research team is using complementary qualitative and quantitative approaches to test how residents’ perceptions and support of large-scale projects are affected by underlying land-use, policy, demographic characteristics, types of permitting and siting processes, and other factors. The project will study ten large-scale projects in four different regions of the country at different stages in the development lifecycle. 

Princeton University

Project Name: Building an Infrastructure for Trust: Creating Shared Value in Large-Scale Solar through Community Benefit Agreements Location: Princeton, NJ DOE Award Amount: $2 million Awardee Cost Share: $500,000 Principal Investigator: Elke Weber Project Description: This project investigates how Community Benefits Agreements (CBAs) between local stakeholders and large-scale solar developers affect community support, procedural justice, and the equitable distribution of a project’s benefits and burdens. It also examines how CBAs, and the process by which they are created and implemented, could be re-envisioned to deliver tangible benefits to communities, build credibility in large-scale solar projects, and strengthen relationships and trust across stakeholder groups. The team’s approach includes document analysis, surveys, stakeholder workshops, and qualitative case studies.

Solar & Storage Industries Institute

Project Name: Testing Approaches to Improve Outcomes of Large-Scale Solar Siting Location: Washington, DC DOE Award Amount: $2.5 million Awardee Cost Share: $625,000 Principal Investigator: David Gahl Project Description: This project is developing innovative community engagement practices for siting and permitting large-scale solar facilities, deploying these practices in communities considering solar projects, and evaluating the impact of those interventions on community attitudes toward the proposed installation. The project leverages the Solar Uncommon Dialogue collaboration, which includes participants from solar industry, conservation, agricultural, environmental justice, academic, and Tribal organizations to develop innovative community engagement practices. The team will then deploy those practices in partnership with stakeholders and evaluate their impact on processes and outcomes for host communities and the solar industry at proposed large-scale solar facilities. 

University of Pennsylvania

Project Name: A Comparative Analysis of Community Support for U.S. Large-Scale Solar Development Location: Philadelphia, PA DOE Award Amount: $2.5 million Awardee Cost Share: $640,000 Principal Investigator: Sanya Carley Project Description: This project compares large-scale solar siting processes and outcomes across regions and communities. The project team is conducting a series of surveys with communities as they move through siting and permitting processes for large-scale solar projects. The community surveys will be complemented by an analysis of media narratives, stakeholder interviews, and a national survey. Together, these analyses will demonstrate how different siting practices shape community engagement and support for large-scale solar projects and how those dynamics differ across different types of communities.

Additional Information

• Explore SETO’s research in solar soft costs . 
• Learn more about large-scale solar siting and siting of other renewable energy facilities . 
• Read the selections announcement . 
• Check out SETO’s other funding programs . 
• Apply for SETO’s open funding opportunities . 
• Browse other DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)  funding opportunities . 
• Sign up for the  SETO newsletter .

Microsoft Researcher Recognition Program

The Microsoft Researcher Recognition Program offers public thanks and recognition to security researchers who help protect our customers through discovering and sharing security vulnerabilities under Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure .

Anyone who submits a security vulnerability to the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC) is eligible to participate.

To view our leaderboards, please visit the MSRC Leaderboard site .

Program Overview

We award researchers points for each valid submission to the MSRC, and accumulated points earn researchers recognition on Microsoft’s Quarterly, Annual, and Technical Leaderboards, with the Top 100 from the Annual Leaderboard gaining the title of Most Valuable Researcher (MVR). MVRs may receive profile badges and swag for achievements in high impact, high accuracy research, and volume for their research. 

How do points work?

It works like this:

Base Points

We award researchers points for each valid vulnerability reported to the MSRC. Base points are determined by the severity and security impact of each vulnerability submitted.

* Submissions eligible for the Mitigation Bypass bounty program​ will receive 60 points, regardless of the Severity or Security Impact.

Research Bonus Multipliers

We award additional bonus points for vulnerabilities found in certain high-impact products and services. This list is subject to change over time, so keep an eye on the research bonus multipliers list!

*Microsoft Security Response Center does not currently service vulnerabilities in GitHub or LinkedIn. To report an issue, go to GitHub’s Bug Bounty Program and LinkedIn’s Bug Bounty Program.

Duplicate Weighting

What if I report a vulnerability someone else already reported?

If you are the first person to submit a report for an unpatched vulnerability, you receive 100% of the points.

If you are the second to submit a report, you receive 50% of the points.

Additional reports of the same issue receive no points.

Leaderboards

Quarterly leaderboard.

Each quarter, we recognize all researchers who have received more than 20 points. In addition, we recognize researchers in specific research and technology areas in our Technical Leaderboards. Quarterly Technical Leaderboards recognize research in Azure, Office, and Windows. 

Annual Leaderboard

Each year, we recognize researchers who have received over 20 points over the entire program period. Each program period runs from July 1 to June 30. For example, the 2022/2023 program period runs from July 1, 2022, to June 30, 2023. 

Annual leaderboards include technical leaderboards for Azure, Office, Windows, and Dynamics. Researchers who do not make the MVR top 100 are eligible for quarterly leaderboards and will receive accuracy, impact, and volume badges where applicable on the published leaderboard page, but will not receive a digital form of the badge.  

Technical Leaderboard

Technical Leaderboards recognize researchers who have distinguished themselves through high-impact research in specific areas, including Azure, Office, and Windows on a quarterly basis, and Dynamics on an annual basis. Technical leaderboards publish the top 10 ranks for each technical group for both Quarterly and Annual Leaderboards. Badges for technical leaderboards will be calculated using the points of only those cases that pertain to the technical research areas. 

Most Valuable Researcher

The top 100 researchers from the Annual Leaderboard will receive the title of Most Valuable Researcher and will receive digital badges. 

Digital Badges

Digital badges highlight researchers’ accomplishments throughout a program period and can be shared on professional profiles and social media such as LinkedIn and Twitter. The first badge recognizes our 2020 Most Valuable Security Researchers, with more badges to come!

Accuracy Badge : Recognizes researchers with 100% accuracy, meaning all their submissions were valid vulnerability reports 

Impact Badge : Recognizes high-impact work, with the average points per valid vulnerability report at or above the 90th percentile 

Volume Badge: Recognizes a larger body of work, requiring at least five valid vulnerability reports 

Each year, a specifically designed SWAG box is sent to Microsoft’s Most Valuable Security Researchers (MVRs). This generally happens in the Fall after the annual MVR announcement, and each researcher eligible for a SWAG box will be notified by our team.

SITE MAINTENANCE ANNOUNCEMENT:

We are making updates to how we publish our leaderboards! You can find the most recent leaderboards on our MSRC leaderboard site!  Legacy leaderboards listed below will be migrated over within the next few weeks. 

2022 Q4 Security Researcher Leaderboard

Click here for the full list of the researchers recognized this quarter.

Recognition Period

This 2022 Q4 leaderboard reflects point values for cases that are:

• Submitted and assessed by the MSRC team between October 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022 
• Submitted between July 1, 2022, and September 30, 2022 (last program period), but assessed after October 1, 2022.

2022 Q3 Security Researcher Leaderboard

This 2022 Q3 leaderboard reflects point values for cases that are:

• Submitted and assessed by the MSRC team between July 1, 2022, and September 30, 2022
• Submitted between April 1, 2022 and June 30, 2022 (last program period), but assessed after July 1, 2022

2021/2022 Recognition Period

Dates: July 1, 2021 – June 30, 2022

2022 Most Valuable Researchers

Click here for the full list of researchers recognized.

2022 Q2 Security Researcher Leaderboard

This 2022 Q2 leaderboard reflects point values for cases that are:

• Submitted and assessed by the MSRC team between April 1, 2022, and June 30, 2022
• Submitted between January 1, 2022 and March 31, 2022 (last program period), but assessed after April 1, 2022

2022 Q1 Security Researcher Leaderboard

Click here for the full list of researchers recognized this quarter.

This 2022 Q1 leaderboard reflects point values for cases that are:

• Submitted and assessed by the MSRC team between January 1, 2022, and March 31, 2022
• Submitted between October 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021 (last program period), but assessed after January 1, 2022

2021 Q4 Security Researcher Leaderboard

This 2021 Q4 leaderboard reflects point values for cases that are:

• Submitted and assessed by the MSRC team between October 1, 2021, and December 31, 2021
• Submitted between July 1, 2021 and September 30, 2021 (last program period), but assessed after October 1, 2021

Additional Information

Check out the frequently asked questions (FAQs) . Still have questions? Email us at [email protected] .

• 2023-04-13: Congratulations to the top MSRC 2023 Q1 Researchers!
• 2023-01-26: Congratulations to the top MSRC 2022 Q4 Researchers!
• 2022-10-24:  Congratulations to the Top MSRC 2022 Q3 Researchers!
• 2022-08-08: Congratulations to the MSRC 2022 Most Valuable Researchers!
• 2022-07-19: Congratulations to the Top MSRC 2022 Q2 Researchers!
• 2022-04-21:  Congratulations and New Swag Awards for the Top MSRC 2022 Q1 Security Researchers!
• 2022-02-01: Congratulations to the Top MSRC 2021 Q4 Researchers!
• 2022-02-01: Expanding the Microsoft Researcher Recognition Program
• 2021-10-14: Congratulations to the Top MSRC 2021 Q3 Security Researchers!
• 2021-08-04: Congratulations to the MSRC 2021 Most Valuable Security Researchers!
• 2021-07-15: Announcing the Top MSRC 2021 Q2 Security Researchers - Congratulations!
• 2021-04-15: Congratulating Our Top MSRC 2021 Q1 Security Researchers!
• 2021-02-10:  MSRC Security Researcher Recognition: 2021
• 2021-01-14: Top MSRC 2020 Q4 Security Researchers - Congratulations!
• 2020-10-15: Announcing the Top MSRC 2020 Q3 Security Researchers
• 2020-08-05:  Congratulations to the MSRC’s 2020 Most Valuable Security Researchers
• 2020-07-15:  Top MSRC 2020 Q2 Security Researchers Announced – Congratulations!
• 2020-04-23:  Congratulating Our Top 2020 Q1 Security Researchers!
• 2020-02-03: Recognizing Security Researchers in 2020
• 2020-01-15:  Announcing MSRC 2019 Q4 Security Researcher Leaderboard
• 2019-10-17: Announcing the Security Researcher Quarterly Leaderboard (2019 Q3)
• 2019-08-07:  Announcing 2019 MSRC Most Valuable Security Researchers
• 2019-07-30:  Recognizing Security Researchers in 2019
• 2019-07-29:  It’s Official – The Way We Recognize Our Security Researchers

Revision History

• 2019-07-29: Information Published
• 2020-01-28: Added Related Posts section
• 2020-04-23: Added published blog posts
• 2020-07-15: Added published blog post
• 2020-08-05: Added published blog post and updated research bonus multipliers table
• 2020-10-15: Added published blog post
• 2021-01-14: Added published blog post
• 2021-02-10: Added Current Recognition Period section and updated research bonus multipliers table
• 2021-04-15: Added published blog post
• 2021-07-15: Added published blog post
• 2021-08-04: Added published blog post
• 2021-10-14: Added published blog post
• 2022-02-01: Re-designed program page. Added link to FAQs.
• 2022-04-21: Added published blog post and 2022 Q1 leaderboard.
• 2022-07-19: Added published blog post and 2022 Q2 leaderboard.
• 2022-08-08: Added published blog post and 2022 MVRs.
• 2022-10-24: Added published blog post and 2022 Q3 leaderboard.
• 2023-01-26: Added published blog post and 2022 Q4 leaderboard.
• 2023-04-13: Added published blog post and 2023 Q1 leaderboard.

LGBTQI+ People and Substance Use

• Research has found that sexual and gender minorities, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex people (LGBTQI+), have higher rates of substance misuse and substance use disorders than people who identify as heterosexual. People from these groups are also more likely to enter treatment with more severe disorders.
• People in LGBTQI+ communities can face stressful situations and environments like stigma and discrimination , harassment, and traumatic experiences . Coping with these issues may raise the likelihood of a person having substance use problems.
• NIDA supports research to help identify the particular challenges that sexual and gender minority people face, to prevent or reduce substance use disorders among these groups, and to promote treatment access and better health outcomes.

Latest from NIDA

A Plan to Address Racism in Addiction Science

Find more resources on lgbtqi+ health.

• Hear the latest approaches in treatment and care from experts in the fields of HIV and SUD in this NIDA video series, “ At the Intersection .”
• See the Stigma and Discrimination Research Toolkit from the National Institute of Mental Health.