Evidence for Action: Innovative Research to Advance Racial Equity

Overview:

Evidence for Action (E4A), a national program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, funds research that expands the evidence needed to build a Culture of Health, with an explicit emphasis on advancing racial equity. We recognize that achieving racial equity is not possible without a focus on the foundational and structural drivers of health, often referred to as the social determinants of health (e.g., housing, education, built environment, economic opportunity, law enforcement, and others). Therefore, we partner with researchers, practitioners, community leaders, advocates, and policymakers to develop evidence about what works to dismantle or remedy unjust systems and practices and produce more equitable outcomes for people and communities of color.

Purpose
Evidence for Action prioritizes research to evaluate specific interventions (e.g., policies, programs, practices) that have the potential to counteract the harms of structural and systemic racism and improve health, well-being, and equity outcomes. We are concerned both with the direct impacts of structural racism on the health and well-being of people and communities of color (e.g., Black, Latina/o/x, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander people, and other races and ethnicities)—as well as the ways in which racism intersects with other forms of marginalization, such as having low income, being an immigrant, having a disability, or identifying as LGBTQ+ or a gender minority.

This funding is geared toward studies about “upstream” causes of health inequities, such as the
systems, structures, laws, policies, norms, and practices that determine the distribution of
resources and opportunities, which in turn influence individuals’ options and behaviors.
Research should center on the needs and experiences of communities exhibiting the greatest
health burdens and be motivated by real-world priorities. It should be able to inform a specific
course of action and/or establish beneficial practices, not stop at characterizing or documenting
the extent of a problem.

E4A seeks grantees who are deeply committed to conducting rigorous and equitable research and ensuring that their findings are actionable in the real world. In addition to research funding, RWJF also supports grantees with stakeholder engagement, dissemination of findings, and other activities that can enhance their projects’ potential to “move the needle” on health and racial equity. Only through intentional and collaborative efforts to disrupt racism and translate research to action can we hope to build a more just and equitable society and a Culture of Health.

Studies will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

• Relevance—research aims are important to advancing racial equity and building a Culture of Health; research can inform demonstrable policy or implementation priorities.
• Actionability—goes beyond theoretical implications and demonstrates potential for practical and timely application in the real world; conditions (e.g., timing, relationships, windows of opportunity) are favorable for translating findings to action; dissemination plans and tactics are appropriate.
• Methodological rigor—studies designed to support causal inference are powered to detect meaningful and plausible effect sizes, account for relevant context and covariates, and include appropriate comparison groups; qualitative studies adhere to best practices in design, sampling, analysis, and interpretation.
• Inclusion of health outcome measure(s)—outcomes may include diverse dimensions of physical, mental, and socio-emotional health and well-being, or behaviors that are well established as determinants of health and well-being, assessed using validated instruments.
• Feasibility—evidence of timely access to appropriate data and/or study populations; reasonable budgets, and timelines that account for sufficient and equitable engagement of relevant stakeholders.
• Qualifications of team—expertise of academic researchers, practitioners, and individuals or groups with issue-specific knowledge and experiences are integrated at appropriate stages of the project; community members, advocates, policymakers, and/or other stakeholders are engaged equitably and meaningfully.

Letters of intent (LOIs) will be evaluated based on the applicant’s ability to clearly articulate
these components.

There are two phases in the competitive proposal process:

• Phase 1: Letter of Intent (LOI)—Applicants first must submit an LOI describing the proposed research through RWJF’s online Application and Review system.
• Phase 2: Full Proposals—Applicants whose LOIs meet the outlined selection criteria are invited to submit a full proposal narrative of up to 10 pages, along with a detailed budget, dissemination plan, and other supplemental information.

There is not an explicit range for allowable budget requests. You should request the amount of funding you will need to complete and disseminate findings from your proposed research project—including direct and indirect costs for the entire duration of your grant. The size of the budget will be weighed in relation to the importance and likely contribution of the proposed work.

Solicitation limitations:

E4A does not fund the costs of program implementation or operations.

Randomized Controlled Trials of Criminal Justice Programs and Practices

Overview:

Arnold Ventures (AV) is a nonpartisan philanthropy whose core mission is to invest in evidence-based solutions that maximize opportunity and minimize injustice. This Request for Proposals—a joint effort of AV’s Criminal Justice and Evidence-Based Policy initiatives—seeks grant applications to conduct randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of criminal justice programs and practices (“interventions”) in the United States that fall into one of three tiers:

1. The intervention is backed by promising prior evidence suggesting it could produce sizable impacts on important criminal justice outcomes (e.g., prevent violence, reduce recidivism, minimize injustice, improve health/employment of persons formerly involved in the justice system);
2. The intervention is widely adopted in practice, but has not yet been rigorously evaluated and its impacts on key criminal justice outcomes are thus largely unknown; or
3. The intervention is growing in use and likely to become widely adopted, but has not yet been rigorously evaluated.

While this Request for Proposals focuses on RCTs, we will also consider certain rigorous quasiexperimental designs when random assignment is not feasible, as discussed under “study design” below. Submissions are welcome in all areas of criminal justice; we especially encourage those that align with a priority area of the Criminal Justice initiative (i.e., policing, pretrial justice, community supervision, prisons, and reintegration) or with the Evidence-Based Policy initiative’s focus on areas where prior studies have identified a number of promising interventions (e.g., youth crime prevention).

Our ultimate goal in this effort is to build credible evidence about “what works” to improve criminal justice outcomes and, in particular, to grow the number of criminal justice interventions rigorously shown to produce important improvements in people’s lives. Few such proven-effective interventions currently exist, and until they do, our nation will lack critical knowledge needed to move the needle on crime, injustice, and other key criminal justice outcomes.

What To Expect in the Grant Agreement: We will ask awardees, as a condition of their award, to –

• Pre-register the study on the Open Science Framework (OSF) website and, prior to commencement of the study, upload a copy of the research and analysis plan described in their proposal.
• Provide us with brief phone or email updates on the study’s progress on a periodic basis, and before making any key decisions that could materially affect the study’s design or implementation.
• Submit concise reports on the impact findings at appropriate intervals. These reports should make it easy for readers to see the study’s main results and gauge their credibility (e.g., by showing the similarity of the treatment and control groups in pre-program characteristics, the amount of sample attrition, and the statistical significance of the impact findings).

- and –

• Make their datasets and related materials (e.g., survey instruments, code used to clean and analyze datasets) publicly available on the OSF site. We ask applicants to do this within one year of the last data collection, and only to the extent allowed under any confidentiality/privacy protections.

Solicitation limitations:

Letter of Intent required.

The Policy permits institutions of higher education, including community colleges, to receive an indirect cost rate of 15 percent (15%) of total direct project costs; all other organizations (e.g., non-profit, governmental, for-profit, etc.) may receive an indirect cost rate of 20 percent (20%) of total direct project costs.

The Brooks and Joan Fortune Foundation (BJFF)

Overview:

Brooks and Joan met in 1939 when he was a young research scientist and she was a medical laboratory technician. Together, they worked on novel products that would allow diabetic patients to check glucose levels at home to better control insulin dosing. Eventually, these would evolve into the basis of all bedside medical testing available today. Brooks rapidly rose through the leadership ranks of the Eli Lilly pharmaceutical company to eventually become an Executive Vice-President and member of the Board until his retirement in 1971.

Always the philanthropists, they supported numerous projects in museums, colleges, and churches located near their home. The incorporation of the Foundation was an opportunity to expand the boundaries of their generosity to other areas of the country.

The Brooks and Joan Fortune Foundation (BJFF) primarily provides funds to support education, art, and outreach programs and projects. In general, the foundation desires to support specific activities that result in a defined outcome rather than general operating funds or fundraising campaigns.

While the foundation activities have historically been located in Indiana and Florida, requests from around the country will certainly be considered. All recipients must have a 501(c)(3) designation from the IRS.

See past grantees HERE.

Arnold Ventures Rigorous Impact Evaluations of Student Success Programs and Practices in Higher Education

Overview:

Arnold Ventures (AV) is a nonpartisan philanthropy whose core mission is to invest in evidence-based solutions that maximize opportunity and minimize injustice. The Higher Education initiative seeks to identify and scale effective practices that improve student success and address equity gaps in higher education. Even as access to higher education has significantly expanded, we still struggle to help students complete their credentials and secure a strong return on their investments. Colleges need sound evidence to identify ways to support students’ financial, social, and academic needs. We support research to uncover the most effective programs and practices that will pave the way for success among all students, especially those underserved by the current system. In recent years, a number of highquality, randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluations have identified several programs with the potential to substantially increase student success and address equity gaps. Arnold Ventures works to continue building the evidence base and to secure policies and investments to scale up what works.  

This Request for Proposals—a joint effort of AV’s Higher Education and Evidence-Based Policy initiatives— seeks grant applications to conduct rigorous impact evaluations of programs and practices (“interventions”) to promote college success in the United States that fall into one of three tiers:  

(i) The intervention is backed by promising prior evidence suggesting it could produce sizable          impacts on important student success outcomes (e.g., student learning, persistence, degree          or certificate completion, job placement, post-college earnings, and debt burden); 

(ii) The intervention is widely adopted in practice, but has not yet been rigorously evaluated and its impacts on key student success outcomes are thus largely unknown; or 

(iii) The intervention is growing in use and likely to become widely adopted, but has not yet been rigorously evaluated.    Whenever possible, Arnold Ventures has a preference for funding randomized controlled trials (RCTs).   We will also consider certain rigorous quasi-experimental designs that can credibly demonstrate a causal relationship when random assignment is not feasible, as discussed under “study design” below.    

Our ultimate goal in this effort is to build credible evidence about “what works” to improve student success outcomes and, in particular, to increase the number of interventions rigorously shown to produce important improvements in outcomes including but not limited to student learning, persistence, degree or certificate completion, job placement, post-college earnings, and debt burden. The field recognizes a few gold-standard programs such as ASAP and Bottom Line; however, we recognize the need to identify other effective interventions to support student success in higher education. For the purposes of this RFP, such interventions may be broadly defined and, for example, may include programs that target high school students or others not currently enrolled in college, so long as the proposed study will measure the outcomes of interest listed above.

We ask applicants first to submit a letter of interest (maximum three pages). Applicants whose letters are reviewed favorably will be invited to submit a full proposal (maximum six pages). 

There is no deadline for submitting a letter of interest; applicants may submit a letter at any time via email.

We recognize the need to expand and diversify the pool of researchers with RCT and quasiexperimental design experience, and are committed to reducing barriers to achieving this goal. Thus we strongly encourage researchers who are new to rigorous impact evaluations, including those from groups historically underrepresented in the research community—such as researchers of color and women—to participate in this funding opportunity. Such individuals who do not meet the “experienced researcher” criterion themselves may still serve as a study’s lead researcher as long as they partner with a colleague who does meet the criterion and will play at least a key advisory role in the study.

Carnegie Corporation of New York Higher Education and Research in Africa

Overview:

To strengthen Africa’s higher education sector by improving the training, retention, and research productivity of academics in select countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

Carnegie Corporation of New York has been a major American philanthropic supporter of higher education in Africa for over two decades. Our grantmaking seeks to deepen and expand the continent’s advanced academic communities, networks, and universities, and promote policies that inform the growing higher education sector.

As African governments increasingly recognize the benefits of knowledge-based economies, research-active academics, whose training is relevant to the African context and who work in universities equipped to retain them, becomes essential. With a steady increase in both the number of universities and student enrollment, keeping pace with the growing need for academic staff is a daunting challenge. More skilled and knowledgeable university lecturers must be trained, and a number of universities must move from being largely undergraduate teaching institutions toward building robust research programs as training grounds for future lecturers. This transition requires new thinking about the provision of researcher development and retention on the continent.

With the aim of nurturing a vibrant corps of African academics working within dynamic and supportive university environments, our grantmaking is focused on:

• Early-career African academics with emphasis on their advancement and retention through support for universities and university networks that show potential for becoming strong regional centers of doctoral education and research 
• African academic diaspora with emphasis on bridging African universities and the diaspora communities in ways that benefit research and training at African universities and create lasting, mutually beneficial relationships
• Higher education policies and practice with emphasis on generating and disseminating data-driven research and publications on Africa’s higher education sector and promoting policy dialogues on national priorities relevant to the sector

Letters of inquiry are accepted on a rolling basis; there are no deadlines. Applicants will be notified via email if their letter of inquiry is declined, or if they have been invited to submit a full proposal. This process usually takes four to six weeks. Only full proposals that have been invited will be considered.

Awards range from $95,000 to $2.6 million, with an average award of $1,029,000.

Grants must benefit primarily higher education stakeholders living in a country that is part of the British Commonwealth. Projects must aim to strengthen research capacity of African scholars, scientists, and/or higher education institutions, or support higher education policy initiatives and/or research programs on higher education in Africa.

Solicitation limitations:

While anyone can apply, the sponsor notes that they do not "seek, and rarely fund, unsolicited grant applications."

Bob Woodruff Foundation Grants

Overview:

The Bob Woodruff Foundation invests in programs that help our service members, veterans, their families and caregivers thrive.

The Bob Woodruff Foundation Grants Program funds programmatic efforts serving the military/veteran community. BWF focuses on programs that improve overall health and wellbeing of service members, veterans, their families, and caregivers. We are interested in programs that:

• Improve social determinants of health 
• Decrease barriers to accessing physical and mental healthcare 
• Increase accessibility to programming that fosters a healthy lifestyle 
• Enhance opportunities for veterans to thrive after service 

To submit an application, your organization and program must:

• Provide direct services to the military/veteran population
• Be administered through a non-profit organization 
• Demonstrate financial responsibility and sustainability and have filed a 990EZ or 990 for the last two fiscal years
• Provide an audited financial statement or a certified financial statement (to include a balance sheet and income statement)
• Have two years of gross receipts greater than $50,000

Competitive applications will clearly articulate the logic of their program, to include the:

• Specific need(s) the program addresses
• Activities and outputs, and how they adhere to evidence-based practices
• Impact on the individuals served by the program to date 
• Intended measurable outcomes, and how they relate to the demonstrated need and are attributable to the program’s activities
• Indicate how the organizations tracks and reports on the program’s impact on participants
• Describe a program that is deliberately inclusive and equitable in both process and intended outcomes 
• Demonstrate strong partnerships across the nonprofit and public sector, as appropriate to the program
• Indicate the staff’s experience/expertise in the subject matter
• Describe how the program uses scientific evidence, program evaluations, and industry best-practices to inform their program delivery 
• Complement services that are publicly available, such as those provided by the Small Business Administration and U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor, and Veterans Affairs, the U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor, and Veterans Affairs and the Small Business Administration 
• Benefit from professional executive leadership and governance

We accept applications year-round and review applications on a rolling basis. We award grants twice a year, in our Spring and Fall grant cycles, and will notify all applicants on their application status as follows:

Applications submitted by January 12, 2023 will receive a response by June 1, 2023*
Applications submitted by June 15, 2023 will receive a response by November 1, 2023*

The foundation's website does not state a funding floor or threshold; however, awards made to programs at institutions of higher education in the past range from $150,000 to $200,000.

Charles Koch Foundation Immigration Research Grants

Overview:

Presently, the U.S. immigration system keeps too many from fully participating in the American experience—to the detriment of our society. Reforms that incentivize legal immigration and welcome the majority of prospective immigrants, while preventing those who would come to do us harm, can yield safer communities and a stronger economy.

The Foundation supports scholars exploring solutions and innovative alternatives to a system burdened by backlogs in family-based immigration and asylum processing and posing countless employment barriers for foreign graduates of U.S. universities. The Foundation is especially interested in research that:

• Examines the costs and benefits of merit- or points-based immigration systems, temporary visa programs, and flexible, provisional, or dual-purpose visa alternatives;
• Measures the impact of immigration on formal and informal institutions, including social capital;
• Explores social and cultural integration mechanisms and their effects;
• Analyzes the consequences of overlapping immigration, law enforcement, and national security policies;
• Tracks entrepreneurship among immigrant populations and their contribution to economic growth;
• Evaluates and proposes improvements on:
  • Interior immigration and border enforcement practices;
  • The adjudication and processing of refugee and asylum claims;
• Collects data and produces longitudinal, structured datasets on:
  • Resident attitudes towards immigration;
  • Measures of immigrant integration such as language acquisition, educational attainment, wage assimilation, or intergenerational social mobility;
  • Status adjustment, naturalization, and emigration rates;
  • Immigrants’ access to, use of, and contribution to welfare and public services.

Henry Luce Foundation Higher Education

Overview:

The Higher Education Program welcomes excellent, innovative proposals from colleges and universities and the organizations that support them. The program encourages inquiries from institutions that are less well-resourced and/or that serve disadvantaged or marginalized communities.

Higher education program grants have several characteristics:

• They support projects in the humanities and qualitative social sciences. (There is one exception: projects that seek to support women or to increase the number of women in certain STEM fields are also eligible.)
• They support projects aimed at faculty and doctoral students; in general, projects aimed primarily at undergraduates will not be supported.
• They support team-based projects or institutional initiatives rather than purely individual research projects; such projects or initiatives will seek to have broader impact—on a field or on the sector.
• The projects they support will not only produce new knowledge but will also model new approaches to the production, dissemination and application of knowledge.

The range of project funding is typically between $25,000 and $100,000. 

Grants awarded to colleges and universities through the Higher Education Program should focus on at least one of the particular strategies described below:

• Encouraging new approaches to the dissemination of research outside of the academy—including to the general public or to particular communities of interest, like policymakers or practitioners
• Facilitating collaboration, dialogue, or another kind of exchange or partnership between scholars and practitioners or policymakers
• Facilitating and nurturing trans-disciplinary and trans-national research and training, especially across institutional boundaries and barriers of various kinds
• Supporting innovation in doctoral education, especially in ways that empower graduate students and equip them to thrive personally and professionally in the more challenging contemporary context
• Supporting women in the professoriate and administration, especially in the physical sciences, engineering, and mathematics
• Supporting dialogue and collaboration between US and non-US institutions about higher education goals and strategies

Solicitation limitations:

The Program does not contribute to:

• Capital projects
• Endowments
• General operating support
• Faculty lines (though a grant may pay a portion of faculty salary attributable to a project)
• Undergraduate financial aid

As a general rule, we prefer to fund only direct project costs, which may include general administrative costs directly related to the grant-funded project (e.g., percentages of support staff salaries, office supplies, rent, etc. that can be clearly attributed to the funded project). Paying indirect costs (or institutional overhead) subtracts from our ability to support a project, and we do not increase grants to cover such costs. Program directors determine on a case-by-case basis whether indirect costs will be allowed and at what rate. If indirect costs are allowed, the maximum is typically 10 percent.

The Coca-Cola Foundation Community Support Grants

Overview:

• Empowering women: economic empowerment and entrepreneurship
• Protecting the environment: access to clean water, water conservation, climate advocacy, and recycling
• Enhancing communities: education, youth development and other community and civic initiatives

All requests for community support in the form of grants, sponsorships or beverage product, for consideration by The Coca Cola Company, The Coca Cola Foundation or any of its affiliated regional foundations must be submitted through this online application system. Only those proposals meeting specific guidelines and furthering our strategic goals and objectives, will be considered for approval.

US Agency for International Development (USAID) Development Innovation Ventures

Overview:

Open year-round, reviews applications on a rolling basis, and funds innovations in any sector and in any country where USAID operates.

Development Innovation Ventures (DIV) is USAID’s open innovation program that tests and scales creative solutions to any global development challenge. By investing in breakthrough innovations driven by rigorous evidence, USAID impacts millions of lives at a fraction of the usual cost.

 About Development Innovation Ventures (DIV)

Open innovation inspires new solutions to the critical challenges affecting millions of people around the world. It also means that game-changing ideas and solutions can come from anyone, anywhere, and at any time. That is why DIV is open year-round, reviews applications on a rolling basis, and funds innovations in any sector and in any country where USAID operates. Whether you are a local problem solver, a passionate American entrepreneur, or a university lab, we want to hear from you.

The DIV Difference

DIV is committed to a “start-up” style of iteration and improvement, which means we provide the flexibility to test and adapt as our innovators learn and grow. We also help bridge the innovation funding gap by providing early seed funding to high-risk solutions that would normally lack access to early financing. This funding helps early stage innovations demonstrate their impact and viability so that others will further invest in and scale these solutions.

DIV recognizes that innovative solutions can come in the form of a product, technology, service, or application of a creative business and delivery model. Whatever form your innovative solution takes, DIV offers support for your groundbreaking ideas that will transform lives and maximize USAID’s impact per dollar. We take strategic risks to build the best solutions and advance what works while avoiding long-term investments in what does not. Turning bright ideas into global solutions. 

The DIV Model

DIV emphasizes three “legs of a stool” to minimize risk and maximize impact. 

Rigorous Evidence - DIV values rigorous testing methods such as impact evaluations or robust market tests to measure the impact of our innovations. Evidence of clear and measurable outcomes helps demonstrate what is working and what is not. Solutions that demonstrate rigorous evidence of impact can then be scaled to other contexts.

Cost-Effectiveness - DIV invests in solutions that provide the greatest impact for every dollar spent. To DIV, an innovation's competitive landscape encompasses not only other types of the same product or service, but also any alternatives targeting the same development outcomes. A cost-effective solution is better, faster, or cheaper than its alternatives.

Pathways to Scale - DIV is ultimately committed to achieving maximum impact. After DIV funding ends, solutions are expected to continue expanding through partnerships and adoption.

For scale through the public sector, the organization is expected to partner with host-country governments, multilateral donors, or other public sector players.

For scale through the private sector, the organization is expected to demonstrate commercial viability or partner with other businesses.

Tiered Funding & Evidence Grants

DIV uses a tiered funding model with three stages to maximize impact per dollar spent. This funding enables grantees to adapt and grow under changing circumstances because the focus is on outcomes rather than strict deliverables or project plans. 

Stage 1: Proof of Concept (Up to $200,000)--Stage 1 grants test a solution’s feasibility in a developing country context. Innovations at this stage are early in their implementation and require testing to understand user interest, willingness to pay, impact, and financial viability. Innovations at this stage must be in a post-prototype or ideation phase. 

Stage 2: Testing and Positioning for Scale ($200,000 to $1,500,000)--Stage 2 grants test and strengthen a solution’s business or delivery model. Innovations at this stage should demonstrate rigorous evidence of causal positive impact or use the funding to build such evidence from a randomized controlled trial or a quasi-experimental evaluation method. Funds must leverage additional external funding or partnerships. 

Stage 3: Transitioning Proven Solutions to Scale ($1,500,000 to $5,000,000)--Stage 3 grants support partnerships to demonstrate the potential for solutions to be replicated or to scale the innovation to a new context. The funds must leverage additional external funding or partnership. 

Evidence Grants: (Up to $1,500,000)--DIV also provides evidence grants to support research and evaluations that generate evidence of an innovation’s impact per dollar and potential for expansion. These evidence grants support impact evaluations, including randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental methods, as well as other methods of assessing impact.