The Institutional Challenge Grant supports university-based research institutes, schools, and centers in building sustained research-practice partnerships with public agencies or nonprofit organizations in order to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
The grant requires that research institutions shift their policies and practices to value collaborative research. Institutions will also need to build the capacity of researchers to produce relevant work and the capacity of agency and nonprofit partners to use research.
We welcome applications from partnerships in youth-serving areas such as education, justice, prevention of child abuse and neglect, foster care, mental health, immigration, and workforce development. We especially encourage proposals from teams with African American, Latinx, Native American, and Asian American members in leadership roles. The partnership leadership team includes the principal investigator from the research institution and the lead from the public agency or nonprofit organization.
Policymakers and practitioners need rigorous research evidence that is relevant to their work. But too often the evidence produced by research institutions is shaped by the traditional values of the academy—the work is rigorous, but it speaks most clearly to the research community. Compounded by limited resources and capacity on the research and practice partners to engage in collaborative research, this misalignment limits the usefulness, use, and impact of research in policy and practice.
Research-practice partnerships—long-term, mutually beneficial collaborations that promote the production and use of rigorous and relevant research evidence—are a promising strategy for better aligning these communities in their efforts to reduce inequality. Researchers who partner with practitioners or policymakers are better equipped to understand local contexts, address pressing questions, and produce informative and actionable findings. They also gain access to programmatic and/or policy insights and data that can facilitate rigorous and groundbreaking research to make headway on issues relevant to youth. Policymakers and practitioners, meanwhile, can more easily access, interpret, and use research evidence when they collaborate with researchers. They can also help define and shape research agendas. Partnerships, then, equip public agencies and nonprofit organizations with new knowledge and tools to better serve youth.
Building sustained research-practice partnerships requires significant investments. It takes time to develop the trusted relationships that form the foundation of the partnership. Establishing the infrastructure to grow and sustain a partnership requires considerable resources. And although we suspect that research-practice partnerships are most robust when they are built at the institutional level, research produced by partnerships is not always valued by institutions. Research institutions’ policies and practices can inadvertently create disincentives to participating in research-practice partnerships. In turn, this can make it difficult to recruit experienced researchers to participate in research-practice partnerships or to sustain their involvement beyond a single project.
The Institutional Challenge Grant is a direct response to these obstacles. The program challenges research institutions to remove barriers to partnerships’ success. This includes the careful scrutiny and redesign of internal policies, practices, or incentives that limit the longevity of partnerships or discourage exceptional researchers from taking part. In turn, when partnerships are more productive, respected, and commonplace, communities of research, policy, and practice will be better aligned to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
The Institutional Challenge Grant asks grantees to pursue four goals:
Grow an existing institutional partnership with a public agency or nonprofit organization.
The research-practice partnership will have defined objectives, roles, and agreements, and will be built for the long term. In this way, the partnership will be mutually beneficial, enabling the partners to develop and pursue a joint research agenda that is relevant to the public agency or nonprofit organization’s work over an extended period of time.
Pursue a joint research agenda to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
The partnership’s research will aim to build, test, or increase understanding of programs, policies, or practices to reduce inequality in the academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes of young people ages 5-25 in the United States. Specifically, the research agenda will seek to inform responses to inequality on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic standing, language minority status, or immigrant origins.
Create institutional change to value research-practice partnerships within research institutions.
The research institution will design a feasible strategy for institutional change that addresses observed structural, motivational, and financial barriers that inhibit research-practice partnerships at the institution. By establishing structural supports and incentives that encourage skilled, mid-career researchers to conduct joint work with policymakers and practitioners, the institution will develop an environment for partnerships to thrive.
Enhance the capacity of both partners to collaborate on producing and using research evidence.
Through new experiences that foster deeper understandings of a given policy or practice context and deepen relationships with partners, grantees on the research side will enhance their capacity for participating in effective partnerships. At the same time, the public agency or nonprofit partner will enhance their own capacity to partner with researchers , as well as understand, conduct, and use research through activities such as technical assistance, infrastructure improvements, or staff training.
The award will provide $650,000 over three years. This includes:
- The award will provide $650,000 over three years. This includes:
Up to $60,000 for up to 9 months of joint planning activities (e.g., refining protocols for partnering, selecting fellows, finalizing partnership and data sharing agreements, etc.).
- Funding for two years of a full-time equivalent fellowship. In addition, universities are required to fund one additional year of a full-time equivalent fellowship.
- Fellowships may be allocated in different ways, for example, by appointing one individual fellow for three years, or three different fellows each for one year, or six half-time fellows for one year each, etc. The minimum appointment level for a fellow is half-time for half of one year.
- Up to three years of support for the partnership to conduct and use research to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
- Resources to advance the proposed institutional shifts and capacities of both partners.
- Indirect cost allowance of up to 15 percent of total direct costs
Current grantees have the opportunity to apply for a funded two-year continuation grant in order to solidify the partnership and institutional changes. At the end of the five years, we expect the following results:
- The research institution has established a set of strategies that facilitate sustained research collaborations with public agencies or private nonprofit organizations.
- The public agency or private nonprofit organization has increased its capacity to use research evidence.
- Participating researchers have improved partnership skills.
The research generated has been used in decision making and is likely to lead to improved outcomes for youth.
Eligible research institutions
- The Foundation makes grants only to tax-exempt organizations. We do not make grants to individuals.
- Eligible organizations include university-based research institutes, schools, or centers. Institutions that sit outside of the academy, such as research organizations and think tanks, are not eligible.
- We encourage proposals from organizations that are under-represented among grantee institutions, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic-serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), Alaska Native-Serving Institutions, Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, and Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs).
Eligible principal investigators
- Eligible principal investigators are leaders at eligible research institutions. They have visibility, influence on institutional policies and practices, and access to the resources needed to optimize and implement the award. They also possess the skills needed to cultivate trusting relationships with leaders from the partner public agency or nonprofit organization and to ensure the conduct of high-quality research.
Eligible public agencies or nonprofit organizations
- Eligible public agencies include state or local agencies and their departments and divisions.
- Nonprofit, tax-exempt organizations are eligible if they are open to the general public and provide or coordinate services for youth ages 5 to 25 in the United States.
- Eligible agencies and organizations engage in work relevant to youth in the areas of education, justice, child welfare, mental health, immigration, or workforce development and have the resources needed to implement and optimize the award.
Eligible leaders from the public agency or nonprofit organization
- Eligible leaders from the public agency or nonprofit organization have the authority and influence required to successfully institutionalize the partnership and the use of research evidence in the agency or organization’s work.
- We are most interested in supporting existing research-practice partnerships that will use the grant to continue learning and growing.
- While the competition is open to partnerships at different stages of maturity, the grant is intended to add significant value to what already exists. As a general guideline, the partnership should be far enough along to conduct the proposed work, but not so established that the grant adds little value to what is currently in place.
- All fellows must be mid-career.
- For researchers, we define mid-career as having received the terminal degree within 8 to 20 years of the date that the application is submitted. (This should be calculated by adding 8 and 20 years to the date the doctoral degree was conferred. For medicine, an institution should use the date from the completion of the first residency.)
- The research fellow does not need to be an employee of the research institution and can be recruited from another institution.
- You may appoint one mid-career fellow from the public agency or nonprofit organization. (All other fellows must be researchers). This should be a mid-career professional at the agency or organization who will be called on to facilitate the use of research. A mid-career professional has 8 to 20 years of cumulative experience in his/her current role.
- Activities for the planning period will strengthen the partnership.
- Activities advance the research agenda, selection of fellows, and capacity building plans.
- The public agency or nonprofit organization will receive at least half of the dollars available for planning.
- The rationale for partnering provides compelling evidence that the research institution and the public agency or nonprofit organization can grow an existing partnership that will work together effectively.
- The plan for partnering demonstrates mastery of the literature on the challenges and strategies for collaborative work to promote the use of research evidence.
- Activities for building the partnerships will deepen trust and relationships.
- There is evidence that the public agency or nonprofit organization is invested in the partnership, will interact regularly with the fellows, and has strong plans for using the research.
- The partnership is likely to be sustained after the award ends.
Joint Research Agenda to Reduce Inequality in Youth Outcomes
- The long-term research agenda (including one or more research projects) aligns with the Foundation’s focus on reducing inequality in youth outcomes by:
- Identifying a specific inequality in youth outcomes, and show that the outcomes are currently unequal by engaging with the extant literature on the causes and consequences of inequality.
- Making a convincing case for the dimension(s) of inequality the study will address.
- Articulating how findings from your research will help build, test, or increase understanding of a program, policy, or practice to reduce the specific inequality that you have identified.
- The research questions and findings are likely to significantly advance the public agency or nonprofit organization’s efforts to reduce inequality in youth outcomes.
- The proposal reflects a mastery of relevant theory and empirical findings, and clearly states the theoretical and empirical contributions the study will make to the existing research base.
- The research plan reflects rigorous methods that are appropriate for the proposal’s goals.
- Plans for case selection, sampling, and measurement clearly state why they are well-suited to address the research questions or hypotheses. For example, samples are appropriate in size and composition to answer the study’s questions. Qualitative case selection—whether critical, comparative, or otherwise—is also be appropriate to answer the proposed questions.
- The quantitative and/or qualitative analysis plan demonstrates awareness of the strengths and limits of the specific analytic techniques and how they will be applied in the current case.
- The methods, time frame, staffing plan, and other resources are realistic.
- Plans to interpret and use the research findings in policy or practice decisions are convincing, feasible, and aligned with the literature on improving the use of research evidence.
- Plans for broader dissemination are likely to amplify study findings and their use.
- The long-term research agenda (including one or more research projects) aligns with the Foundation’s focus on reducing inequality in youth outcomes by:
Changing Institutional Policies and Practices
- The application provides a thoughtful discussion of specific obstacles that limit researchers’ participation in research-practice partnerships at the research institution and offers a plan for overcoming those obstacles.
- Assurances are compelling that the research institution will provide the necessary funding, alter policies, and/or enact new practices to attract, support, and reward strong investigators to conduct partnership research.
- The plan for institutional change is feasible given the resources and time frame.
- The application demonstrates a commitment to sustain the institutional changes beyond the conclusion of the award.
Developing the Capacity of the Mid-Career Fellows and Partners
- The application includes a rich description of the activities and expertise of the mid-career fellows. Financial support for two of the full-time equivalent fellows comes from this grant while support for the third full-time equivalent fellow will come from the university.
- The application includes written assurances that the research institution will provide support for the equivalent of one full-time mid-career fellow for one year.
- All fellows commit a minimum of half-time status for at least a six-month period.
- The criteria for selecting fellows ensure that the fellows possess the relevant expertise to carry out the proposed work and can effectively communicate what is learned to the broader research community and to change makers in other state or local settings.
- The capacity-building plan for the research fellows significantly extends the fellows’ skills as effective partners to policymakers and practitioners.
- Capacity-building activities for the public agency or nonprofit organization leverage the empirical literature on strategies for mobilizing research for use in practice or policy.
- The capacity-building plan for the public agency or nonprofit organization significantly extends the organization’s ability to access, conduct, and integrate high-quality research evidence into their work.