Institutional Challenge Grant

The Institutional Challenge Grant aims to foster collaborative research by requiring institutions to adapt their policies and enhance capacities for meaningful partnerships. It encourages applications from diverse leadership teams in youth-serving areas, focusing on addressing inequalities in youth outcomes. The grant outlines four key goals: strengthening partnerships, pursuing a joint research agenda, facilitating institutional change, and enhancing collaborative capacities for producing actionable research evidence.

Program Overview
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.
Program Goals
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, sexual or gender minority status, 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.

Application Details

Updated March 2025
Online Application Opens:

• May 15, 2025
• Application Deadline:
• September 15, 2025, 3 PM ET
• Finalist Interviews:
• January 30, 2026

Program Overview
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.

Background
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. This misalignment limits the usefulness, use, and impact
of research in policy and practice, a challenge compounded by limited resources and
capacity of the research and practice partners to engage in collaborative research.
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 researchers, policymakers, and practitioners
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 ground-
breaking research to make headway on issues relevant to youth. Policymakers and
practitioners, meanwhile, can more easily access, interpret, and use research evi-
dence when they collaborate with researchers. They can also help define and shape
research agendas. Partnerships, then, equip public agencies and nonprofit organiza-
tions 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 part-
nership. Establishing the infrastructure to grow and sustain a partnership requires
considerable resources. And for research-practice partnerships to thrive, they cannot
be dependent on individuals alone, as turnover among individuals threatens partner-
ships’ sustainability.
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 inadvertent-
ly create disincentives to participating in research-practice partnerships. In turn,
this can make it difficult to recruit experienced researchers to participate in re-
search-practice partnerships or to sustain their involvement beyond a single project.
The Institutional Challenge Grant is a direct response to these obstacles. The pro-
gram challenges research institutions to remove barriers to partnerships’ success.
Doing so involves the careful scrutiny and redesign of internal policies, practices, or
incentives that limit the longevity of partnerships or discourage exceptional research-
ers 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.

SELECTED RESOURCES FOR APPLICANTS
Practical Guidance:

• • Research-Practice Partnerships Website
• A “one-stop shop” for research-practice partnerships, the Foundation’s RPP
• website includes guiding tips, work samples, and resources from successful
• partnerships.
• • Assessing Research-Practice Partnerships: Five Dimensions of Effectiveness
• This paper outlines specific elements that members of existing RPPs have

reported are essential to their work. In addition to indicators for each dimension
of effectiveness, the authors provide a unified framework for assessing
partnerships.

• No One-Size-Fits-All: A Context-Sensitive Approach to Research-Practice

Partnership Health and Effectiveness
The post shares insights on using tools that are tailored to the specific needs,
politics, and contexts of different RPPs in education settings, ensuring they are
truly helpful and actionable in real-world settings.
Recent Thinking:

• • Research-Practice Partnerships in Education: The State of the Field
• Scanning the current landscape of partnerships, identifying points of variation,
• and outlining shared principles, this paper, published in 2021, offers an
• updated definition of research-practice partnerships in education: “A long-term
• collaboration aimed at educational improvement or equitable transformation

through engagement with research. These partnerships are intentionally
organized to connect diverse forms of expertise and shift power relations in the
research endeavor to ensure that all partners have a say in the joint work.”

• Racial Equity and Research Practice Partnerships 2.0: A Critical Reflection

One of three written reflections on Research-Practice Partnerships in Education:

• The State of the Field, this essay centers on equity considerations in RPPs and
• cautions: “to avoid reproducing the very inequities that many claim to challenge
• … we need to confront racial injustice directly and build RPPs that are committed
• to dismantling it.”
• • Universities Take Promising Steps to Reward Research that Benefits Society
• This report details promising institutional changes taking place at universities

around the United States. These include department-, campus-, and university
system-wide reforms to faculty tenure and promotion processes; formalized
structures to implement expanded faculty reward systems; capacity-
building, training, and funding to advance faculty’s engaged scholarship; and
infrastructure supports for public-engaged scholarship.

Goals
The Institutional Challenge Grant asks grantees to pursue four goals:

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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
This year, we will award at least two Institutional Challenge Grants. Each
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 mid-career 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. See Figure 1 (p. 06) for additional exam-
ples.

• 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.

Following the initial three years of funding, grantees have the opportunity to apply
for a funded two-year continuation grant in order to solidify the partnership and
institutional changes.

• • 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.
• NOTE
• Since 2018, we have been able to make multiple awards per year thanks to the
• generosity of the Spencer Foundation, the Doris Duke Foundation, the American

Institutes for Research, and the Bezos Family Foundation. Current funding partners
are invested in improving youth outcomes in education and other youth-serving
systems, as well as preventing children and families from coming into contact with
the child welfare system.
05

FIGURE 1.
EXAMPLE ALLOCATIONS OF MID-CAREER FELLOWS
This Institutional Challenge Grant provides 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. The tables here
provide examples of different ways to allocate mid-career fellows during the
grant period.

Eligible research institutions

• The Foundation makes grants only to tax-exempt organizations.

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,
Hispanic-serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Alaska Native
Serving Institutions, Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, and Asian American
Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions.
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, prevention of child abuse and neglect, foster care, mental
health, immigration, or workforce development and have the resources needed to
implement and optimize the award.
07

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.
Eligible partnerships

• 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.
Eligible fellows

• All fellows must be mid-career.

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.

NOTE
The Foundation accepts applications only through our online application system,
Instructions for creating and submitting
your application are also available online. We recommend starting the application
as early as possible to allow sufficient time to develop a strong proposal, secure the
necessary agreements and letters of support, and resolve any technical issues that
may arise.
All applications must include the following materials:

1. Budget and Budget Justification

• Provide budget information for three years using the budget grid in the online

application.

• Complete the budget justification form, which can be downloaded from the online

application. The budget justification should map tightly to the activities and
staffing described in the narrative.

• The total budget should amount to exactly $650,000 (including the combined

direct and indirect costs for the full grant period). Indirect costs may not exceed 15
percent of total direct costs.

• Funds for the planning period may not exceed $60,000.
• At least half of the planning budget should be allocated to the public agency or

nonprofit organization(s).

• The remainder of funds may be used to support the fellows, capacity building

activities, and research-related work. (The Foundation pays expenses for the
research and practice or policy leaders of the partnership to participate in
Foundation-sponsored meetings, such as grantee convenings. Do not include
funds for those expenses in the budget.)

• If funds to the public agency or nonprofit organization exceed $50,000, complete

a separate subcontract budget and budget justification. (The forms can be
downloaded from the online application.) Subcontract funds of $50,000 or less do
not require separate forms, but must be explained in detail in the primary budget
justification.
09

1. Short CV/Resume of PI

Five pages maximum.

• Include education; position history; recent and relevant publications; grants, roles,

and products related to work with policymakers and practitioners; and leadership
roles within the institution.

• Requests to fund recipient’s salary must not exceed 50 percent of the total

salary received from the sponsoring institution. The portion of the grant used
for salary must be equivalent to the time made available for research by this
award. The remainder of funds may be used to support research-related work.
(The Foundation pays expenses related to the PI’s participation in Foundation-
sponsored meetings.)

1. Short CV/Resume for lead from the public agency or

nonprofit organization
Five pages maximum.

• Include education, position history, key roles and responsibilities at the

current agency or organization, and positions or products related to work with
researchers.

1. Short CV of any identified Fellows (optional)

Five pages maximum.

• Include education; position history; recent and relevant publications; and grants,

roles, and products related to work with policymakers or practitioners (for
research fellows) or with researchers (for policy or practice fellows).

1. IRS Tax-Exempt Status Determination Letter (for the apply-

ing research institution)

• A copy of your institution’s IRS tax-exempt status determination letter is required

as part of your application.

1. Structured Abstract

Four pages maximum.

• Abstracts are a critical part of the application. Foundation staff use them to screen

applications for further review. In addition, Selection Committee members review
the abstracts of all finalists, but do not necessarily read the full applications.
10

• Include sections providing sufficient detail about each of the following areas of

the application: 1) the partnership, 2) joint research agenda and research plans,

1. shifts in organizational practices at the university to elevate the status of

partnership work, and 4) criteria for selecting mid-career fellows and activities to
build fellows’ and public agency or nonprofit organization’s capacity.
NOTE
Format your structured abstract and narrative as follows: 12-point Times New Ro-
man font, single-spaced text with a line space between each paragraph, numbered
pages, and 1-inch margins on all sides. Tables, references, and appendices are not
counted toward the page limits.

1. Narrative

Twenty-five pages maximum. Describe the planning period, institutional
partnership, joint research agenda and research plan, capacity building activities,
and changes in institutional policies and practices.
Planning Period (if applicable):

• • The Institutional Challenge Grant includes up to $60,000 to support a planning

period of up to nine months during the first year. The planning period activities
are intended to advance the partnership and its related grant activities.

• Describe the length, objectives, and activities proposed for the planning period.

This includes details about the process for refining protocols for partnering,
readying the organizations for the joint work, and advancing the research agenda
and selection of fellows. Also describe the value of these planning activities for the
rest of the grant.
Institutional Partnership:

• • Provide a rationale for the selection and inclusion of the public agency or non-
• profit organization, as well as the nature of their current relationship with the

research institution.
proximity, with a demonstrated commitment to the local/regional setting.
NOTE
Joint work is challenging, time intensive, and requires intention and formal structure
(Coburn, Penuel, & Geil, 2013; Dugery & Knowles, 2003; Trotter, Laurila, Alberts,
& Huenneke, 2014). The proposal needs to describe the collaboration and relation-
ship-building process and articulate the plan for working together, including the type
11

and frequency of activities that will cultivate trust and deepen relationships,
strategies for communicating, and processes for using the research. A strong
application makes it evident that the public agency or nonprofit organization is
significantly invested in and has co-defined the proposed work, and that they will
interact regularly with the university fellows, provide input on the interpretation of
the findings, and have compelling plans for using the research.
The plan for joint work needs to demonstrate mastery of the literature on the
challenges and strategies of collaborative work to promote the use of research
evidence (Oliver, Innvar, Lorenc, Woodman, & Thomas, 2014; DuMont, 2015; Hunter,
2017; Tseng, 2017). Therefore, in your narrative, provide a strong justification for
how the proposed plan will offset differences in institutional cultures and reward
systems, ensure equal voice in the agenda setting, and overcome operational
barriers for both the university and the nonprofit or public agency. Successful
applications discuss potential challenges to research-practice partnerships and
how the current partnership is prepared to address those challenges proactively.
Prior work on the use of research evidence offers helpful suggestions for initiating
and advancing meaningful partnerships and establishing long-term collaborations
(Coburn, Penuel, & Geil, 2013; Farrell, Penuel, Coburn, Daniel, & Steup, 2021;
Henrick, Cobb, Penuel, Jackson, & Clark, 2017; Palinkas, Short, & Wong, 2015).
Further, there should be a theory of action and clear articulation of how the evidence
produced by the partnership will be used (Tseng, 2017).
To the extent possible, include memoranda of understanding and/or other docu-
ments that articulate the partnership goals, roles, governance, principles for working
together, and timelines. It may also be appropriate to reference data sharing agree-
ments.
ipate that successful applicants will have worked out the initial agreements before
submitting the proposal.
Well-established partnerships with strong institutional support will need to make a
convincing case that the award will add value to the existing work. Newer partner-
ships, meanwhile, will need to show promising initial evidence that the partners have
worked together successfully in the past and have the potential to sustain a long-
term collaboration.
Related Resources:

• • The Next Big Leap for Research-Practice Partnerships: Building and Testing
• Theories to Improve Research Use
• • How School and District Leaders Access, Perceive, and Use Research
• • Research-Practice-Policy Partnerships for Implementation of Evidence-based
• Practices in Child Welfare and Mental Health
• • What is the Conceptual Use of Research, and Why is it Important?
• 12

Joint Research Agenda to Reduce Youth Inequality

• The partnership must conduct research to build, test, or increase understanding

of programs, policies, or practices to reduce inequality in the outcomes of young
people ages 5-25 in the United States. The research questions must be relevant
to the local organization, while also informing theory and extending prior and
concurrent research. The proposed research agenda must:

• ○ Identify 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. We are especially interested in research to reduce
inequality in academic, social, behavioral, or economic outcomes.
○ Make a convincing case for the dimension(s) of inequality the study will
address. We prioritize studies that aim to reduce inequalities that exist along
dimensions of race, ethnicity, economic standing, sexual or gender minority
status, language minority status, or immigrant origins.
○ Articulate how findings from your research will help build, test, or increase
understanding of a program, policy, or practice to reduce the specific inequali-
ty that you have identified.

• Articulate a detailed research agenda that: 1) states the specific hypotheses and/

or research questions to be addressed, 2) presents a clear and specific theory of
change, 3) provides a detailed discussion of how the design of the study addresses
the theory of change, and 4) describes the methods. In the description of research
methods, attend to the sample/case definition and selection procedures; the
research design; key constructs, measures, and data sources; and procedures for
data collection. Include the data analysis plan for addressing the hypotheses and/
or research questions. Please see the application review criteria (p. 18) to help
anticipate the level of detail expected.
OUR INTEREST IN REDUCING INEQUALITY
The Foundation supports research from a range of disciplines and using a variety
of methods. We welcome descriptive studies that clarify mechanisms for reducing
inequality or elucidate how or why a specific program, policy, or practice operates
to reduce inequality. We also welcome intervention studies that examine attempts
to reduce inequality. In addition, we seek studies that improve the measurement of
inequality in ways that can enhance the work of researchers, practitioners, or policy-
makers. The common thread across all of this work is an explicit focus on reducing
inequality—one that goes beyond describing the causes or consequences of unequal
outcomes and, instead, aims to build, test, or understand policy, program, or prac-
tice responses. Available online, resources for applicants to our program of research
grants on reducing inequality may be especially helpful when preparing your research
agenda.
13

Selected Resources:

• • Letters of Inquiry to Propose Research on Reducing Inequality: Identifying the
• Lever for Change
• • Shifting the Lens: Why Conceptualization Matters in Research on Reducing
• Inequality
• • Proposing Research on Reducing Inequality: Is Your Study a Fit?
• Changing Institutional Policies and Practices
• • Describe the specific barriers to engaged scholarship that exist at your institution
• and show how the proposed plan for institutional change addresses those barriers.
• Carefully consider the alignment of your research institution’s policies and prac-

tices with the nature and demands of the partnership and research agenda. Note
that the plan for institutional change may be university-wide or centered within a
school or college.

• Provide a compelling plan to alter or introduce policies, practices, or incentives

to encourage strong researchers to conduct joint work with public agencies or
nonprofit organizations. Initial strategies might include course releases, reduc-
tions in service obligations, seed money to support partnership work, forums that
showcase the work, distinguished appointments, and training to help researchers
become more effective partners.

• Engage deeply with the question of how your institution can do more to value the

work of research-practice partnerships and those engaged in partnering. Propose
a plan that is bold, feasible, and specific to the barriers to engaged scholarship at
your institution. Finally, show reviewers that the institution is commited to con-
tinuing these significant efforts beyond the award period.
Enhancing the Capacity of the Partners to Collaborate and Use Research

• Describe how the research institution will invest in and enhance the capacity of

the public agency or nonprofit organization to use research evidence, including
how it will enhance the capacity of the policy or practice fellow to use research.

• State the ways that the research institution will increase routine and beneficial

uses of research in deliberations and decisions relevant to youth, which go beyond
a single instance of evidence use and, instead, aim toward the agency’s ability to
make research-informed decisions in the future.
○ Strong applications include strategies aligned with existing literature on the
organizational conditions that facilitate the use of research evidence. For
example, funds may be used to support a research staff person, data infrastruc-
ture, routine access to research expertise on agency priorities, or staff develop-
ment to improve use of research (Farrell & Coburn, 2017; Frisch, 2016).
14

• Clearly delineate the learning objectives, primary responsibilities, and rationale

for all fellows.
○ Researchers at the mid-career stage have established skills and expertise,
influence, and job security. They also have ample time left in their careers to
sustain long-term relationships. A mid-career professional from the public
agency or nonprofit organization may also serve as a fellow to enhance their
capacity to be a critical consumer and user of research.

• Provide the specific methods the partners will use to recruit fellows and the

criteria by which fellows will be selected. If you have already identified potential
fellows, describe how their skills and expertise match the activities in the project.

• For selecting new mid-career fellows, the criteria for selecting fellows must be

clear, rigorous, and well-suited for the research-practice partnership and its re-
search projects. We want to know how applicants will ensure that fellows’ exper-
tise and scholarship are relevant to the proposed research, and how applicants will
ensure that fellows have the requisite skills to engage in a successful partnership.

• Include a plan for how your institution will support the research fellows in gaining

a deep understanding of the policymakers’ and practitioners’ needs and systems.
All fellows must commit to a minimum of half-time status for at least a six-month
period. The arrangement should provide ample opportunity to establish meaning-
ful relationships between the fellow and the public agency or nonprofit organiza-
tion, and to conduct the research and support the use of the findings. Also include
plans for orienting and training the fellows. Well-designed plans will reflect con-
sideration of the burdens and benefits for both partners. Be sure to describe the
amount of time allotted and specify whether research fellows will be embedded in
the practitioner organization (Frisch, 2016; Petersilia, 2008) or maintain separate
working spaces (Coburn, Penuel, Geil, 2013).

• In addition, the research institution must invest in and enhance the capacity of

the public agency or nonprofit organization to use research evidence, and en-
hance the capacity of the policy or practice fellow to use research. Specify how the
grant dollars will be used to enhance the non-profit’s or public agency’s access to,
interpretation of, and use of research. Describe specific strategies, mechanisms,
and conditions that may increase routine and beneficial uses of research in delib-
erations and decisions relevant to youth. Strong applications include strategies
aligned with existing literature on the organizational conditions that facilitate the
use of research evidence. For example, funds may be used to support a research
staff person, data infrastructure, routine access to research expertise on agency
priorities, or staff development to improve use of research (Farrell & Coburn,
2017; Frisch, 2016).

THE CO-DEFINED RESEARCH AGENDA
For the research institution, co-designing research means actively engaging repre-
sentatives from the community organization or public agency in the research pro-
cess. In some cases, this may mean that specific details of the proposed studies are
not yet finalized as the time of application. How can applicants provide specific and
compelling details about the research plan, such that the Selection Committee is
able to evaluate the rigor of the work? To balance this tension, for example, you may
describe previous work with the agency partner and how those plans exemplify po-
tential future work; discuss relevant research plans from the literature that illustrate
potential directions for joint research with the partner agency; or explain separate
research plans for a handful of possible directions that will grow out of the planning
period. In all cases, be sure to provide a detailed description of the methods, inclu-
sive of the sampling framework, research design, data sources, data collection pro-
cedures, and analysis plan for at least one candidate project. This will make it possi-
ble for the committee to judge the quality and relevance of the partnership’s efforts
Mid-career Fellows
For established models of selection criteria for mid-career fellows, you may find
candidate eligibility information for high-profile mid-career development awards
such as the NSF Mid-Career Advancement Award and the NIH K01 Award useful.

1. Partnership Agreement

• This document articulates the partnership goals, key roles, governance, principles

guiding joint work, and timelines, and must be signed by both the principal inves-
tigator at the research institution and the partnership leader at the public agency
or nonprofit organization. Resources on building partnerships and samples of
memorandums of understanding and working agreements can be found on the
Foundation’s research-practice partnerships website: rpp.wtgrantfoundation.org.

1. Endorsement of the application from the research institution

• This letter must come from the appropriate institutional office (e.g., university

dean, provost, vice chancellor for research) and demonstrate support for the PI,
partnership, research project(s), and changes in institutional policies and prac-
tices. The letter must also confirm the institution’s commitment to provide a
match of one full-time equivalent fellow for one year and the presence of sufficient
resources to carry out the proposed work. Strong letters explicitly spell out how
the university will engage in institutional change to support community-engaged
research-practice partnerships.
16

1. Endorsement of the Application from the Public Agency or

Nonprofit Organization

• This letter must come from the appropriate institutional office (e.g., agency leader,

director, or executive) and demonstrate support for the leader of the partnership
within the agency or organization. The letter must also confirm that there are
sufficient resources within the organization to carry out the proposed work. This
attachment should be uploaded by the PI.

Application Review Criteria
Applications will be reviewed against the following criteria:

• Planning Period (if applicable)
• • 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.
• Institutional Partnership
• • 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 showing 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 that the study will
• address.
• 18