New E4A Funding Opportunity: Indigenous-Led Solutions to Advance Health Equity and Wellbeing

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) will award up to $4 million in grants through the Evidence for Action (E4A) program to support research driven by Indigenous communities focused on advancing “upstream” solutions to promote health equity and wellbeing for Indigenous Peoples. The term “upstream” refers to systems, structures, laws, policies, norms, and practices that determine the distribution of resources and opportunities, which in turn influence individuals’ choices and behaviors.

Cody Hammer, an Osage man, standing in front of a body of water and looking at the horizon

What We’re Looking For

We’re looking for research led by and aligned with the priorities of Indigenous communities that embodies and contributes to the advancement of health equity, self-determination, and identity affirmation for Indigenous Peoples. Additionally, projects should center the needs, experiences, and strengths of Indigenous communities, such as thriving in the face of historical trauma; be reflective of Indigenous worldviews and concepts of knowledge, health and wellbeing; and be able to inform a specific course of action and/or establish beneficial practices. These projects may fall along a continuum of stages from initiating and developing research capacity and infrastructure to later-stage, sustained research efforts.

Who We’re Looking For

Preference will be given to applicant organizations that are Tribal entities (including those that are state recognized, federally recognized, or have no formal recognition status) or Indigenous Serving Organizations*, including Urban Indian Organizations. We particularly encourage applications from project directors who are American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or otherwise Indigenous to the United States or its territories; researchers from organizations currently underrepresented among RWJF grantee institutions; and/or first-time applicants for an RWJF grant. Non-indigenous applicants, working in partnership with and with extensive experience working in service of Indigenous communities are also eligible.

Key Dates

December 7, 2023, 11am PST: Informational applicant webinar

March 1, 2024, 3pm EST: Brief proposals due.

April 1, 2024: Applicants notified whether they are invited to submit full proposals.

June 28, 2024: Invited full proposals due.

July 31, 2024: Applicants notified of review committee decisions.

October 1, 2024: Grants start. 

Applicant Frequently Asked Questions

The below list of questions was developed based on the E4A team’s experience working with potential applicants for former calls for proposals (CFP) and based on input from the Indigenous scholars and reviewers of the CFP. Questions and answers will be added throughout the brief proposal period as needed.

Eligibility

  • Are fiscally sponsored Indigenous- or Native-led projects allowed to apply?

    Yes.

  • Does the Indigenous-Led Solutions CFP fund projects outside of the United States?

    No, E4A will only fund projects led by and focused on advancing health equity and wellbeing of peoples and groups that are indigenous to what is now known as the United States. Work centering Indigenous peoples or groups that span colonial borders is permissible as long as a portion of the population lives within US borders.

  • Is there a limit to the number of applications that can be submitted per community or organization?

    No, there is no limit on the number of brief proposal applications that may be submitted from a particular community, organization, or institution.

  • What is the process for lead applicant verification as a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization for Track 1?

    We anticipate that verification will typically require letters of support from Tribal communities or entities. In cases where there is no Tribal entity, we will work with applicants to determine the appropriate validating body and process.

  • What types of organizations are eligible to apply for funding?

    Preference will be given to applicant organizations that are Tribal entities (including those that are state recognized, federally recognized, or have no formal recognition status) or Indigenous Serving Organizations, including Urban Indian Organizations. Applicant organizations must be based in the United States or its territories. Only one organization may serve as the lead applicant. For applications submitted under Track 1, this must be a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization.

  • Can applications from lead organizations outside the U.S. apply?

    No, applicant organizations must be based in the United States, its territories, or sovereign nations.

  • Who may serve as a Project Director?

    Anyone may be designated as the Project Director. The PD does not need to hold an advanced degree nor need to be based in an academic institution. Two PDs may be listed in the brief proposal application, but the team is not limited to these two individuals. For ease of administration, it is preferable, but not required, for the PD to be based at the lead organization.

  • Is there preference for who serves as a Project Director?

    Yes, in an effort to support a diverse group of researchers in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, disability, and seniority we particularly encourage lead researchers who are American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or otherwise Indigenous to the United States or its territories; researchers from organizations that are underrepresented among RWJF grantee institutions, including Tribal Colleges and Universities, Alaska Native-Serving Institutions, Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions, Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, and other Indigenous Serving Organizations; and first-time applicants for an RWJF grant to apply.

  • What constitutes an Indigenous community for the purpose of this CFP?

    The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and E4A respect and acknowledge the sovereignty of Indigenous Tribes and communities, urban and rural, regardless of U.S. and state governmental acknowledgement, and recognize Indigenous Peoples as descendants of independent sovereign nations who experience contemporary health inequity due to centuries of intentional colonial subjugation. For the purposes of this funding opportunity, Indigenous Peoples include, but are not limited to, Tribal Nations (regardless of federal or state recognition), American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders of U.S. territories. 

  • How does E4A define Indigenous Serving Organization (ISO)?

    For the purpose of this call for proposals, Indigenous Serving Organizations are defined as organizations with a core mission to serve Native Americans, Alaskans, Hawaiians, or Peoples Indigenous to the U.S. Territories; that can demonstrate a track record of successfully meeting this mission; are poised to reach these populations; and can obtain appropriate verification from a Tribal or Indigenous governing body that the applicant meets these requirements as a contingency of award.

  • May I submit more than one brief proposal?

    Yes, applicants may submit multiple brief proposals or serve as a partner for another organization's application. There are no rigid restrictions against multiple submissions from the same applicant. However, there is limited funding to be awarded through this solicitation, so we encourage you to think critically about the relative strengths of the projects for which you are considering submitting brief proposals. Applicants are also welcome to apply for funding under E4A’s open and rolling racial equity call for proposals.

  • May I apply for E4A’s open and rolling racial equity call for proposals?

    Yes, applicants may apply to E4A’s open and rolling racial equity call for proposals, whether they are turned down or funded through the Indigenous-Led Solutions to Advance Health Equity and Wellbeing Call for Proposals.

  • If I am not chosen for this funding opportunity, will I still be eligible for other RWJF grant opportunities?

    Yes, interested applicants may apply to E4A again or to other RWJF funding opportunities. Each funding program of RWJF has distinct objectives, funding guidelines, and criteria. To learn more about other funding programs and initiatives at RWJF, visit https://www.rwjf.org/en/how-we-work/grants-and-grant-programs.html.

  • May I apply for this funding opportunity even if I am already funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF)?

    Yes, applicants who are current or past RWJF grantees may apply.

  • What if my brief or full proposal is turned down?

    We do not know how many applications to anticipate in response to this call for proposals, but imagine that it will be very competitive as we only have the resources to fund a small percentage of them. If you are turned down, we strongly encourage you to reach out to the E4A national program office (evidenceforaction@ucsf.edu) to request feedback on your submission. It is possible that projects not funded under this funding opportunity will be a good fit for our open and rolling racial equity call for proposals. Applicants that feel this is the case for their project are encouraged to apply.

    A small group of applicants may be invited to participate in a Technical Assistance cohort program.

  • What is involved in the Technical Assistance cohort program?

    Select applicants may be invited to participate in a Technical Assistance cohort program. It is anticipated that the program will be conducted over a year with involvement of Dr. Jeana Morrison, E4A's Research and Program Manager, and Dr. Claudette Grinnell-Davis, an experienced Indigenous scholar.

Project Fit

  • How is health defined for the purpose of this CFP?

    We have not provided a concise definition of “health” in this CFP, recognizing that there is no singular viewpoint on Indigenous concepts of health and wellbeing. Projects should be guided by Indigenous frameworks and worldviews, such as the inclusion of cultural connectedness, relationships to land and natural resources, holistic approaches, and traditional practices of wellness, among others.

  • Why is there a focus on systems-level, rather than individual-level, solutions to inequities?

    The goal of this call for proposals is to address root causes of inequities in health and wellbeing, rather than mediators further downstream from those causes. As E4A sees it, root causes of these inequities lie in the systems and structures built by governments, institutions, and other organizations, so addressing these issues requires action at these same levels. This is not to say that individual-level solutions to address inequities in health and wellbeing are not important, because people still make choices that can benefit or harm their health; but E4A is focused on first creating the conditions for people to thrive, rather than asking people to change their behaviors within flawed systems.

  • What types of projects are a good fit for funding under the Indigenous-led solutions call for proposals?

    There are a wide range of projects that may be a good fit for funding under this call for proposals. Generally speaking, research projects are a good fit if they are Indigenous-driven; center the needs, experiences, and strengths of Indigenous communities; are reflective of Indigenous worldviews and concepts of health and wellbeing; and are able to inform a specific systems- or structural-level course of action and/or establish beneficial practices that will advance Indigenous health equity and wellbeing.

  • What types of projects are NOT a good fit under this call for proposals?

    Projects identifying or testing solutions operating solely at the individual, household, or other hyperlocal unit are not a fit for this funding opportunity. Research that aims to simply describe a problem or document inequities is not a fit. Applications seeking funding for program implementation or general operations are not eligible for funding through this call for proposals. Projects proposing to conduct an earlier stage project aligned with Track 1, without an established partnership with a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization that can act as the lead applicant, will NOT be funded under this call for proposals.

  • What types of research designs are a good fit for this call for proposals?

    As long as the research designs, methods, and/or frameworks are appropriate for answering the research questions under study, they may be a good fit for this CFP. These designs can include Indigenous knowledges, approaches, methodologies, and methods, “Western” frameworks and methods, or a mix of Indigenous and Western approaches as described by the Etuaptmumk - Two-Eyed Seeing concept created by Mi’kmaw Elder Albert Marshall, which refers to, “learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of Western knowledges and ways of knowing, and learning to use both these eyes together, for the benefit of all.”

  • What types of research designs are NOT a good fit for this call for proposals?

    Research designs and approaches that do not center equity and Indigenous perspectives are NOT a good fit for this call. Projects with a lack of alignment between the research questions being explored and the designs and methodologies being employed will not be funded under this call.

  • Is tribally-driven participatory research (TDPR) an acceptable approach for funding through this call?

    Yes, approaches and processes that optimize Indigenous leadership, build upon existing community strengths and capacity, help establish collaborative partnerships, work towards equitable power dynamics, and facilitate bi-directional learnings, such as TDPR, are strongly encouraged. For more information on TDPR, see Mariella et al, 2009.

The Two Tracks

  • For Track 1, can an academic organization be considered an Indigenous Serving Organization?

    Tribal Colleges and Universities are considered Indigenous Serving Organizations. Most other academic entities will not be considered Indigenous Serving Organizations, and are not eligible to serve as a lead applicant for Track 1 submissions. This decision is based on the allocation of indirect costs - in order for an Indigenous serving center or department within a larger institution to qualify as an Indigenous Serving Organization, the indirect costs must accrue solely to the Indigenous serving unit.

  • What are the two tracks under which I can apply for funding?

    Track 1 is Initiating and Developing Research Capacity and Infrastructure. This track is intended for those teams that are still in the earlier stages of systematic inquiry, specifically identifying and developing potential solutions to challenges determined by the Indigenous community. For this track, the primary applicant MUST be a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization. 

    Track 2, Supporting Later-Stage, Sustained Research Efforts, is intended for later-stage systematic inquiries evaluating the health and wellbeing impacts of solutions being implemented by and for Indigenous communities.

  • What are examples of projects that are a good fit for Track 1?

    Under Track 1, example projects may include, but are not limited to, conducting an Indigenous-grounded needs assessment, developing and validating new measures of Indigenous health, or creating new methods of data collection or management.

  • What are examples of projects that are a good fit for Track 2?

    Examples of projects that align with Track 2 include, but are not limited to, assessing whether practices, policies, or systems-level initiatives like traditional healing, Indigenous cultural practices, economic and commerce developments, housing initiatives, or climate change adaptations, impact Indigenous Peoples’ health and wellbeing.

  • How do I determine which track is the best fit for my project?

    The main distinction between the two tracks is the stage of the proposed project. If the team is applying to build research capacity within the community or identify potential solutions to community-identified challenges, Track 1 is likely to be the best fit. Track 1 is also appropriate for those working to build equitable research partnerships. Track 1 requires that the lead applicant organization is a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization.

    If the team already has established partnerships with Indigenous communities and is proposing to test a community-driven solution  to enhance Indigenous health equity and wellbeing, Track 2 is likely the best fit. For this track, lead applicants may be Tribal entities or Indigenous Serving Organizations, but it is not a requirement.  

  • What if my project team selects the wrong track to apply under?

    Ultimately, the tracks are intended to better facilitate the review process. For some proposals, there may not be an exact fit for either track. You will not be penalized for your track selection. Your application can be “reassigned” after submission if reviewers feel your project fits better under the other track.

  • What if I am conducting an earlier stage project aligned with Track 1, but do not have an established partnership with a Tribal entity or Indigenous Serving Organization that can act as the lead applicant?

    This funding opportunity is NOT a good fit for your project and you should consider an alternate source of funding.

  • Will selection criteria be adjusted based on whether proposals are submitted under Track 1 or Track 2?

    No, the same selection criteria will be used to evaluate proposals submitted to both funding tracks. The selection criteria were developed in a manner that allows them to be applied consistently to both tracks (e.g. the criteria for methodological rigor specifies that the methods be appropriate for answering the research question(s), rather than dictating a certain methodological approach or research design). However, eligibility criteria is different between the two tracks. Tribal entities or Indigenous Serving Organizations may serve as the lead applicant for either track; they MUST be the lead applicant for Track 1.

  • For projects submitted under Track 2, what is meant by “testing” a solution or strategy as part of their project?

    Under this call for proposals, testing a solution refers to systematic inquiry evaluating the acceptability, adaptability, or effectiveness of an intervention (e.g., policies, healthcare infrastructure or systems investments, cultural revitalization initiatives, etc.) aimed at improving Indigenous Peoples’ health equity and wellbeing.

  • Can I apply under both tracks?

    Yes, investigators can be part of multiple brief proposals being submitted under this call for proposals. However, funding for this call is limited, so consider carefully when submitting competing proposals.

Application & Review Process

  • When are brief proposals due?

    Brief proposals are due on March 1, 2024 at 10am HST/11am AST/12pm PST/1pm MST/2pm CST/3pm EST. We strongly recommend that you plan to submit your proposal well in advance of the deadline because late proposals will not be accepted.

  • What are other key dates in the application and review process?
    • December 7, 2023, 2pm - 3:30pm EST
      Register to attend an optional informational webinar.
    • March 1, 2024 (3pm Eastern Time)
      Deadline for submission of brief proposals. 
    • April 1, 2024
      Applicants are notified whether they are invited to submit full proposals. 
    • June 28, 2024 (3 p.m. Eastern Time)
      Deadline for receipt of full proposals (invite only).
    • July 31, 2024
      Applicants are notified of review committee decisions. 
    • October 1, 2024
      Grant start date.
  • Are there resources available regarding the brief proposal submission?

    Yes, there will be an informational webinar held on December 7, 2023 from 11:00am - 12:30pm PST. If you are unable to attend, the recording, transcript, and slides will be made available the following week. In addition to the webinar, E4A program staff will hold drop-in, virtual office hours via Zoom three times a month while the brief proposal submission period is open. Last, but not least, a brief proposal guide is available that outlines the project information questions and prompts, along with additional information on the specific information reviewers are looking for and character limits.

  • What selection criteria will be used to evaluate brief and full proposals?

    Brief and full proposals will be evaluated based on: 

    • Relevance to improving Indigenous health and wellbeing, 
    • Actionability, 
    • Methodological appropriateness, 
    • Focus on health equity, 
    • Feasibility, and 
    • Qualifications of the team. 

    Additional detail around these selection criteria can be found in the call for proposals. In addition to this criteria, all proposals should be written from a strengths-based perspective and focus on advancing strengths-based approaches for improving Indigenous health and wellbeing.

  • Who will review proposals submitted under the Indigenous call for proposals?

    Brief and full proposals will be reviewed by a committee composed of Indigenous scholars and community members, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) staff, and members of the E4A National Program Office and National Advisory Committee. Indigenous scholars and community members were selected with input from the Center for Indigenous Health at Johns Hopkins University. These individuals also provided input in developing the  call for proposals. To avoid potential conflicts of interest, reviewers are not eligible to apply for funding under this call for proposals.

    All reviewers participated in training to ensure review criteria are applied consistently across brief and full proposals and that funded projects align with the aims and spirit of the funding opportunity. Final grant decisions will be made by RWJF.

  • How will reviewers determine methodological appropriateness?

    Reviewers are evaluating whether the proposed methods are well suited to answer the research questions in a manner that aligns with Indigenous community values and priorities.

  • How will reviewers assess if the proposal itself is equitable and beneficial for the population? How will reviewers assess for potential harm to Indigenous Peoples and communities?

    Reviewers will assess equity, as well as potential benefits for and harms to Indigenous communities, based on multiple portions of the application. They’ll take into consideration team structure, letters of support, the way the budget is allocated amongst partners and how participants are compensated, framing of the research, and the rationale and appropriateness of proposed methodologies and approaches.

  • Will I receive feedback on my brief or full proposal?

    Applicants will not receive proactive feedback if their brief or full proposal is turned down. However, applicants are welcome to contact the program office with specific questions about their proposal.

  • What support will be provided to applicants at the full proposal stage?

    During a follow-up webinar held for those individuals who are invited to submit a full proposal, E4A staff members will provide additional information about components of the application, such as the proposal narrative,  budget worksheet and narrative, the project timeline, and the dissemination strategy. Full proposal applicants will also be provided ample opportunity to ask questions during the webinar and at follow up virtual office hour sessions on Zoom. E4A staff will also be available via email or for brief check-ins to answer any questions.

  • Is there an expectation around the generalizability of the findings from projects funded under this call for proposals?

    We understand that findings from projects funded under this call for proposals may not be generalizable to other Tribal communities or Indigenous populations. We do hope that some learnings may be shared to inform work by and with Indigenous Peoples more broadly, as well as improve the way research is done by and with other communities. Such learnings may include insights around the process by which the research was conducted, measures developed, data collection and infrastructure, relationship building and power sharing, etc.

Funding

  • How much funding is being granted under the Indigenous-led solutions call for proposals?

    Up to four million dollars in grants will be awarded under this call for proposals. Additionally, we anticipate that many projects that align with Track Two of the funding opportunity are also eligible to apply under the open and rolling racial equity call for proposals.

  • How much funding is available per grant?

    While there is no explicit funding cap for projects funded under this CFP, we anticipate that approximate budgets for projects under Track 1 will be between $100,000 – $400,000 total and projects under Track 2 will be between $500,000 – $750,000 (inclusive of indirect costs).

  • What is the duration of the grants funded under this call for proposals?

    There is a strong preference for project durations between 2 and 3 years (24 - 36 months), but the review committee will consider project durations of up to 5 years (60 months) with reasonable justification.

  • What if I need more time or money to conduct my project?

    We recognize the funding amount and duration could impact the type of projects that may be undertaken. We encourage applicants to consider creative ways for conducting research within the duration and budget parameters of this program. For example, by breaking research into phases, utilizing funding to supplement an existing project, leveraging funding from multiple sources, etc. Please contact the program office to discuss ideas for research that may fall outside the funding parameters of this program.

  • How many projects will be funded under the Indigenous-led solutions call for proposals?

    The total number of grants to be awarded will be determined based on the number, size, and scope of the studies proposed, and we expect to award grants in a range of sizes and durations.

  • How should I estimate my budget?

    You should request the amount of funding you will need to conduct and disseminate your proposed research. In the case of multi-year proposals, budget requests should reflect the entire grant duration as opposed to an annual amount. Please do not provide a detailed budget breakdown at the brief proposal stage. When entering the budget request at the brief proposal stage, round up to the nearest $10,000.

    Budget requests should be inclusive of both direct and indirect costs. The Foundation’s maximum approved rate for indirect costs is up to 15% of all project costs (Personnel, Other Direct Costs, and Purchased Services) for colleges/universities and hospitals or health systems, 30% non-profit organizations, and 0% for for-profit or government entities. More detailed guidance and exceptions are provided in the Budget Preparation Guidelines available at the Full Proposal stage. For further detail about permissible uses of grant funds please see the related FAQ.

  • What types of travel costs should be included in the budget?

    All applicants should budget for two project team members to attend an annual RWJF/E4A grantee meeting. To budget for travel, RWJF travel guidelines suggest up to $975 for a one-night, one-day meeting where

    air travel is necessary. This figure includes airfare and baggage ($500), lodging ($225 per night), the amount necessary for meals not supplied at the meeting (up to $100 per day), and ground transportation ($150). For longer trips, add up to $225 for each extra night of lodging, and up to $100 per day for meals when necessary. Travel costs associated with your project should also be included in your budget. Such travel may include, but is not limited to, site visits for collaborators or travel associated with dissemination such as to conferences or other knowledge sharing events. Additional direction about accounting for travel costs will be provided to those invited to submit a full proposal. 

  • What are examples of appropriate or non-appropriate uses of grant funds?

    Grant funds should cover all research-related aspects of a project, including staff time, travel stipends, support for participant involvement, consultant fees, data collection, analysis, interpretation, dissemination, meetings, supplies, support for intellectual contributions (e.g., review sessions, advisory board service, etc.), research capacity-building, and a variety of other costs related to the research project itself. Grant funds will also cover indirect costs to support the applicant organization’s general operations. 

    In keeping with RWJF policy, funds may not be used to support clinical trials of unapproved drugs or devices, to construct or renovate facilities, or for lobbying or political activities. In general, it is not appropriate to buy office equipment or office software with program funds. However, if office equipment or software essential for conducting research (i.e., for collecting or analyzing data) is needed and justified in the budget narrative, and the cost does not exceed five percent of the total direct costs in the budget, it is acceptable to include such items.

    Additional budget guidelines are provided in the online application materials.

  • Are matching funds from other outside sources required for this funding opportunity?

    No, matching funds are not required, but supplemental funding is welcome.

  • Where can I learn more about other funding opportunities from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation?

    Some projects eligible for funding through the Indigenous call for proposals may also be eligible for funding through E4A’s open and rolling racial equity call for proposals. Additionally, funding opportunities from other RWJF programs can be found here: http://www.rwjf.org/en/grants/funding-opportunities.html.

Working With E4A & RWJF

  • Who owns the research produced through projects funded under this call for proposals?

    The research findings will belong to the project team, as well as individuals and communities that are involved in the project. While the Foundation and E4A will not share ownership of the findings, we do anticipate that findings will be shared with those directly involved in the project and that some broader learnings will be shared publicly, while still adhering to data sovereignty and similar guidelines.

  • Why is this call for proposals focused on Indigenous health equity and wellbeing?

    The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Evidence for Action program are committed to advancing health and racial equity in the area now known as the United States and its territories. While Indigenous Peoples are sociopolitical groups, rather than racial groups, they have been racialized and experience racism because it intersects with settler colonialism and is embedded in and operates through U.S. systems, policies, and practice. The impact of settler colonialism and racism continues to be deeply ingrained within our societal systems, leading to persistent health inequities. Despite this, Indigenous Peoples have historically lived healthy thriving lives, as communities lived in harmony with nature, practicing vibrant cultural and spiritual traditions. RWJF and E4A are committed to supporting Indigenous communities in identifying and testing solutions to enhance health equity for their people.

  • How was the Indigenous-led solutions call for proposals developed?

    The call for proposals (CFP) was developed through an interactive process in close collaboration with the Center for Indigenous Health (CIH) at Johns Hopkins University. An initial scoping/literature review was completed by E4A . The CIH team coordinated and hosted three listening sessions with junior scholars, senior scholars, and members of Tribal Organizations or Indigenous communities. Altogether, CIH and E4A staff spoke with 37 individuals to gather their input on an initial draft of the CFP. The E4A team then incorporated feedback from CIH and RWJF staff, as well as Indigenous scholars and researchers. We are very grateful to the reviewers and CIH staff for their incredibly helpful comments.

  • What is expected of grantees funded under this call for proposals?

    Grantees funded under this call are expected to:

    • Develop research in alignment with tenets of the CARE Principles (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, Ethics). Devised by international Indigenous scholars, leaders, and allies, the CARE Principles outline essential guidelines for non-Tribal actors when handling Indigenous data (Carroll et al. 2020).
    • Participate in periodic progress check-ins throughout the grant period with E4A program staff; share research findings or learnings with RWJF and E4A leadership and staff; and submit annual progress reports.
    • Attend annual RWJF meetings (dates and locations vary) to network with RWJF and E4A staff, leadership, grantees, and other thought-leaders; E4A staff are also available to visit grantee sites, if invited and appropriate. 
    • Participate in virtual peer networking activities with other E4A and RWJF grantees. 
    • Build appropriate funds and time into the project budget and timeline for engagement, conferences, meetings, and other forms of dissemination - especially to community groups, including after analyses are complete.
    • Collaborate with the E4A team to develop and implement an appropriate strategy to disseminate findings and engage relevant audiences. We respect that some information gathered and gained through these grants may be deemed sacred or proprietary. However, some aspects of the research or research process—with approval from Tribal or Indigenous communities—are expected to be shared publicly (e.g., via story work, videos, presentations, community organizing activities, fact sheets, reports, white papers). 

    Additionally, grantees are encouraged to pre-register their research on Open Science Framework (OSF) at the start of the grant period. Exceptions will be allowed in cases where pre-registration would compromise data sovereignty or other Tribal research agreements.

  • What support will be provided to grantees?

    The E4A program staff will work collaboratively with grantees to provide technical assistance in the form of trainings, one-on-one calls and site visits (if desired by grantees), and grantee networking and knowledge sharing meetings. Topics for many of these sessions are driven by the proposed research and project timeline, while others are based on needs identified by grantees and/or program staff. More information about how E4A program staff and grantees will work together will be provided during an onboarding call after the grants start.

  • What are the expectations around the sharing of the data and research findings?

    Grantees and E4A program staff will work together to refine and implement dissemination strategies and tactics that align with the actionability aims of the E4A program while honoring data sovereignty and other Tribal or Indigenous research agreements. The primary goals of the dissemination strategies are to share information about the progress of and learnings from the research with the Indigenous community closest to the project. Ideally, there will also be learnings shared with other Tribal or Indigenous communities and organizations, and other non-Indigenous groups as appropriate. These learnings do not necessarily have to be the specific outcomes or data from the project, but can be centered around topics such as the research process, methods and methodologies, building collaborative and equitable partnerships, etc. Dissemination strategies will be individualized for each project. While Westernized approaches to dissemination may be appropriate in some cases, we encourage you to elevate ways of communicating your research that align with the communities you are working with.

    While teams are welcome to publish in academic journals, it is NOT a requirement of RWJF or the E4A program office. Decisions about publication will be at the discretion of project teams and any relevant Tribal entities or partners. If your team does decide to publish in an academic journal, the article must be open access. Foundation funds can be requested at the full proposal to pay for this.

  • What are the goals of participating in the in-person grantee and program meetings?

    The purpose behind these in-person meetings is to build collaborative partnerships between grantees from the RWJF network, E4A and RWJF program staff and leadership, and other thought-leaders. Additionally, in-person meetings will offer the opportunity for bi-directional knowledge sharing between grantees and program staff.

  • Can you share more information about site visits?

    Site visits are only conducted upon the request of the grantees. We are open to traveling to you to learn more about your project and how things are going, if you like.

  • What are the reporting requirements for grantees?

    Grantees will need to submit budget reports to the Foundation on an annual basis. The E4A staff team can answer any questions regarding what, how, and when materials need to be submitted.

  • What requirements are there around obtaining approval from Tribal or institutional review boards and/or other relevant governing bodies?

    Funding is contingent on receiving the necessary approvals from Tribal or Indigenous entities, as well as the relevant Tribal institutional review boards, as appropriate. If such approvals have not already been obtained, applicants should incorporate the process to obtain them into their project timeline.

Indigenous mother and child with a sign that reads, "you feel empty  because you were mistreated yet you are held sacred , no one cries alone around me"

Image from Cody Hammer.

Text on the sign reads:

"you feel empty
because you were mistreated
yet you are held sacred,
no one cries alone around me"

Stay Connected