Step 7: Get Funding
Implementation science grant writing
Implementation science grant proposals require specific elements that are not common features in other grant types. Thankfully for those new to implementation science, to grant writing, or both, Dr. Enola Proctor and colleagues published an incredibly useful resource.
✪ Writing implementation research grant proposals: Ten key ingredients was published in the journal Implementation Science in 2012, and is a rich source of expert knowledge on writing successful grants in this young field.
Below you will find a high-level overview of this article, to serve as an introduction to thinking about this type of grant. The full article linked above is available open source - be sure to read it!
Don’t miss the video adaptation of “10 Key Ingredients”, produced by the Colorado Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.
Key Ingredients for Implementation Science Grants
Access/quality gap: It is not enough to simply document the burden of disease. Proposals need to demonstrate an unmet need, underuse or poor reach in the targeted population or low adoption, wide variation, or poor penetration of evidence based practices in usual care settings.
Evidence-based practice: Must clearly establish that the evidence based practice is ready to implement. Strength of empirical evidence is key part of determining readiness, yet how much evidence is necessary is socially determined. Note the importance of evidence of effectiveness in targeted settings and populations. How much adaptation will be needed?
Conceptual model: Active and intentional use of theory is needed to produce generalizable knowledge and situate the study within larger body of knowledge. This is particularly needed for specifying key contextual variables that influence implementation and the mechanisms by which strategies have their effects. A theoretically based conceptual model helps to frame study questions and hypotheses, clarify the constructs to be measured, and specify the relationships to be evaluated or tested.
Stakeholder priorities and engagement: Engagement affects the impact of the proposed implementation effort, the sustainability of the proposed change, and the feasibility and ultimate success of the proposed project. Varying levels and forms of engagement are possible. The key is, have they demonstrated its impact?
Setting readiness: Stronger proposals include information that reflects the setting’s readiness for change. This is especially true regarding the adoption and implementation of the proposed evidence based practice. Conducting a formal readiness assessment, formative evaluation of implementation facilitators and barriers, and letters of support from the setting that address the alignment of the proposed implementation effort with organizational priorities, policy, and funding context.
Implementation strategy: Describe the strategy in detail (see our page Identify Implementation Strategies for more on this topic). Strategy selection should be justified conceptually and matched to known barriers (determinants) in the setting. Theory should be used to explain the mechanisms of action. The strategy should be robust, adaptable, feasible, acceptable, scalable and sustainable. It is important to know the cost and budget impact of selecting a particular strategy.
Team experience: Does the research team possess all of the relevant expertise? Does the team have experience with the study setting, the evidence based practice, and the strategy?
Feasibility of the proposed research design and methods: Is there preliminary or pilot data? Is the approach well described? Have potential problems and alternative approaches been described?
Measurement and analysis: Does the conceptual framework inform the measures? Does the analysis plan align with the research questions? How well is the speed, quality, or degree of implementation captured? Is there appropriate attention to implementation outcomes not just clinical effectiveness outcomes?
Policy/funding environment: Proposals that address how the implementation effort aligns with policy trends enhance their likelihood of being perceived as having high public health significance, as well as greater practical impact, feasibility, and sustainability.
Implementation Science Funding Announcements
TDR (UNICEF/UNDP/WHO)
TDR Grants and other funding activities
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research
National Institutes of Health
Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health (R01 Clinical Trial Optional)
Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health (R21 Clinical Trial Optional)
Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health (R03)
Current cancer control funding opportunities for implementation science
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Funding Announcements Overview
Improving Management of Opioids and Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) in Older Adults (R18)
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
UK Research and Innovation
Australian Government
PAUSE AND REFLECT
❯ Do the funder’s values and mission align with the goals and ethical standards of your research? Are there any potential conflicts of interest between the funder’s objectives and your research aims?
❯ How might the source of funding influence the direction, scope, or outcomes of your research? Are there any restrictions or expectations from the funder that could impact the integrity or independence of your research?
❯ Does the funder have a history of supporting diverse and inclusive research initiatives? How does the funder address issues of equity and inclusion in their funding practices?
❯ Is the funding source reliable and sustainable for the duration of your research project? What are the funder’s expectations for the long-term impact and sustainability of the research?
❯ How transparent is the funder about their decision-making processes and criteria for awarding funds? What mechanisms are in place for accountability and reporting to the funder?
❯ Does the funder encourage or require engagement with the community or stakeholders affected by the research? How does the funder support the dissemination and application of research findings to benefit the community?
The IS Research Pathway
Get inspired
Browse a selection of funded implementation science research with UW principal investigators.
An Evidence-Based Guide to Writing Grant Proposals for Clinical Research (Annals of Internal Medicine, 2005)
✪ How research funding agencies support science integration into policy and practice: An international overview (Implementation Science, 2014)
✪ Implementation science in cancer prevention and control: A decade of grant funding by the National Cancer Institute and future directions (Implementation Science, 2015)
✪ Concocting that Magic Elixir: Successful Grant Application Writing in Dissemination and Implementation Research (Clinical and Translational Science, 2015)
✪ A review of policy dissemination and implementation research funded by the National Institutes of Health, 2007–2014 (Implementation Science, 2016)
✪ A methodology for enhancing implementation science proposals: comparison of face-to-face versus virtual workshops (Implementation Science, 2016)
✪ Standardizing an approach to the evaluation of implementation science proposals (Implementation Science, 2018)
What new investigators need to know about dissemination and implementation research (National Cancer Institute (NCI), Advanced Topics in Implementation Science)
A jury of peers: Untangling D&I grant reviews with the people who chair them (NCI)
Crossing the finish line of grant submission: R’s from the perspectives of the PIs (NCI)
From sapling to redwood: Implementation science career development awards (NCI)
Communicating implementation science efforts: Grants and publications from development to review (NCI, Fireside Chat)
10 Key Ingredients for D&I Research Proposals (Colorado CTSI, University of Colorado Anschutz)