Application Guidelines

Proposals for Program Evaluations

The Foundation is currently accepting Research Project (RP) proposals and Existing Program Evaluation (EPE) proposals that have the potential to provide data that will inform how to address disparities in educational opportunities associated with race, ethnicity, and family income.


Existing Program Evaluation (EPE proposals):
  • Primary aim:
    • What works: The primary aim must concern evaluating the effectiveness of programs designed to promote positive cognitive and/or achievement outcomes for children (birth through 18 years) with the goal of informing ways to close the educational opportunity gaps associated with race, ethnicity, and income.
  • Secondary aims may also focus on one or more of the following:
    • What works for whom, under what conditions: Investigate variations in program effects; that is, test for moderation effects that inform whether effects are stronger for certain groups and/or under certain conditions than other groups or conditions.
    • Reasons for effects: Investigate mechanisms through which effects occur; that is, test for mediation effects that inform why the program is effective.
    • Cost-benefit analyses: Compare the total costs of the program (start-up and ongoing operational costs) with its estimated monetary benefits to determine the net cost or benefit associated with the program.
Research Project (RP) proposals:
  • Primary and secondary aims:
    • The Primary and any secondary aims must concern obtaining information that will inform how to address disparities in educational opportunities associated with race, ethnicity, and/or family income.


  • The proposed project may span up to three years

Inquiries (Optional)

  • Due to having a small staff, the Foundation is typically unable to discuss individual projects prior to the submission of a Stage 1 application. However, potential applicants have the option of submitting a 500-word (maximum) statement to obtain general feedback concerning the proposal’s potential fit with the Foundation’s mission and funding priorities prior to submitting a Stage 1 application. Please note that this optional 500-word statement submission is NOT a Stage 1 application.
  • If you elect to submit a statement for preview:
    • Provide the name and contact information for the Principal Investigator and the sponsoring institution
    • In a 500-word statement, describe:
      • The significance of the issue that the proposed project would address
      • The specific aims of the proposed project
      • A brief description of the proposed methodology
      • The estimated timeline of the proposed project
      • An estimate of the total budget that would be requested from the Foundation
      • Other support sought or secured for the project, if applicable
      • State how you heard of this Brady Education Foundation grant opportunity
    • Convert statement to .pdf format and email contact information and statement to
  • 500-word statements will NOT be accepted for review:
    • January 1 – February 15
    • May 1 – June 15
    • September 1 – October 15

Application Process

  • There is a two-stage application process:
Stage 1
  • Stage 1 applications must be submitted using a Brady Education Foundation application form (either a Stage 1 Program Evaluation Application (EPE) or a Stage 1 Research Project Application (RP), depending on the study aims). Email to request a Stage 1 Program Evaluation Application (EPE) or Research Project (RP) Application, as applicable. Applications that do not use either form will be disqualified and not reviewed by the Board.
  • Review all information provided below concerning Submission Timetable, Review Criteria, and Funding Policies before completing application.
  • See Inquiries section above concerning the option to submit a 500-word statement for pre-review prior to completing and submitting a Stage 1 application. Note that these optional 500-word statements are only to gain general feedback prior to submitting a Stage 1 application; these optional 500-word statements are NOT a Stage 1 application (see above for further information about obtaining a pre-review prior to submitting a Stage 1 application).
  • After completing application, convert application form and the six required attachments to .pdf format and combine into one PDF document. Required attachments include (see application form for complete instructions for each):
    • Budget justification
    • Timeline with benchmarks
    • CVs/Resumes of each key personnel (maximum 3 pages)
    • Letter of Support from each partnering organization
    • Letter of Approval from applicant institution / organization
    • Proof of tax-exempt status for applicant and partnering institutions / organizations
  • Submit entire application as one .pdf document to:
  • You can expect to receive a confirmation email. If you do NOT receive a confirmation email within three days of submitting, please message the Foundation via the “Contact Us” page on this website.
Stage 2
  • Full Board review determines if applicant is approved to submit a Stage 2 application.
  • If approved by the Full Board, the applicant will be invited to submit a Stage 2 application; Stage 2 applications are accepted by invitation only.
  • Stage 2 application guidelines are provided when invited to submit.

Submission Timetable

Stage 1 Applications are accepted throughout the year. Submission deadlines and funding cycles are as follows:

Stage 1 Proposal  
Due Date
Notification Date
If Invited to Continue,
Stage 2 Proposal Due Date
Notification Date
Start Date Range
12/1/20222/15/20234/1/20236/15/20239/1/2023 – 12/31/2023
4/1/20236/15/20238/1/202310/15/20231/1/2024 – 4/30/2024
8/1/202310/15/202312/1/20232/15/20245/1/2024 – 8/31/2024
12/1/20232/15/20244/1/20246/15/20249/1/2024 – 12/31/2024
4/1/20246/15/20248/1/202410/15/20241/1/2025 – 4/30/2025
8/1/202410/15/202412/1/20242/15/20255/1/2025 – 8/31/2025
12/1/20242/15/20254/1/20256/15/20259/1/2025 – 12/31/2025
4/1/20256/15/20258/1/202510/15/20251/1/2026 – 4/30/2026

Funding Policies


  • Direct costs are costs that can be specifically attributed to the proposed project. Examples include the proportion of key personnel and staff salaries, travel expenses, and supplies needed to complete the scope of work proposed. How each cost is directly attributable to the project should be made clear in the budget justification.
  • Indirect costs (also known as “overhead costs” and “facilities and administrative costs”) are administrative or other expenses that are not directly attributable to the specific project being proposed and are instead expenses that support the entire operations of the grantee organization and are incurred as a result of common or shared activities (i.e., activities related to overall general operations and activities shared among projects and/or functions of the institution).

BEF Indirect Costs Policy:

The Foundation recognizes that there are categories of costs that can be considered direct or indirect depending on the accounting practices of the grantee organization and the nature of the cost relative to the proposed project’s specific aims. Given that different types of organizations have different financial structures and accounting practices, the following guidance is provided for the two types of organizations that conduct projects that the Foundation typically funds: 1) universities and colleges (public or private), and 2) non-profit research organizations. If your organization is neither of these types, please contact the Foundation at

We encourage all who are considering submitting an application to contact the Foundation at if they have questions about this policy.

Please note, after an application is submitted, the Foundation may ask for additional information to determine if a proposed expense is a direct or indirect cost and to fully understand the total cost needed to achieve the aims of the project.

Universities and Colleges (public or private):
  • As described above, indirect costs are administrative or other expenses that are not directly attributable to the specific project being proposed and are instead expenses that support the entire operations of the grantee organization and are incurred as a result of common or shared activities. Examples include general administrative support (including salary and fringe benefits for administrative personnel, grants management and accounting, general finance management, human resources, and IT support personnel); rent; utilities; phones; internet; general office equipment (including personal computers) and supplies not directly attributable to the project; word processing and spreadsheet programs; statistical software typically used to analyze data that is made available across projects; computer network charges and utilities; insurance; accounting/bookkeeping fees; and audit fees. Proposals from universities or colleges (public or private) that include any of these indirect cost items as direct costs will be disqualified and will not be reviewed by the Board.
  • Indirect cost rates for grants to universities and colleges:
    • Indirect costs may not be charged on grants that have a total project budget (including all years of the grant) of $50,000 or less (i.e., the indirect costs rate on grants $50,000 or less is 0%).
    • For grants that have a total project budget (including all years of the grant) over $50,000, the Foundation caps indirect costs for both primary institutions and subcontracts at 10% of the direct costs of the project.
    • Primary institution may NOT charge additional indirect costs on subcontract funds.
Non-profit Research Organizations:
  • As described above, indirect costs are administrative or other expenses that are not directly attributable to the specific project being proposed and are instead expenses that support the entire operations of the grantee organization and are incurred as a result of common or shared activities. Examples include personnel costs associated with general administrative support, travel not directly related to the project, and supplies not directly attributable to the project. Items that may generally be considered indirect costs (e.g., grants management and accounting, rent, utilities) may be listed as direct costs in the amount that can be demonstrated to be required and allocable to the project to meet its specific aims.
    • For example, certain personnel (e.g., accountants, IT support personnel) may conduct activities that support the central organization (e.g., manage the bookkeeping and costs for the organization); these would be considered indirect costs. These same personnel may also have duties that support the specific project being proposed (e.g., manage the bookkeeping and cost for the proposed project); the percentage of their time managing and supporting the specific project may be considered direct costs.
    • For example, facility expenses (e.g., rent, utilities) are generally considered to be indirect costs, but facility expenses that can be demonstrated to be directly attributable and allocable to key personnel working on the specific project may be included as direct costs.
  • Indirect cost rate for grants to non-profit research organizations:
    • The Foundation caps indirect costs for both primary institutions and subcontracts at 10% of the direct costs of the project.
    • In the budget justification, organizations should provide a general description of what is covered by the indirect costs requested.

Other Funding Policies:

  • Funding must be through the Principal Investigator’s home institution (i.e., the home institution of the PI of the team conducting the evaluation).
  • The leadership team of the proposed work (at the PI / co-PI level) must include researchers who are representative of the populations included in the study sample in terms of gender, race, and ethnicity. The leadership team can also include researchers who are not representative of the populations included in the sample; co-PI leadership structures are permitted. This applies to all applications (Existing Program Evaluations and Research Projects).
  • Grants are awarded to nonprofit organizations only.
  • The Foundation will support up to two key personnel to attend one conference in the last (or only) year of the project, with an allowable cost of $1,500 per person. For Existing Program Evaluations, the Foundation will support one practitioner or service provider from the program to attend the conference as well at the same rate.
  • The Foundation follows National Institutes of Health guidelines for salary caps.

The Foundation does NOT fund:

  • Scholarships
  • Capital projects
  • Continuing education for providers
  • Projects outside of the United States or its territories
  • Support for scaling up programs already found to be effective
  • Evaluations conducted by for-profit organizations
  • Evaluations of for-profit programs
  • Evaluation of programs for children at risk for poor cognitive and academic outcomes due to medical conditions (including developmental delays or disabilities associated with biological causes) or substance abuse
  • Post-doctoral positions or fellowships (To clarify, if such individuals would work on the proposed Research Project or Existing Program Evaluation, they can be included as key personnel and the %FTE they would work on the project can be included in the budget. In contrast, BEF is not currently accepting applications with the sole purpose of supporting a post-doctoral position or other type of fellowship).

Review Criteria Information

BEF currently accepts two types of Stage 1 applications: Existing Program Evaluations (EPE) and Research Project (RP). All successful applications go through a two-stage process. Note that Stage 2 applications are accepted by invitation only. All applicants are strongly encouraged to read through the criteria used to disqualify and review Stage 1 proposals prior to submitting an application. Click on the following links to access information concerning Stage 1 review criteria:

  • Disqualified Applications: describes factors that will cause a proposal to be disqualified and thus not reviewed by the Full Board of the Foundation; this information applies to ALL applications (Existing Program Evaluation (EPE) and Research Project (RP) applications)
  • Existing Program Evaluation Applications (EPE): provides detailed information concerning review criteria specific to Existing Program Evaluation applications
  • Research Project Applications (RP): provides detailed information concerning review criteria specific to Research Project applications

The Foundation favors projects that:

  • Represent strong collaborative relationships between researchers and practitioners and other community stakeholders (as appropriate).
  • Projects that include a member of the team (not necessarily the PI) who has experience leading projects of similar or greater scope. Applicants at all career stages may apply; teams are evaluated in terms of their abilities to successfully carry out the proposed work. We welcome applications that include both early career scholars and more experienced scholars in the leadership team (PI / co-PI level).
  • Projects that investigate ecocultural strengths (the set of sociocultural practices sustained by community values and beliefs and embedded in children’s daily life which enable the development of foundational skills in racially minoritized and linguistically diverse children).
  • For Existing Program Evaluations, specifically:
    • Projects that evaluate programs consistent with strength-based approaches rather than deficit models and consider the specific and unique assets and needs of children from diverse racial and ethnic groups and/or from low-income communities. Concerning race and ethnicity, the Foundation seeks to increase understanding of what works best for children from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds (e.g., Black / African Heritage, Latine*, Indigenous Peoples).
    • Projects for which operational funding for the program is already secured so that funding from the Foundation is used only for evaluation activities.
    • Projects that employ randomized control designs (including wait-list control designs when assignment to wait-list condition is randomized) to assess the impact of the program. Comparison group designs may also be employed when strong efforts are made to control for potential confounding variables (e.g., due to selection effects). The Foundation very rarely funds evaluation projects that employ neither randomized control nor comparison group designs.
    • Projects that evaluate programs that show promise of being feasible, accessible, and sustainable
    • Projects that evaluate effects on measurable child outcomes.


Due to the high volume of proposals, the Foundation is unable to provide customized feedback to applicants after review by the Full Board.

Current Funding Rates:

About 14% of Stage 1 applications eventually result in funding. Approximately 20% of Stage 1 applicants are invited to continue to Stage 2, and approximately 71% of all Stage 2 submissions are funded.


Resubmission of Stage 1 applications are allowed, but unless specifically invited to resubmit by the Board, are rarely successful.

*Consistent with experts in the field, we use Latine to refer to individuals whose cultural background originated in Latin America. In U.S. academic circles, Latinx is being used as a gender-inclusive term to refer to people from Latin American backgrounds, but Spanish-speakers find that Latinx is unpronounceable in Spanish. Therefore, we have opted to use the gender-inclusive term Latine, commonly used throughout Spanish-speaking Latin American countries. Melzi, G., Prishker, N., Kawas, V., Huancacuri-Harlow, J.  (Forthcoming).  Multilingual Parenting in the United States: Language, Culture and Emotion. In A. Stavans and U. Jessner (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Childhood Multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.