Opportunity Information: Apply for RFA HS 10 013

  • The Agency for Health Care Research and Quality in the health recovery act sector is offering a public funding opportunity titled "ARRA OS Recovery Act 2009 Limited Competition Comparative Effectiveness Delivery System Demonstration Grants (R18)" and is now available to receive applicants.
  • This funding opportunity was created on Mar 5, 2010 and posted on Feb 19, 2010.
  • Applicants must submit their applications by Apr 7, 2010. (Agency may still review applications by suitable applicants for the remaining/unused allocated funding in 2026.)
  • The funding agency has allocated a total of $12,000,000.00 to eligible and selected applicants.
  • Eligible applicants include: City or township governments Native American tribal organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments) Public and State controlled institutions of higher education Private institutions of higher education State governments Others (see text field entitled Additional Information on Eligibility for clarification) Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized) County governments.
  • Other Eligible Applicants include the following Eligible Agencies of the Federal Government Faith based or Community based Organizations Indian/Native American Tribal Governments (Other than Federally Recognized).
Apply for RFA HS 10 013

[Watch] Creating a grant proposal using the step-by-step wizard inside the applicant portal:

Opportunity Summary:

The ARRA OS Recovery Act 2009 Limited Competition Comparative Effectiveness Delivery System Demonstration Grants (R18) opportunity (Funding Opportunity Number RFA-HS-10-013) was a one-time, Recovery Act-supported grant program run by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Its core aim was to fund real-world demonstrations that test how changing the way care is delivered and/or paid for can produce meaningful improvements in the U.S. health system. The announcement sits under the broader American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5) funding that HHS directed toward Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER), with this specific FOA focusing mainly on delivery system strategies and reforms rather than drug-to-drug or device-to-device comparisons.

The purpose of the FOA was to invite Research Demonstration and Dissemination Grant (R18) applications from organizations proposing demonstrations in one of two main areas. The first area was redesigning care delivery, meaning broad strategies or specific interventions that restructure clinical workflows, care teams, coordination processes, or how services are organized and delivered to patients. The second area was redesigning payment, meaning strategies and interventions that change how providers and systems are reimbursed, with the expectation that payment reforms can drive better care, better value, and better outcomes. In both cases, the work was expected to be practical and implementation-oriented, producing evidence about what works best in everyday settings rather than tightly controlled environments.

The outcomes the demonstrations were expected to target were major improvements in quality of care, including clinical outcomes and other important dimensions of quality. The FOA also emphasized improving access to care, reducing health disparities, and improving population-based health outcome measures. Applicants were expected to connect their proposed demonstrations to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services priorities, explicitly including issues relevant to Medicare and Medicaid, which signals a strong interest in interventions that can scale within public programs or address populations heavily served by them.

A defining feature of this opportunity was its alignment with HHS requirements for using ARRA funds for Comparative Effectiveness Research. HHS described CER as research that conducts and synthesizes comparisons of benefits and harms of different interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor health conditions in real-world settings. The FOA notes that CER comparisons can involve medications, procedures, medical devices and technologies, diagnostic tests, behavioral change approaches, and delivery system strategies. While acknowledging that broad CER scope, the announcement makes clear that this particular competition concentrated primarily on delivery system strategies, recognizing that how care is delivered can shape downstream use and effectiveness of many other interventions.

The program design was also informed by national priority-setting work at the time. HHS drew on recommendations from the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research and referenced the Institute of Medicine (IOM) 2009 report that listed 100 initial national priority topics for CER. In practical terms, that meant applicants were encouraged to anchor their projects in recognized national needs and priority questions, increasing the likelihood that funded demonstrations would address pressing gaps and produce evidence useful to policymakers, payers, and health system leaders.

From an administrative standpoint, this was a discretionary grant program with no cost sharing or matching requirement, and it offered an estimated total funding amount of $12,000,000. Key dates show it was posted February 19, 2010, with the original closing date of March 23, 2010 later extended to April 7, 2010, and an archive date of May 7, 2010. The limited-competition nature is reflected in the title, indicating the applicant pool or eligibility conditions were constrained compared with fully open solicitations, though multiple categories of organizations were still eligible.

Eligible applicants included a wide range of public and academic entities such as state governments, county governments, and city or township governments, as well as public and state-controlled institutions of higher education and private institutions of higher education. The eligibility language also included Native American tribal governments (federally recognized) and other tribal organizations, and it referenced additional eligible applicants such as eligible federal agencies and faith-based or community-based organizations. Anyone considering the announcement at the time would have needed to review the FOA text for the exact boundaries of eligibility and any limitations implied by the "limited competition" designation.

Overall, this grant opportunity was meant to rapidly generate actionable, comparative evidence under ARRA timelines by funding hands-on demonstrations of delivery and payment reforms. The expectation was that these demonstrations would produce clear, decision-relevant findings about which system-level approaches improve quality, access, equity, and population health, particularly in contexts that matter to Medicare, Medicaid, and broader HHS priorities.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the ARRA OS Recovery Act 2009 Limited Competition Comparative Effectiveness Delivery System Demonstration Grants (R18) opportunity?

It was a one-time, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) supported discretionary grant program run by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The program funded real-world demonstration projects designed to generate practical evidence about which delivery system and/or payment reforms improve the U.S. health system.

What is the Funding Opportunity Number (FON) for this program?

The Funding Opportunity Number was RFA-HS-10-013.

What grant mechanism did this opportunity use?

This opportunity invited applications under the Research Demonstration and Dissemination Grant (R18) mechanism.

What was the main purpose of the funding opportunity?

The purpose was to fund implementation-oriented demonstrations that test how changing the way care is delivered and/or paid for can produce meaningful improvements in everyday (real-world) health care settings.

What were the two main demonstration areas applicants could propose?

Applicants were expected to propose demonstrations in one of two areas: (1) redesigning care delivery and (2) redesigning payment.

What does "redesigning care delivery" mean in this FOA?

Redesigning care delivery referred to strategies or interventions that restructure clinical workflows, care teams, coordination processes, or how services are organized and delivered to patients.

What does "redesigning payment" mean in this FOA?

Redesigning payment referred to strategies and interventions that change how providers and systems are reimbursed, based on the idea that payment reforms can drive better care, better value, and better outcomes.

Was this opportunity focused on drug-to-drug or device-to-device comparisons?

No. While the FOA acknowledged that Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) can include comparisons involving drugs, devices, procedures, tests, and other interventions, this specific competition concentrated primarily on delivery system strategies and reforms.

How did this FOA define or frame Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER)?

The FOA aligned with HHS requirements for ARRA-funded CER, describing CER as research that conducts and synthesizes comparisons of benefits and harms of different interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor health conditions in real-world settings.

What kinds of interventions can CER comparisons include, according to the FOA?

The FOA noted CER comparisons can involve medications, procedures, medical devices and technologies, diagnostic tests, behavioral change approaches, and delivery system strategies, even though this particular funding opportunity emphasized delivery system strategies.

What outcomes were demonstrations expected to improve?

Demonstrations were expected to target major improvements in quality of care (including clinical outcomes and other dimensions of quality). The FOA also emphasized improving access to care, reducing health disparities, and improving population-based health outcome measures.

How were HHS priorities reflected in the program expectations?

Applicants were expected to connect proposed demonstrations to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) priorities, explicitly including issues relevant to Medicare and Medicaid. This signaled interest in work that could scale in public programs or address populations heavily served by them.

How did national priority-setting efforts influence the program?

The program was informed by recommendations from the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research and referenced the Institute of Medicine (IOM) 2009 report listing 100 initial national priority topics for CER. Applicants were encouraged to anchor projects in recognized national needs and priority questions.

Was this a limited competition?

Yes. The title indicates it was a limited competition, meaning the applicant pool or eligibility conditions were constrained compared with fully open solicitations, while still allowing multiple categories of organizations to apply.

Which agency administered the grant program?

The program was run by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).

What was the source of funding for this program?

The program was supported by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5), under HHS-directed funding for Comparative Effectiveness Research.

What was the estimated total funding amount available?

The FOA listed an estimated total funding amount of $12,000,000.

Was there a cost sharing or matching requirement?

No. The FOA stated there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

When was the funding opportunity posted?

It was posted on February 19, 2010.

What were the application closing dates?

The original closing date was March 23, 2010, and it was later extended to April 7, 2010.

When was the opportunity archived?

The archive date was May 7, 2010.

What types of organizations were eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants included state governments, county governments, and city or township governments; public and state-controlled institutions of higher education; private institutions of higher education; Native American tribal governments (federally recognized) and other tribal organizations; and additional eligible applicants such as eligible federal agencies and faith-based or community-based organizations.

Did the FOA mention anything about needing to confirm eligibility details?

Yes. Because the opportunity was described as a limited competition, the information indicated that prospective applicants at the time would need to review the full FOA text for the exact boundaries of eligibility and any limitations implied by the limited-competition designation.

What kind of evidence was this program trying to produce?

The program aimed to rapidly generate actionable, decision-relevant comparative evidence under ARRA timelines, focusing on what works best in everyday care settings rather than tightly controlled environments.

Why did the FOA emphasize delivery system strategies?

The FOA recognized that how care is delivered can shape downstream use and the effectiveness of many other interventions, so it concentrated primarily on delivery system strategies even within the broader CER definition.

Browse more opportunities from the same agency: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality

Browse more opportunities from the same category: Health Recovery Act

Next opportunity: Water Conservation Field Services Program Klamath Basin Area Office

Previous opportunity: BLM WY Pygmy Rabbit Survey

USGrants.org Applicant Portal:

Are you interested in learning about about how to apply for this government funding opportunity? You can create a free applicant account and receive instant access to our applicant portal that many business owners like you have benefited from.

Apply for RFA HS 10 013

 

[Watch] how do funding administrators access proposals?

Applicants also applied for:

Applicants who have applied for this opportunity (RFA HS 10 013) also looked into and applied for these:

Funding Opportunity
ARRA OS Recovery Act 2009 Limited Competition Enhanced State Data for Analysis and Tracking of Comparative Effectiveness Impact Improved Clinical Content and Race Ethnicity Data (R01) Apply for RFA HS 10 010

Funding Number: RFA HS 10 010
Agency: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
Recovery Act Limited Competition The NIH Directors ARRA Funded Pathfinder Award to Promote Diversity in the Scientific Workforce (DP4) Apply for RFA OD 10 013

Funding Number: RFA OD 10 013
Agency: National Institutes of Health
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: $2,000,000
2010 ARRA Prevention and Wellness Leveraging National Organizations Apply for OS PAW 10 001

Funding Number: OS PAW 10 001
Agency: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: $1,500,000
ARRA Training in Primary Care Medicine Interdisciplinary and Interprofessional Joint Graduate Degree Apply for HRSA 10 236

Funding Number: HRSA 10 236
Agency: Health Resources and Services Administration
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
ARRA Training in Primary Care Medicine Physician Assistant Training in Primary Care Apply for HRSA 10 234

Funding Number: HRSA 10 234
Agency: Health Resources and Services Administration
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
ARRA Training in Primary Care Medicine Predoctoral Training in Primary Care Apply for HRSA 10 233

Funding Number: HRSA 10 233
Agency: Health Resources and Services Administration
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
ARRA Training in Primary Care Medicine Physician Faculty Development in Primary Ca Apply for HRSA 10 232

Funding Number: HRSA 10 232
Agency: Health Resources and Services Administration
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
ARRA Training in Primary Care Medicine Administrative Academic Units in Primary Care Apply for HRSA 10 231

Funding Number: HRSA 10 231
Agency: Health Resources and Services Administration
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: Case Dependent
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Funding to Beacon Communities Apply for HHS 2010 ONC BC 006

Funding Number: HHS 2010 ONC BC 006
Agency: Office of the National Coordinator
Category: Health Recovery Act
Funding Amount: $18,000,000

 

Grant application guides and resources

It is always free to apply for government grants. However the process may be very complex depending on the funding opportunity you are applying for. Let us help you!

Apply for Grants

 

USGrants.org applicant portal membership

 

Premium leads for funding administrators, grant writers, and loan issuers

Thousands of people visit our website for their funding needs every day. When a user creates a grant proposal and files for submission, we pass the information on to funding administrators, grant writers, and government loan issuers.

If you manage government grant programs, provide grant writing services, or issue personal or government loans, we can help you reach your audience.

Subscribe to Leads

 

Request more information:

Would you like to learn more about this funding opportunity, similar opportunities to "RFA HS 10 013", eligibility, application service, and/or application tips? Submit an inquiry below:

Don't forget to subscribe to our grant alerts mailing list to receive weekly alerts on new and updated grant funding opportunities like this one in your email.