Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Academic research institutions are increasingly looking for ways to build fair, meaningful, and mutually beneficial partnerships with community members and organizations that serve their communities. Small grant programs are emerging as a promising way to support these partnerships. Six Community Engagement Cores representing Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMIs) agreed to take part in a multi-site study of small grant programs. Researchers compared the programs to identify common themes and approaches. Despite differences in the types of projects, communities served, funding approaches, and program structures, the study found common strategies that enabled the small grant programs to become key elements of the larger university and RCMI infrastructure. Small grants helped create the foundation needed to support community-engaged research. These programs strengthened the conditions needed to build lasting partnerships between academic institutions and communities and to address health disparities. The biggest impact went beyond individual projects or partnerships. The programs helped build trust, encourage the sharing of knowledge, promote shared leadership, and strengthen the ability of both community members and researchers to conduct research focused on health priorities identified by the community. The success of small grant programs should not be measured only by traditional academic outcomes but also by their broader impact on communities and partnerships. By investing in community and academic research skills, improving administrative processes, and creating fairer funding opportunities, RCMIs can strengthen community engaged research and help produce meaningful improvements in the health of individuals and communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dillard et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: