Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF)
$600,000 won
Data & Evidence
Verified Win

RWJF evidence framework: mixing peer-reviewed research with community-generated data

RWJF reviewers reject proposals that rely solely on academic citations — they read it as extractive. The winning evidence stack pairs peer-reviewed research with community-generated data (listening sessions, photovoice, participatory mapping).

James Chen, MPH

Research & Evaluation Manager

Bay Area Community Health Collaborative

54 upvotes

The Strategy

The most common rejection reason I've seen at RWJF is 'evidence feels imported, not grounded.' Applicants cite CDC statistics and RWJF's own County Health Rankings, but never show that the community itself identified the priority. The fix: build a two-column evidence table in your narrative. Left column = peer-reviewed or administrative data (e.g., 'CDC PLACES shows 34% adult obesity in our census tract'). Right column = community-generated evidence (e.g., 'In our 2024 photovoice project, 12…

Unlock the full strategy

Create a free account to read the complete breakdown, plus access 85,000+ grants and AI grant-writing tools.

No credit card required · Free plan includes 5 AI credits

rwjf
evidence
participatory-research
photovoice
health-equity

More winning strategies