Frequently Asked Questions - Program
FAQ Categories
Would it be appropriate for a researcher to expand on a law review article that she or he has already published in a short-term project?
The purpose of the PHLR program is to encourage more rigorous empirical research in public health law. That requires building up a field that is based on publication and scholarly interchange and additional mechanisms in scholarly interchange. At the same time, the evidence has to have a policy impact; therefore the law review article, the social science journal article or the medical journal article cannot be the end product. The results of the proposal must be tailored to different audiences that can use the findings in important ways. The project would need to be addressing something new; such as a new advance or a new application of the material to rigorous scientific research. Also, if it is purely doctrinal analysis, there is a heavy burden to show that it is illuminating in some important way how public health is affected by law. The applicant should tie the legal analysis to the analysis of the data and a logic model to highlight where the presence or absence of law, at least in terms of the existing knowledge, could be an important factor in public health.
If the proposal includes conference costs, is there a limit to the amount or proportion of the budget?
Costs for attending conferences that are relevant to this program and the research, may be included. The conference will be judged on its appropriateness to the project. Applicants should keep in mind that the emphasis of this program is on public health law research, rather than educational outreach or other efforts. The PHLR program is focused on trying to advance both the research methodologies in the field and the impact of public health law research on policy-making and enforcement, therefore, dissemination to key policy stakeholders is very important.
PHLR projects these awards to start November 15, 2010. No costs can be budgeted prior to November 15, 2010.
The focus of this CFP is on public health law research. For a proposal to be competitive during the brief proposal period, the methodology has to be rigorous and well defined with as much detail as is possible in the space allotted.
Does RWJF have a preference for studies examining morbidity/mortality versus studies examining process by which public health is delivered?
No. The CFP outlines categories of studies: (1) The impact of laws and legal practices on population health outcomes; (2) The use of innovative policies or regulatory techniques to promote healthier individual or organizational behavior (3) The development, implementation and/or effectiveness of ordinances, executive orders and other legal tools used by local governments to improve public health. However, RWJF does not have a preference about the specific types of public health intervention studies proposed.
Do public health laws encompass any law or issue that affects the health of a large number of people?
The PHLR program uses "public health" in a broad sense. For example, consider the use of laws designed to influence a particular health outcome like seatbelt laws and questions of the effect of tax law on the income inequality and its effect on the epidemiology of disease. These topics are all appropriate for consideration in this program provided the work is based on solid methods that will produce important results.
The CFP says funding requires integration of quality legal analysis and empirical research. Under short-term studies, it says legal research or empirical evaluation. Is a legal study without an empirical component okay?
Studies using conventional techniques of legal research or analysis are not excluded. However, the CFP is aimed at supporting empirical evidence on the impact of law on public health, which would usually entail data collection or the integration of existing data with legal analysis.
Would it be inappropriate to involve government officials on the research team, for example, someone from the county attorney or state attorney general's office?
No, it would not be inappropriate. In fact, it is the hope of PHLR that collaborations occur among people who usually do not work together, such as a lawyer at a research institution working with public health leaders or academics. Having real practice questions addressed by practitioners would be a great use of collaboration.
PHLR expects that there will be collaboration on each project, but there is no required approach to collaboration. A lead organization should be designated that will be eligible to receive the award. If there is another individual or organization participating in the project, they would need to be subcontracted by the lead organization. It is anticipated that the teams applying will bring together the public health and the law aspects of the project as well as appropriate methodologies.
Who are the members of the National Advisory Committee (NAC) and is there a list available to the public?
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation selects national advisory committees to advise our large national programs. The NAC members for PHLR can be found at our program website at www.publichealthlawresearch.org
All proposals must fall into one of three of the second-round priority research areas:
PHLR uses legal analysis to mean traditional techniques of legal research and interpretation of current legal materials such as laws, regulations and cases.
No, although existing data can certainly speed up the process, it is not part of the program's selection criteria.
Do the research team members have to be legal or public health researchers? Or could the research team be comprised of a team from another discipline who proposed their evaluated questions related to public health and law?
>The goal of the PHLR program is to broaden the field of public health law. Public health law experience is not necessary as long as a strong proposal is submitted. There is no specified composition for a team, however, the applicant must demonstrate that the proposal is informed by one or more research disciplines and by public health practice or that it is relevant to public health practice.
Which will be considered more favorably, the novelty of the question or the potential impact of the findings?
This question needs to be examined individually for each proposal. The work has to be a novel examination of how law has had an effect on population health. However, for each study, PHLR also wants to see that the correct methodology for data collection and data analysis are applied.
Can funding be primarily used for salary support, and is there a cap on the amount used for salary support?
Neither the Foundation nor the NPO has a cap on salary support. Applicants need to commit enough time to do the project specified. That may mean needing several people or that people are committing a large percentage of their time to the project. It is important to demonstrate that the investigator has the time to commit to the project and to appropriately address the questions that are being posed.
Is it a problem to have one collaborator participating in two proposals if they are both significantly different in scope?
No, there is not a problem with a collaborator participating in more than one proposal unless there is overlap between the proposals. RWJF just needs to ensure that the time the investigator is spending on each proposal is distinct. It is important that applicants document the members of the research team when submitting a brief proposal, so PHLR can look at personnel qualifications;
This is a public health law research program, so the answer is no. Please refer to our Web site at www.rwjf.org to find other CFPs that fund health care and delivery research.
What is the distinction between law and policy? How strong is the preference for studying the impact of laws as compared to studying the impact of agency policy?
The PHLR program is taking a broad view of law, and is interested equally in law on the books and in the activities of agencies that enforce law. Studies of how laws are implemented, including the ways that statutes are turned into agency policies, certainly fall within the scope of the program. PHLR has discussed all of these topics within the CFP, and the key element is not so much how the applicant defines policy in the abstract but whether a particular study tells us something concrete about the influence of law in public health.
In subsequent funding cycles, will it be possible to apply for a long-term grant building on findings from a short-term grant?
No, each short-term or long-term proposal should describe distinct research with its own final outcome. RWJF does not anticipate funding these grants to build on each other.
Are the three study areas that you've identified mutually exclusive or can study areas be combined if the projects call for it?
The CFP describes three distinct areas, but the project may call for overlap between them. The key focus should be clearly defined questions and appropriate process and methodology.
Will research or the interpretation of the research be more important? That is, is the intent to find solutions or to add to the body of knowledge so that others may take the finding into account to understand the issue being addressed?
For the PHLR program, the research is the primary focus of the funding. At the same time, it is important that the evidence obtained during the program be easily translatable and available to people who are trying to make decisions. Research questions do need to be articulated in a way that will provide lessons for others; however, the focus is on the methodology to build the evidence that seems to be necessary in the field of public health law.
The CFP indicates that the studies that focus primarily on the health care system and the health care delivery are not candidates for funding in this round. Can you provide more information about what this means?
In the CFP, the term "health care system" refers to the set of institutions concerned with the delivery, assessing or regulating health care services to individuals. Applicants who propose studies that are focused on health care system questions have the responsibility to clearly demonstrate the public health implications of such studies, in order to be considered for this round of funding. Due to the nature of this program, proposals are being sought that apply to population health. There may be health system implications of your work, but that should only be one component. It seems unlikely that it would be the primary focus of the study.
If individuals want more specific information about the appropriateness of their topic, what kind of guidance can you give them?
Specific questions should be directed to the Public Health Law Research helpdesk at PublicHealthLawResearch@sra.com. Questions will be routed to the appropriate person, and an individual response will be given. By going through the helpdesk PHLR is able to capture the types of questions applicants are asking, and post them into the Frequently Asked Questions section of the Web site;
Can a proposal adopt features from more than one research method; i.e., a mechanism and intervention study?
Yes, multiple methodologies may actually be needed to address the research question. The main concern will be whether the methods that are used are appropriate and rigorous.
What does it mean that PHLR supports collaborative efforts to conduct legal analysis and empirical research?
Studies funded through this program aim to support interdisciplinary research on law and public health. Research teams that bring together expertise in law and public health practice will receive a favorable rating as part of the evaluation criteria. Other disciplines, such as medicine, economics, sociology, anthropology, psychology and public administration may also be involved in these studies. It is not a funding requirement that research be conducted by interdisciplinary teams or even by more than one investigator, but the program seeks to fund work that is informed by multidisciplinary perspectives and integrates law with one or more additional disciplines.
