Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRP) Program: Health and Function (Development)

View on Grants.gov
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRP) Program: Health and Function (Development)
Opportunity ID
Primary CFDA Number
Funding Opportunity Number
Funding Instrument Type
Expected Number of Awards Synopsis
Length of Project Periods
60-month project period with five 12-month budget periods
Project Period Expected Duration in Months
Eligibility Category
State governments,County governments,City or township governments,Special district governments,Independent school districts,Public and State controlled institutions of higher education,Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized),Native American tribal organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments),Nonprofits having a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education,Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education,Private institutions of higher education,Others (see text field entitled "Additional Information on Eligibility" for clarification)
Additional Information on Eligibility
States; public or private agencies, including for-profit agencies; public or private organizations, including for-profit organizations, IHEs; and Indian tribes and tribal organizations.
Estimated Award Date
Funding Opportunity Description


In the United States, approximately 56.7 million people have a disability, including 38.3 million who have a severe disability (Brault, 2012). Research has contributed to a wide variety of policies, programs, services, interventions, and products to enhance the health and function of people with disabilities. Despite this work, a large number of people with disabilities lack adequate access to necessary healthcare, personal assistance services, and rehabilitation services. This lack of access compromises health outcomes (Krahn et al., 2015; National Council on Disability, 2009, Peacock et al., 2015), reduces the general well-being of people with disabilities, and limits their fulfillment of personal aspirations in areas such as employment and community participation (Henry et al., 2007; Waghorn et al., 2008).
Adults with disabilities are substantially more likely than adults without disabilities to be in fair or poor health (as opposed to excellent, very good, or good health) (Reichard et al., 2011; 2015), and to experience a wide variety of diseases and chronic conditions (Bureau for Health Information, Statistics, Research, and Evaluation, 2011; Reichard, et al. 2011; 2015). Health conditions often vary by condition or type of limitation. For example, people with significant vision loss or with an intellectual disability have a greater prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and heart disease than people without disabilities (Capella-McDonnall, 2007; Krahn et al., 2015; Stancliffe et al., 2011). National survey estimates of obesity prevalence show that children with disabilities have between a 27% to 59% greater likelihood of being obese than their peers without disabilities (Bandini et al, 2015). Other research has shown that obesity in childhood and adolescence may have serious consequences, including premature mortality and morbidity in adulthood (Reilly and Kelly, 2011).
People with disabilities experience adverse health outcomes, including reduced longevity. For example, 60 percent of people with serious mental illness die 25 or more years earlier than the general population due to preventable or treatable chronic diseases (Colton, Manderschied, 2006). Despite their substantial health needs and elevated risk of adverse health outcomes, people with disabilities have substantial disadvantage in obtaining access to needed health care services compared to those without disabilities (National Council on Disability, 2009; Yee, 2011; Reichard et al., 2017).
In addition to disparities in health care and health outcomes, people with disabilities frequently experience a wide range of functional limitations that jeopardize their access to employment and other forms of community participation. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 5 million adults need assistance from another person to perform one or more activities of daily living, such as getting around inside the home, getting into or out of bed, bathing, dressing, eating, and toileting. Approximately 15 million people have difficulty with one or more instrumental activities of daily living such as going outside the home, managing money, preparing meals, doing housework, taking prescription medication, and using the phone (Brault, 2012). As the number of people with disabilities in the United States continues to grow (Institute on Medicine, 2007), it will be necessary to improve the Nation’s capacity to meet their needs and access their talents. This will require the development and refinement of policies, programs, practices, and technologies that reduce functional limitations and improve health outcomes for people with disabilities.
NIDILRR has funded a wide range of disability research and development projects related to health and functional outcomes of people with disabilities. NIDILRR seeks to build on these investments by supporting innovative and well-designed research and development projects that fall under one or more of NIDILRR's general "health and function" priority areas, as described in the following funding opportunity description.
To address disparities in health and function and to improve outcomes of people with disabilities NIDILRR proposes to fund a Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP) on Health and Function for Individuals with Disabilities.
Bandini L, Danielson M, Esposito LE, Foley JT, Fox MH, Frey GC, Fleming RK, Krahn G, Must A, Porretta DL, Rodgers AB, Stanish H, Urv T, Vogel LC, & Humphries K (2015).
Obesity in children with developmental and/or physical disabilities. July, 2015. Disability and Health Journal.
Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with Disabilities: 2010. U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. (available at: www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf.
Bureau for Health Information, Statistics, Research, and Evaluation (2011). A Profile of Health Among Massachusetts Adults, 2010: Results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (available at www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/data.html).
Capella-McDonnall, M. (2007). The Need for Health Promotion for Adults Who Are Visually Impaired, Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 101(3): 133-145. (available at: http://lvib.org/2010/09/02/september-awareness/).
Colton CW, Manderscheid RW (2006). Congruencies In Increased Mortality Rates, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Causes of Death Among Public Mental Health Clients in Eight States. Preventing Chronic Disease, 3(2): 1-10. (available at: www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2006/apr/05_01 80.htm).
Henry, A., Banks, S., Clark, R., & Himmelstein, J. (2007). Mobility Limitations Negatively Impact Work Outcomes Among Medicaid Enrollees with Disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 17(3), 355-369.
Institute on Medicine (2007). The Future of Disability in America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). Persons with disabilities as an unrecognized health disparity population. American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198- S206.
National Council on Disability (2009). The Current State of Health Care for People with Disabilities. National Council on Disability. Washington, DC. (available at: www.ncd.gov/publications/2009/Sept302009).
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (2006). Notice of Final Long- Range Plan for Fiscal Years 2005-2009. Federal Register. Vol 71, No 31. P 8166-8200.

Peacock, G., Iezzoni, L. I., & Harkin, T. R. (2015). Health Care for Americans with Disabilities—25 Years after the ADA. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(10), 892-893.
Reichard, A., Stolzle, H, and Fox, M.H. (2011). Health disparities among adults with physical disabilities or cognitive limitations compared to individuals with no disabilities in the United States. Journal of Disability and Health, Vol 4, No 2, P 59-67.
Reichard, A. Stransky, M., Phillips, K., Drum, C., and McClain, M. (2015). Does Type of Disability Matter to Public Health Policy and Practice? California Journal of Health Promotion, Vol 13, No 2, P 25-36.
Reichard, A., Stransky, M., Phillips, K., McClain, M., and Drum, C. (2017). Prevalence and reasons for delaying and foregoing necessary care by the presence and type of disability among working-age adults. Journal of Disability and Health, Vol 10, No 1, P 39-47.
Reilly, JJ and Kelly, J. (2011). Long-term impact of overweight and obesity in childhood adolescence on morbidity and premature mortality in adulthood: systematic review.International Journal of Obesity (2011), 891-898.
Stancliffe, R., Lakin, K.C., Larson, S., Taub, S., Bershadsky, J., & Fortune, J. (2011). Overweight and obesity among adults with intellectual disabilities who use ID/DD services in the U.S. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 116(6), 401-418.
Waghorn, G., Loyd, C., Abraham, B., Silvester, D., & Chant, D. (2008). Comorbid physical health conditions hinder employment among people with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 31(3), 243-247.
Yee, Sylvia (2011). Health and Health Care Disparities Among People with Disabilities. Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. Berkeley, CA. (available at: www.dredf.org/healt hcare/Health-and-Health-Care-Disparities-Among-People-with-Disabilities.pdf).
Priority--DRRP on Health and Function of Individuals with Disabilities
The Administrator of the Administration for Community Living establishes a priority for a Disability Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP) on Health and Function of Individuals with Disabilities. The DRRP must contribute to the outcome of maximizing the health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(1) To contribute to this outcome, the DRRP must--
(a) Conduct development activities in one or more of the following priority areas, focusing on individuals with disabilities as a group or on individuals in specific disability or demographic subpopulations of individuals with disabilities:
(i) Technology to improve health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(iii) Interventions that are designed to contribute to improved health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities. Interventions include any strategy, practice, program, policy, or tool that, when implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(iv) Effects of government policies and programs on health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(v) Practices and policies that contribute to improved health and function outcomes of transition-aged youth with disabilities;
(b) Focus its development on a specific stage of development. If the DRRP is to conduct development that can be categorized under more than one stage, including development that progresses from one stage to another, those stages must be clearly specified. These stages, proof of concept, proof of product, and proof of adoption, are defined in this notice. Applicants must justify the need and rationale for development at the proposed stage or stages and describe fully an appropriate methodology or methodologies for the proposed development.
(c) Conduct knowledge translation activities (i.e., utilization, dissemination) in order to facilitate stakeholder (e.g., individuals with disabilities, employers, policymakers, practitioners) use of the knowledge, interventions, programs, technologies, or products that resulted from the development activities conducted under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority.
(d) Involve key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority in order to maximize the relevance and usability of the development products to be developed under this priority.
Definitions: Stages of Development
(a) Proof of concept means the stage of development where key technical challenges are resolved. Stage activities may include recruiting study participants; verifying product requirements; and implementing and testing (typically in controlled contexts) key concepts, components, or systems; and resolving technical challenges. A technology transfer plan is typically developed and transfer partner(s) identified, and plan implementation may have started. Stage results establish that a product concept is feasible.
(b) Proof of product means the stage of development where a fully-integrated and working prototype meeting critical technical requirements is created. Stage activities may include recruiting study participants, implementing and iteratively refining the prototype, testing the prototype in natural or less-controlled contexts, and verifying that all technical requirements are met. A technology transfer plan is typically ongoing in collaboration with the transfer partner(s). Stage results establish that a product embodiment is realizable.
(c) Proof of adoption means the stage of development where a product is substantially adopted by its target population and used for its intended purpose. Stage activities typically include completing product refinements and continued implementation of the technology transfer plan in collaboration with the transfer partner(s). Other activities include measuring users' awareness of the product; opinion of the product; decisions to adopt, use, and retain products; and identifying barriers and facilitators impacting product adoption. Stage results establish that a product is beneficial.

Award Ceiling
Award Floor
Average Projected Award Amount
Due Date for Applications
Date for Informational Conference Call

Last modified on 06/24/2019

Back to Top