Blog
March 13, 2026
As ARPA-H marks its fourth anniversary on March 15, it’s a fitting moment to reflect not only on how far the agency has come, but also on how institutions have adapted to its model. In just four years, ARPA-H has reshaped expectations around speed, ambition, and execution in federal health research. For those of us in research administration, supporting ARPA-H proposals has required a rapid shift in mindset: embracing a mission-driven, milestone-based approach that differs significantly from traditional NIH or NSF submissions. Since 2023, I’ve had the opportunity to support multiple ARPA-H efforts, and the experience has reinforced just how central research administrators are to turning bold ideas into competitive, execution-ready proposals.
I still remember working on my first ARPA-H proposal in late 2023. I’ll be honest, I felt like a deer in headlights. The process was unfamiliar, the timelines moved quickly, and expectations differed in meaningful ways from more traditional federal submissions. But with each proposal, I began to see a consistent theme: success depended not just on strong science, but on tight alignment, disciplined execution planning, and proactive administrative leadership.
ARPA-H’s mission, structure, and proposal model fundamentally change how teams need to plan, and that’s where strong administrative leadership becomes critical.
How ARPA-H Funding and Proposal Structure Differ from Traditional Agencies
ARPA-H is mission-driven and execution-focused, with the goal of accelerating bold, high-impact health solutions. Funding opportunities are released as Innovative Solution Openings (ISOs) aligned with four focus areas: Health Science Futures, Proactive Health, Resilient Systems, and Scalable Solutions.
Programs are developed and led by Program Managers who serve time-limited appointments, bringing fresh perspectives but also varying expectations from one ISO to the next. In addition to Program ISOs, Mission Office ISOs offer a rolling submission pathway for projects that align with ARPA-H priorities but don’t fit neatly into an existing program.
One of the most valuable features of ARPA-H, especially from an administrative perspective, is the two-stage proposal process. Teams submit a Solution Summary first and receive feedback indicating whether they are encouraged or discouraged from submitting a full proposal. That early signal can save significant time and effort and allows teams to recalibrate before committing to a full submission.
ARPA-H primarily uses Other Transactions (OTs) and Cooperative Agreements, which also require a different mindset than traditional grants when it comes to budgeting, compliance, and risk.
Where Research Administrators Add Strategic Value in ARPA-H Proposals
What I’ve come to appreciate most is that ARPA-H proposals live or die on alignment. The science matters, of course, but so does the ability to demonstrate that a team can execute.
Here’s where research administrators can truly shape the outcome:
Aligning Milestones, Budgets, and Execution Plans
ARPA-H proposals require a tight connection between milestones, personnel, timelines, and budgets. I’ve found that administrators are often the ones best positioned to spot gaps or inconsistencies early.
What helps: Working closely with PIs to map milestones to specific effort and resources, and flagging misalignment before it becomes a reviewer concern.
Managing Multi-Sector Partnerships
Many ARPA-H teams include industry partners, nonprofits, or collaborators who are new to federal funding.
What helps: Clarifying expectations early, establishing a point of contact at each partner organization, using a proposal checklist to track timelines and deliverables, and meeting early with partners who are new to ARPA-H to walk through the process and required materials.
Building Alignment that Demonstrates Execution Readiness
In my experience, reviewer confidence hinges on whether a team appears aligned and ready to execute. When roles and expectations aren’t clearly defined at the outset, inconsistencies across budgets, milestones, and partner materials often follow, and those inconsistencies can undermine an otherwise strong proposal.
What helps: Setting clear expectations across teams early, aligning on how work will be described and budgeted, and conducting a final administrative review focused on cohesion and execution readiness.
Preparing for Unpredictable ARPA-H Timelines
One of the trickiest aspects of ARPA-H is that full proposal deadlines are typically provided with Solution Summary feedback, but the timing of that feedback isn’t always predictable. Once it arrives, the turnaround to submit a full proposal is often very short.
What helps: Building flexible internal timelines, staying closely connected with investigators and partners, and encouraging teams to review full proposal requirements early. I often suggest that teams begin preparing administrative components while waiting for Solution Summary feedback, so they are positioned to move quickly once full proposal timing is confirmed.
Common Pitfalls
Even experienced teams can struggle with ARPA-H submissions. Some of the most common challenges I’ve encountered include late partner documents, budgets that don’t clearly support milestones, overlooked compliance requirements, and version control issues across multiple drafts. Maintaining consistent communication, tracking deliverables, and building additional review time can significantly reduce these risks.
Why Research Administrators Are Critical to ARPA-H Proposal Success
ARPA-H has reinforced something I’ve long believed: bold science requires equally strong administrative strategy. Research administrators play a critical role in shaping proposals that are credible, aligned, and ready to execute. As more institutions engage with ARPA-H, the strategic role of research administrators will only continue to grow.
I’d love to hear from others working on ARPA-H submissions. What has been most challenging, and what strategies have worked well for your teams?
Attain Partners – Research Strategy and Proposal Development
Supporting complex federal proposals requires more than administrative coordination. Attain Partners helps research institutions strengthen proposal strategy, align cross-sector teams, and prepare competitive submissions for evolving funding models such as ARPA-H.
Learn more about how Attain Partners can support your institution’s proposal development efforts.
About the Author
Liz Higgins is a Senior Consultant at Attain Partners. With 12 years of experience in research administration across nonprofit and academic institutions, she specializes in pre-award strategy and has extensive experience supporting complex, multi-institutional proposals, including ARPA-H submissions. Before joining Attain Partners, Liz led government grant pre-award operations at the Alzheimer’s Association, coordinating proposal development across 70+ chapters and the Home Office. She also worked in the central office at Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, where she provided full life cycle support for sponsored projects – partnering directly with PIs, guiding proposal development, interpreting sponsor requirements, developing budgets, and negotiating award terms. Liz applies a strategic, execution-focused lens to proposal development, aligning timelines, sponsor expectations, and cross-sector partners to position teams for competitive, implementation-ready submissions.
