World Health Organization (WHO) 2025 Global Health Grants — Apply for Fully Funded Research Support

Introduction

Global health research has shifted. After the COVID-19 pandemic, funders and policymakers agreed on two things: (1) health research must be equitable—produced and led by researchers in the countries affected—and (2) the best projects link science to implementation (i.e., they improve services, policy or health outcomes, not just publish papers).

The World Health Organization (WHO) is at the center of this shift. Beyond normative guidance and pandemic coordination, WHO runs a variety of grant and fellowship programs to support research and capacity building across low- and middle-income countries. These opportunities include small grants for implementation science, fellowships that build clinical trial capacity, regional research calls, and targeted initiatives (for example, for health systems, maternal health, or antimicrobial resistance).

Two examples of active WHO grant channels that applicants frequently use are the TDR (Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases) small research grants and regional WHO office-supported research grants (for example, WHO Eastern Mediterranean Office grants)—these are practical routes for researchers in Africa, Asia and the Middle East to access funding and technical support.

Overview — What WHO 2025 Global Health Grants Cover

WHO’s grant offerings are broad and intentionally varied to meet different needs. In 2025, common grant types include:

Small research and pilot grants — short, focused projects (often USD 5k–$50k) to test interventions, collect pilot data, or perform implementation research. TDR’s impact and small research grants are classic examples.
Fellowships and capacity-building awards — support for training clinicians and researchers (e.g., clinical research leadership fellowships) that place fellows in product development partnerships, industry, or high-capacity research groups.
Regional WHO office grants — tailored calls for the Eastern Mediterranean, African, South-East Asia and other regional contexts, often oriented to local priorities and leveraging WHO country office contacts.
Targeted calls for epidemic preparedness, AMR, maternal/child health, digital health — thematic solicitations aligned to WHO’s normative priorities for 2025.
Large collaborative grants — multi-partner projects addressing systems questions (may be co-funded by WHO with other donors or executed through UN agencies).

Who can apply? Depending on the mechanism: universities, research institutes, ministries of health, NGOs, and sometimes individual investigators (often within an institutional umbrella). Regional WHO grants often require an implementing partner or endorsement from a WHO country office.

Duration & funding size: Ranges from small 6–12 month pilots (USD 10k–50k) to multi-year research programs (USD 100k–500k or higher when co-financed). Timelines and amounts vary by call.

Why WHO Global Health Grants 2025 Matter

WHO grants matter because they combine funding, technical credibility, and policy access—a rare triple that increases the chance research will translate into real health benefits. Here are the principal reasons:

Link to policy: WHO sponsorship gives projects a direct line to policy audiences—national ministries and global guideline committees—making it more likely that findings will change practice.
Equity-focused funding: Many WHO calls prioritize low- and middle-income countries and projects led by local investigators. That addresses a longstanding imbalance in who sets the research agenda.
Practical, implementation-driven science: WHO favors applied research—interventions, delivery-science, operational studies—so your results are useful immediately.
Capacity building: Grant awards often include training, mentorship, and networks that outlast the project, strengthening national research ecosystems.
Multiplicative effect: WHO endorsement often attracts co-funders (foundations, regional banks) for scaling up successful pilots.

In short: a WHO grant is not just cash—it’s a credibility engine and a route to scale.

Key Importance — What WHO Grants Enable for Africa, Asia & the Middle East

If you’re based in Nairobi, Dhaka, Amman or Lagos, what difference does a WHO grant make?

For researchers: funding to collect robust local data, hire research assistants, and test interventions that are context-appropriate.
For educators: opportunities to integrate implementation research into curricula, supervise student theses tied to funded projects, and host training modules.
For parents and communities: better services—faster diagnosis, improved vaccine delivery, safer maternal care—built on locally generated evidence.

Take clinical research capacity: WHO fellowships and TDR grants have supported clinicians in LMICs to design and run clinical trials, improving local oversight and trial-readiness for new vaccines or treatments. These investments build resilience—so a country is not only a recipient of global solutions, but a generator of them. tdr.who.int

Key Insights — What Reviewers and WHO Look For in 2025

If you plan to apply in 2025, keep these evidence-based insights in mind:

Clear problem, clear outcome: Start with a concise, data-driven problem statement: who is affected, how many, and what will change. Avoid generic ambitions.
Local leadership matters: Proposals with local principal investigators and evidence of national endorsement score higher. Letters of support from a ministry or WHO country office are a strong positive.
Implementation pathway: Explain how the research will be used—policy brief, guideline input, training module, or operational change—and identify the user.
Feasible monitoring and evaluation: Include measurable indicators, baseline data, and an analysis plan. WHO reviewers favor realistic targets and sound M&E.
Ethics and community engagement: Address human subjects protections, data privacy and community advisory mechanisms. Describe how participants will provide informed consent and how grievances will be handled.
Budget transparency: Provide line-item budgets and justification. WHO reviewers dislike lump sums without narrative backing.
Sustainability: Show how outcomes will be sustained—through government funding, integration into public programs, or private partnerships.

Benefits — Beyond the Grant Money

Awardees receive more than budget lines. Typical added benefits include:

Technical mentorship: From WHO experts or affiliated specialists; reviewers may ask WHO staff to mentor awardees.
Access to networks: Invitations to WHO technical meetings and guideline development fora—critical for influencing policy.
Capacity and training: Workshops on trial management, data stewardship, or health economics.
Visibility and trust: WHO association can open doors to national scale-up and other funders.

Table — Quick Comparison: Common WHO Grant Mechanisms (2025 Snapshot)

Mechanism	Typical Applicant	Funding Range	Duration	Best fit for
TDR Small Research Grants	LMIC researchers at institutions	US$10k–15k	6–12 months	Small pilot studies, operational research in tropical diseases.
Clinical Research Leadership Fellowships	Early-career clinician-researchers	Fellowship stipend + training	12–24 months	Builds clinical trial & leadership capacity.
WHO Regional Office Grants (e.g., EMRO)	Ministries, NGOs, research centers in region	Varies (US$20k–200k)	1–3 years	Regionally relevant priorities; requires WHO country office engagement.
Targeted WHO Thematic Calls	Consortia, universities, NGOs	US$50k–500k+	1–3 years	Thematic priorities (AMR, maternal health, pandemic preparedness)

Real-World Examples — Practical, Region-Focused Cases

To make things concrete, here are three realistic, composite case studies—each tailored to a specific role (student, educator, parent/community leader) and region.

1. International student — Kenya (doctoral candidate)

Problem: Outpatient clinics in two counties report frequent misdiagnosis of severe febrile illness in children; diagnostic tools are limited.
Project: A TDR small research grant funds a cross-sectional study to validate a low-cost point-of care panel (rapid CRP + malaria RDT + pulse oximetry) and to pilot a diagnostic algorithm. The student leads data collection, supervised by a university PI.
Outcomes: Diagnostic accuracy measured; an implementation brief is shared with county health officials; proposal for scale to Ministry for a larger WHO-supported trial.

2. Educator — Bangladesh (public-health faculty)

Problem: High dropout rate in facility-based antenatal care due to clinic wait times and poor counseling.
Project: A WHO regional research grant co-funds a QI (quality improvement) intervention in three hospitals introducing appointment systems, midwife-led group education, and mHealth appointment reminders. The university runs pre/post evaluation and trains local health workers.
Outcomes: Increased ANC retention, improved maternal knowledge scores, MOH adopts components for national scale-up.

3. Parent / community leader — Jordan (refugee health NGO)

Problem: Refugee children miss routine vaccinations because of mobility and documentation gaps.
Project: With regional WHO support, the NGO implements mobile outreach clinics using digital immunization registries and community health volunteers. The program integrates rapid verification protocols to handle missing documents.
Outcomes: Vaccination catch-up coverage increased in target sites; the Ministry of Health and WHO delegation collaborate to adapt the model for other refugee settings.

Your Statement of Purpose — A Simple, Strong Structure

An effective SoP (≈600–800 words) for a WHO grant should be crisp and outcome-oriented. Use this template:

Opening hook (1 paragraph) — A short story or fact that frames the local problem. Example: “In my district, three clinics serve 150,000 people, yet vaccine stockouts occur monthly, causing preventable outbreaks.”
Academic & operational background (1 paragraph) — Your training, institutional capacity, and prior relevant experience.
Project summary (2 paragraphs) — What you will do, who you will work with, and why this approach is feasible. Include measurable objective(s).
Impact & policy pathway (1 paragraph) — How results will be translated to policy or practice (e.g., MOH adoption, WHO guideline input).
Sustainability & equity (1 paragraph) — Post-grant plan (government funding, integration into existing programs), and how you will reach the most vulnerable.
Closing (1 short paragraph) — Reiterate readiness, partnership, and commitment to ethics and community engagement.

Common Mistakes — And How to Avoid Them

Many strong projects fail at the proposal stage due to avoidable errors. Here’s how to dodge them:

Mistake: Vague problem statement.
Fix: Use local data and a one-paragraph problem definition with numbers.
Mistake: No user or policymaker identified.
Fix: Name the ministry, program, or partner who will use results; include a letter of support.
Mistake: Overambitious scope.
Fix: Keep the project scale realistic for the budget and timeframe.
Mistake: Weak M&E plan.
Fix: Define baseline, endpoint, and specific metrics; describe data collection methods.
Mistake: Missing ethical approvals.
Fix: If human subjects are involved, include a timeline for IRB/ethics review and indicate any existing approvals.
Mistake: Poor budget justification.
Fix: Provide unit costs, compute personnel time, and explain major purchases.
Mistake: Ignoring gender and equity.
Fix: Include a short section on gender analysis and how you will ensure inclusive participation.

FAQs (Concise but Useful)

Q: Are WHO grants open to individuals or only institutions?
A: Many WHO mechanisms fund institutional applications; however individual researchers (students, clinicians) can apply for fellowships or small research grants when hosted by an eligible institution.

Q: How do I find the right WHO call?
A: Monitor WHO web pages for funding (WHO programme portals and regional office pages) and sign up for WHO mailing lists. Regional WHO offices (e.g., EMRO) post region-specific opportunities and guidance.

Q: Do WHO grants fund salaries?
A: Often they fund project staff, stipends, and research expenses; the exact policy depends on the call. Include personnel costs in your budget with justification.

Q: How competitive are these grants?
A: Competitive—WHO receives many strong submissions. Local leadership, feasibility and clear policy pathways significantly increase chances.

Q: How long until I hear a decision?
A: Timelines vary; smaller grants may be decided in 8–12 weeks, larger programs can take several months.

Practical Timeline — How to Prepare (3–6 months)

Month 1: Scoping & partnerships

Identify the WHO call and its eligibility rules.
Engage a local WHO country office or relevant ministry for feedback and endorsement.

Month 2: Draft concept & project plan

Produce a one-page concept note with objectives, partners, budget estimate, and an implementation outline.

Month 3: Build team & finalize methods

Secure letters of support, confirm data access, and finalize M&E instruments.

Month 4: Budgeting & ethics

Prepare detailed budget and procurement plan; draft IRB submission if needed.

Month 5: Review & submission

Get external review (colleague or mentor), finalize attachments, and submit 48 hours before deadline.

Month 6+: If shortlisted

Prepare to respond to reviewer queries and refine your implementation plan.

Measuring Success — Suggested Indicators

When WHO reviews projects, they look for clear, measurable public-health outcomes. Consider these indicator types:

Coverage & access: % increase in service uptake (vaccination, ANC visits) among target populations.
Quality & safety: Reduction in diagnostic errors, decrease in antibiotic misuse, or improvements in adherence to protocols.
Health outcomes: Reduced incidence or morbidity (e.g., malaria cases per 1,000).
System outcomes: Number of trained providers retained, policy documents influenced, or budget lines created.
Equity measures: Impact on women, rural populations, refugees or other vulnerable groups.

Ethics, Data & Community Engagement — Non-Negotiables

Ethics approvals: Plan for IRB/ethics committee timelines and include them in your Gantt. Human subjects research cannot start without appropriate approvals.
Data protection: Describe storage, anonymization, and data-sharing plans consistent with national law and WHO expectations.
Community engagement: Create advisory groups, feedback loops, and clear grievance mechanisms when interventions affect livelihoods or services.

Funding Pathways & Complementary Sources

WHO grants are often catalytic—intended to generate evidence that attracts larger investments. Complement WHO funding with:

National research councils (domestic public funding).
Regional development banks (cofinancing for scale).
Foundations (e.g., Wellcome, Gates) for larger R&D budgets.
Bilateral donors and UN pooled funds for implementation scale.

A blended financing strategy strengthens sustainability.

Example: A Short Concept Template (1 page)

Title: Improving Timely Childhood Immunization in District X Using Digital Registries and Community Outreach

Problem: District X reports 25% zero-dose children; poor documentation and caregiver mobility cause missed opportunities.

Objective: Increase fully immunized coverage from 60% to 85% in 18 months among children <24 months.

Approach: Implement a digital immunization registry linked to CHV (community health volunteer) outreach; run an RCT comparing standard reminders vs. CHV-assisted catch-up.

Partners: University A (lead), Ministry of Health (endorsement), Local NGO (implementer), WHO country office (technical support).

Budget (estimate): US$150,000 (registry development, CHV stipends, evaluation costs).

Indicators: % fully immunized; zero-dose rate; retention at 9 and 18 months.

Common Reviewer Questions — Prep Your Answers

How will you ensure data quality in low-resource settings?
What are the primary risks and how will you mitigate them?
Who will use the findings and how will you engage them?
How will you ensure the project is gender-responsive and equitable?
What is the plan for scale if the pilot succeeds?

Prepare short, evidence-based answers to these as part of your submission package.

Conclusion — Recap & Clear Call to Action

WHO’s 2025 Global Health Grants are practical, policy-oriented funding opportunities that empower local researchers, strengthen health systems, and accelerate evidence into action. For applicants in Africa, Asia and the Middle East, these grants are particularly valuable because they favor local leadership, emphasize implementation, and provide access to WHO’s policymaking networks.

Recap of essential actions:

Identify the right WHO call (regional office or TDR small grants are often the most accessible).
Lead with a tight problem statement supported by local data.
Build a consortium that includes a national stakeholder (ministry or WHO country office).
Create a realistic budget, MEL plan, and sustainability strategy.
Address ethics, data protection and community engagement up front.

Call to action (practical): Draft a 1-page concept note this week. Send it to a WHO country office or the relevant WHO technical unit for preliminary feedback. Early engagement increases your chances and aligns your project with national priorities.