FAQs: Families at the HEART Funding

Yes, Perigee hosted two info sessions, one in English and one in Spanish, with an opportunity for Q&A. Recordings of these info sessions can be found below.

Watch in English
Mira en Español

Expressions of Interest will only be accepted via our Perigee Partner Portal. Click here to create an account and begin the process!

The EOIs and applications will be reviewed by the Perigee team and an advisory group made up of field experts.

To maintain the integrity of the selection process, Advisory Committee members will remain anonymous during the review period. Once finalists have been selected, committee membership may be shared publicly to recognize the expertise and contributions of those involved. However, any committee member who prefers to remain anonymous beyond the selection phase may do so, and their confidentiality will be respected.

Phase 1 of the process includes an Expression of Interest (EOI) which is due on August 15th. EOIs will be reviewed by the Perigee Fund and an advisory group of community experts. In Mid- September, up to 12 finalists will be invited to interview and participate in the Proposal Process. Of the 12 finalists, up to 6 will be selected and notified in Mid-December.

Both the interviews and application will inform the decision making process. The interviews will be conducted earlier in the phase if possible so that organizations may update their application based upon the interview.

Perigee expects to receive and fund proposals from organizations whose models are focused on one stage of the prenatal-to-age-3 mental health continuum (e.g., maternal mental health). 

In an ideal world, there are some models that work across the continuum (including maternal mental health and infant and early childhood mental health), but that is not an expectation for applications to this RFP. Any model focused on expanding access to some aspect of prenatal-to-age-3 mental health is eligible to apply. 

To be considered for this RFP, organizations must meet all eligibility criteria. These criteria were intentionally developed to ensure that selected organizations are well-positioned to fully engage in and benefit from the activities and support offered through the initiative.

Thank you for your interest and for the important work you’re doing with families. Unfortunately, your agency would not be eligible for Families at the HEART. HEART grants cannot be used for model implementation in the form of direct services. Additionally, applicants should be the model developer or lead model steward. In this case, because your agency is delivering a nationally recognized home visiting program that your team did not originate, it would not meet the eligibility criteria. While this opportunity may not be a fit, we deeply value your commitment to families and recognize the critical impact of your work.

The focus of the model should be on centering the diverse experience of families in the prenaal-to-three-age range, and should have already been in place for the past two years. This example would not qualify.

For this funding opportunity, the model must be have operationalized the model with population to be served.

Evidence based tools are welcomed to support community rooted models, as long as the community and leadership that is informing the program design, strategy and decision making feels that it is right for the community.

The program or model must be two years old by the time of the application and meet all other eligibility requirements. Please see page 8 of the RFP.

Yes, your model would still be eligible. We recognize that disruptions like the pandemic have affected many programs. As long as the model has been in existence for at least two years and you meet the data and funding requirements and can demonstrate a clear plan to resume or strengthen operations, you can apply.

Two (or more) organizations may apply as partners, but only the lead organization would receive the funding. The model must meet all the model and leaderhip requirements. However, you are welcome to develop a partnership in whatever way makes sense.

To be eligible, the lead applicant must be a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, a tribal entity, a public agency, or be a fiscally sponsored by a nonprofit. Universities or academic institutions are noteligible to apply as lead applicants, though they may participate as subcontractors.

There is not a specific budget or size of a budget that we are requiring for this opportunity. The model must be supported by at least two funding sources for at least two years to qualify.

Yes, an FQHC would qualify for funding.

To be eligible, a model must have been supported by at least two different funding sources simultaneously over the last two years. These can include private donors, public dollars, grants, insurance/Medicaid reimbursement, or general funds intentionally allocated to the model. The funders do not need to contribute equal amounts or cover the full program costs, and there is no minimum contribution amount required. However, in-kind support alone does not count toward the two required sources.

Yes, the two different sources must have been active at the same time within the last two years. Funding history from more than two years ago (e.g., 10 years ago) would not qualify. Gap years or models currently relying on only one funder (even if they had two in the past) would be ineligible, unless they meet the two simultaneous funders requirement within the last two years.

What funding has this model had for the last two years? Provide a list of other sources of funding for the modelʼs development and/or implementation. Each item should include the name of the funder or revenue source and the amount of funding.

Models that have previously received Perigee funding for model implementation or expansion are not eligible. Though this initiative is intended to engage new partners, organizations that have previously received funding for model implementation may submit an Expression of Interest for a model that has not previously been funded by Perigee.

Perigee is not an expert on trauma. We look to a variety of experts for guidance on what constitutes trauma, such as the National Child Traumatic Stress Center. The definition and examples we provide here are directional. We honor and accept that some communities and collaboratives may define trauma differently than Perigee, and some may choose not to use this term. Your group does not need to have the same definition as Perigee. We are looking for alignment and a shared aspiration to support prenatal-to-age-3 families impacted by trauma. 
 
At a high level, Perigee understands that trauma is often caused by events that are dangerous, violent, or frightening, whether those events are experienced or witnessed. Natural disasters, domestic violence, and community violence are all examples of traumatic events. Perigee also thinks broadly about trauma as occurring in a historical and collective context. Many generations of Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color in the United States have experienced and continue to experience trauma because of structural racism. We believe it is important to acknowledge that the original Adverse Childhood Experiences, or ACES, are “Atrocious Cultural Experiences,” as explained by Dr. Chandra Ghosh-Ippen and Dr. Markita Mays. These traumatic cultural or community experiences include colonization, slavery, removal of property/land, and forced family separations. 

Mental health must be an integral part of the model. Please refer to page 15 of the RFP. There are two definitions that are helpful, somatic and therapeutic.

Peer support could be considered an approach for mental health as long as the model is therapeutic and or somatic in nature, which may include clinical support or healing practices rooted in cultural values and traditions. The model must be focused on interventions or treatments that include mental heath care. Proposals focused soley on promotion or primary prevention will not be considered.

In our definition, therapeutic is the intervention or practice aimed and treating existing conditions that support the infant or child’s emotional, social and developmental well-being often focusing on the parent-child relationship. While models that connect families with therapists or therapy are encouraged, Perigee holds the view that in many cases models can be therapeutic without involving a therapist.

Perigee values the work of promotion and prevention. However, for this specific opportunity this opportunity models must be focused on intervention and treatment. The intervention or practice should aim at training existing conditions that support the infant’s or toddler’s emotional, social and developmental well-being, often focusing on the parent-child relationship. While models that connect families with therapists for therapy are encouraged, Perigee holds the view that in many cases models can be therapeutic without involving a clinical therapist.

The definition of model can be found on page 14. The intervention model has defined and documented approaches that include tools, resources, training, and expected outcomes, making them teachable, replicable, and accessible but you made modifications based on data collected or family voice, then you are eligible.

The lead steward assumes that the model was created within the organization applying, in partnership with meaningful participation in program design, strategy, and decision making with the community receiving these services.

The evidence does not have to be “published” as in a journal. The intervention model must have defined and documented approaches that include tools, resources, training and expected outcomes- making them teachable, replicable, and accessible while in operation for two years. Part of the planning process may include defining key elements of the model integrity and identification of challenges and opportunities to facilitate model expansion.

The model must have at least two cycles of data, which a preference for three and has used this data to inform the intervention or implementation strategy. Data can be qualitative, quantitative and we anticipate it will look different for different models. The key is that the data collected is used to inform the intervention or implementation strategy.

Yes, data that has been collected at least two times over the two years qualifies. The model must have been implemented for at least two years and must have completed two distinct cycles of data collection. We understand that data collection timelines vary across models, but to be eligible, your model should have been implemented with at least two different groups over separate cycles.

Data can be collected by an outside evaluator or by the agency itself. The model must have at least two cycles of data, which a preference for three and has used this data to inform the intervention or implementation strategy. Data can be qualitative, quantitative and we anticipate it will look different for different models. The key is that the data collected is used to inform the intervention or implementation strategy.

For this specific opportunity you cannot retroactively collect data. Our baseline requirement is that data has been collected for two cycle of data, with a preference for three, and has used this data to inform the intervention or implementation strategy.

We will not be asking for the data itself. Rather, we are asking what type of data have you collected and what key insights were gained, and how do they support refinement and expansion of the model. You can find the Expression of Interest questions here.

The model must have two cycles of data with a preference for three, and the data has been used to inform the strategy or intervention, so this example is not qualified.

Each organization will receive a $425,000 grant. The grant will be an upfront, one time awarded of $425,000 per grantee over a three year grant period.

Funding will be distributed as one lump sum payment at the beginning of 2026. 

No, funding does not need to be evenly distributed across the three years. We encourage participants to consider how funding can best be leveraged across the three years to support the growth and expansion effort they are pursuing. 

Direct services means the hands on work of supporting the model implementation or the services or staff intended to work directly with families.
This includes a clinicians salary if they are engaging with families. This funding can be used to pay for time for staff to plan, work on capacity building, and devote to model growth and development.
The monies for this grant are intended to support the growth of the model. The intention of the grant is to provide staff the time for planning, capacity building activities, and efforts for efforts to strengthen organizational systems to enable model expansion.
Please see page 9 of the RFP for a full list of intended use of funds and restrictions.

Year one will focus on intentional planning to identify capacity building goals and co-design strategies for implementation. In years two and three, grants will focus on implementing their capacity building plans and embedding sustainable practices to support model growth, adaptability, and long-term impact. We do not anticipate funding to support ongoing implementation after the grant period.

Yes, funds may be used to support training of staff training is an activities associated with one of the three expected strategies 1) Model development and impact, 2) Financial strategy and adaptability, and 3) Leadership Nourishment.

We are not requesting a full budget during the Expression of Interest phase.
Finalists will be asked to submit a proposed budget, which can include indirect costs.

Perigee is funding a technical assistance provider who will be working with the selected grantees.

Perigee will look forward to getting to know all grantees and to partnering with them during the grant period. We hope to connect with grantees regularly to hear about their work and learn how we can be a supportive partner.

Our formal reporting requirements are to submit an interim report (including the workplan developed with the technical assistance provider) at the one-year mark, an interim report at the two-year mark, and a final report after the grant ends. These reports have both a narrative and a financial reporting component.

Reporting requirements of the evaluator will be developed over time and communicated proactively with grantees.

We are still in the planning phase for the overarching evaluation work that will be funded to support this RFP.

Correct, all grantees will be expected to participate in initiative-level evaluation throughout the grant period. The evaluation partner will be selected and funded by Perigee Fund.

While we do not have a specific evaluation framework in place, it is imperative that the evaluation partners we select have a deep understanding of community-rooted work, the historical under-recognition and underfunding of mental health models, and the complex systems in which these models operate

Perigee will procure a separate evaluator to inform the overall HEART strategy. We expect that funded grantees may need to work in partnership with the evaluator to respond to questions on what is working well, and what challenges they are experiencing for the overall strategy.

If you are working with an evaluator, we encourage you to continue to work with them. Perigee will procure a separate evaluator to inform the overall HEART strategy. We expect that funded grantees may need to work in partnership with the evaluator to respond to questions on what is working well, and what challenges they are experiencing for the overall strategy.