ARPA-H (Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health)

ARPA-H (the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health) is a U.S. federal research-funding agency, authorized by the FY2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act (signed March 15, 2022), that funds high-risk, high-reward biomedical and health research through a Program Manager-driven model adapted from DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) rather than through NIH’s traditional investigator-initiated, peer-reviewed grant system.

Where ARPA-H sits structurally

In March 2022, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra decided to place ARPA-H administratively within the National Institutes of Health rather than as a fully independent HHS agency, while specifying that the ARPA-H Director reports directly to the HHS Secretary, not to the NIH Director. NIH provides back-office administrative functions (human resources, payroll, legal services, and similar support), but ARPA-H’s program decisions, funding mechanisms, and Program Manager appointments operate outside NIH’s Institute/Center and Center for Scientific Review peer-review structure. ARPA-H maintains physically separate offices from NIH’s Bethesda campus, including a headquarters/stakeholder hub in the Washington, D.C. area, an “investor catalyst” hub in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a “customer experience” hub in Dallas, Texas, the latter focused on reaching diverse and underserved patient populations.

As part of the 2025 HHS reorganization under Executive Order 14210, HHS announced it would combine ARPA-H with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) under a new Office of Healthy Futures, pairing ARPA-H’s early-stage, high-risk research focus with BARDA’s late-stage development and procurement mission. Given how recently this restructuring was announced, readers working on a live ARPA-H proposal or award should confirm current organizational placement directly with arpa-h.gov rather than relying solely on this summary.

The Program Manager model, and how it differs from NIH peer review

ARPA-H does not run open, investigator-initiated grant cycles the way NIH’s R01 or R21 mechanisms do. Instead, individual Program Managers (PMs) — typically scientists, engineers, or clinicians hired on limited-term appointments — identify a specific, unsolved health problem, define a technical vision and success metrics for solving it, and then design a program to pursue that vision. Programs are announced publicly as Innovative Solutions Openings (ISOs), which are open for a limited application window rather than standing on a recurring cycle the way NIH standard due dates do.

PMs stay closely involved after award: they select multiple competing performer teams (drawn from academia, industry, nonprofits, or government labs) to pursue different technical approaches to the same problem in parallel, then track progress against pre-negotiated, granular technical milestones. Performance is reviewed on a recurring cadence, and a team whose results fall short of its milestones can have funding stopped before the program’s planned end date — a materially different mechanism from NIH’s model, where a funded R01 or similar award generally runs its full project period once an application clears peer review and is selected for funding, subject to routine progress reporting rather than go/no-go technical gates. For a direct look at how NIH’s own review scoring works by contrast, see CASRAI’s guide to the NIH Simplified Review Framework.

Funding mechanisms

ARPA-H uses a mix of federal award instruments rather than a single grant type, chosen program-by-program to fit the technical goal:

• Other Transaction (OT) agreements — a flexible award instrument (distinct from grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts) that federal R&D agencies including DARPA and ARPA-H use to negotiate customized, milestone-gated terms with performers, including for-profit and nontraditional entities that may be reluctant to accept standard federal grant terms. See CASRAI’s related guide on Other Transactions Authority and milestone funding for how this instrument is used elsewhere in federal R&D funding.
• Procurement contracts and cooperative agreements — used where a more standard federal instrument fits the program’s goals.
• Milestone-based disbursement — regardless of instrument type, funding is typically released against negotiated technical checkpoints rather than as a lump-sum or fixed-period budget, so continued funding is contingent on demonstrated progress. See CASRAI’s milestone payment entry for the general mechanic.
• SBIR/STTR set-asides — like other federal R&D agencies with extramural budgets above the statutory threshold, ARPA-H administers a Small Business Innovation Research / Small Business Technology Transfer allocation for small-business performers.

Because ARPA-H programs are structured around Program Manager-defined ISOs rather than a standing catalog of numbered activity codes, applicants should treat each solicitation as defining its own eligibility, instrument type, and milestone structure — there is no single ARPA-H equivalent to NIH’s R01/R21/U01 activity-code system. See CASRAI’s NIH activity codes entry for contrast with how NIH organizes its own mechanisms.

How ARPA-H compares to DARPA and other federal R&D agencies

ARPA-H was explicitly modeled on DARPA’s PM-driven, milestone-gated approach, adapted for biomedical and health research rather than defense technology. Institutions that already work with DARPA-funded research should note that DARPA-specific compliance processes — such as DARPA’s Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP) — are agency-specific and do not automatically apply to ARPA-H awards; each ARPA-H program and award should be checked against its own solicitation terms and disclosure requirements rather than assumed to mirror DARPA’s. For a broader landscape view of how DARPA fits among other defense-research funders, see CASRAI’s DoD Research Funding guide.

Frequently asked questions

When was ARPA-H created?

ARPA-H was authorized by the FY2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed into law March 15, 2022. HHS announced its administrative placement within NIH later that month, and the agency built out its leadership, hub locations, and first programs through 2022–2023.

Is ARPA-H part of NIH?

Administratively, yes — NIH provides ARPA-H’s back-office support functions — but ARPA-H’s Director reports directly to the HHS Secretary rather than the NIH Director, and ARPA-H’s program design, review, and funding processes operate independently of NIH’s Institute/Center peer-review system. As of the 2025 HHS reorganization, ARPA-H has also been paired with BARDA under a new Office of Healthy Futures; confirm current placement at arpa-h.gov for any live award or proposal question.

Does ARPA-H use NIH-style grant peer review?

No. ARPA-H funding decisions are driven by individual Program Managers who define a program’s goals and select performers, rather than by an independent study-section peer-review panel scoring investigator-initiated applications the way NIH’s Center for Scientific Review does.

What is an Innovative Solutions Opening (ISO)?

An ISO is ARPA-H’s term for a public program solicitation: a Program Manager’s published description of a health problem, the technical goals a solution must meet, and how to apply, open for a limited window rather than on a recurring standing schedule.

Can academic institutions receive ARPA-H funding?

Yes. ARPA-H performer teams are drawn from academia, industry, nonprofits, and government labs, often on the same program competing with different technical approaches; the specific eligibility and award instrument (OT agreement, contract, or cooperative agreement) is defined per solicitation.

References

• ARPA-H, “The ARPA-H Model” and “ARPA-H 101: The Lifecycle of an ARPA-H Program,” arpa-h.gov.
• Congressional Research Service, Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H): Overview and Selected Issues, Report R47568, congress.gov.
• HHS, FY2026 ARPA-H materials and Office of Healthy Futures reorganization announcements, hhs.gov.