**Background:** Health disparities in Hawai‘i are substantial, especially among Native Hawaiians (NH), other Pacific Islanders (OPI), and Filipinos, who suffer disproportionately higher rates of obesity, hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, and breast and lung cancers, and have the lowest life expectancy of any racial/ethnic group in the state. Research efforts are limited by a shortage of skilled investigators, particularly from these ethnic groups. The traditional single-investigator model is insufficient for addressing complex social, economic, and environmental contributors to health disparities. With support from the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD), the Ola HAWAII RCMI Specialized Center aimed to improve minority health and reduce disparities through a team-science Pilot Projects Program (PPP).
**Methods:** The PPP provided funding for new and early-stage health disparities investigators and encouraged team science through five methods: (1) multidisciplinary review of pilot projects; (2) community relevance and participation in project development; (3) assistance in team development during Research Infrastructure Core consultations; (4) team-science examples during Mentoring Bootcamp sessions; and (5) encouraging team-science participation in academic promotions. The program leveraged four integrated cores—Administrative, Research Infrastructure, Investigator Development, and Community Engagement—advised by the CEC Hui (a community advisory group). Innovations included customizing the PPP to prioritize team-science projects, instituting a Mentoring Bootcamp (two-hour sessions, three days/week, for four weeks each summer), and expanding access to mentors and reviewers outside Hawai‘i. The annual application process began with a one-page preproposal evaluated by three reviewers using NIH criteria plus three Ola HAWAII-specific criteria (alignment with health disparities mission, collaborations/partnerships, and use of Center cores). Full proposals were reviewed by two external scientific reviewers and the CEC Hui.
**Key Results:** During 2017–2022, 102 PPP preproposals were received across basic biomedical, clinical, and behavioral science. Of these, 45 (48%) were invited to submit full proposals, and 22 (19%) were awarded (8 basic biomedical, 7 clinical, 7 behavioral). These 22 projects engaged 32 new and early-stage investigators, 18 (83%) of whom were early-career faculty (assistant professor). Most investigators were ethnic minorities and/or women; 18 (83%) of funded projects focused on ethnic minority populations, specifically NH, OPI, and Filipinos. PPP awardees published 77 peer-reviewed manuscripts and submitted 84 grants, with 31 awarded, including $8,307,680 in extramural grants. The total pilot funds invested were $1,417,375 ($1,197,375 from Ola HAWAII and $220,000 from institutional funds), yielding a return on investment of 5.9. The Mentoring Bootcamp grew from 19 attendees in 2017 to 112 in 2022 after transitioning to a virtual platform. The RIC processed more than 1300 requests for resources over five years. Challenges included a decline in preproposals from 43 in Year 1 to 11 in Year 5 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which also forced the transition to virtual training. Two illustrative pilot projects are described: the MALAMA backyard aquaponics feasibility study (10 NH families, n=21 participants) which found fruit consumption significantly increased from 2.1 to 2.9 servings/day with favorable changes in vegetable and fish consumption and a trend in blood pressure reduction; and the PAAC COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy study (1124 adults) which found that trust in official sources increased vaccination probability by 20.7% per unit of trust, while trust in unofficial sources decreased it by 12.5%.
**Clinical Implications:** The PPP model demonstrates that structured, team-science-oriented pilot funding programs with integrated mentoring, community engagement, and personalized development plans can successfully develop a diverse health disparities research workforce and yield substantial extramural funding and publications. The program's return on investment of 5.9 suggests that targeted investment in early-stage minority investigators can be highly productive. The authors plan to enhance the program by strengthening team science (requiring community collaborators on all projects), implementing a personalized Research Studio Program (with development, implementation, and outcomes studios), and building connectivity with other infrastructure programs offering pilot project funding. These approaches may serve as a replicable model for other institutions seeking to build health disparities research capacity, particularly in underserved and minority communities.