A farmer’s hand holding grains. A farmer’s hands holding grains.

Enhancing the Flavor of Plant-based & Fermentation-derived Proteins RFA

Open Opportunity

Program Contact

Constance Gewa
cgewa@foundationfar.org

Grants Team
grants@foundationfar.org


Start New Application
Access Saved Application

Applications Due March 25, 2026

About this Opportunity

As global demand for protein continues to rise, this funding opportunity can help diversify protein sources, strengthen the sustainability of food and agriculture supply chains and contribute to a safer, more resilient global food system. Improving the functionality and flavor of plant-based and fermentation-derived proteins can increase consumer acceptance, open new markets for crops, create value-added opportunities for farmers and processors, enhance farmland health and support economic growth.

To drive such innovation the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) and the Good Food Institute (GFI) have joined forces to support plant-based and fermentation-enabled protein ingredient optimization.
The long-term success of plant-based and fermentation-enabled protein foods depends not only on sustainability and cost but also on their ability to deliver a compelling eating experience. By advancing research in ingredient design, enrichment methods and formulation strategies, we can accelerate progress toward high-protein foods that meet or exceed consumer sensory expectations.

Flavor, inclusive of both taste and aroma, remains a critical barrier to consumer acceptance. While early innovation has made progress, many products on the market still face challenges with off-flavors or insufficient desirable flavors. Improving flavor emerged as a key recommendation from the joint FFAR-GFI global call for ideas and workshop, summarized in The Priorities for Plant-based and Fermentation-enabled Protein Ingredient Optimization Convening report.

Application Guidelines & Frequently Asked Questions

For general application questions, including questions about the Grant Management Portal (BBGM) and the Budget Template, please see FFAR’s Applicant FAQs.

I am concerned I may not meet the “Benefit to U.S. Food and Agriculture” criterion, can you qualify what counts?
  • We encourage you to think of the “benefit to the U.S. food and agriculture system” requirement broadly. A wide variety of crops, microbes, and ingredients are grown, produced, processed, and consumed in the U.S. Generally, if the ingredient(s) is from a crop grown in the U.S., a feedstock/sidestream present in the U.S., or can be produced in the U.S., projects utilizing these components would be considered transferable to the U.S. We anticipate the “benefit to U.S. food and agriculture” requirement to primarily eliminate research involving hyper-regional crops or ingredients that utilize components banned in the U.S. Regardless of whether the research is conducted in or outside of the U.S, researchers may want to include a statement on how the research is relevant or translatable to the U.S. food and agriculture system in their proposal.
  • If you have an idea but are concerned it may fail this criterion, we strongly encourage you to examine if it may be relevant or transferable to the U.S. food and agriculture system. As a crop example, one may not associate teff (Eragrostis tef) with the United States, but teff is currently grown throughout the U.S. for food, feed, and as a cover crop. As a sidestream example, while the U.S. does not grow a significant amount of cocoa, the U.S. imports a substantial amount of raw cocoa beans and even more refined cocoa products. Sidestreams generated from the processing of cocoa, as well as ingredients produced from cocoa, are therefore relevant to the U.S. food and agriculture system. As a production example, synthetic vanillin can be produced in the U.S. For a converse example, research involving sweet flag (Acorus calamus) would be disqualified based on this criterion, as the plant is banned for use in food in the U.S.
What types of research does this RFA not support?

The RFA will NOT support research in the following areas:

  • Research not relevant to U.S. food and agriculture (please see additional explanation above)
  • Research focused on ingredients that are NOT intended for center-of-plate
  • Texture-focused research
  • Research that may cause harm to animal subjects or research that uses any animal-derived ingredients or animal-derived upstream inputs, including insects
  • Human subject research. However, projects that involve trained sensory panels as one part of the project may be acceptable if the purpose of that analysis is to test the sensory aspects of a new ingredient, process, or product developed as part of an eligible project.
  • Proposals focused on market research, consumer preference studies, life-cycle analyses, and similar topics.
Does this RFA limit the amount that can be requested for equipment purchases?

Equipment is considered any durable good with a cost that exceeds $5,000. This RFA limits equipment requests to 25% of the total budget. It is important to note that during the review process, proposals will be evaluated on the reasonableness of the budget and the value of the research in comparison to the budget requested. When including equipment requests in the budget, clearly articulate how the requested equipment aligns with the project’s objectives and contributes to its overall success in the budget justification. 

What are organizational assurances? Do sensory panels require organizational assurances?

These are approvals typically provided by an ethics committee within the applicant organization for research projects involving hazardous materials, etc.

Note that this RFA does not support research involving human subjects, animal use or fetal tissue.

Projects that involve trained sensory panels as one part of the project can include organizational assurances to ensure validity of their data.