Free guide
Writing the Economic Evaluation Section of a Grant Proposal
A practical structure for the health economics section of a research or programme grant — aims, design, costs, outcomes, analysis, team and budget — with the choices reviewers look for.
PDFUpdated 30 September 2026Economic evaluation & HTA · Costing
What's inside
- How to write a clear economic evaluation aim
- The design choices to state — comparator, perspective, time horizon, outcomes
- How to plan cost data collection alongside the study
- Analysis, uncertainty and reporting plans
- Budget lines and team roles for the health economics work
- A checklist reviewers are likely to apply
Key points
- 01State one clear economic question linked to the study's main comparison.
- 02Plan cost data collection from the start; costs are hard to reconstruct later.
- 03Name the methods guidance you will follow, such as a reference case and CHEERS 2022.
- 04Budget realistically for health economist time and cost data collection.
Frequently asked questions
How long should the economic evaluation section be?
It depends on the funder's format. Often half a page to two pages in the main proposal, with more detail in a protocol or health economics analysis plan.
Do we need a health economist on the team?
Reviewers usually expect named expertise for the economic aim. A health economist can be a co-investigator, a collaborator or a subcontractor, depending on the funder's rules.
Should the evaluation be trial-based or model-based?
Trial-based analysis uses the study's own data; a model can extend results beyond the trial's follow-up or population. Many studies combine both.
Need this done properly?
This guide explains the method. If you would rather have the analysis done for you — with local data, independent quality control and a report you can defend — we can help.
Need this done properly?
Tell us about the decision you need to support. We will propose a scope, timeline and price.