The Zenith Fellows Award was initiated in 1991 as a vehicle for donors with a substantial personal commitment to propel research in AD/ADRD research. The awards are made possible by the generosity of individuals and organizations (Zenith Society) who have each committed
$1 million to the Alzheimer’s Association in support of the program.

The objective of the 2026 Zenith Fellows Awards competition is to provide funding support for investigators who have:

• Contributed significantly to today’s scientific progress including AD/ADRD.
• Contributed significantly to neuroscience breakthroughs that have informed our broader understanding of AD/ADRD.
• Are likely to make substantial contributions in the future with their proposed work.

The proposed research should address fundamental problems related to early detection, etiology, pathogenesis, treatment, or prevention of AD/ADRD. We seek proposals at the cutting edge of basic science or biomedicine that may challenge prevailing orthodoxy or not conform to traditional funding mechanisms, but which promise a sustained and positive impact on the future of AD/ADRD research.

Areas of focus

The Alzheimer’s Association supports a number of high priority areas that span the entire spectrum of science and have other programs throughout a given year, however, the Zenith Fellows program is unique in focusing specifically on biological studies and clinical investigations (excluding clinical trials). Innovative and novel ideas to address research challenges are the core of the Alzheimer’s Association's scientific program. The Alzheimer’s Association is committed to minimizing health disparities and increasing representation of all populations within research and clinical trials.

Basic biology: these are bench science projects involving in vitro or animal work pertaining to the causes of AD/ADRD; early and accurate detection and diagnosis; animal models; treatments; and prevention. Basic biology may also include computation studies, such as data mining for genes linked to risk, or other bioinformatic studies. Please note that in vitro work involving human samples falls into this category.

Clinical investigations (this is not applicable for clinical trials): projects in which the majority of data is derived directly from studies of human participants. Examples include studies that aim to evaluate potential therapeutic approaches; promising biomarkers; imaging technology; and possible risk factors including genetics, lifestyle, cardiovascular issues, diabetes, and metabolic factors. In vitro projects conducted with human samples should be categorized as basic biology rather than clinical investigations. Note that this definition of clinical investigation does not extend to clinical trials which will not be considered for funding under the Zenith program.

Although vast advances have been made in AD/ADRD research, the field still faces a great number of serious impediments in translating basic science discoveries into effective treatments and evidence-based clinical practices. Some of the many challenges that remain for investigators to address include:

Cause(s) of AD/ADRD

• How do specific neurons in vulnerable brain structures become dysfunctional?
• What causes selective neuronal death in some brain regions but not others?
• What factors initiate these processes and what are key steps leading to cell death?
• How do genetics interact with other factors to influence these processes?
• What factors tip the balance between effective removal or pathological accumulation of toxins in the brain?
• How do risk factors interact to promote disease(s), and how do they underlie specific neurologic/neuropathologic changes in the brain?

The primary neuropathological events in AD/ADRD involve aberrant formation of pathologic protein species. Advances in molecular biology provided the tools to unravel mechanisms of synthesis, trafficking, and accumulation of these proteins in the brain. Research in this area has produced promising leads about the role of these proteins in neural function, dysfunction, and cell death, while also suggesting strategies to correct this molecular damage. Although these insights have generated many hypotheses, the precise etiology of AD/ADRD is still not known. Critical questions remain.

The precise relationships between clinical symptomatology and neuropathology are not well defined. There is a critical need to understand not only the causal links between neurobiology and clinical progression, but also the mechanisms for heterogeneity in clinical presentation. These mechanisms may vary widely and may influence both differential diagnosis and treatment response. 

Early and accurate detection and diagnosis

• What are the most sensitive, specific and cost-effective diagnostic procedures?
• What are the most sensitive, specific and cost-effective procedures for assessing change through the course of the disease?

Several converging lines of evidence suggest that the neurodegenerative processes associated with AD/ADRD begin several years before the first clinical features can be detected with current instruments. Although clinical information can be gleaned from longitudinal studies, these data are usually obtained in the middle to later stages of the disease when initial cognitive and behavioral signs have already manifest. As a result, there is little information on disease presentation during its earliest preclinical stages. These gaps result from a lack of non-invasive tools for observation and early detection of the disease. Finding sensitive and specific markers will become even more important as pressure increases to develop very early treatments, especially if these early interventions have the potential for harmful side effects and must be targeted appropriately. Thus, there is an urgent need to find accurate, accessible biological markers of disease that are applicable to all populations. These include imaging techniques and more culturally sensitive cognitive and behavioral assessment instruments.

Well-tested biological markers for AD/ADRD are not the only critical need—investigators are also encouraged to explore the observational and subjective perspective that family members, care providers, and people with the illness can provide about the very earliest events. The observations of family members, nurses, social workers, and other care providers have already provided important insights about early cognitive and behavioral events.

Risk factors

• What genetic or acquired characteristics increase the risk of AD/ADRD? Conversely, what factors offer protection or delay onset?
• How do the risk factors vary among representative populations?
• Which risk factors are modifiable, and when in life does intervention have the greatest impact?

Growing evidence suggests that most cases of AD/ADRD involve a combination of genetic and environmental risk factors, with some populations being disproportionately affected. Identifying and validating these risk factors remains a critical challenge. For instance, there is a potential link between cerebrovascular disease and AD, but we do not yet know if systemic vascular or metabolic factors modify risk for AD/ADRD.

Funding and award period

We anticipate funding up to three Zenith Fellows Awards. Each award is limited to $450,000 total funding (direct and indirect costs) over a period of up to three years. Requests in any given year may not exceed $250,000 (direct and indirect costs). Additional details on allowable costs are outlined in the budget section below.

Key dates

• Letter of Intent Launch: Oct. 10, 2025
• Letter of Intent Deadline*: Dec, 1, 2025, 5 p.m. (ET)
• Letter of Intent Notifications: Week of Jan. 13, 2026
• Application Deadline*: March 18, 2026, 5 p.m. (ET)
• Application Review: March–July 2026
• Award Notifications: By Aug. 31, 2026

*The Letter of Intent and application must be received by 5 p.m. ET on their respective deadlines. They will not be accepted after these dates — no exceptions will be made. Hard copies or emails will not be accepted.

Budget

”Budget summary” for the proposed research project is required and must be submitted with the application and within the allowable two-page limit. Your budget must not exceed $250,000 in any given year nor exceed $450,000 total across all years, including indirect costs. The minimum award duration is 2 years — awards cannot be for only one year. It is required that most of the funds awarded under this program be used for direct research support. No more than 10% of the total award may be used for indirect costs; this is inclusive of indirect costs for the implementing institution as well as any to subcontracts.    
 
Allowable costs under this award include: 

• Purchase and care of laboratory animals
• Small pieces of laboratory or clinical research equipment
• Special use computer hardware and software for neuropsychological or imaging studies
• Laboratory or clinical supplies
• Salary for the Principal Investigator
• Salary for scientific staff (including post-doctoral fellows and graduate students) and technical staff (including laboratory technicians and modest secretarial support)
• Childcare costs provided by a licensed childcare provider – not to exceed $2,500 per budget period
• Open access publication fees for journal articles related to the funded research project
• Participant remuneration adhering to the NACC ADRC Best Practices located here: https://naccdata.org/adrc-resources/best-practices
• Membership to ISTAART, the professional society of the Alzheimer’s Association
• Membership to scientific associations
• Professional development and communication training
• Support for travel - a total of $12,500 over a two-three year period not to exceed $7,000 per year. 

Not allowable as Direct Costs under this award include:

• Computer hardware or standard software (e.g. Microsoft Office, mouse monitor, computer parts)
• Laboratory equipment such as freezers, ultracentrifuges, RT-PCR, Microscopy/imaging equipment
• Service contract fees of equipment
• Construction or renovation costs
• Tuition
• Rent for laboratory/office space
• Visa costs and fees
• Expenses such as Data Network Recharges and Computing and communication device support services
• General liability insurances, such as GAEL
• Wire and currency exchange fees
• Salary and/or compensation for Alzheimer’s Association Staff or current members of the Alzheimer’s Association Medical and Scientific Advisory Group (MSAG) and the International Research Grant Program (IRGP) Council. A complete list of MSAG and IRGP Council members can be found on our website alz.org/grants.

AI Based Application Success Predictor

1. Strong Alignment with Alzheimer’s Disease & Related Dementias (AD/ADRDs)

Successful proposals clearly address:

Disease mechanisms (amyloid, tau, synaptic dysfunction, neuroinflammation, proteostasis, vascular pathways).

Risk, prevention, or early detection strategies.

Human-based or translational models.

Clinical relevance for AD/ADRD populations.

Predictor: The project must be directly tied to improving understanding, diagnosis, or treatment of AD/ADRD.

2. Clear Fit with the Correct Award Mechanism

Successful applicants match career stage, independence level, and project scope to the right award:

AARG / AARG-D (early faculty; 2–15 yrs post-doc)

AARG-NT (non-traditional fields)

AACSF (clinician-scientist fellows)

AACSD (diversity-focused career development)

Part the Cloud (ready-for-human trials; high translational impact)

Diagnostics Accelerator (biomarker development)

ISTAART Awards (member-focused research + travel)

Predictor: Applicants choose the award that matches their experience, goals, and preliminary data expectations.

3. Strong Preliminary Data (Even for Early-Career Grants)

Most successful applications include:

Compelling pilot data supporting feasibility.

Proof-of-concept that the hypothesis is testable.

Clear rationale linking preliminary findings to the proposed work.

Predictor: Solid preliminary data dramatically increases competitiveness, even in “seed” mechanisms.

4. Clear, Focused, and Feasible Specific Aims

Winning proposals feature:

2–3 sharply defined aims.

Logical progression from Aim 1 → Aim 2 → Aim 3.

Realistic completion plan within 2–3 years.

Explicit milestones, outcomes, and go/no-go criteria.

Predictor: Focused, milestone-driven plans are rated highly in peer review.

5. High Innovation + High Impact (Dual Requirement)

Successful applications demonstrate both:

A clear innovative concept or approach, and

A realistic potential to shift the AD/ADRD research field.

Examples:

Novel biomarkers (blood, saliva, digital, retinal).

First-in-class targets (immunology, proteostasis therapies).

Precision medicine approaches.

AI/ML-based diagnostic or prediction tools.

Predictor: Innovation PLUS plausible translational impact.

6. Strong Mentorship & Institutional Environment (Critical for Early Career Awards)

For AARG, AACSF, AACSD:

Named mentors with strong, relevant AD expertise.

Clear training plan.

Institutional commitment letters ensuring protected time (e.g., 75%).

Access to core facilities (biostatistics, imaging, neuropathology, data science).

Predictor: Proposals with well-structured mentorship plans and protected research time score highest.

7. Rigor, Reproducibility, and Statistical Strength

High-scoring proposals include:

Power analyses and statistical approaches.

Transparent, reproducible methodology.

Risk mitigation strategies.

Predictor: Clear rigor and reproducibility (R&R) sections strengthen competitiveness.

8. Community, Diversity, and Inclusion Factors

The Alzheimer’s Association places strong emphasis on:

Recruitment of diverse participants (racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, rural/urban).

Workforce diversity (AACSD, AARG-D).

Community engagement strategies.

Predictor: Demonstrating a D&I plan that is concrete and feasible increases scoring in multiple programs.

9. Clear Translatability / Path to Impact

Even basic science applications are strengthened by:

A pathway toward clinical utility or human-relevant outcomes.

Plans to use human biospecimens, human iPSC models, or real-world cohorts.

Predictor: Reviewers favor projects with a visible path toward human impact.

10. Well-Structured, Persuasive Writing

Successful applicants consistently:

Use clear, concise, well-organized writing.

Highlight novelty and significance early in the application.

Address weaknesses up front (e.g., model limitations).

Predictor: High-scoring grants are polished, persuasive, and easy to follow.

🏆 Summary Table