"The Hewlett Foundation’s decision to add a focus on disinformation to its 2017 US Democracy strategy was motivated by a desire to figure out how best to encourage social media platforms to reduce polarization exacerbated by disinformation.1 The foundation invested in two major efforts to support this ambition: a multi-funder partnership with Facebook to create data access for independent researchers to study the impact of social media on democracy and elections; and a grant making portfolio conceived to build an academic field to deepen the understanding of disinformation and identify policy solutions that mitigate its spread and impact on society . We found compelling the suggestion that disinformation is better considered a topic than a coherent field, and that multi-disciplinarity brings richness in framing, methods, and applications. Among Hewlett grantees, scholars self-identify as members of different fields that carry with them important epistemological and philosophical differences. We found evidence that there are perceived gaps between researchers, platforms, journalists, policy makers, civil society and others that obstruct the development of policy solutions. The missing competency among many academics to translate research findings for use, and of the need for tighter connections between scholars and decision makers were additional insights we gained about important gaps in the current landscape. During the two-year grantmaking period, the disinformation portfolio invested in varied policy and academic institutions and supported a diverse group of principal investigators. This is in contrast to the perceptions we heard about the foundation’s lack of a diverse grantee portfolio and approach. We learned from key informants and secondary research that there is an inextricable link between disinformation, racial and social equity and justice. A stronger communication strategy about the foundation team’s approach to diversity, equity and inclusion is warranted, as is a deliberate effort to showcase the work of all their grantees and their distinct perspectives. The foundation’s significant role in creating momentum for this body of work was widely noted, as was the need for continued leadership and support." (Executive summary, page 2-3)