This study investigated the factors that shape the broader impacts activities of NSF grant recipients. A random sample of NSF grantees was surveyed about the type and quality of their broader impacts activities, their views on knowledge production and the democratization of science, their experience and training, and the existence of a supportive climate and resources for community engagement at their home institutions. Respondents indicated that they shared an orientation towards knowledge production that was more democratic than technocratic and valued public engagement in science; that they had adequate experience but little training in community engaged activities and lacked confidence in their ability to evaluate such work; that executive leaders at their institutions encouraged community engagement but promotion and tenure policies did not recognize such activities; and that they had little access to training, funding, or infrastructure to support community engaged activities. A multinomial logistic regression showed that faculty expertise, available resources, and academic discipline were the strongest predictors of type of broader impacts activity (p < 0.001). A multiple regression analysis revealed that faculty expertise, a democratic orientation towards knowledge production, and a supportive climate were the strongest predictors of quality of broader impacts activity (p < 0.001).