MARC Technical Assistance Workshop:

1. MARC Technical Assistance Workshop: Friday, February 1, 2008 MORE Division, NIGMS, NIH, DHHS

2. OVERVIEW The MARC program is an INSTITUTIONAL research training program that provides an opportunity to develop the research and academic skills of students and training capabilities of the applicant institution

3. Case Study Instructions • Write down 2-3 specific objectives for your proposed program (4 mins) • Read Case Study 1 Discuss in groups for 20 min. List : • Strengths • Weaknesses • Gaps • Recommendations • General discussion of Case Study 1 • Read Case Study 2 Discuss in groups for 20 min. List: • Strengths • Weaknesses • Gaps • Recommendations • General Discussion of Case Study 2

4. CASE STUDY I Whowahr U (WU) is a moderate sized liberal arts college with a student population that is 85% underrepresented minority (43% African American, 40% Hispanic, 2% Native American, 10% Asian and 5% Caucasian). WU enrolls 1100 students that express an interest in the sciences, (Chemistry, Biology, Physics and Computer Science). The number of BA degrees awarded by the combined departments has averaged 95 per year for the past five years. On average, 2 alumni per year graduate with a PhD from prestigious universities around the country. Under a new Dean of Science, who is the PI of the application, the college plans to improve its reputation as a scholarly institution. Faculty will be judged on their scholarly productivity as well as their teaching. The faculty are interested in research but their current teaching workload limits their time for research. The Dean would like the college to become more selective, have a better graduation rate, and send more students on to post graduate training. WU proposes to use a MARC U*STAR program to motivate student interest and preparation for research careers. Having a MARC program will provide financial support that will help the college recruit stronger students. The specific objectives of the proposed MARC program are to: • Support 6 juniors and 6 senior honors students with stipends and a strong research experience with college faculty who are outstanding mentors. • Provide the students with mentored research experiences at intramural and extramural sites. • Provide an enriched curriculum with an interdisciplinary strength in the neurosciences with special MARC courses developed for MARC trainees. • Expose the MARC Trainees to role models and career guidance through a seminar series. • At least 33% of the MARC graduates will enroll in graduate school and go on to receive a PhD.

5. Case Study 1: Strengths • Large URM pool (in ALL science fields? Honors?) • Institutional commitment (really only from new dean not others) • Supportive Admin • Measurable and doable objectives (too low- really not an increase from current outcomes? Not objectives at all, really activities) • Special courses for MARC students (actually is aweakness focus only on MARC not all science students = institutional) • Data Tracking (actually this is thin; PA requires 10 years) • Faculty interest in research (not really - heavy teaching loads) • Program as indirect recruiting tool (in some ways, having MARC program to attract ‘good’ students to institution, but not for added financial assistance and out recruiting of other schools; national need) • Increased scholarly production

6. Case Study 1: Weaknesses • High teaching load – (perhaps if propose academic year, intramural research) • Program goals will not increase #URM PhDs • # students supported not equal to # of interested students • Student interest beyond neuroscience • No documentation of student PhD #s • Persistence in science questionable • Some “objectives” are not really objectives • No pre-MARC activities • Lack of support for faculty research • Lack of data for diversity (student body) • Institutional commitment not documented • No documentation of mentor credentials • Exclusivity of MARC courses • No data on research infrastructure

7. Case Study 1: Gaps • Budget • No info on faculty strengths • No info on institutional support plan • No overall plan of action • Limited baseline data presented • Training on RCR missing • Disconnect between interest in research and research active faculty

8. Recommendations • Provide release time for faculty to do research • Redesign the curriculum; and release time for faculty to do this • Targeted faculty hires by dean • Better tracking system – data by majors • Apply for faculty development grants • Needs statement (quantifiable) • Plan for interest/encouragement in biomed. Res.

9. CASE STUDY II Whatsa Matter U. (WMU) is a major research institution offering both undergraduate and graduate programs. WMU enrolls close to 15,000 students. Its student profile is 15% Hispanic, 13% African American, 10% Hawaiian and/or Samoan, 20% Asian American, 40% Caucasian non-Hispanic, and 2% foreign students with visas. The university student body includes 1% students with disabilities, 65% female and 35% males. The academic departments in science include the traditional science departments (biology, chemistry and physics) and social behavioral sciences (psychology, anthropology) as well as a school of engineering, a law school, a school of medicine, and a school of public health. The faculty in these areas is funded by several government agencies and foundations such as Kellogg and Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI). The institution’s portfolio of student development programs includes: STEP, Louis Strokes Alliance for Minority Participation, IGERT and GK12 Programs from the NSF, undergraduate and graduate HHMI programs, a Bridges to the Doctorate Program, an IMSD Program from MORE, and five (5) Training grants from NIGMS. ZU students have also the opportunity to compete for EPA, NASA and USDA fellowships on a regular basis. Most the researchers that have R01 type funding also include the students as research associates. Whatsa Matter U science students complete the undergraduate degree in approximately five years. WMU annually graduates approximately 1,800 students of which 5% are science undergraduate majors and 8% are science doctorates. WMU graduates 2% underrepresented students at the undergraduate level and 1 % of them pursued or are pursuing PhD degrees in sciences. At the graduate level, Whatsa Matter U awards 0.5% doctorates in science to minorities and foreign students.

10. CASE Study 2: Strengths Strengths • Provides research training on campus • Students included in research • A lot of resources • Other URM student develop programs • Highly diverse student pop • Active grants office • Institutional data provided • Active research faculty • Time to degree is good • Large doctoral enrollment at instiutiton

11. Case 2: Weaknesses • No objectives; no outcomes • Pipeline loss • Lack of data • Poor URM graduation rates/pipeline loss • No PROGRAM structure • No evaluation • Low URM science pool • No data on curriculum

12. CASE Study 2 Gaps • No program Recommendations • Focus on retention • Gather baseline data and do an analysis/assess Provide info on program synergy with other student development programs on campus • Address faculty diversity

13. Lessons Learned and “10 Must Haves”

14. “10 MUST Haves” • Institutional Setting • Institutional Past Training Record • Institutional Commitment • Program Director • Research Training Environment • Recruitment & Student Development Plan • Skills Development Pre-MARC • Skills Development MARC • Responsible Conduct of Research Training • Evaluation and Tracking

15. 1. Institutional Setting (baseline data) ALL URMs of Participating Departments • #URMs in science departments • # of honors URMs • # of junior/senior honors URMs • # URMs graduating per year • # URMs enrolled in PhD or MD/PhD • # URMs enrolled in MD/other professional • # URMs enrolled in postbacc

16. New (T1) and Competing Renewal (T2) MARC Applicants must describe the past 5 year record of institution in sending URMs to science PhD programs Competing Renewal (T2) MARC Applicants must also describe MARC alumni outcomes (sample table provided) 2. Institutional Past Training Record

17. 2. Institutional Past Training RecordSample Table for T2 applications

18. 3. Institutional Commitment Documented commitment to proposed research training program’s goals and assurance that the institution intends the MARC program to be an integral part of its research and research training endeavor (financial or otherwise)

19. 4. Program Director • Must be a full-time faculty or administrator • Posses scientific background, leadership, and research training experience and administrative capabilities • Responsible for the overall direction, management, administration, and evaluation of the program

20. 5. Research Training Environment • Extramural research – summer requirement at T32 or like institution required • Intramural research if research intensive (RI) environment with active research faculty OR partnerships w/nearby RI (T32) institutions and/or “Research Classroom” training http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Training/MARC/USTARAwards.htm

21. CAGThttps://cagt.nigms.nih.gov/

22. 6. Recruitment & Student Dev. Plan • Recruitment and development plan for enhancing the pool of potential trainees (prefreshmen, freshmen, & sophomores) • A plan for trainee selection

23. 7. Skills Development Pre-MARC Program must develop the skills of pre-trainees (pre-freshmen, freshmen, sophomores) via workshops, etc. 8. Skills Development MARC trainees Program must develop the skills of MARC trainees: research, critical thinking, communication, & career guidance

24. 9. Responsible Conduct of Research • RCR training is expected for MARC trainees • “NIH does not establish specific curricula or formal requirements, all programs are encouraged to consider instruction in the following areas: conflict of interest, responsible authorship, policies for handling misconduct, data management, data sharing, and policies regarding the use of human and animal subjects. Within the context of training in scientificintegrity, it is also beneficial to discuss the relationship and the specific responsibilities of the institution and the graduate students or post-doctorates appointed to the program”

25. 10. Evaluation and Tracking • Evaluation should be for your institution, not for NIH • Evaluation that’s in-line with measurable goals and objectives - - Did you get expected outcomes? If not, what would you change? • Tracking - 10 year tracking system to follow MARC trainee alumni

26. Budget • No cap 5 year grant • Allowable Costs: - Stipends (~11 K/yr), partial tuition & fees - Trainee travel (mtgs and summer research) - Summer per diem ($931/mo. + travel)

27. Training Related Expenses • Activities to strengthen the pool: pre-freshmen, freshmen, & sophomores e.g., curriculum improvement • Costs for workshops for faculty development • Evaluation • Workshops to improve student critical thinking skills

28. Unallowable Costs • Stipends to pre-trainees • Funds to support more than awarded number of trainees • Recruitment activities • Faculty research • Faculty payment for mentoring • Workshops for specific tests (GRE)

29. Preparation of a MARC-USTAR Training Grant Application

30. Overview of the MARC Program The MARC program is an INSTITUTIONAL research training program that provides an opportunity to develop the applicant institution. The program emphasizes: • Institutional impact/improvement • Curricular reform (quantitative sciences) • Activities that increase the development of students in preparation for research careers • Summer research internships at research intensive institutions

31. Program Expectations • Increase in the baccalaureate retention rate as a result of pre-MARC training • Increase in the graduation rate of URM students from MARC supported schools • Increase in the number of URM students, both from the program and the institution, that obtain BS degrees and enroll in Ph.D. programs (institutional impact)

32. PROGRAM EXPECTATIONS • Increased academic preparation as a result of interdisciplinary instruction in the quantitative sciences to teach about biological phenomena. • Increased collaboration between MARC supported institutions and research intensive institutions • Exposure of MARC trainees to research during the academic year

33. Needs and Rationale

34. Need a Good Plan • Conduct a self analysis and gather baseline data!! • What are the institutional needs? • What is your long range goal? • What are your specific goals and measurable objectives? • What activities will help your institution achieve these objectives?

35. What Exists Now What Is Present Level of Knowledge or Capacity What Should Be What Ought to Be Desired State of Knowledge or Capacity Needs Statement

36. Needs Statement • The needs statement is the difference between what is and what should be. • What your program will do to close this gap.

37. Rationale • Describe the problem or need • Explain the program’s long range goal • Identify institutional commitment • Put the program in context of institutional needs/program objectives (e.g. student retention, scholastic achievement/GPA/GRE scores, interest in research) • Review relevant literature that underlies your plan.

38. Proposal Development

39. Important Steps in Preparing a Competitive Grant Application • read the program announcement carefully • Read the Program Announcement Carefully • READ THE PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT CAREFULLY • Read the correct program announcement (know the right program) • Read the most current program announcement • Read all of the instructions in the program announcement • FOLLOW all of the instructions in the program announcement

40. Sequence of Proposal Topics for Reading • Title Page and Abstract (Description) • Specific goals and measurable objectives • Institutional background and need • Rationale for literature review • Progress report (competing renewals) • Administration of the program • Plans to achieve objectives/activities • Evaluation Plan • Budget

41. Sequence of Topics for Proposal Development • Needs statement • Rationale and literature review • Specific measurable goals and objectives vis a vis current institutional productivity • Plans to achieve measurable goals and objectives • Evaluation Plan • Progress Report • Administration, budget, and biographic sketches • Budget • Description (Abstract)

42. Specific Goals and Measurable Objectives

43. Specific Goals & Measurable Objectives • State the long range goal of the program • State each specific goal or measurable objective, and state how it is connected to the long range goal • Be brief and focused

44. Objectives Achieved Through Activities Restate each objective and describe: • The intervention activities to achieve each objective • The anticipated impact of each activity • Who will implement the plan • Possible pitfalls and solutions • Alternative approaches • Timeline for interventions

45. Data

46. Presentation of Data • Present data in figures, graphs, tables, or text • Place figures, tables, and graphs close to where they are referred to in the text • Make all figures, tables, and graphs clearly legible • Make a SINGLE point with each figure, graph, or table • Avoid irrelevant information

47. Progress Report(for competing renewals) • Analysis of data on student performance • Highlights of specific achievements • Explanation for not meeting previous aims or measureable objectives. • Explanation for changes in the plan

48. The Training Plan

49. The Plan: Summary • Make sure the long range goal is clear • Specific goals and measurable objectives are statements of end results. They are not a means to an end. • The activities proposed are the means to achieve your specific goals and measureable objectives.

50. The Plan: Summary • Clearly explain the need • Provide baseline data • Explain the rationale for objectives and activities • Cite literature to support your choices • Consider alternative approaches or strategies