Mary Beth Genter, PhD, DABT Chair, PNATF Marybeth.genter@uc

1. Professional Needs Assessment Task Force: Moving from Data Collection to Analysis and Recommendations Mary Beth Genter, PhD, DABT Chair, PNATF Marybeth.genter@uc.edu

2. Welcome!!!

3. Professional Needs Assessment Task Force (PNATF) • Appointed in 2008 • Charge: “To define key areas where the Society can assist members in addressing the long-term needs of theprofession” • Included in this charge: To identify and prioritize future training needs of Toxicologists, including continued training in the use of new technologies and knowledge bases” • Original Chair: Dr. Daniel Acosta, Jr. • Original/Previous TF members: Kerry Blanchard, Barbara Davis,Kevin Kerzee, Elaine Knight, Jim Lamb, Jim Popp; Larry Curtis, Patti Ganey (SOT Council Contacts)

4. Current TF members: • Dr. Gary Carlson (Purdue University) • Dr. Betty Eidemiller (SOT Staff Liaison, Data Task Force) • Dr. Mary Beth Genter (Univ. of Cincinnati) • Dr. Tom Kawabata (Pfizer, Inc.) • Dr. Kevin Kerzee (Battelle) • Ms. Marcia Lawson (SOT Staff Liaison) • Dr. Jim Popp (Stratoxon LLC) • Dr. Tim Reilly (Bristol-Myers Squibb Company) • Dr. Mari Stavanja (Celanese Corporation) • Dr. Mike Waalkes (NIEHS; Council Contact)

5. PNATF Goals • Professional Needs Assessment (PNA) Survey • Target: SOT Full, Associate, and Postdoctoral members • Developed in collaboration with Career Resource and Development, Continuing Education, Education, Membership, and Research Funding Committees • Survey design and execution were conducted in conjunction with the SOT Data Task Force • Was available for members to complete during October 2009 • Extensive data analysis was undertaken by TF and SOT Staff • Implementation of recommendations will occur in collaboration with the partners identified above • Job Market Outlook Survey

6. PNA Survey Results • Completed by 660 SOT members (14%) • Demographics *including military *including military

7. Additional Demographics

8. Survey Content • Survey covered broad topic areas: • Overview of Existing and Proposed SOT Programs • Professional Training/Development • Work and Life Balance • Future of Toxicology

9. Overview of Existing and Proposed SOT programs • 65% of respondents had attended at least three of the past 5 SOT meetings and 40% had taken at least 3 CE courses [31% had taken 0] • 41% had used the Job Bank; 50% had used data from the Triennial Salary Survey; only 7% had used Mentor Match • Degree of satisfaction in 13 areas of Professional Development were ranked as “adequate” or “inadequate” with regard to current needs and future needs

10. Match to current needs: Emerging areas coverage @ Ann Mtg 90% Networking opportunities @ Ann Mtg 90% Specialty Section activities 86% Job Bank: job search tools 84% SIG activities 83% Mentor Match mentoring opportunities 83% Applied toxicology at annual meeting 83% Job Bank: recruiting tools 82% MM: opportunities to be mentored 80% RC meetings 79% CE courses state of the art 72% Career developm’t sessions @ Ann Mtg 68% Web-based seminars 61% Match to future needs 86% 87% 81% 79% 82% 83% 78% 80% 79% 78% 65% 62% 57% Satisfaction with Professional Development Activities

11. Professional Training/Development • Desired content for CE Courses • Regulatory toxicology guidelines—where can one get the basics and how does one stay current? (64%, 338 of 524) • Development of new scientific and technical skills (63%, 328) • Maintenance of scientific and technical skills (53%, 276) • Global regulations (46%, 243) • Consulting opportunities (40%, 211) • Science writing (32%, 167) • Management skills (28%, 149) • Extensive suggestions were provided re: additional mechanisms for providing CE

12. Work and Life Balance • Survey respondents were asked how important it is for SOT to provide resources in the following areas (very important or somewhat important %) • Flexibility/adaptation (balancing work & family): 60% • Career progression throughout life: 88% • Career progression/geographic mobility: 78% • Retirement planning, health care, long-term care: 59%

13. Future of Toxicology • 17 choices: rank as Important, Somewhat Important or Not Important • Top 7 “Important” topics: • Integration of newer technologies into risk assessment • Issues related to genetic variability in humans that impact human risk assessment based on animal studies • Participation of toxicologists in translational research and medicine • Funding for toxicological research • Content of academic training programs—match to future workforce needs • The evolving paradigm of toxicology testing (based on the 2007 NAS report Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century) • Gene-environment interactions in humans and animal models

14. Future of Toxicology, con’t • Of the 17 topics listed, which THREE are of greatest importance to the future of toxicology?

15. Recommendations based on PNA Survey Results • Need for SOT to routinely evaluate and prioritize career development activities to best meet the needs in the shifting marketplace • SOT leadership should review PNATF suggestions to reinvigorate and align programmatic activities relative to current and future SOT Member needs • Membership should be made more aware of valuable but under-utilized resources, such as Mentor Match • SOT should work with other societies and disciplines to enhance training of toxicologists • SOT should carefully monitor and prioritize what is cutting edge in “career development” • SOT needs to provide an increased understanding of the global marketplace and employment opportunities • SOT should consider presenting both scientific and professional development CE opportunities in a variety of venues and formats • SOT should consider re-energizing some Regional Chapters and making some RC programs available to the membership at-large.

16. Job Outlook Survey • Rationale: Last SOT Job Market survey was conducted in 1996 • Rationale: Resources such as the US BioScience Sector 2010 Report (Venn Research) and Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010 (11th Ed) contain projections about hiring in the life sciences, but not specifically toxicologists • Strategy: Target “hiring managers” to learn about projected trends over the next 3-5 years • All job sectors targeted • US as well as international employers • Questions focused on projected increases or contraction in hiring of toxicologists globally AND the specific experience and skill sets that would be desired in newly-hired toxicologists

17. Job Outlook Survey • Ongoing; first wave of requests to complete survey went out in January 2011 • Most sectors are hesitant to complete survey given uncertain economic times • Government unable to make projections—recent Congressional activities may affect hiring in unanticipated ways • Provided no data; referred us to Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010 (11th Ed) • Best response so far: US academic sector

18. Academic Sector Responses • 16 academic institutions responded to survey • Predictions for academia • ~109 new hires anticipated in the next 3-5 years • Most at the “general toxicology, early career” and “general toxicology, experienced ” level • i.e. employers are not seeking to hire toxicologists with specialized credentials/experience • 26 positions are anticipated to open because of retirements • ~15 positions will be lost due to planned reductions in slots

19. In Summary…….. • PNA Survey was a success, in that the response rate (14%) is considered acceptable, and robust data were obtained, especially via the free text fields • The work of the TF will conclude effective May 2012, so plans to implement suggestions and further evaluate data will be handed over to SOT Standing Committees. • Job Outlook Survey was more problematic, in that finding the ‘right person’ within an organization was not straightforward and employers were hesitant to complete the survey due to uncertain economic times