Transcript GEA Grant Program

GEA NATIONAL GRANT
PROGRAM
Sebastian Uijtdehaage, PhD
Maria Blanco, EdD
SDRME Summer Meeting
Charleston, SC
June 23, 2014
Objectives
Step back process:
• 10 minutes: brief description of the GEA Grant Program and
summary of the 2014 submissions
• 5 minutes: clarify questions
• 20 minutes: Seek the group’s consultation on program
challenges
• 5 minutes: Debrief
Program aims
• Develop community of scholars
• Advance medical education research and innovation
• Foster collaborations among GEA sections, regions,
schools, professions, departments
Available Funds: $10,000
Developed/administered by MESRE
GEA National Grant Committee
• Sebastian Uijtdehaage
• Maria Blanco
• Karen Szauter
• Sara Kim
• Janet Riddle
• Scott Cottrell
• Steve Durning
Charge:
• Develop RFP
• Develop/administer review process
• Make funding decision
Target areas in RFP
• Implications across the training continuum of the transition
to accountable care in general, and the implementation of
the Affordable Care Act in particular.
• Innovations in faculty development.
• Inter-professional education.
• Curricular innovations (competency-based education,
EPAs, milestones, creative approaches to delivery of
education-flipped classroom, MOOCs, simulations, etc).
Submission process
Pre-proposals (3 pages)
1.
Lit review
2.
Conceptual framework
3.
Study objectives and research
question/hypothesis
62
4.
Methods
5.
Anticipated outcomes
6.
Total funds requested and
preliminary budget breakdown
7.
Qualifications of research team
8.
References
Full proposals
(5 pages)
• Budget
justification
• Power analysis
4
• Bio sketches
• Letters of
support
Number of submissions per region
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
NEGEA
SGEA
CGEA
WGEA
Common themes
Type of Proposal
Type of Proposal
Research
(N=16)
26%
Innovation
(N=45)
74%
What GEA section was targeted?
Combination
13%
Unclear
9%
UGME
42%
CME
12%
GME
24%
Type of Collaboration
Interdisciplinary
7%
Interinstitutional
13%
None
37%
Inter-regional
23%
Interprofessional
20%
GEA Grant Program: your input
• How should we evaluate the impact of the program?
• What should be the future direction of program in terms
of:
• Target topics
• Type of submission (research vs. innovation)
• How can we increase funds?
• How can we further develop program?
CLARIFYING QUESTIONS?