Transcript Preparation of a Competitive Research Training/Student

MARC Technical
Assistance Workshop:
Friday, February 1, 2008
MORE Division, NIGMS, NIH, DHHS
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
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
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.
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 a weakness 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
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
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

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.
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.
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
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
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
Lessons Learned
and “10 Must Haves”
“10 MUST Haves”
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
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
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
2. Institutional Past Training Record

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
Sample Table for T2 applications
MARC PROGRAM CUMULATIVE REPORT
Outcomes
Progress Report
Current
Non-Competing Continuation
Reporting
Period
YR1
Number of trainees slots awarded:
Number of trainees appointed: Junior
Number of trainees appointed: Senior
Number of trainees graduating with BS or BA:
Number of trainees enrolled in Ph.D programs:
Number of trainees enrolled in MD/Ph.D programs:
Number of trainees enrolled in MD programs:
Number of trainees enrolled in MS programs:
Number of trainees in post-bacc programs:
Number of trainees in other professional degree:
Number of trainees in teaching positions:
Number of publications by MARC trainees:
YR2
YR3
YR4
YR5
2006-2007
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)
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
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
CAGT
https://cagt.nigms.nih.gov/
6. Recruitment & Student Dev. Plan

Recruitment and development plan for
enhancing the pool of potential trainees
(prefreshmen, freshmen, &
sophomores)

A plan for trainee selection
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
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 scientific integrity, it is also beneficial to discuss
the relationship and the specific responsibilities of
the institution and the graduate students or postdoctorates appointed to the program”
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
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)
Training Related Expenses




Activities to strengthen the pool: prefreshmen, freshmen, & sophomores
e.g., curriculum improvement
Costs for workshops for faculty
development
Evaluation
Workshops to improve student critical
thinking skills
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)
Preparation of a MARCUSTAR Training Grant
Application
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
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)
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

Needs and Rationale
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?
Needs Statement

What Exists Now

What Should Be

What Is

What Ought to Be

Present Level of
Knowledge or
Capacity

Desired State of
Knowledge or
Capacity
Needs Statement


The needs statement is the
difference between what is and what
should be.
What your program will do to close
this gap.
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.
Proposal
Development
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
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
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)
Specific Goals and
Measurable Objectives
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
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
Data
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
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
The Training Plan
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.
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
The Plan: Summary





Use plain English
Be convincing
List intellectual and physical resources
Provide a timeline for implementations
The proposal should flow logically from
section to section, i.e. activities = logical
extensions of specific goals/measurable
objectives
Evaluation and
Administration of the
Program
Evaluation



How will you measure the effectiveness of
each activity?
How will you know if you have achieved your
objectives?
How will you know if you need to make
programmatic changes?
Reviewers Need to Know the Answers!!
Evaluation





Describe how you will monitor progress during the
grant period (formative evaluation)
Describe how you will measure institutional impact
(summative evaluation)
Data can be both quantitative or qualitative
Provide examples of tools for data collection and
analysis
Provide credentials of evaluators
Evaluation should inform the institution’s
administration
Administration
Program Director


Choose an outstanding leader, educator,
and scientist
Must work well with students, faculty, and
the administration
Clearly explain the role of the Program
Director
Administration
Advisory committee:



Not required but highly recommended
Possible roles include program direction, selection
of students and faculty mentors, preparing the
application
Define the role(s) of the committee clearly
Trainers, mentors,& other key personnel:


Define the roles clearly
Provide credentials
Other Parts of the Application





Title Page
Description of the Proposal (Abstract)
Budget
Biographical Sketch of key personnel
Institutional Resources
Description


Write the narrative for the
description last – it details and
summarizes the objectives, rationale,
the plan and the anticipated outcomes
It should be succinct and motivatingmost often it is the first section to
be read, and is also the most often
read section of a proposal
Budget





Should never drive the proposal
Justify all personnel with respect to effort
and expertise
Any equipment request must be congruent
with the resource statement and must stem
from the proposed activities
Faculty mentoring is an unallowable cost
JUSTIFY, JUSTIFY, JUSTIFY
Biographical Sketches



Document credentials accurately
Document aspects of training and
expertise that are relevant to the
application
Include only relevant and full citations
in the bibliography
Reasons for Failure
Common Reasons for Failure

Failure to use your resources wisely
If the institution has limited or no research capacity, don’t
propose to put students in research labs on your campus.
Find alternatives

Lack of clear and well-defined measurable
objectives
“Having a seminar series” is not a measurable objective and
neither is “creating an atmosphere of science”

Missing or inadequate baseline data
Reviewers need to know your starting point and what will
change as a result of your proposed program
Common Reasons for Failure





Activities poorly related to the objectives
Poorly developed or missing evaluation data
Lack of institutional commitment or support
Lack of coordination with other programs at
the institution aimed at accomplishing similar
goals
“Program-centric” application vs. institutional
application
What Reviewers
Seek…
“10 MUST Haves”










Institutional Setting
Institutional Past Training Record
Institutional Commitment
Program Director
Research Training Environment (mentors)
Recruitment & Student Development Plan
Skills Development Pre-MARC
Skills Development MARC
Responsible Conduct of Research Training
Evaluation and Tracking
Questions and Answers