1. Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI) Oversight Committee Report 2013 Jose Romero, PhD Shirley A. Blanchard, PhD Virginia Sarapura, MD

2. Jose Oversight Committee Membership 1. Requires 10 members from various constituencies of NMRI 2. Members serve a two year term except Ad Hoc 3. Terms are staggered so that 50 percent of members rotate off at the end of each year 4. If insufficient nominees members may continue 5. Staff and Ad Hoc members remain on the committee Terms congruent with Planning Committee membership: Chair serves four years for continuity A. 1 Year as Chair elect B. 2 years as Chair C. 1 year as past Chair Chair and chair elect appointed by committee members Chair is in second year and the chair elect is in his/her first year 2Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

3. Oversight Committee Members Chair Jose Romero, PhD- Harvard Medical School, Boston 2012-2013 Chair Elect Lewis Roberts, M.D., PhD, - 2012 Past Chair, Charmaine Stewart, M.D. -University of Minnesota 9/11 -4/12 2013 Past Chair Elect - Daisy DeLeon, Ph.D - Loma Linda University 2010 - 2012 Past Chair - Shirley Blanchard, Ph.D - Creighton University 2008 – 2010 Past Chair – Virginia Sarapura, M.D. - University of Colorado 2006- 2008 Members:Ad Hoc Members Leonor Corsino, MD, 2012-2014Shirley Blanchard Danita Eatman, PhD, 2011-2013Virginia Sarpura Robert Ferry, Jr., MD, 2012-2014 Cynthia Ann Jackson, PhD, 2012-2014 Myra Kleinpeter, MD, MPH, 2011-2013 Lewis Roberts, MD, Ph.D – Mayo Clinic Omaima Sabek, PhD, 2011-2013 Marion Sewer, PhD, 2012-2014 3Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

4. Oversight Committee Meetings: 1.Convene by conference call every three months 2.The fourth meeting coincides with the annual meeting 4Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

5. NMRI Organizational Statement 1. Facilitate the development of active mentoring between senior and junior members A. Based on research /professional interest / goals B. Match mentors /mentees 2. Facilitate outreach – identify & recruit new members 3. Retention of NMRI members A. Communicate the accomplishments of NMRI members 4. Determine program effectiveness by evaluating success in grant funding, promotions, tenure, leadership and teaching. 5. Coordinate with professional societies for support of the regional and annual meetings 5Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

6. Committee Goals April 2009 Shirley +Achieved 1.Monitor the formalized mentoring program for member career development 2.Identify specific learning activities 3.Post program evaluation questionnaire on the website (track outcomes) 4.Construct and refine the mentee/mentor form 5.Post mentor/mentee forms on the NMRI website (completed by Darrell Anderson) 6.Update data base and assign mentors to mentees at 2009 annual meeting (Virginia) 7.Schedule a focus group to brainstorm how to recruit and retain members (initial and new) 6Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

7. Committee Goals April 2010 1.Monitor formalized mentoring program for member career development 2.Identify specific learning activities 3.Schedule a focus group to brainstorm how to recruit and retain members 4. Design DVD for recruiting new members A. Attendees to 2010 / 2011 sign consent to have picture displayed on NMRI website B. Use brief snippets from conference attendees to advertise NMRI C. Post video on NMRI website 7Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

8. Mentee / Mentor Form posted NMRI website 1.Mentee constructs an educational objective for the year 2.Mentee and mentor agree to four communications in current year to determine progress towards the objective 3.At the end of the year (at the annual meeting) mentee and mentor meet during scheduled time to review progress 8Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

9. Program Evaluation Results April Survey – 23 questions 28 respondents (2009) Results of Academic Status: Post doc – 3 (10%) Instructor – 2 (7%) Research Assistant – 1 (4%) Assistant Professor – 13 (46%) Associate Professor – 5 (18%) Professor – 2 (7%) Division Chief – 1 (4%) Missing – 1 – (4%) Survey – 24 questions 111 Respondents (2010) Results of Academic Status Assistant Professor – 51 (45.9%) Associate Professor – 23 (20.7%) Professor – 7 (6.3%) Instructor – 4 (3.6%) Missing – 26 – (23.4%) 9Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

10. Tenured 2009 n=28 20 not tenured (71%) 8 tenured (29%) 2010 Yes 22 – (32.8%) No – 82 – (70.8%) No response – 7 (12.5%) 10Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

11. N=28 first year attending NMRI 2009 2008 - 9 2007 - 2 2006 - 4 2005 - 2 2004 - 5 2003 - 2 2002 - 4 28/7 = average attendance of 4 times 2010 n=111 Attended some of the meetings - 82 (73.9%) Attended all -11 (9.9%) No answer -18 (16.2%) 11Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

12. What motivates you to attend NMRI? 2009 1.Professional mentorship – 23 2.Enhance grant writing skills - 21 3.Research opportunities – 18 4.Assistance in developing management skills-14 5.Continuing education – 13 6.Assistance in applying for tenure – 10 7.Oral presentation 8.Poster presentation 9.Prerequisite for tenure 10.Other – meet researchers with similar interest 2010 1.Professional mentorship – 81 (73%) 2.Research opportunities – 76 (68.5%) 3.Enhance grant writing skills - 72 (64.9%) 4.Assistance in developing management skills- 56 (50.5%) 5.Continuing education – 41 (36.9%) 6.Poster Presentation – 34 (30.6%) 7.Oral Presentation 14 (12.6%) 8.Assistance in applying for tenure – 20 (18%) 9.Prerequisite for tenure -6 (9%) 10.Mentoring junior faculty 2 (3%) 12Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

13. How has NMRI helped with career development and mentoring? 2009 Grant study sections: -Exposed me to grant writing & review process Career development: networking (most common answer)networking (most common answer) knowing peers who experience the same challenges of being an underrepresented researcherknowing peers who experience the same challenges of being an underrepresented researcher helped in focusing on the prerequisites for success in building a portfolio for promotionhelped in focusing on the prerequisites for success in building a portfolio for promotion helped me stay in contact with other minority fellowshelped me stay in contact with other minority fellows It encouraged me to continue looking for a path that would re- engage me in researchIt encouraged me to continue looking for a path that would re- engage me in research 13Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

14. How has NMRI helped with career development and mentoring? Career development: 2010 - interact with administrators; stay current in NIH policies -mentoring undergraduate researchers -learn how to manage a laboratory -manage staff and conflicts in the lab -job negotiation, options, planning -requirements for promotion and tenure; realistic view -continuing education -best practice to succeed as a minority investigator -submit focused grant applications 14Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

15. How has NMRI helped with career development and mentoring? Mentorship 2009 -collaboration -provide national exposure -brainstorming research ideas -positive environment for review of posters -interaction with colleagues in different fields -”not alone” others with a similar background have persevered and succeeded Mentorship 2010 Mentorship opportunities “Massive help while I was applying for faculty position. I had made some unforgivable errors in my first series of interviews. Some of the senior fellows at the NMRI corrected my interview style and were helpful in the next series. I am now an Assistant Professor.” 15Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

16. How has NMRI helped with career development and mentoring? 2010 Continued 1.Form collaborations / network / mentorship with other investigators 2.Understand how research protocols are developed 3.Opportunity to discuss criteria for submitting research for publication 4.Mock grant review session 5.Exposure to colleagues in clinical research 6.Learn how to be an independent researcher 7.Opportunity for scientific presentation 8.Suggestions for how to manage conflict in the work place “First time I saw there was a slew of people like me. Made me feel less alone. Good role models of success in academia.” 16Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

17. How has NMRI contributed to supporting your tenure process? Build track record of scholarship and service for tenure 2010 Letter from NMRI Mentoring during junior faculty years Being a member NMRI Keep focus on research and not just teaching Informed me about the process Professional membership at a national level Development as an academic scientist 17Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

18. Scale 1-10Rate Professional Development /NMRI 2009 2010 16 respondents (57%) Total score 118/16 = 7.4 / 10 12 no rating (43%) One comment – “attended too few meetings” 13 – 10 (11.7%) 59.4% 16 – 9 (14.4%) 37 – 8 (33.3%) 18 – 7 (16.2%) 4 – 6 (3.6%) 8 – 5 (7.2%) 27% 1- 3 (0.9%) Total 763/93 or 8.20 18Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

19. Mentorship 2009 Are you willing to be a mentor? Yes - 21 (75%) No – 7 (25%) Are you interested in having an NMRI member as a mentor? Yes – 24 (86%) No – 4 (14%) 2010 Are you willing to be a mentor? Yes - 73 (65.8%) No - 25 (22.5%) 13 – no answer (11.7%) Are you interested in having an NMRI member as a mentor? Yes – 68 (61.3%) No – 30 (27%) No answer – 13 (11.7%) 19Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

20. Research topics identified for mentorship Disparities Research & Clinical Research 1.Chronic kidney disease 2.Dialysis timing and modality 3.Clinical nephrology 4.Hypertension & vascular stiffness 5.Obesity; bariatrics; minimally invasive sx 6.Apoptosis; colon cancer (ionizing radiation) 7.Diabetic kidney disease 8.Gene targeting/mouse physiology 9.Metabolic systems; regulation of energy 20Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

21. Research topics identified for mentorship 2009: Stress and disease Aging nutrition and physical activity Preparing a dossier for tenure & promotion Professional ethics in the biosciences Pediatric gastroenterology; short bowel syndrome Inflammatory bowel disease Neonatal nutrition Adipose tissue biology Sickle cell anemia Pain research Identifying an independent research project Managing a research lab Mixed methods research (qualitative & quantitative research) Cultural and linguistic competence in health care interactions 2010 Grant writing Community based participatory research/Translational Research How to mentor graduate students How to organize and implement clinical research Bioinformatics How to become a journal reviewer How to achieve a national reputation 21Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

22. Which area do you need the most assistance? 20092010 1.Develop research idea – 7 2.Grant writing – 5 3.Health disparities – 5 4.Develop collaborative skills – 4 5.Manuscript writing- 3 6.Lab management - 3 7.Design a clinical trial - 3 8.Data analysis - 2 9.Oral presentation skills - 1 10.Balance research, family, time -1 11.Develop a budget – 1 12.In vivo methodology – 1 1. Diabetes research - 16 2. Grant writing – 12 3. Kidney disease – 6 4. Health disparities - 6 5. Design clinical trial – 4 6. Journal reviewer – 4 7. How to use NIH resources – 3 8. Animal models -1 9. Time management - 1 22Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

23. Presentations - 2010 Oral/ Podium/ Poster 111/50 = 2.2 average number of oral presentations 23Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

24. Total Grants Submitted 2009 57/28: submitted an average of 2 grants per respondent 2010 61 grants submitted by 41 or 1.5 per person Funded 16 24Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

25. Academic Status 2011-2012 (n=44) Faculty Member – 32 (32.7%) Post doc – 7 (15.9%) Researcher – 2 (4.5%) Student – 2 (4.5%) Professor – 1 (3.2%) Assistant Professor – 22 (68.6%) Associate Professor – 8 (25%) Instructor – 1 (3.2%) N=41 Tenured – 7 (15.9%) Non Tenured – 34 (77.3%) Motivation to Attend Professional mentorship Research Opportunities Enhance grant writing Develop management skills Continuing education Poster presentation Assistance in applying for tenure Blanchard & Sarapura 201325

26. 2011-2012 Career Development Networking Research opportunities Career development Areas for Assistance Diabetes research Kidney disease Health disparities Nutrition and obesity Bioinformatics Scale of 1-10 professional growth n=44 8.1 /10 Are you willing to be a mentor? Yes – 34 (77.3%) No – 9 (20.5%) No answer 1 (2.2%) Blanchard & Sarapura 201326

27. 2011-2012 Presentations 71 grants submitted by 37 members Average of 1.9 grants per respondent 32 grants were funded Oral and poster presentations total 180 from 44 members = average of 4 per respondent 2009 average 2 grants per participant 2010 average 1.5 submitted (16 funded) 2011-2012 1.9 submitted (32 funded) Blanchard & Sarapura 201327

28. 2013 Rank and Income Rank n=34 22 (64.7%) Assistant Professor 8 ( 23.53%) Associate 1 – Professor 2 – post doc 1 - instructor Income n=31 Range $53K-$325K Average income $115,161 Blanchard & Sarapura 201328

29. Research Interests Diabetes Obesity (adult and childhood) Cardiovascular risk factors ERSD Health Disparities Vitamin d and obesity Obesity and physical activity Blanchard & Sarapura 201329

30. Expectations NMRI Members 1.Consistent reporting of publications, presentations, grants, tenure and promotion (Complete survey at NMRI website) 2. Complete post program evaluations 3.Recruit one or more new members per year 4.Contact at least one organization or society to support NMRI 30Blanchard & Sarapura 2013

31. 2013-2014 Directions Jose 1.Mentorship 2.Membership retention 3.Funding 4.Metrics for the success of NMRI 5.Program Evaluation 31Blanchard & Sarapura 2013