OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Women and healthcare providers from underserved rural and urban communities participated in Community Engagement (CE) studios to offer perspectives for increasing research participation of women from diverse backgrounds prior to initiating recruitment for a randomized-controlled trial comparing treatments for urgency urinary incontinence. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: CE studios are listening sessions to gather patient or community input on specific study areas of interest before implementation. Ten CE studios were held via Zoom at five study sites (Rhode Island, Washington DC, Alabama, New Mexico, and Southern California). Each site held two studios: 1) women living with urgency urinary incontinence, 2) clinicians providing care in their areas. Participants gave recommendations on ways to increase study participation of women from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds with a focus on recruitment and retention, identification of barriers to participation, and suggested approaches to overcome those barriers. Summaries were compiled from each CE studio to identify similar and contrasting recommendations across sites. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: A total of 80 participants (47 community women experiencing urgency urinary incontinence, and 33 healthcare professionals) participated across all sites. Studio participants discussed anticipated barriers for participant recruitment and retention with a focus on solutions to those barriers. Based on these suggestions, we created recruitment materials using pictures, videos, and simple terminology. We created educational content to help providers with current best practices for urinary urgency incontinence. We have allowed most study visits to be conducted virtually, identified affiliated clinics in various locations to improve proximity to undeserved communities, and have earmarked additional funds to help offset travel costs including gas, public transportation, and childcare. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: CE studios have provided pragmatic patient- and provider-centered recommendations that have been incorporated into functional strategies to improve research participation and diversity. CTSA CE core expertise can support successful CE studio planning and implementation.

The Weill Cornell Heart to Heart Community Outreach Campaign (H2H) is a free outreach program that provides mobile health screenings. The program brings medical and nursing faculty and students to the underserved, uninsured communities of New York City. Participants are screened for diabetes and heart disease risk factors through onsite exams, including point of care blood tests. If an abnormality is found, they receive a medical consultation to offer personalized advice and referrals to free/low-cost clinics when needed. The goal is to help underserved individuals understand their cardiometabolic health and to promote early intervention. This article describes the development of the program, including factors that were essential to the collaboration, challenges faced, barriers to implementation, and its evolution throughout the first 12 years. The program has benefited from strong foundational program leadership, effective inter-institutional collaboration, and maintaining community trust.

Enterprise data warehouses for research (EDW4R) is a critical component of National Institutes of Health Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs. EDW4R operations have unique needs that require specialized skills and collaborations across multiple domains which limit the ability to apply existing models of information technology (IT) performance. Because of this uniqueness, we developed a new EDW4R maturity model based on prior qualitative study of operational practices for supporting EDW4Rs at CTSA hubs. In a pilot study, respondents from fifteen CTSA hubs completed the novel EDW4R maturity index survey by rating 33 maturity statements across 6 categories using a 5-point Likert scale. Of the six categories, respondents rated workforce as most mature (4.17 [3.67–4.42]) and relationship with enterprise IT as the least mature (3.00 [2.80–3.80]). Our pilot of a novel maturity index shows a baseline quantitative measure of EDW4R functions across fifteen CTSA hubs. The maturity index may be useful to faculty and staff currently leading an EDW4R by creating opportunities to explore the index in local context and comparison to other institutions.

Identifying and disseminating actionable intelligence is a challenging task that requires thoughtful planning. The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences instituted the Common Metrics Initiative with the goal of evaluating the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Programs using a standard set of metrics. Initially managed by Tufts University, the Center for Leading Innovation and Collaboration (CLIC) at the University of Rochester began leading this initiative in 2017. In directing this work, CLIC created a framework for communicating and disseminating data insights. Insights to Inspire emerged from the need to share strategies and lessons learned to improve metric performance at the local level to a network of 60+ academic research institutions. Insights to Inspire employs a mixed methods approach for translating data into actionable intelligence. A series of blogs, webinars, and webcasts were designed to communicate metric-specific strategies used by individual sites to the broader CTSA consortium. A dissemination plan to expand the reach beyond metric stakeholders utilized focused communications including social media channels, network newsletters, and presentations at national meetings. This framework serves as a blueprint for other national evaluation programs interested in a systematic approach to using data insights for continuous improvement.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) recurrence ranges from 16% to 43% and presents significant challenges to clinicians, patients, and families. This comparative effectiveness research study aims to disseminate, implement and evaluate whether an existing intervention, consisting of decolonization and decontamination procedures, which has been determined to be effective in hospital intensive care unit settings, can be implemented by Community Health Workers (CHWs) or “promotoras” conducting home visits prevent recurrence of CA-MRSA and transmission within their households for patients presenting to primary care with SSTIs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In partnership with 3 Community Health Centers and 4 community hospitals in NYC, this study will recruit patients (n=278) with confirmed MRSA SSTIs and their household members. Participants are randomized to receive either a CHW/Promotora-delivered decolonization-decontamination intervention or usual care, which includes hygiene education. The highly engaged stakeholder team meets monthly to review interim results, identify areas for refinement and new research questions, and develop and implement strategies to improve participant engagement and retention. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: MRSA and MSSA were found in 19% and 21.1% of wound cultures, respectively. 59.5% with MRSA+ wound culture had one or more MRSA+ surveillance culture; 67.8% with MSSA+ wound culture had one or more MSSA+ surveillance culture. The “warm handoff” approach, developed and implemented by the stakeholder team to engage patients from their initial consent to return of lab results and scheduling of the home visits, helped improve completion of baseline home visits by 14%, from 45% to 59% of eligible participants. Home visits have demonstrated that 60% of households had at least one surface contaminated with S. aureus. Of the surfaces that tested positive in the households, nearly 20% were MRSA and 81% were MSSA; 32.5% of household members had at least one surveillance culture positive for S. aureus (MRSA: 7.7%, MSSA: 92.3%). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This study aims to understand the systems-level, patient-level, and environmental-level factors associated with SSTI recurrence and household transmission, and to examine the interactions between bacterial genotypic and clinical/phenotypic factors on decontamination, decolonization, SSTI recurrence and household transmission. This study will evaluate the barriers and facilitators of implementation of home visits by CHWs in underserved populations, and aims to strengthen the weak evidence base for implementation of strategies to reduce SSTI recurrence and household transmission.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: 1. Describe the development and implementation of a Community Scholars Program to train graduate and professional students on principles of community engagement and its application to their research. 2. Evaluate lessons learned and overall impact implementing a Community Scholars Program. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: After identifying a need to train scholars on the principles of community engagement, the Community Engagement Research Core’s (CERC) Community Advisory Council (CAC) developed the Community Scholars Program (CSP) in 2014. The CSP was designed to educate scholars on community engaged research and how it can be applied to their research projects. The program is currently in its ninth cohort with 19 graduate and professional students having participated in the program to date. Prospective scholars identify a community partner and faculty mentor and apply to conduct a community engaged research project over the course of an academic year. The purpose of this project is to describe the development and implementation of a CSP and identify lessons learned throughout the process. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Five lessons learned have been identified: five major lessons learned from implementing the CSP: (1) establish partnership agreements between the scholars and their community partners and faculty mentors, setting expectations to avoid conflict and increase mutual understanding; (2) expand and implement more creative outreach approaches to cultivate a more diverse pool of applicants; (3) increase networking between current and past scholars to share experiences and serve as a resource for each other; (4) provide formal CE training for scholars to develop a better understanding of the principles of CE and CE research; and (5) document progress of the program through formal feedback and evaluations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The CSP was constructed to fill a gap in CE research training for graduate and professional scholars. Over the course of the program, the identified lessons learned have created program clarity and increased accountability for scholars, mentors, and community partners alike.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this project was to a) evaluate the first five years of Miami CTSI’s Pilot Translational and Clinical Studies Program using outcome measures that quantify research productivity augmented by the CTSA Common Metrics; and b) use the results to shape future program management. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Pilot Program applicant and awardee demographic data were collected during the first 5-year cycle of the Miami CTSI grant. Projects were categorized into the translation spectrum based on type of research using published guidelines. Research productivity from funded pilot projects were tracked annually using internal institutional grant award databases and external databases such as PubMed and NIH Reporter. CTSA Common Metrics were tracked using the Results Based Accountability framework. Relative Citation Ratio (RCR), NIH percentile and translation impact of pilot project publications were determined using the iCite tool (NIH Office of Portfolio Analysis). RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The Miami CTSI’s Pilot Award Program demonstrated notable success in its first five years. Of the twenty-two projects that were funded during that time period, 45% led to follow-on funding for a total of $17.2M—a strong return on investment of 15:1. Further, 77% of awardees had at least one publication. A total of four patents and 43 publications resulted directly from the funded projects. The mean RCR for all publications was 2.7, weighted RCR was 99.87, and nine papers were been cited by clinical documents. Overall, 63% of the projects were classified as T1/T2 (pre-clinical/clinical research) and 37% as T3/T4 (post-clinical translational research/public health). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Miami CTSI’s Pilot Award Program demonstrated success in scholarly output, follow on funding, and scientific impact. These results will serve as benchmarks going forward and will allow the CTSI to leverage program strengths in collaborating with other institutional internal award mechanisms.

ABSTRACT IMPACT: This project successfully implemented a promising team science model by introducing and facilitating best practices to develop high functioning teams working to accelerate health innovations from bench to bedside. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this project was to improve the team science knowledge, skills, and attitudes of interdisciplinary engineering students (undergraduate and graduate) who were partnered with health professionals to develop technical solutions to translational health challenges during a year-long Engineering Innovation in Health (EIH) program. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We adapted, implemented, and evaluated team science training content and approaches in the EIH program at the University of Washington (UW). EIH faculty and the UW Institute of Translational Health Sciences’ (ITHS) Team Science Core co-developed and delivered highly interactive team science training modules and evaluated their impact with biannual surveys. A student cohort was surveyed prior to the implementation of the team science trainings, which served as a baseline. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize student demographics and survey responses within and between years. Median and interquartile range of responses to Likert-type questions were calculated, and Mann-Whitney U Tests (independent samples Wilcoxin Rank Sum Tests) were used to test for differences within and between years. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: During both the baseline and the team training year, student demographics were similar in terms of gender and past experience working in teams. Team training during the first year of implementation was well-received. Post-implementation surveys of students demonstrated measurable improvement in team dynamics, communication, and effectiveness; including, students reporting higher levels of psychological safety and self-efficacy within their teams. Comparisons within the team training year and between the baseline and team training years identified numerous instances in which differences were statistically significant. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Tailored team science training in an interdisciplinary EIH program was successful at improving psychological safety and self-efficacy among undergraduate and graduate students and offers a promising model for similar settings and audiences.

ABSTRACT IMPACT: Investigators in clinical and translational research will be better supported by CTSAs that reduce barriers to the efficient and effective utilization of their program services. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Evidence from three CTSAs show that investigators do not take advantage of all program services provided. This session will explore the patterns and sources of underutilization by sharing preliminary results from investigators and program managers. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Interviews with investigators at all three CTSA sites were conducted in Spring 2020. Investigators who had only used one program service and those who had used multiple program services across a span of three-years (2016 to 2018) were included in the sample. Investigators who had only used REDCap, were excluded. Interviews numbered about six interviews per site. Content analysis helped identify emerging themes and patterns. A survey with program managers at the three CTSA sites will be deployed in January 2021. Program managers across all programs will be included in the sample. Basic descriptive analysis will be used to analyze the data. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Interviews with investigators at all sites illuminated ways different investigators use, learned about and leveraged services, as well as the barriers they encountered to using cross-program services. Investigators also provided thoughts on ways to address lack of program service use. Survey results are expected to clarify program managers’ knowledge of other program services in their CTSA, programs’ referral processes, and the barriers program managers face when recommending other services to users. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: When investigators do not take full advantage of all program services provided, investigators are put at risk of having longer, less successful projects. Knowing the sources of underutilization can help curb this trend and effectively address investigator needs throughout the research process.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Calls for health care organizations to promote health equity, through reducing health care disparities and addressing the social determinants of health, are growing and disrupt assumptions about equal care and the role of the health care delivery system more generally. This paper uses qualitative data to explore the emotions that health care personnel express as they make sense of the newfound emphasis on equity. To do so, we consider the relationships between social identity, sense of control, emotion, cognition, and action. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The principle investigator conducted 21 semistructured interviews with senior leaders and equity team members and 7 focus groups with providers and staff employed at one of Minnesota’s largest health care system. The PI asked respondents to describe recent conversations about equity in their workplaces and to identify barriers and facilitators to addressing equity. Focus group participants were also asked to imagine colleagues’ reactions—“what would they say, think, and feel”—should they be asked to adapt practices to address the social determinants of health, community health, and healthcare disparities. Interviews and focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed. Two coders independently coded each transcript for themes and then compared and reconciled their coding. Reactions to equity work emerged inductively during the coding process. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Findings suggest that discourses on health equity can disrupt personal and professional identities and trigger a mixture of emotions, including fear, sadness, and excitement. Personnel with broad, or flexible, constructions of their work roles experienced less disruption, and more positive emotions, than those personnel who constructed narrow, or rigid, professional identities. Those who expressed a stronger sense of control also expressed more positive emotions, such as happiness and hope, and were excited about the prospect of greater accountabilities related to equity. Those who doubted the existence of disparities were defensive and pointed to cues such as standardized care protocols and perceptions of colleagues’ professionalism to oppose change. Those who perceived low organizational self-efficacy, due to a lack of time, skills, or knowledge, often expressed frustration and helplessness. Their sensemaking focused on the lack of progress and sought sensegiving about ways to “make it workable.” DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Discussions about equity are new in healthcare and trigger mixed reactions, drawing out provider and staff’s hopes, fears, and anxieties. Variations in emotional reactions may be related to differing perceptions about sense of control over disparities and the social determinants of health. If we want to enlist health care providers, nurses, and managers in efforts to improve health equity, we need to understand these emotions and sensemaking processes.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Atopic Dermatitis (AD) affects 10% of people globally and is studied widely in clinical trials. However, clinical outcomes assessment (COA) for AD are not standardized, hindering easy comparisons across different studies. This study examines AD studies to identify the most used COAs. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Clinicaltrials.gov was searched to identify AD trials conducted between 2011 and 2021. Ongoing and completed trials were classified according to the therapeutic modality: Biologic, Immunosuppressive, or Other (botanicals and antibiotics). Further, AD trials were examined to determine which of the COAs listed in the FDA compendium issued in 2021 were included: the Investigators Global Assessment (IGA), the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75), and the Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The results were analyzed to determine which COA is most frequently used and if there were differences across therapeutic modalities or trial phases. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Across a total of 50 AD trials registered in clinicaltrials.gov, EASI-75 was the most used COA; the item was included in 12 of 16 biologics, 5 of 14 immunosuppressives, and 7 of 20 other products. Moreover, AD trials of biologics included more of the FDA-suggested COAs than those studying other modalities. There were also differences across the clinical trial phases in that most phase III AD trials (83.33%, n=8) included two of the three COAs listed (IGA and EASI-75) compared to less than half of phase I/II trials (vs. 43.75%, n=32). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Findings from this study indicate a lack of COA harmonization across AD trials, impeding comparative analysis of the trial results. Establishing a common standard for COA would foster communication and transparency among key stakeholders including researchers, healthcare providers, and patients.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: (1) Provide an innovative tool used to accelerate and evaluate T3-T4 research; (2) describe the collective capacity building tool (CCBT) methodology—both programmatic and evaluative applications; and (3) share insights about the process and outcomes of community-engaged research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Academic and community-based partners complete the assessment together at the beginning and conclusion of their Community Engagement pilot projects. Further, they are encouraged to use the tool and the associated insights/priorities that emerge as the basis for data-driven coaching with Community Research Liaisons throughout the 12-month grant cycle. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Pre/post results with 4 cohorts of pilot grantees consistently demonstrated the most positive change in relation to 1 item: overcoming previously identified barriers to community engagement (eg, language, mistrust, scheduling conflicts). Other key findings: (1) networks of reciprocal ties expand, providing structures to support dissemination of information and interventions. (2) Partners leverage expanded networks to pursue follow-on funding and extend the scope/reach of their efforts geographically and/or with new populations. (3) Projects enhance trust in the research process by developing group processes that facilitate the respectful sharing of diverse (often alternative) viewpoints and through culturally-responsive project implementation. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The CCBT can be used at multiple points in time to help project partners achieve the deliberate integration of CBPR principles in practice and advance community-engaged translational research efforts for sustainability and scalability. The CCBT is sensitive enough to document the iterative nature of partnership development and CBPR. An example: a great deal of variability was found in how formally partners defined roles. Further, partner roles often changed as projects evolved. Still, results indicated a general trend toward achieving greater clarity in partner roles over time. Further, the tool captured set-backs due to partner turn-over and partnerships regaining momentum after new staff came on board. Results have strong face validity: more mature partnerships reported stronger community connections and previous successes to build upon. Perhaps most importantly: the tool and associated process was well-received by academic and community-based partners alike.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: In 2022, 116,000 Puerto Ricans were estimated to be affected by Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Gait limitation (GL) has been associated with different stages of AD. We study the GL-AD association in two elderly populations: Hispanics residing in PR and Americans in the mainland U.S., and identify the effects, and social determinants of health. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We propose a cross-sectional study involving data analysis from elderly (>65 years) Hispanics in PR and Americans in the U.S. Data will come from the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center (NACC) and a cohort of AD in PR. Our analysis will consider gait parameters, cognitive performance assessments, and AD stage (mild, moderate, and severe) as determined by the Alzheimer’s Association. We will examine social determinants of health and their association with GL and cognitive performance by AD. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Our analysis will evaluate data about GL and AD stages to 1) investigate the association between GL and the distinct stages of AD and 2) evaluate the effects of social determinants of health in the association between GL and AD. We seek to profoundly understand how these factors interact within elderly populations. This exploration encompasses a diverse demographic, including elderly individuals in the U.S. and PR. We seek to identify disparities in social determinants among elderly individuals experiencing GL and AD by comparing PR and US populations. Through this association analysis, our study aspires to offer insight into the connections between GL and AD while considering the effects of social determinants of health in diverse populations. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: The prevalence of AD is higher among Hispanic populations (e.g., Puerto Ricans) in the USA when compared to other ethnic groups. Experiencing GL may affect their daily lives, leading to exacerbating AD stages. The findings from this study will contribute to possible interventions to improve their GL and AD progression.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The objective of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prognostic utility of electroencephalography (EEG) in stroke recovery. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A literature search was conducted using three electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL. Key search terms were “EEG,” “stroke,” and “rehabilitation”. Only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English that examined the relationship between EEG and a standardized clinical outcome measure(s) at a later time in stroke patients were included. Two independent raters completed data extraction and assessed methodological quality of the studies with the Downs and Black form. A linear meta-regression was performed across subsets of individual studies that utilized a common clinical outcome measure to determine the association between EEG and clinical outcome while adjusting for sample size and study quality. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: 56 papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. The prognostic value of EEG was evidenced at both the acute and chronic stages of stroke. The addition of EEG enhanced prognostic accuracy more than initial clinical assessment scores and/or lesion volume alone. In the meta-analysis, a subset of 10 papers that utilized the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and a subset of 7 papers that utilized the Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) were included. Analysis demonstrated an association between EEG and the subsequent clinical outcome measures. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Currently, prognosis is largely based on initial behavioral impairment level. However, post-stroke recovery outcomes are heterogeneous despite similar initial clinical presentations. Uncertain prognosis makes it difficult for clinicians to develop personalized treatment plans for patients. Improved prognosis for recovery may guide clinical management for stroke survivors by helping clinicians determine the maximally efficient course of treatment and care. This study suggests that prognostic accuracy may be enhanced using EEG.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: (1) To propose an iterative decision-making model of care planning for CSHCN. (2) To identify targets warranting measurement in future studies of SDM in care planning for CSHCN. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Conceptual model developed by a multidisciplinary team iteratively considering the complex relationships among diverse factors affecting care planning for CSHCN, informed by clinical and implementation science experience and a scoping literature review of medical and cognitive sciences literature addressing interpersonal decision-making, communication, negotiation, and trust among children, their parents, and their clinicians. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Decision-making interventions in pediatrics tend to focus narrowly on single acute decisions, providing minimal guidance for decisions related to chronic disease management over time. Few models account for the role of the child in the decision-making process, despite their ongoing development. Therefore, we propose a model of shared decision-making in the context of managing chronic illness in children that recognizes all actors and can support both the design of clinical care and research. This model—The SDM Learning Loop Model—highlights the dynamic iterative nature of exchanges between and among the clinical team and the parent-child dyad and recognizes the child as the center of each decision-making cycle. The model accounts for key practice, family, experiential, and emotional contexts influencing the decision-making encounter. In this model, change in child health status and developmental capacity resulting from a given cycle’s care plan will directly influence the relationship between clinician and parent-child dyad (eg, mutual trust, attunement) and impact each party’s engagement in the next round of decision-making. The relationship between experience and outcome stimulates learning. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Our proposed SDM Learning Loop Model suggests that increasing the shared nature of decision making is not only likely to optimize care planning, but creates “buy-in” that can both reinforce the impact of positive outcomes, and moderate the negative impact on relationships when the outcome is other than desired. We hypothesize that this model can guide care planning and shape research to the benefit of both clinical outcomes and clinician-family relationships. Future work should focus on the development and validation of measures to account for the experiential and emotional contexts in which such decisions are made, and the outcomes of care in this population.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The study aims to (1) investigate the structural patterns of professional communication that exist at the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon (2) explore if and how the professional networks of the participants change after engaging in the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon (3) explore any associations between the characteristics of participants’ professional networks and successful innovation development. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The recruitment pool consists of all 78 Mount Sinai Health Hackathon 2018 participants. Characteristics of the social network of Health Hackathon participants are assessed via an SNA data collection instrument at three time points: T1 directly before the Health Hackathon event, T2 directly after the event, T3 six months post-event. The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Institutional Review Board approved this study as exempt. In order to explore patterns of communication between Health Hackathon participants during event, whole network data is collected at T2. Participants are provide with a roster of Mount Sinai Health hackathon participant names and asked to report the nature, frequency and perceived importance of their interaction with each of the other participants over the duration of the 48 hour event. In order capture any network change in the wider professional networks of the individual participants, known as “ego networks”, participants are asked to complete an SNA ego network survey at time points T1, T2 and T3. Open ended questions asked participants to report up to 20 people they consider being most important to them in their professional network and record the professional background of each person, the nature of the communication and the importance of each person to their success. Finally, at T3 participants are also asked to report on their project success (determined by businesses formed, filed provisional patents, financial income generation). This will be reviewed in relation to their social network data, to see if there is any relationship between the two. Data is analyzed using the specialized SNA software, UCiNET, which creates network sociograms to visualize network data. Descriptive statistics are used to report individual-level characteristics of respondents.RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: To describe the structural patterns of communication at each time point, the following network-level indices are calculated: density (a measure of network cohesion), degree centrality (how many connections the individual has), betweenness centrality (whether the individual provides connections to other people in a network) and closeness centrality (how close the individual is to other people in the network). Network sociograms are generated for each time point to provide a visualization of the network. To explore the hypothesis that participating in the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon increases diversity of a professional network, analysis will focus on whether and how network-level indices change pre- and post- Hackathon. It will also explore any association between network characteristics and project success. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Social Network Analysis of the Mount Sinai Health Hackathon provides an understanding about the structure of relationships that are formed as a result of participation in this event. Although, the design of this study does not allow for inferences of causality, the SNA approach enables an in-depth exploration of Hackathon participants’ professional networks, how these evolve over time and how certain network characteristics may be associated with project success. This information will be used to inform the development, content and delivery of future Health Hackathon initatives.

Objectives/Goals: We operationalized our evaluation using the RE-AIM framework, by defining its dimensions as nodes within a net effect diagram in the form of radar charts to visually display group variation among nodes. This enhanced our ability to measure the reach, effectiveness, and implementation of our efforts in under-resourced Los Angeles communities. Methods/Study Population: We applied the RE-AIM framework to guide the operationalization of evaluation methods, defining the RE-AIM dimensions generally with a focus on reach, effectiveness, and implementation. We developed and defined a standardized scoring system for metrics that contributed to the RE-AIM dimensions of focus, using data from our activities such as health education workshops targeting diverse, under-resourced populations in Los Angeles. Our standardized scoring system ranged from 1 to 5, reflecting the degree of success within each metric/dimension. Scores were mapped in net effect diagrams in the form of radar charts to enable comparative analysis and visualization, highlighting a variety of grouped variables (i.e., language, locations, and adaptation). Results/Anticipated Results: The operationalized and developed scoring system allowed us to standardize assessment across the RE-AIM dimensions, making it possible to visualize our impact through net effect diagrams. These diagrams illustrated variations in reach, effectiveness, and implementation across different community engagement activities stratified by group variables, providing insights into our impact and areas for adjustment. Preliminary results suggest that the net effect diagram effectively captures both broad and nuanced impacts and serves as a viable application of the RE-AIM framework. The use of standardized scoring enhances data comparability and offers a dynamic visual tool for monitoring ongoing and future initiatives while serving as a tool to display and report our impact. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Operationalizing evaluation with the RE-AIM framework and implementing a standardized scoring system allows us to visualize and monitor effectiveness in real time. This system supports data-driven decision-making for our sustainable, impactful community engagement initiatives ultimately contributing to our goal of improving health equity.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The University of Michigan Frankel Cardiovascular Center (FCVC) Innovation Challenge is an annual competition offering funding for innovative ideas to improve cardiovascular care. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, administrators converted the recruitment process and pitch event to fully virtual. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We detail the process of converting the event from a hybrid process (virtual and in-person recruiting and in-person event) to a fully virtual one. Changes to the event included implementing a virtual recruiting process utilizing short video recordings as submission format; a new tool for storing and displaying submissions; fully virtual finalist selection and coaching; and a fully virtual pitch and judging event. The submission process tracked information about submissions that include the type of idea (process or product), role of team lead, and department of team lead. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The FCVC Innovation Challenge was successfully converted to a fully virtual event. Methods and tools will be shared to allow similar institutions to replicate a successful virtual pitch event. These include methods and tools utilized to allow participants to describe their ideas, strategies to select and coach finalists, and to host a virtual pitch event. Data will be shared on the number of ideas and category (product/process) of projects submitted, and number and category of finalists selected. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This case review can demonstrate how institutions can use a similar virtual idea submission and pitch process to (1) catalyze innovative ideas that can impact patient care by accessing its communitys ideas and (2) fund innovative ideas that do not fit traditional mechanisms.