Community-engaged research is essential to advance the implementation of evidence-based practices, but engagement quality is rarely assessed. We evaluated community health centers’ (CHCs) experiences partnering with the Implementation Science Center for Cancer Control Equity (ISCCCE) using an online survey of 59 CHC staff. Of 38 respondents (64.4% response rate), most perceived their engagement positively, with over 92% feeling respected by ISCCCE collaborators and perceiving projects as beneficial. Limited staff time and resources were the main challenges identified. This study suggests the utility of gathering feedback to evaluate community research engagement and inform adaptations of research processes to optimize partnership quality.

Objectives/Goals: Developing an online platform for the clinical research coordinator (CRC) mentoring program aimed to create an accessible space for professional development and peer support using Microsoft Teams. The platform fosters communication, community, and connection to share best practices and resources, enhancing competencies and growth within the CRC research learning community. Methods/Study Population: The CRC group mentoring program was developed using the ADDIE model. In the analysis phase, CRC needs were assessed to identify gaps in professional development, leading to the choice of Microsoft Teams for its effective communication and resource-sharing capabilities. The Design phase established objectives and content outlines for mentors and mentees. During development, training materials and interactive activities were created. Implementation involved onboarding participants and facilitating scheduled sessions. Finally, the Evaluation phase employed the Kirkpatrick model to assess program effectiveness: Level 1 gathered participant feedback, Level 2 measured knowledge gains, Level 3 tracked skill application, and Level 4 evaluated overall CRC performance and professional development impact. Results/Anticipated Results: Building and maintaining a learning community in Microsoft Teams with 16 mentors and 34 mentees across two health locations offers benefits and challenges. Benefits include the structured organization that facilitates collaboration, resource sharing, and real-time communication, regardless of location. Specific channels can focus discussions and virtual meeting scheduling streamlines coordination. Teams allow easy access to training materials and assessments. Challenges include maintaining engagement and fostering community. Asynchronous communication may lead to uneven participation, while digital literacy levels can hinder involvement. Sustaining meaningful interactions requires intentional facilitation and consistent encouragement to keep discussions dynamic and supportive. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The online Microsoft Teams mentoring platform boosts professional development, enhances community, and provides a vital space for resource sharing and discussion, thereby improving CRC competencies. Despite challenges like digital literacy and asynchronous communication, effective facilitation is crucial for empowering future leaders.

Objectives/Goals: We reorganized the University of Illinois Chicago, Center for Clinical and Translational Science education programs in part to extend assessment beyond funding success. We evaluated the impact of early career grant coaching on applicants’ perceived preparedness for grant submission, confidence in securing grants, and self-reported benefits. Methods/Study Population: Modeled after the National Research Mentoring Network, groups of ~5 investigators who wanted to submit a career development grant proposal met weekly for ~12 weeks with a senior faculty coach to refine aims pages, biosketches, and career development plans using a real-time peer review process. To evaluate impact, we assessed perceived preparedness (“How prepared do you feel to submit your grant proposal?”) and funding confidence (“How confident do you feel in your proposal’s funding chances?”) on entrance and exit surveys using a visual analog scale (max 100 points). Exit surveys also included an open-ended question: “What did you learn or accomplish during the coaching group?” We used paired t-tests to evaluate pre-to-post participation changes and reviewed free responses for additional context. Results/Anticipated Results: From June 2023 to September 2024, 21 people (12 postdocs/1 research assistant professor/7 tenure-track assistant professors/1 other; 13 female) were enrolled in 4 sessions. Seven people did not finish the sessions and were lost to follow-up. For the 14 participants who completed both the entry and exit survey, perceived preparedness for grant submission increased from 30.1 ± 23.5 to 67.1 ± 24.6 (p  =  0.001). Funding confidence in securing funding also increased from 40.8 ± 19.1 to 64.0 ± 20.7 (p  =  0.003). Participants valued the structure and accountability of the groups and reported other benefits, such as improved writing skills. Opportunities for feedback were also appreciated, with one participant stating, “I learned to face my fear of constructive criticism.” Discussion/Significance of Impact: Coaching improved perceived preparedness for grant submission and confidence in securing funding for participants’ current submissions and provided potentially durable benefits such as receiving and positively responding to constructive feedback. The impact of such programs likely exceeds the short-term financial return on investment.

Objectives/Goals: To assess the impact of UCLA’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute Research Associates Program (CTSI-RAP), a student-led undergraduate clinical research initiative, on current members’ career interests and development. Methods/Study Population: To evaluate CTSI-RAP’s impact, we surveyed students using the REDCap platform between May and June 2023. The survey captured data on demographics, academic background, motivations for joining, and engagement in clinical research activities. Students also provided self-assessments of how the program influenced their career interests. Both descriptive and qualitative analyses were then used to assess key factors influencing students’ experiences, including the program’s impact on career decisions in healthcare and clinical research. Results/Anticipated Results: Out of 43 students surveyed, 40 responded (93%). Before entering, 84.2% of students had less than one year of research experience, and most students (73.6%) did not have family members in healthcare or research professions. Top reasons for joining were gaining clinical research exposure, healthcare setting experience, and pursuing healthcare careers. Overall, 97% of students stated CTSI-RAP “definitely” or “most probably” confirmed their interest in medicine and 76% of students reported CTSI-RAP has “definitely” or “most probably” solidified their interest in clinical research. 100% of students who have applied for a job, professional school, scholarship, or internship included CTSI-RAP as a meaningful experience, reflecting the program’s mission to provide motivations for a career in medicine and science. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Since its establishment in 2013, CTSI-RAP has expanded from 15 students to more than 50 annually, providing hands-on clinical research and professional development opportunities. The program’s peer-mentorship and student-led approach have proven effective in preparing students for diverse healthcare and research pathways.

Objectives/Goals: Micro-credentialing programs provide a rapid solution to the growing shortage of clinical research professionals (CRPs) by expanding the applicant pool and improving training efficiency. This study evaluates the impact of a micro-credential course on CRP education and its potential to reduce staffing shortages. Methods/Study Population: To address the CRP staffing shortage, new and existing clinical research staff at the Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey (CINJ) participated in a micro-credential badging course developed by NJ ACTS and Rutgers’ Master’s in Clinical Research Management Program. The course focused on key clinical research topics designed to equip participants with foundational knowledge. Post-completion, surveys were administered to both participants and CINJ management to assess the program’s effectiveness. The survey measured perceived knowledge gains, interest in further opportunities, and the program’s potential to alleviate staffing shortages. Survey results were analyzed to determine the program’s overall impact on CRP education and staffing challenges. Results/Anticipated Results: Survey results demonstrated significant knowledge gains among participants, with 85% reporting increased confidence in clinical research topics after completing the micro-credential course. Additionally, 70% of participants expressed interest in pursuing further opportunities in the field. CINJ management reported smoother onboarding processes and noted an improvement in job readiness among new hires. The CRC Badge has since been integrated into CINJ’s formal onboarding process. Overall, the micro-credential program contributed to expanding the CRP applicant pool, improving training efficiency, and offering a short-term solution to alleviate staffing shortages. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This research demonstrates the effectiveness of micro-credentialing in addressing the critical shortage of CRPs. By rapidly equipping staff with essential knowledge, the program broadens the applicant pool, enhances onboarding, and offers an immediate solution to workforce gaps.

Objectives/Goals: The Competency-Based All-Level Training (COBALT) curriculum standardizes learning for clinical research coordinators (CRCs) across multiple institutions within Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho (WWAMI), with flexible, topic-specific training at all experience levels, in both academic and industry-sponsored research. Methods/Study Population: The COBALT curriculum was developed in collaboration with subject matter experts, managers of CRCs, and other clinical research professionals from institutions across the WWAMI region. A thorough assessment of existing training programs within the region helped identify gaps and unmet needs. The curriculum was designed within a user-friendly learning management system that can be accessed across institutions. It has been piloted with diverse groups and committees of CRCs, professionals, and institutional leaders in clinical and translational science. Ongoing evaluation is being conducted qualitatively using built-in assessment surveys, demonstrations, and interviews. Results/Anticipated Results: The anticipated outcome is the creation of a highly standardized and efficient training program for clinical research professionals across multiple institutions in the WWAMI region. This program will be carefully tailored to each professional’s level of experience, ensuring personalized skill development. By aligning training with diverse expertise levels, the initiative aims to significantly elevate the quality, consistency, and overall performance of clinical research efforts across the regional research community. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The COBALT curriculum provides a vetted learning curriculum for CRCs, with a tailorable training plan that helps them collaborate with their supervisors to tailor training to their career goals. This ensures that the curriculum is not only comprehensive but also adaptable to individual needs.

Recruitment of diverse populations into research studies continues to be a challenge. There remains a gap in knowledge and practice on how to best engage with and recruit diverse populations, specifically among Latinos who account for 11% of research participants nationally. Our study focused on Latinas with pre-cervical and cervical cancer in the Pacific Northwest. Our research team took a multilevel approach to diversify recruitment and enrollment processes, focused on methods within healthcare, community-based, and paid media advertisements. This article shares strategies and lessons learned that helped increase participant diversity, meet enrollment goals, and expand relationships with community-based organizations.

Objectives/Goals: Trainees in clinical and translational science (CTS) take courses in biostatistics, epidemiology, and other quantitative areas. To be most successful, trainees require competency in algebra. We developed a quantitative assessment and study guide to assess trainee’s quantitative skills and provide review material to address weaknesses. Methods/Study Population: The Tufts CTS Graduate Program is the training core of the Tufts CTSI and its associated pre- and post-doctoral T32 awards. Approximately 10 trainees with a range of backgrounds (e.g., physicians, medical students, master’s-level researchers, and basic science PhDs) and varying math education experiences matriculate each year. We wanted to address the resulting range of quantitative skills to help students succeed in our program. In Spring 2023, we met with faculty teaching quantitative courses to identify core algebra concepts needed to succeed in their classes. A graduate student in computational mathematics with extensive tutoring experience then drafted assessment questions, a comprehensive study guide, and brief cheat sheet. The material was reviewed and revised with input from quantitative faculty. Results/Anticipated Results: We developed a 20-item quantitative assessment covering properties of operators; identity elements and inverses; simplification of arithmetic and algebraic expressions; solving algebraic equations; functions; equations of a line; and exponents/logarithms. A cheat sheet provided trainees with a brief refresher for these topics. A study guide provided more detailed instruction, example exercises and solutions, and referenced publicly available, online resources (e.g., Khan Academy). During the introductory summer course for the Tufts CTS Program, trainees were allowed to use the cheat sheet and were given 1 hour to complete the assessment. Trainees who got questions incorrect were directed to relevant sections in the study guide. We anticipate collecting formal feedback to evaluate the material. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Trainees must have adequate foundational algebra skills to succeed in CTS graduate programs and as future researchers. Developing a quantitative assessment allowed us to identify areas of weakness resulting from educational disparities or reflecting other aspects of their backgrounds and to provide material to reinforce their preparation.

Objectives/Goals: Trainees in clinical and translational science (CTS) must learn to effectively communicate their research ideas and findings to a range of audiences. As part of our science communication curriculum, we developed ORAL and WRITTEN science communication rubrics for our trainees to use across their courses and research activities. Methods/Study Population: The Tufts CTS Graduate Program is the training core of the Tufts CTSI and its associated pre- and post-doctoral T32 awards. Approximately 10 trainees with a range of backgrounds (e.g., physicians, medical students, master’s-level researchers, and basic science PhDs) matriculate each year. Faculty members and staff with expertise in science communication and pedagogy formed a committee to develop the rubrics. Because oral and written communication require different skills, we developed separate rubrics for each. We reviewed our current science communication curriculum, reviewed existing communication rubrics, and identified common mistakes students make. Following pilot testing by students and faculty pilot for one semester, we modified the rubrics based on informal feedback. Results/Anticipated Results: Both rubrics include a section to identify the target audience and specific items organized by theme. Oral rubric themes include presentation content, slides, verbal communication, nonverbal communication, and following instructions. Written rubric themes include overall, manuscript/proposal sections, and following instructions. The rubrics serve as feedback tools for faculty and students to evaluate work others produce and as self-evaluation tools. Feedback elements include a 4-point rating for each rubric item, open text feedback for each theme, and an open text holistic assessment. We now use the rubrics in our study design course, which features student presentations of planned research, and in our writing course. We anticipate collecting formal student feedback to further evaluate the rubrics. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Our rubrics can supplement existing science communication training and can be integrated into all CTS coursework and research activities. For future clinical and translational scientists to have the greatest impact, they must learn to effectively communicate findings to multiple audiences, ranging from experts in their field to the general public.

Objectives/Goals: The clinical research professional (CRP) workforce suffers from high turnover. Stay interviews have led to increased satisfaction and reduced turnover in other industries. We describe a multi-institutional project to develop, disseminate, and evaluate a CRP-tailored Stay Interview tool reimagined as the Individual Retention Conversation (IRC) toolkit. Methods/Study Population: In August 2022, following on the heels of a series of un-meeting conversations focused on CRP workforce development, the CRP taskforce initiated a working group to tackle issues related to CRP workforce retention. As a first initiative, this multi-institutional working group set out to develop, disseminate, and evaluate a Stay Interview tool tailored for a CRP audience and reimagined as the IRC toolkit. A 2-phase pilot study was initiated across six academic medical centers (AMCs: ASU, Duke, MUSC, UAB, UPenn, VCU) to: 1) optimize the toolkit for the CRP audience and 2) evaluate the impact of the toolkit using a standardized CRP satisfaction survey. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected via surveys using the REDCap platform. Results/Anticipated Results: The optimization phase of the pilot included 69 participants (16 managers and 53 of their CRP team members) from 6 AMCs. Respondents identified most and least useful questions for stimulating meaningful conversations regarding job satisfaction and retention issues with additional feedback on the IRC experience and tools. CRPs and managers represented a variety of roles, with 77% patient facing. The majority were satisfied with the IRC experience (82%) and found the experience personally beneficial (76%). Managers were satisfied with the manager’s guide (90%). Quantitative and qualitative feedback was used to optimize the toolkit prior to launch of phase 2 in September 2024, which includes a longitudinal survey-based assessment of CRP job satisfaction and IRC-consequent work environment changes. Discussion/Significance of Impact: CRP retention is impacted by complex factors, many related to job satisfaction, supervisor /employee relationships, and beneficial work environments. Initial evaluation of the IRC suggests that this intervention fosters positive supervisor/employee relationships and beneficial work environment changes, which may lead to improved retention.

Objectives/Goals: We designed a forum to educate participants about bioethical issues in the application of big data (BD) and artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical and translational research (CTR) in underrepresented populations. We sought to determine changes in participants’ interests in ethics, bias, and trustworthiness of AI and BD. Methods/Study Population: 141 individuals registered for the forum, which was advertised to our partner institutions, minority-serving institutions, and community organizations. Registrants received email instructions to complete an AI Trustworthiness (AI-Trust) survey, a questionnaire with integrated qualitative and quantitative measures designed to better understand learners who engaged with the institution-specific AI/Data Science curriculum. Respondents completed the survey using personal devices via a link and QR code, with anonymized responses and enhanced privacy features. 82 people attended; 22 responded to the survey pre-forum and 22 post-forum. Pre- and post-forum responses were qualitatively compared to assess shifts in attitudes toward AI and BD and related interests in ethics, bias, and trustworthiness. Results/Anticipated Results: We found increased interests post- vs. pre-forum in the use of AI for CTR, AI bias and its effects on underrepresented populations, and ethical risk assessment and mitigation strategies for the use of BD to empower research participants. In contrast, trust in AI was lower post- vs. pre-forum. Moreover, respondents also indicated that the current application of AI in healthcare practice would result in increased racial, economic, and gender bias. In comparison, interest in ethical challenges, bioethical considerations, and trustworthiness regarding use of BD and AI in health research and practice did not differ pre- vs. post-forum. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Interest in the application of BD/AI in CTR increased post-forum, but AI distrust and bias expectations also increased, suggesting that learners become more skeptical and discerning as they become more knowledgeable about the complexity of the ethics of AI and BD use in healthcare, especially its application to underrepresented populations.

Objectives/Goals: To design and implement programming that better prepares graduate students for diverse roles in a variety of workforce environments, our study models the training landscape and programming needs of graduate students in behavioral, clinical, and biomedical graduate programs at a large Midwestern school of medicine and public health. Methods/Study Population: We conducted six focus groups (two graduate program manager focus groups and four graduate student focus groups), to assess the programming, career development, and training needs of graduate students. Using a grounded theory approach, we first engaged in open coding of a sample of transcripts. After developing a codebook, we continued with an iterative coding process interspersed with coder meetings to discuss emerging and changing codes. Using the framework of landscape analysis allowed our coding and modeling to go beyond graduate student needs and study the varying relationships and contexts that impact graduate students throughout their training, such as relationship to supervisor or institutional policies. Results/Anticipated Results: Preliminary results indicate that students wrestle with their status as both students and workers. Specifically, conflict arises between graduate and supervisor expectations around time spent in class, lab, and other career development activities based on these divergent roles. Students and program managers also note the disparities that arise from the university’s lack of standard, formalized policy on labor issues, such as paid leave. Data also suggest that students on training grants note the difference in access to career development resources compared to colleagues. In many cases, students themselves coordinate ad hoc programming to better suit their career and professional development needs, although this work is not a required aspect of their training. Discussion/Significance of Impact: We characterize current graduate training landscapes, which continue to shift as graduate student bodies diversify, unionize, and express interest in increasingly varied biomedical careers. Data from multiple perspectives facilitate creating, implementing, and evaluating supportive training programs that meet identified student needs.

Objectives/Goals: In this project, we set out to supplement our existing grant writing workshops with targeted, learner-centered, multimodal training. This method will assist us in moving toward a more equitable training landscape, reaching a wider variety of learners, by freely disseminating these resources. Methods/Study Population: To increase access and impact of training materials for our career development grant writing workshops, we restructured our pre-workshop training videos. We culled expert advice from lengthy recorded lectures into brief (less than 5 minute) how-to videos that target instruction to writing specific sections of an NIH K grant. We then coupled these how-to videos with easy-to-navigate, open access online courses that further illustrate best practices for writing key sections of NIH K grants. These resources were given to registered workshop attendees and made available through a public Canvas course, the Diamond portal, MICHR website, and U-M Innovation Partnerships to disseminate the materials through multiple channels. Results/Anticipated Results: Four online courses and complementary videos were developed over six months, each focusing on a specific section of the NIH K grant proposal. These resources provide targeted instruction for writing the Specific Aims, Candidate Background, Career Development Plan, Career Goals and Objectives, and Mentor Letter. Learners accessed all four of the online courses. Released in January 2024, we continue to gather data on whether learners believe their knowledge about writing successful K grants has increased after using the resources, if they believe the courses have prepared them to write the section of the grant covered, and whether learners would recommend the courses. We will analyze these results to better understand how learners are using and responding to these new resources. Discussion/Significance of Impact: These how-to videos and online courses provide targeted, learner-centered training and fill an important gap by meeting learners where they are and extending the impact of our training beyond our institution. Widely disseminating online interactive training resources is a model we are applying beyond grant writing to other projects.