National Research Mentoring Network Research Articles

A/B Testing of User Enrollment Forms to Enhance Diversity in the Biomedical Workforce via the National Research Mentoring Network: User-Centered Design Case Study.

The National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) is a National Institutes of Health-funded program for diversifying the science, technology, engineering, math, and medicine research workforce through the provision of mentoring, networking, and professional development resources. The NRMN provides mentoring resources to members through its online platform-MyNRMN. MyNRMN helps members build a network of mentors. Our goal was to expand enrollment and mentoring connections, especially among those who have been historically underrepresented in biomedical training and the biomedical workforce. To improve the ease of enrollment, we implemented the split testing of iterations of our user interface for platform registration. To increase mentoring connections, we developed multiple features that facilitate connecting via different pathways. Our improved user interface yielded significantly higher rates of completed registrations (P<.001). Our analysis showed improvement in completed enrollments that used the version 1 form when compared to those that used the legacy form (odds ratio 1.52, 95% CI 1.30-1.78). The version 2 form, with its simplified, 1-step process and fewer required fields, outperformed the legacy form (odds ratio 2.18, 95% CI 1.90-2.50). By improving the enrollment form, the rate of MyNRMN enrollment completion increased from 57.3% (784/1368) with the legacy form to 74.5% (2016/2706) with the version 2 form. Our newly developed features delivered an increase in connections between members. Our technical efforts expanded MyNRMN's membership base and increased connections between members. Other platform development teams can learn from these efforts to increase enrollment among underrepresented groups and foster continuing, successful engagement.

Examining Educational and Career Transition Points Among a Diverse, Virtual Mentoring Network

AbstractGiven the differences in trajectory for under-represented minorities in biomedical careers, we sought to explore how a virtual mentoring program, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), and its platform (MyNRMN), may facilitate transitions in the science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) pipeline. The purpose of this study was to describe how the size of an MyNRMN member’s mentoring network and level of engagement correlate with academic and career transitions. We examined MyNRMN platform user data from March 2020 to May 2021 (n = 2993). Logistic regression estimated the odds of a career or academic transition related to NRMN mentoring network size and engagement, while adjusting for confounders. Among active MyNRMN users for the one-year period, 5.2% (n = 155) had a positive transition. In the adjusted logistic regression model, users with more engagement on the MyNRMN platform (201 + points) had significantly higher odds of a positive transition (aOR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.14, 4.22) compared to those with 1–50 NRMN Points. Network size was not statistically significant. This study shows an association between being active within a virtual mentoring network and positive educational and career transitions in the STEMM pipeline. Active engagement in a virtual mentoring network may have benefits for mentees who aspire to join the STEMM workforce.

Fostering Success and Promoting Professional Development of Clinician Educator Mentees: A Workshop for Mentors.

The goal of academic mentoring relationships is to enable the mentee to identify/achieve professional advancement. Although mentors of clinician educators (CEs) must understand the criteria for successful career advancement, few have received formal CE mentor training. The National Research Mentoring Network convened an expert panel to develop a 90-minute module for training CE mentors. This module included individual development plans, case studies involving challenges for CE faculty, and examples of the broadened scope of scholarly activity. The workshop was delivered to 26 participants across four institutions and evaluated by a retrospective pre/post survey. Using a 7-point scale (1 = very low, 4 = average, 7 = very high), participants rated the overall quality of their CE mentoring as slightly below average preworkshop (M = 3.9) and as above average postworkshop (M = 5.2, p < .001). Areas of greatest self-perceived change in skills on a 7-point scale (1 = not at all skilled, 4 = moderately skilled, 7 = extremely skilled ) included setting clear expectations of the mentoring relationship (pre M = 3.6, post M = 5.1, p < .001), aligning mentor expectations with those of mentees (pre M = 3.6, post M = 5.0, p < .001), and helping mentees set career goals (pre M = 3.9, post M = 5.4, p < .001). This module trains CE mentors using an interactive and collective problem-solving approach. Workshop participants better defined demonstrable markers for CE progression with potential to impact tailored guidance for mentees.

Individual and Institutional Factors Contribute to Research Capacity Building for Early-Stage Investigators from Groups Underrepresented in Biomedical Research: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis.

Enhancement of diversity within the U.S. research workforce is a recognized need and priority at a national level. Existing comprehensive programs, such as the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI), have the dual focus of building institutional research capacity and promoting investigator self-efficacy through mentoring and training. A qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the combination of factors that explain the success and failure to submit a grant proposal by investigators underrepresented in biomedical research from the RCMI and non-RCMI institutions. The records of 211 participants enrolled in the NRMN Strategic Empowerment Tailored for Health Equity Investigators (NRMN-SETH) program were reviewed, and data for 79 early-stage, underrepresented faculty investigators from RCMI (n = 23) and non-RCMI (n = 56) institutions were included. Institutional membership (RCMI vs. non-RCMI) was used as a possible predictive factor and emerged as a contributing factor for all of the analyses. Access to local mentors was predictive of a successful grant submission for RCMI investigators, while underrepresented investigators at non-RCMI institutions who succeeded with submitting grants still lacked access to local mentors. Institutional contexts contribute to the grant writing experiences of investigators underrepresented in biomedical research.

109 Pursuit of Fellowship Funding Through Peer Review Writing Groups

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Pursuit of independent funding by predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows requires navigating the intricate steps in preparing extramural grant applications. The Workforce Development Core of the NJ Alliance for Clinical and Translational Science (NJ ACTS) sought to evaluate an interactive grant writing group of fellows mentored by a trained coach. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participants meet weekly for 3 months to develop components of a fellowship application for submission to NIH and private foundations. Sessions were moderated by a senior faculty member trained as a coach by the National Research Mentoring Network. Participant grant submission and review of the program were collected annually for the period of 2019 to 2021 as well as demographics for the 2022 cohort. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Over this period, 32 predoctoral and 19 postdoctoral fellows participated in the peer review writing groups with 24 trainees currently enrolled. The peer review writing group moved to Zoom in 2020 which has enabled expansion of training to include the 3 Hub institutions and 6 additional universities. Of the 41 survey respondents, 78% submitted fellowship applications to NIH (N=28) or a non-NIH agency (N=4). Eight of these applications are currently under review or have been resubmitted for peer review. 54% of reviewed applications have been funded as NIH fellowships, diversity supplements, career grants, or non-NIH fellowships. Over 90% of participants have recommended the writing group to other trainees. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, a weekly grant writing group of predoctoral and postdoctoral fellows is an effective means to receive peer review of fellowship application components and support submissions for extramural funding.

Diverse Mentoring Connections Across Institutional Boundaries in the Biomedical Sciences: Innovative Graph Database Analysis.

With an overarching goal of increasing diversity and inclusion in biomedical sciences, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) developed a web-based national mentoring platform (MyNRMN) that seeks to connect mentors and mentees to support the persistence of underrepresented minorities in the biomedical sciences. As of May 15, 2024, the MyNRMN platform, which provides mentoring, networking, and professional development tools, has facilitated more than 12,100 unique mentoring connections between faculty, students, and researchers in the biomedical domain. This study aimed to examine the large-scale mentoring connections facilitated by our web-based platform between students (mentees) and faculty (mentors) across institutional and geographic boundaries. Using an innovative graph database, we analyzed diverse mentoring connections between mentors and mentees across demographic characteristics in the biomedical sciences. Through the MyNRMN platform, we observed profile data and analyzed mentoring connections made between students and faculty across institutional boundaries by race, ethnicity, gender, institution type, and educational attainment between July 1, 2016, and May 31, 2021. In total, there were 15,024 connections with 2222 mentees and 1652 mentors across 1625 institutions contributing data. Female mentees participated in the highest number of connections (3996/6108, 65%), whereas female mentors participated in 58% (5206/8916) of the connections. Black mentees made up 38% (2297/6108) of the connections, whereas White mentors participated in 56% (5036/8916) of the connections. Mentees were predominately from institutions classified as Research 1 (R1; doctoral universities-very high research activity) and historically Black colleges and universities (556/2222, 25% and 307/2222, 14%, respectively), whereas 31% (504/1652) of mentors were from R1 institutions. To date, the utility of mentoring connections across institutions throughout the United States and how mentors and mentees are connected is unknown. This study examined these connections and the diversity of these connections using an extensive web-based mentoring network.

Implementation of an unconscious bias course for the National Research Mentoring Network

PurposeIncreased awareness and mitigation of one’s unconscious bias is a critical strategy in diversifying the Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM) disciplines and workforce. Greater management of unconscious bias can enhance diverse recruitment, persistence, retention, and engagement of trainees. The purpose of this study was to describe the implementation of an asynchronous course on unconscious bias for people in STEMM. Specifically, we explored who engaged with the course and reflections from participation.MethodA five-part, asynchronous Unconscious Bias Course was developed and was hosted on a national mentoring platform starting in July 2020. To examine course engagement, we assessed the demographics of course participants and completion. Participant responses to reflection questions after each module were also synthesized using qualitative methods.ResultsOverall, 977 people registered for the course and 42% completed all modules. In the reflection responses, participants reflected on their unconscious biases in their lived experiences and how it relates to actions, judgements, external factors, stereotypes, and un-intentionality. Participants also reflected on microaggressions, their impact on the recipients and others, and the relationship between microaggressions and unconscious bias. Participants reported four key strategies used by allies against unconscious bias: immediately acting (83%), reflection (46%), improving the organizational culture (30%), and individual-level ally-ship (44%). Strategies for self-awareness included: reflection, pausing/breathing, and self-observation.ConclusionThe assessment of the Unconscious Bias Course implementation revealed the course reached a wide cross-section of people in STEMM and demonstrated that participants were able to reflect on the underpinnings of the course. This course, and its suite of offerings, support a nationwide effort to mitigate bias and prepare individuals to be culturally competent in a diverse society in order to foster a STEMM environment that caters to individuals’ success and diversification of these fields.

Variations of a group coaching intervention to support early-career biomedical researchers in Grant proposal development: a pragmatic, four-arm, group-randomized trial

BackgroundFunded grant proposals provide biomedical researchers with the resources needed to build their research programs, support trainees, and advance public health. Studies using National Institutes of Health (NIH) data have found that investigators from underrepresented groups in the biomedical workforce are awarded NIH research grants at disproportionately lower rates. Grant writing training initiatives are available, but there is a dearth of rigorous research to determine the effectiveness of such interventions and to discern their essential features.MethodsThis 2 × 2, unblinded, group-randomized study compares the effectiveness of variations of an NIH-focused, grant writing, group coaching intervention for biomedical postdoctoral fellows and early-career faculty. The key study outcomes are proposal submission rates and funding rates. Participants, drawn from across the United States, are enrolled as dyads with a self-selected scientific advisor in their content area, then placed into coaching groups led by senior NIH-funded investigators who are trained in the intervention’s coaching practices. Target enrollment is 72 coaching groups of 4–5 dyads each. Groups are randomized to one of four intervention arms that differ on two factors: [1] duration of coaching support (regular dose = 5 months of group coaching, versus extended dose = regular dose plus an additional 18 months of one-on-one coaching); and [2] mode of engaging scientific advisors with the regular dose group coaching process (unstructured versus structured engagement). Intervention variations were informed by programs previously offered by the NIH National Research Mentoring Network. Participant data are collected via written surveys (baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after start of the regular dose) and semi-structured interviews (end of regular dose and 24 months). Quantitative analyses will be intention-to-treat, using a 2-sided test of equality of the effects of each factor. An inductive, constant comparison analysis of interview transcripts will be used to identify contextual factors -- associated with individual participants, their engagement with the coaching intervention, and their institutional setting – that influence intervention effectiveness.DiscussionResults of this study will provide an empirical basis for a readily translatable coaching approach to supporting the essential grant writing activities of faculty, fellows, and other research trainees, including those from underrepresented groups.

NRMNet: Building a National Resource for Mentorship, Networking and Professional Development to Enhance Diversity.

To address the need for diversifying the biomedical research workforce, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) established the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC) with the goal of developing, implementing, assessing, and disseminating interventions and programs to enhance the participation and persistence of individuals from underrepresented backgrounds in biomedical research careers. As part of the DPC initiative, the NIH funded the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN), which aimed to increase diversity of the biomedical research workforce through culturally responsive mentorship, networking, and professional development. In 2015, the NRMNet portal was developed to provide a broad-based network of mentors who are accessible to diverse mentees across the country. The portal also provides networking and professional development resources that support mentee transitions from one career stage to the next. NRMNet is the gateway for career stage-specific mentorship, networking, resources, and professional development programs for trainees across the biomedical, behavioral, clinical, and social sciences. In the first five years, the NRMN strategic recruitment efforts resulted in an expanded network of nearly 13,000 diverse mentors and mentees with NRMN representation in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Consistently, over the first five years, racial and ethnic diversity was reflected in composition of mentee and mentor groups: 66% of 6,526 mentees and 33% of 3,866 mentors were from underrepresented groups. The NRMNet portal is a promising effort for enhancing participation and continued engagement of undrerepresented individuals in biomedical research careers by providing culturally responsive mentorship, networking, and professional development for individuals at all career stages.

Mentoring Experiences and Publication Productivity among Early Career Biomedical Investigators and Trainees.

To identify which mentoring domains influence publication productivity among early career researchers and trainees and whether publication productivity differs between underrepresented minority (URM) and well-represented groups (WRGs). The mentoring aspects that promote publication productivity remain unclear. Advancing health equity requires a diverse workforce, yet URM trainees are less likely to publish and URM investigators are less likely to obtain federal research grants, relative to WRG counterparts. A mentoring-focused online follow-up survey was administered to respondents of the NRMN Annual Survey who self-identified as mentees. Publications were identified from a public database and validated with participant CV data. Bivariate and multivariate analyses tested the associations of publication productivity with mentoring domains. URM investigators and trainees had fewer publications (M = 7.3) than their WRG counterparts (M = 13.8). Controlling for career stage and social characteristics, those who worked on funded projects, and received grant-writing or research mentorship, had a higher probability of any publications. Controlling for URM status, gender, and career stage, mentorship on grant-writing and funding was positively associated with publication count (IRR=1.72). Holding career stage, gender, and mentoring experiences constant, WRG investigators and trainees had more publications than their URM counterparts (IRR=1.66). Grant-writing mentorship is particularly important for publication productivity. Future research should investigate whether grant-writing mentorship differentially impacts URM and WRG investigators and should investigate how and why grant-writing mentorship fosters increased publication productivity.

MyNRMN: A national mentoring and networking platform to enhance connectivity and diversity in the biomedical sciences.

ABSTRACTAimsIncreasing the diversity of the biomedical sciences workforce is a national priority. Having a mentor, and more crucially, a personal network of mentors, improves the likelihood that an individual will pursue an advanced degree and career in the biomedical sciences. The chief mission of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) is to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the biosciences workforce through the mentoring of historically underrepresented individuals.MethodsTo address this need, we created MyNRMN, an online mentoring platform that connects mentors and mentees nationwide. The platform enables multiple forms of mentoring and recommends connections to mentees that will help them build their personal networks.ResultsThe MyNRMN online platform has registered more than 13,500 active mentors and mentees across all 50 states and from more than 2100 institutions. Black and Hispanic mentees are highly represented.DiscussionMyNRMN has expanded opportunities for mentorship in the biomedical sciences, particularly among those not from a culture or institution that historically supports mentorship. The platform's robust search and recommendation capabilities and graph database technology enable members to grow their personal network of mentors.ConclusionThe MyNRMN online platform has proven successful in connecting mentees and mentors nationwide, expanding the pipeline in biomedical science careers to attract a more diverse workforce.

11554 Getting the Grant: Assessment of a Monthly Grant Writing Group for Junior Investigators

ABSTRACT IMPACT: NJ ACTS provides mentored coaching in NIH grant writing for early stage investigators. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Launching an independent academic careers requires the ability to effectively communicate the purpose and impact of biomedical research in order to obtain extramural funding. We sought to develop and evaluate an interactive grant writing group of junior faculty and senior postdoctoral fellows mentored by trained coaches. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Participants meet monthly for 1 hour to peer review Specific Aims pages for grant applications to NIH and private foundations. Sessions are moderated by two senior faculty trained as coaches by the National Research Mentoring Network. Participant grant submission and review of the program are collected annually. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: From 2019-2020, 15 faculty and 2 postdoctoral fellows participated in the grant writing group with an average of 5.7 participants each month. Over the year, participants submitted 53 grant applications (68% submitted to NIH with the majority being R21 or R01 grant mechanisms). Half of grants submitted were discussed during peer review sessions. Of the grants reviewed, 42% were funded or near/below the funding payline. Using a 5-point Likert scale, participants highly rated the quality of coaching (mean/SD: 4.9 ±0.2), time discussing their research (mean/SD: 4.5 ±0.8), and the input from other participants (mean/SD: 4.5 ±0.5). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: In conclusion, a monthly meeting of junior investigators hosted by two grant writing coaches is an effective means to receive peer review of grant application aims and support submissions for extramural funding.

23688 Impact of moving to a virtual format with the Wake Forest School of Medicine (WFSM) Mentor Academy (MA)

ABSTRACT IMPACT: The Wake Forest School of Medicine Mentor Academy has adapted to provide continued effective and relevant formal mentoring training to translational researchers in a virtual format, to improve mentoring and provide effective mentor-mentee communication tools. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To determine whether the WFSM Mentor Academy (MA), an effective long-standing mentoring program for research faculty, is compromised after moving from an in-person to an online format as a result of COVID-19 restrictions. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A vetted National Research Mentoring Network (NMRN) implemented at WFSM addresses 6 major competencies (Effective Communication, Aligning Expectations, Assessing Understanding, Addressing Equity/Inclusion, Fostering Independence, Promoting Professional Development) over 6 months with 10 sessions (20 contact hrs). COVID-19 required that the MA (13 participants) move to an online format after 3 (out of 10) in-person sessions. We survey 26 self-rated mentoring competencies pre- and post MA, based on a numerical 7-point scale (abstract published for ACTS 2020) and, in 2020, included additional assessments of online versus in-person MA satisfaction/effectiveness and perceived impact on abilities of MA participants to mentor in an exclusively virtual format. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: All 13 participants responded to the survey and rated the online format as effective (9) or somewhat effective (4) for learning content. However, for participant interactions, only 4 found it effective and 9 somewhat effective. When assessing ability to mentor in a virtual format, most negatively affected competencies were ‘helping your mentee network effectively’ (7 of 13), ‘motivating your mentee’ (7), and ‘identifying and accommodating different communication styles’ (6). Goal setting (research goals, career goals) was rated easier under COVID-19 restrictions by 3 mentors. Increases in Pre-Post self-expressed mentoring effectiveness (+1 pt quality; +1 pt meeting mentee expectations) are similar to historical values, and 12 of the 13 mentors changed mentoring practices based on MA experiences. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: While 2020 ratings for increased effectiveness are similar to prior years, since the 2021 MA will remain online, we will adjust content to address challenges identified in training mentors and in mentoring trainees in virtual settings by strategies to keep MA participants engaged online and sharing new resources for virtual/hybrid format mentoring.

Grant application outcomes for biomedical researchers who participated in the National Research Mentoring Network's Grant Writing Coaching Programs.

BackgroundA diverse research workforce is essential for catalyzing biomedical advancements, but this workforce goal is hindered by persistent sex and racial/ethnic disparities among investigators receiving research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In response, the NIH-funded National Research Mentoring Network implemented a Grant Writing Coaching Program (GCP) to provide diverse cohorts of early-career investigators across the United States with intensive coaching throughout the proposal development process. We evaluated the GCP’s national reach and short-term impact on participants’ proposal submissions and funding outcomes.MethodsThe GCP was delivered as six similar but distinct models. All models began with an in-person group session, followed by a series of coaching sessions over 4 to 12 months. Participants were surveyed at 6-, 12- and 18-months after program completion to assess proposal outcomes (submissions, awards). Self-reported data were verified and supplemented by searches of public repositories of awarded grants when available. Submission and award rates were derived from counts of participants who submitted or were awarded at least one grant proposal in a category (NIH, other federal, non-federal).ResultsFrom June 2015 through March 2019, 545 investigators (67% female, 61% under-represented racial/ethnic minority, URM) from 187 different institutions participated in the GCP. Among them, 324 (59% of participants) submitted at least one grant application and 134 (41% of submitters) received funding. A total of 164 grants were awarded, the majority being from the NIH (93, 56%). Of the 74 R01 (or similar) NIH research proposals submitted by GCP participants, 16 have been funded thus far (56% to URM, 75% to women). This 22% award rate exceeded the 2016–2018 NIH success rates for new R01s.ConclusionInter- and intra-institutional grant writing coaching groups are a feasible and effective approach to supporting the grant acquisition efforts of early-career biomedical investigators, including women and those from URM groups.

Baseline Characteristics of the 2015-2019 First Year Student Cohorts of the NIH Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD ) Program

The biomedical/behavioral sciences lag in the recruitment and advancement of students from historically underrepresented backgrounds. In 2014 the NIH created the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), a prospective, multi-site study comprising 10 Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) institutional grantees, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and a Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC). This article describes baseline characteristics of four incoming, first-year student cohorts at the primary BUILD institutions who completed the Higher Education Research Institute, The Freshmen Survey between 2015-2019. These freshmen are the primary student cohorts for longitudinal analyses comparing outcomes of BUILD program participants and non-participants. Baseline description of first-year students entering college at BUILD institutions during 2015-2019. Ten colleges/universities that each received <$7.5mil/yr in NIH Research Project Grants and have high proportions of low-income students. First-year undergraduate students who participated in BUILD-sponsored activities and a sample of non-BUILD students at the same BUILD institutions. A total of 32,963 first-year students were enrolled in the project; 64% were female, 18% Hispanic/Latinx, 19% African American/Black, 2% American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 17% Asian, and 29% White. Twenty-seven percent were from families with an income <$30,000/yr and 25% were their family's first generation in college. Primary student outcomes to be evaluated over time include undergraduate biomedical degree completion, entry into/completion of a graduate biomedical degree program, and evidence of excelling in biomedical research and scholarship. The DPC national evaluation has identified a large, longitudinal cohort of students with many from groups historically underrepresented in the biomedical sciences that will inform institutional/national policy level initiatives to help diversify the biomedical workforce.

Culturally aware mentorship: Lasting impacts of a novel intervention on academic administrators and faculty.

National efforts to address the diversity dilemma in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) often emphasize increasing numbers of historically underrepresented (HU) students and faculty, but fall short in instituting concrete changes for inclusion and belonging. Therefore, increasing the pool of senior faculty who wish to become guides and advocates for emerging scientists from HU populations is an essential step toward creating new pathways for their career advancement. As a step toward achieving this goal, we created a novel eight-hour intervention on Culturally Aware Mentoring (CAM), a program of the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) targeted to faculty and administrators. A previous report of surveys at the end of the CAM sessions revealed substantial awareness and knowledge gains, with participants expressing intentions to use and implement new skills they had learned. In this paper, we provide the results of our thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with academic administrators and faculty, 18–24 months after participation in CAM. Interviews were designed to determine: 1) What changes in self-perceptions and interactions occurred as a result of participation in CAM? 2) What specific components of CAM are associated with changes in individual beliefs and practices? 3) How did participants actively make changes after the CAM workshop? 4) What barriers or challenges do participants encounter after the CAM intervention? The results demonstrate the lasting influences of CAM on participants’ awareness of cultural differences, their assumptions about and approaches toward interactions with colleagues and students, and their efforts to change their behaviors to promote inclusive practices in their mentoring and teaching of HU students in STEM. Our findings provide evidence that CAM can be incorporated into existing mentor training programs designed to improve the confidence and capacity of senior research faculty mentors to make culturally-informed, scholar-centered decisions to more deliberately recognize and respond to cultural differences within their mentoring and collegial relationships.

The Impact of Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy on Early Stage Investigators of The National Research Mentoring Network Steps Toward Academic Research (NRMN STAR).

The NRMN STAR program was created to address the persistent underrepresentation in grant submissions and receipt of National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards by racial/ethnic minority groups. In our current study, we assessed program impact on trainees' self-efficacy related to grant writing. The program was conducted with two cohorts: one in June 2014 and one in June 2015. We used a 19-item grant writing self-efficacy scale drawn from the 88-item Clinical Research Assessment Inventory of three domains (conceptualizing, designing, and funding a study) to predict whether self-efficacy influences researchers' grant submissions. Trainees were assessed prior to and following program completion with subsequent assessments at 6 and 12 months beyond participation. The majority of trainees were Black (62%), female (62%), and had obtained a PhD (90%). More than half (52%) were assistant professors and 57% had none or <1 year of research experience beyond postdoctoral training. However, 24% of trainees reported no postdoctoral research training. NRMN STAR trainees' self-efficacy significantly improved on all three domains exhibiting a 2.0-point mean change score on two domains (conceptualizing and design) and 3.7 point mean change score on the domain, funding a study. Findings suggest that NRMN's STAR provides impactful, confidence-building training for diverse, early stage investigators with little-to-no skills, experiences, or low self-efficacy in writing research grants.

Advancing Health Equity through Organizational Mentoring Policies at Minority-Serving Institutions.

Morehouse School of Medicine, a collaborative partner in the National Research Mentoring Network, established the Mentoring Academy Institutional Planning Forum (MA Forum) to help minority-serving institutions (MSI) optimize research mentoring. In this commentary, we describe the policy workshop and review survey data from six MSIs to assess the current state of organizational policies and activities that advance research mentoring. Twenty-eight institutional leaders, representing six MSIs, participated in an MA Forum between May 20, 2016 and May 11, 2017. After describing the MA Forum's background, design and recruitment strategy, we present a synthesis of institutional summaries built from responses to a 45-item survey that explored existing mentoring infrastructure, policies, and activities at each institution. There is a heavy reliance on extramural funds to facilitate research mentoring initiatives. Mentoring policies and activities were most often governed by individual programs rather than the institution. Thus, the research mentoring expertise was concentrated at the local level, which may prevent opportunities for future scalability and optimization. Given these findings, we offer recommendations to help MSIs establish a mentoring culture backed by institutional policy.

3388 Evaluation of Mentor Academy using self-assessed research mentoring competencies

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The goal of the Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (WF CTSI) Mentor Academy is to contribute to increasing the next generation of faculty with competencies specific to research mentoring. The curriculum of the Mentor Academy is adapted from an evidence-based national curriculum developed by the National Research Mentoring Network and includes 20 contact hours of didactic and experiential training, complemented with outside readings and assignments. A pre-post-follow-up competency assessment is built in as part of the curriculum for both participants and their current mentees. The purpose of this study was to assess self-rated research mentoring competencies among the Mentor Academy participants to better understand the effectiveness of the Mentor Academy. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: A total of 37 mid-level or early senior faculty members from WF have participated in the 3 Mentor Academy cohorts that have completed so far. All of the participants receive 5% salary support and are expected to regularly participate in Mentor Academy sessions; complete a pre, post, and 6-month follow-up self-assessments; and provide a list of their active mentees. The identified mentees are also asked to assess the participating mentors’ research mentoring competencies before the start and 6-months after the end of the Mentor Academy. The same list of 26 mentoring competencies are included in the self-assessments for both mentors and mentees. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The initial results of the self-assessments suggest that mentors are coming into the academy with a rather high self-assessed competency ratings. The change in competency ratings pre/post is not as significant. On average the change in self-assessed competency ratings increases by 1.0 on a 7-point scale. Interestingly enough, for 2 of the cohorts were mentees were also asked to assess their mentors’ competencies, the mentees rated their mentors as having a higher competency (for all 26 items) than what the mentor rated themselves, at both pre and 6-month follow-up assessments. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: After compiling data for 3 different cohorts, we are consistently seeing similar patterns in self-assessed competency ratings; participants are coming in with a high level of competency and an increased level of competency rating by mentees. These findings need to be further considered. For example, the program administrators need to discuss how participants are recruited, if we are recruiting the intended users, and what should we be expecting as an outcome(s) of the program. We also need to further explore different perceptions of mentor-mentee relationships and expectations to see how reliable are the data from mentees. A collaboration with the National Research Mentoring Network is also needed to see how the self-assessed competencies compare to those utilizing their curriculum outside of WF.

3362 Enhancing Mentee Motivation Using the CARES Mentoring Model: A New Online Mentor Training Module

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The goals of this project are to develop, disseminate, and evaluate an online, self-paced training module designed to help mentors better understand and support their mentees’ motivation. The module introduces learners to the CARES mentoring model, which is rooted in Self-Determination Theory (SDT), one of the leading theories of motivation. According to SDT, an optimal mentoring environment provides support for mentees’ psychological needs for Competence, Autonomy, Relatedness, Equity in extrinsic resources, and Structure (CARES). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Content for the CARES online module was drawn from a previously developed two-hour mentor training workshop designed for delivery in a face-to-face, small group setting. Content experts developed a slide deck and speaker notes. These materials were edited, adapted into a storyboard, and translated into a 60-minute interactive online module created with e-learning authoring software (Articulate Storyline). An evaluation survey was developed to assess mentors’ perceived skills gains related to course content (e.g., “Encouraging my mentees to think about how well their psychological needs are being met within the work/training environment,” “Recognizing how diversity, equity, and inclusion can be salient issues that impact a mentee’s motivation”) and mentors’ confidence gains in their ability to implement motivation-focused practices into their mentoring relationships (e.g., “Autonomy: Giving my mentees freedom in deciding what goals to pursue and how they to do their work,” “Competence: Working with my mentees to establish appropriate challenges to stretch their abilities”). The module was beta tested in October 2018 by 11 individuals with experience as mentors and in facilitating mentor training. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The beta testing process produced useful recommendations for improving clarity of content, visual design, and navigation. Users expressed a high level of enthusiasm for the content, which included a combination of practical information and empirical support for the CARES mentoring model. They also appreciated specific functionality in the module, including the presentation of brief case examples of mentoring scenarios that enhance or diminish motivation, opportunities for self-reflection, and a downloadable guide for initiating conversations with mentees about different domains in the CARES model. Evaluation data (quantitative and qualitative) from beta testers (n=11) are being analyzed. A preliminary examination of these findings found that mentors report gains from before to after the training in their self-perceived skills and confidence levels. Moreover, all expressed an intention to makes changes in their mentoring practices as a result of the training. Comments indicated potential value in offering a follow up face-to-face experience in which mentors can hear from others who have successfully implemented the CARES approach and acquire practice in skillfully implementing the CARES conversation guide with their mentees. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This innovative e-learning module offers a readily accessible and theoretically driven training approach to help mentors recognize the value of supporting their mentees’ motivation, and become more intentional in implementing motivation-focused practices into their mentoring relationships. In future work, the CARES module will be pilot tested with specific cohorts and in different implementation scenarios (as a standalone training, or combined with other programming) and made available to users nationally with support from the University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute and the NIH National Research Mentoring Network.