Enhancing Philanthropy's Support of Biomedical Scientists Proceedings of a Workshop on Evaluation (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Research Program Evaluation at the American Heart Association--Nancy Fishman
Research Program Evaluation at the American Heart Association--Nancy Fishman
Pages 52-65
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 52... ...
To accomplish this the association strives to raise public awareness about healthy lifestyles, enhance the focus of prevention among health care providers, and provide funding to research programs that will enrich the existing pool of evidence-based research and identify new ways to prevent, detect, and treat cardiovascular disease and stroke, the nation's number one and number three leading causes of death, respectively. AHA RESEARCH PROGRAM The research program has two specific strategic goals: • Increase the capacity of the research community to generate the highest-quality research.
|
From page 53... ...
The goal of this award is to promote the independent status of promising beginning scientists. Eligible candidates include M.D., Ph.D., D.O., or equivalent faculty/ staff members initiating independent research careers, up to and including assistant professor (or equivalent)
|
From page 54... ...
EVALUATION AND THE SUPPORT OF SCHOLARS Research program evaluation is an important component of the AHA research program. In reviewing the association's research program evaluation efforts since 1988, several questions will be considered: 1.
|
From page 55... ...
This paper focuses on those AHA programs whose purpose is to provide mentored training or a bridge to the development of independent investigative careers. These include postdoctoral fellowship, including affiliate postdoctoral fellowships and the fellows of AHA/Bugher Centers for Molecular Biology in the Cardiovascular System (awards activated in 1986 and 1991)
|
From page 56... ...
The objectives of most programs were to assist in research career development and/or fund scientific discovery. The original evaluation plan was designed to measure success against specific program objectives, not to evaluate the productivity of individual awards or determine the long-term scientific impact of AHA funding.
|
From page 57... ...
Both funded and unfunded applicants are asked to complete the survey, which is intended to determine the extent to which AHA-funded individuals have established successful research careers and whether applicants whom the AHA selected for funding were significantly more productive than those not funded. Data collected include academic position, number of promotions, tenure status, extramural funding, and percentage of time dedicated to research.
|
From page 58... ...
The amount of time involved in an annual analysis of progress is prohibitive for over 2,000 awardees. Although scientific progress reports continue to be collected and reviewed annually, the objective information on academic promotion, publications, other funding, and honors has been eliminated from the progress report.
|
From page 59... ...
Postdoctoral Fellowships, Beginning Grants-in-Aid, and Scientist Development Grants Because the AHA's affiliate postdoctoral fellowships have existed for many years, both formative and outcomes evaluations have been conducted. Formative analyses have provided a good picture of the participants in the fellowship program (see Table 2)
|
From page 60... ...
• Led to change in target audience definition to include M.D.s or M.D.-Ph.D.s with clinical responsibilities who hold a title of instructor or a similar title due to their patient care responsibilities but who devote at least 80 percent full-time effort to research training M.D.s with clinical responsibilities. Outcomes assessments have provided intermediate outcomes assessed at award termination and longer-term outcomes via past applicant surveys and bibliometric analyses.
|
From page 61... ...
Productivity levels were similar to those of the postdoctoral fellows; grant-inaid recipients had 2.4 publications and 1.4 abstracts since receiving their awards. Nearly all believed that the award advanced their research careers.
|
From page 62... ...
Scientist Development Grants Though initiated in 1997, the Scientist Development Grant is a more recent program and is just reaching the point where a follow-up five years after award termination is possible. However, annual applicant profiles provide a good picture of the program's participants, and surveys at award termination provide information on the intermediate-term impact of the program.
|
From page 63... ...
Although the results suggested that more of those surveyed would choose the NIH award because of its prestige and higher initial salary support, the caliber of the Fellow-to-Faculty Transition Award (FTF) applicants, the fact that several expressed a preference for the FTF, and the positive comments made about the FTF reinforced the association's commitment to continue the program for at least two additional cycles.
|
From page 64... ...
Could a similar study be designed and repeated today? Also ahead is another round of past applicant surveys and bibliometric analysis to assess the longer-term impact of the Scientist Development grants on research careers.
|
From page 65... ...
1998. American Heart Association-Bugher Foundation Centers for Molecular Biology in the Cardiovascular System, Update on Progress.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.