3369 Assessment to Action: Engaging network member’s in identifying needs and directions of network improvement

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To complete a needs assessment and action planning process that engaged clinical and translational research network members in identifying needs through survey feedback, characterizing the needs in small group sessions, and developing recommendations for action at the network’s annual scientific meeting. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The project included (1) a survey of 357 members across partner institutions from the Great Plains IDeA CTR Network, (2) 6 - 90 minute brainstorming sessions to characterize needs identified through survey assessment, and (3) 6 - 60 minute sessions to develop recommendations for network improvement based on the characterization activity. Approximately 75 members participated in the characterization and recommendation sessions. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Seven areas of need from the survey were identified based upon the frequency of identification by network members (support to move research across the translational spectrum, database design and management, data access and sharing, data analysis, recruitment and retention of subjects, support for members who have submitted grants but were repeatedly unsuccessful, mentoring). Members indicated which characterization sessions they were interested in attending and based on the enrollment numbers needs related to unsuccessful grant submitters and mentoring were combined as were needs related to database design and data access-sharing. Sessions resulted in 8 inter-related recommendations for network action that included to (1) develop GP-CTR directory/registry of clinicians, researchers, system partners, that can be used to identify people that want to be involved in research partnerships or mentoring, (2) create a GP CTR Navigators Program to will provide support to network members throughout the collaborative research and grant preparation process, (3) identify and disseminate information about assets (funding, databases/registries) that exist amongst network partners that can be leveraged by member, (4) develop a searchable repository of evidence-based interventions for T3/T4 efforts, (5) review GP CTR supported professional development, and technological resource offerings and identify potential gaps, (6) facilitate opportunities for peer support/networking, (7) provide guidance to GP CTR network institutions looking to adopt policies that will support translational research collaboration, and (8) identify potential barriers to GP CTR network engagement (i.e., infrastructure, communication, marketing). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This process allowed for a wide range of network members to contribute to actionable recommendations for CTR leadership to move into action and improve the scientific network’s ability to conduct clinical and translational research.