Journal of Clinical and Translational Science (Apr 2024)

138 Supporting Early-Career Faculty Grant Proposals through Narrative Development Training: A Proposal Narrative Development Program for Early-Career Faculty

  • Kharma Foucher,
  • Kelly O’Shea,
  • Rebecca Milczarek

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.134
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8
pp. 41 – 41

Abstract

Read online

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Faculty pursuing their first independent research grants often struggle to express their ideas in a concise, compelling way. Thus, we developed the “Research and Scholarship Storytelling Bootcamp” to equip these faculty with narrative development skills applicable across disciplines and mechanisms. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Early-career researchers who were preparing either their first NIH R-series application or an NSF CAREER award proposal were invited to participate. Enrollment was limited to 20 participants. Those accepted learned the “And-But-Therefore” narrative framework by reading a short book and attending 4 synchronous lectures. Between sessions, they applied the framework by drafting abstracts and Specific Aims/Project Summary documents and reviewing their fellow participants’ work. We assessed participants' comfort with storytelling, perceptions of preparedness, and confidence regarding funding chances, before and after the program using a visual analog scale (max 100 points) and calculated Cohen’s d to evaluate the effect size of any changes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Thirty people applied for 20 slots, indicating strong demand. Eleven NIH applicants and 9 NSF applicants enrolled. Before the program, participants rated their comfort with storytelling at 45 ± 25, their preparedness at 39 ± 24, and their funding confidence at 39 ± 26. Nine total participants completed all sessions, assignments, and surveys. Completion rates were comparable for NIH- and NSF-targeting participants. After the program, completing participants reported increases in their comfort with storytelling (68 ± 14 post vs 32 ± 20 pre, d = 1.46), perceived preparedness (64 ± 20 post vs 48 ± 26 pre, d=0.58), and confidence in funding chances (56 ± 19 post vs 40 ± 27 pre, d=0.75). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This program was the first of its kind for multidisciplinary early-career faculty at our institution. The program successfully achieved its objectives for those who completed all activities. Future analysis of survey comments and proposal success rates will reveal barriers to full program engagement and opportunities for further training.