NORDP 2018 Annual Research Development Conference

Idea Showcase, Session B
Tuesday, May 8, 2018, 5:30–6:30 p.m. | Regency A&B

An Effective Limited Submission Process -- and working with Key offices across the university

Download the Poster PDF

Internal Selection competitions are extramural grant programs that limit the number of applications an institution may submit. At Washington University in St. Louis, the Office of Vice Chancellor for Research (OVCR) manages the Internal Selections process, and specifically managed by me. There are critical elements to an effective internal selections program. Since my time in this role, the Internal Selections Process has made significant advances.

Even though the Internal Selections Process is managed within the central unit (OVCR), other offices throughout the university are helpful with regard to the Internal Selections Process (i.e. our partners). Specifically the relationship between the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Alumni & Development Office of Corporate and Foundation Relations is key to the success of the Internal Selections Process.


Catherine Determan

Big Ten - Ivy League Traumatic Brain Injury Research Collaboration: A Unique Approach for Multi-Institutional, Cross-Conference Research Collaboration

The Big Ten – Ivy League Traumatic Brain Injury Research Collaboration is a multi-institutional research effort whose mission is to better understand the causes and effects of sport-related concussion and head injuries. Established in 2012, the 22-insitution membership is a well-integrated group of clinicians and scientists working in partnership to study the effects of traumatic brain injury in sports and to, ultimately, improve the health and wellness of our student-athletes.

A unique aspect of the TBI Collaboration is that it is the only one of its kind that unites two Division I athletic conferences that has the support of the conference Presidents. Additionally, the administration of the TBI Collaboration is housed in the Big Ten Academic Alliance, which is a 60 year old academic consortium of the Big Ten universities. The support of the Big Ten Academic Alliance leverages people and expertise by maintaining a common vision, providing regular communications, utilization of convening mechanisms, and by developing and maintaining successful collaborations.

Through program evaluations, lessons learned since the inception of the collaboration, and specific examples of success that have been a result of the collaboration, this session provides many valuable and tested strategic approaches that had led to a successful research collaboration.

In this showcase poster, we will address the circumstances around which this collaboration was formed; note the research, clinical, and funding benefits that have occurred; and detail the lessons learned for those considering the creation and management of a large-scale research collaborations.


Martha Cooper

Building Resilience by Bringing Research Development and Research Administration Together

Download the Poster PDF

Traditionally, central research development (RD) professionals and research administration (RA) professionals have significantly different roles and responsibilities. Yet both RD and RA professionals are faculty facing positions that can influence the research culture of an institution. At Saint Louis University we have launched an ambitious goal to double our research enterprise in five years. To accelerate progress towards this goal, we are embarking on major organizational changes and re-envisioning the way research is supported on campus.

Through the creation of centralized “Grant Operation (GO) Centers,” we are bringing pre-award, post-award, and research development professionals into the Office of the Vice President for Research. With this new infrastructure, our goals are to raise the level of services offered to faculty, offer more specialized and personalized services, and ultimately submit higher quality proposals for funding.

In this showcase poster, we will discuss (1) the centralization process of combining RD and RA; (2) the advantages and challenges of this model; and (3) how this can create a more resilient research support infrastructure in a changing research climate.

Under this model, we have begun to see results in reaching a larger number of faculty through close proximity and partnerships among RA and RD professionals; increasing the capacity of both RA and RD professionals through cross-training; offering a variety of career development and leadership opportunities to retain RA and RD talent; offering opportunities for career advancement and promotion; and raising the profile of SLU Research within the community and sponsoring agencies.


Jasmin Patel, Alexis Bruce-Staudt

Collaborative Collision: An Innovative Approach to Interdisciplinary Networking

Download the Poster PDF

Lack of personal connections between faculty in different Colleges, Departments, and Centers is a common barrier to interdisciplinary research. The goal of Collaborative Collision is to foster these connections by providing an atmosphere for researchers to discuss their expertise, potential contributions to a research team, and possible partnerships to enhance their own research. Based around a general research theme, Collaborative Collision is designed to involve faculty from as many colleges and departments as possible, as well as align with the relative strengths and goals of the university.

This showcase poster will present a case study of Collaborative Collision at Florida State University focused on the event’s background, logistics, and impact. Presenters will share their experiences planning and executing two Collaborative Collison’s, enabling audience members to replicate the event at their own institutions.


Mike Mitchell, Beth Hodges, Rachel Goff-Albritton

Connecting faculty to funding opportunities - a multi-level approach to engage researchers in finding funding opportunities to meet their career goals

The goal of this idea showcase is to provide research development practitioners tools and strategies to help connect faculty to funding opportunities that best match their research interests. Presenters will focus on the importance of a holistic approach to understanding faculty researchers’ individual needs at each institution. Decades of combined experience and organizational metrics shows this method has much greater success and satisfaction than standard “push” efforts which may be less personalized.

This session will discuss why it is important to keep in contact with targeted faculty on a regular basis, build trust, and be an approachable resource. The program will also discuss how to keep ongoing relationships of collaboration. Search engines like PIVOT, SPIN and GrantsForward are ways faculty may find funding, but if they do not know how to use the tool to their advantage then it is useless and unused. This session will look at three groups of researchers on campuses - postdocs, junior faculty and full-time faculty - and discuss appropriate interventions for each group. Matching faculty with funding opportunities requires a multi-level approach as well as a concerted effort over time.

Finally, this session will show how research development professionals might map and track successes with faculty. Tracking opportunities, writing proposals and getting awards are standard measures, but it also takes planning. Many faculty, especially those who are working toward tenure, may map out various projects, set publication goals, have teaching loads, but their research funding plan is not always an active document or managed regularly. The research development professional can help motivate faculty to better plan. Participants will take-away strategies and tools from successful examples of working with faculty and motivating them with a life-cycle plan for garnering external funding and providing targeted funding opportunities to help cultivate continuous interest.


Camille Coley, Gina Betcher, Mindali Dean, Barbara Wygant

Developing Systems and Services Necessary for Effective Research Data Management

Download the Poster PDF

The scientific community is expanding its outlook on the data that results from research. As many funding bodies and governments begin to mandate that research data be made openly available, researchers are looking for new ways to manage and share research data. Research development professionals have the opportunity to serve an important role in guiding these efforts. The poster will examine various aspects of research data management, including: data literacy, data management plans for grant proposals, publishing data, data discovery, metrics for research data impact, and funders’ public access policy mandates. Audience will also explore how research development professionals can partner with their library colleagues and research information providers to develop guidance materials for their faculties.


Holly Falk-Krzesinski, Karen Markin

Evaluation as an Integral Component of the Research Development Process

Download the Poster PDF

Government funders of research often require that projects include an evaluation component to assess the progress and impact of proposed activities, as well as to aid project team members continuously improve and increase the likelihood of success. Evaluation is intended to determine the merit and worth of the research, while also serving as evidence of accountability to funders and the public. When your project requires an evaluation plan, what should you do?

The goal of this poster is to familiarize Research Development Professionals with the role of evaluation and provide ideas on how to integrate evaluation into research projects with varying levels of staff capacity and funding. Participants will gain basic knowledge of how evaluation can benefit their project, how to plan for an evaluation, characteristics to look for in an Evaluator, and how to locate an Evaluator. Additionally, participants will learn special considerations when working with an External Evaluator.

Incorporating evaluation into research development promotes resiliency in many aspects, such as increased capacity of project team members to use data to inform decision-making, recognition of areas for improvement, and documentation of successes and challenges that can help research teams strategically plan for the future. As more funding agencies are beginning to require evaluation, this poster session speaks to the theme of Resilience in a Shifting Research Landscape by providing practical tips and resources to help Research Development Professionals adapt to new and/or changing funder expectations.

Prior NORDP conference sessions related to evaluation have typically been focused on metrics to assess research success. This session is intended to expand the Research Development Professional’s knowledge of the evaluation process and provide resources and tips to select the right evaluation professional for projects with varying budget sizes and research content.


Katie Allen, Cindy Shuman

FRDO: A unique model for enhancing research success at the University of New Mexico

Download the Poster PDF

As more universities invest in research development offices and services to better navigate the shifting research funding landscape, there is a growing interest in demonstrating the benefits of that investment. The University of New Mexico has created a hybrid model of centralized and college level research development services (Faculty Research Development Network) and implemented a service management tracking software. We will 1) describe our hybrid model of research development services and the tracking software system that is used throughout campus; 2) demonstrate how we are using the system to quantitatively and qualitatively assess the effectiveness of the Faculty Research Support Network; 3) demonstrate how we are using the system to assess the impact of broad and targeted marketing of the Network’s services to faculty; and 4) identify data the system cannot provide.


Stephanie Tofighi, Jennifer Kavka, Mary Jo Daniel

GA vs VA Tech Neuroscience Research: A comparative analysis of reach and impact using Altmetric and Dimensions data to evaluate funding impact

We compared Georgia Institute of Technology and VA Tech using the Dimensions research insights platform and the Altmetric Explorer for Institutions platform. We identified neuroscience publications from both institutions and compared their highly cited papers to their papers with most attention.

GA Tech produced 449 articles associated with 90 grants, 54 patents, and 2 clinical trials. VA Tech produced 751 articles associated with 60 grants, 35 patents, and 1 clinical trial. We sorted the publication lists by their top 10 highest scoring Altmetric papers and 10 mostly highly cited papers evaluating:

Median Altmetric Attention Score
Total number of mentions in the News, Twitter and blogs
Demographic reach in News, Twitter, and Facebook
Total number of citations
Collaborations with the US and internationally
Journals the articles were published in

Interestingly there was no overlap between the 10 most highly cited articles in both data sets and articles with the 10 highest Altmetric Attention Scores. The most highly cited articles received very little attention in online digital platforms and were published in less well known journals. Articles with high Altmetric Attention Scores were published in high profile journals with established name recognition and high impact factors like Science, Nature, and PLoS One.

While no conclusions can be drawn as to whether one institution was “better” than the other, higher Altmetric Attention scores do mean that more groups are engaging with the research online and thus the reach of those articles exceeds academia. Further qualitative analysis of the actual attention (via the Altmetric Explorer platform) is necessary to identify what stakeholder groups were engaging, what their sentiment was, and which online platforms were the most successful in disseminating the research.


Sara Rouhi

Guidance on writing a successful NRSA application

Download the Poster PDF

As the funding landscape becomes more difficult, it is important to understand what elevates a proposal past the funding line. This is especially true for graduate students and postdocs who may not have much experience in writing grants, nor do they have the time at their career stage for countless submissions. Here, we present advice to give to students and postdocs who are writing NRSA F31 and F32 proposals. Through discussion with study section participants and analysis of funded proposals, we have come up with writing advice that goes beyond the normal NIH instructions. We have presented this guidance to grad students and postdocs at our university and have seen a tremendous increase in scores and funded proposals.


Jeremiah Paulus, Angel Syrett

Hanover's Grant Academy: Concentrated Development and Proposal Support for Junior Faculty


Hanover Research


Identify High-Impact Experts: An Examination of Collaboration and Research Networks


Clarivate Analytics


Igniting Research Collaborations: an innovative pilot program, currently with 17-fold return on investment

Funding agencies increasingly support team science and multi-disciplinary research (1). Indeed, the proportion of collaborative (multiple principal investigator, MPI) proposals submitted to NIH increased by 50% from 2010 to 2013 (2), and the number of MPI awards at NSF now matches those from single investigators (3). Effective pilot programs have the potential to build and sustain meaningful collaborations with high potential for funding and scientific advancement.

Under the leadership of Dr. Linda Dwoskin, the University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy implemented a university-wide pilot program with the overarching goal of creating new cross-college collaborations. Since 2014, the Igniting Research Collaborations (IRC) program grew from two participating colleges and $80K in support to ten diverse colleges and almost $300K in support. Of the 26 pilots awarded at $15K to $35K, 15% successfully competed for extramural funding for a total of almost $12M—a 17-fold return on investment. Further success is expected as 11 recent projects are ongoing. Principal features of the IRC program include: 1. optional networking event where faculty engage with new collaborators, and interests are matched to topic areas; 2. associate dean involvement throughout the lifecycle from inviting faculty to the networking event to selecting proposals for funding; 3. concluding symposium to share progress and results as well as stimulate next cycle’s projects. Next steps involve integration with units at the university level to streamline processes.

Summary: The growing IRC program engages collaborative researchers and senior administrators to produce innovative cross-college proposals.



Julie Oestreich, Linda Dwoskin

Mandatory Scientific Peer Review: Lessons Learned in Year One

Download the Poster PDF

Lurie Children’s Hospital has made Providing an Environment that Fosters Scholarly Activity an institutional priority. This includes successfully implementing a Scientific Peer Review to improve the funding rate of Federal grants. This poster describes the evolution of this process over the last 5 cycles and chronicles our successes and failures as well as important Lessons Learned. The inclusion of this project in the 2018 hospital goals resulted in increased attention and Quality Improvement resources which moved this program past its infancy and into sustainability. This project can serve as a guide for others who implement important but unpopular programs.


Kelly Carroll, Marianne Reed, Reuben Fan

NSF CAREER Grant Writing Bootcamps: A Trickle Up Theory of Faculty Development

Is it possible to incrementally change an institutional grants and collaboration culture by inculcating “better” practices among junior faculty? This is a key premise of the NSF CAREER Bootcamp program offered to all eligible assistant professors across the City University of New York’s 24 colleges and Advanced Science Research Center. The initial motivation for the NSF Bootcamps, first held for the 2017 cycle, was to help individual faculty write more competitive CAREER proposals. However, recognizing a gap in support for junior faculty and that the culture tends to rely on “just-in-time” writing, the Bootcamps also reflect a “trickle up” theory of faculty professional development. For the 2018 NSF CAREER cycle, the Bootcamps have been redesigned as a multi-phase program with the following objectives:

  1. Create explicit opportunities for faculty to begin strategizing for their proposals early
  2. Open the Bootcamps to all eligible faculty at all 24 of CUNY’s colleges.
  3. Make the intensive writing group portion competitive to serve the most motivated and prepared to succeed
  4. Identify writing group participants likely to be enthusiastic about both the group interaction and ultimately, mentoring faculty at their home institutions.
  5. Enhance the Advanced Science Research Center’s (ASRC) mission to foster and support collaborative research across CUNY, as the institutional host for the Bootcamps.
  6. Provide leadership from below (or without authority) on best practices in proposal development and grant writing.

The poster will describe the 4 elements of the NSF CAREER Bootcamp: Primer; Hackathon; Core of 14 lecture/presentations; and Intensives, a program of approx. 16 weeks of intensive writing, with an emphasis on a structured writing timeline with significant ongoing peer feedback. Formative evaluations of the program will be documented in the poster.


Linda Vigdor

Powered by NeRD: Multidisciplinary Translational Brain Research

The Neuroscience Research Development (NeRD) office at the UT Southwestern Medical Center provides investigators with research development (RD) services to enhance translational research teams, increase funding and expedite the publication of manuscripts. Our office consists of dedicated scientific writers and research administration professionals that function as members of the research team to manage submissions, specializing in complex, multi-department, multi-institutional grant submissions. We provide “pre-pre-awards” services through study design consultation, navigation of institutional research resources and identification of collaborators. Furthermore, we assist with post-awards administration and manage study start-up. RD services are available to all faculty, fellows, residents and students conducting neuroscience research spanning several departments within the newly formed Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute (PODBI).

NeRD was instrumental in the submission of over 400 grants (since January 2013) with a funding rate of 28%. Our writers have provided substantive and copy editing services for numerous manuscripts. We work synergistically with collaborative teams to establish and grow important institutional, state and national research initiatives, such as the Neuroscience Nursing Research Center, North Texas Concussion Registry Study and Alzheimer’s Disease Center, respectively.

NeRD augments research education by providing grant writing and funding strategy seminars, manuscript writing workshops, and research mentoring. Notably, we have developed a training program for the next generation of RD professionals, the NeRD Associate-in-Training (NeAT) program. In addition, we have several other education initiatives designed to enable the academic success of students, fellows and junior faculty.

In sum, NeRD is key to successful neuroscience research and will position UTSW as the premier destination for brain research and patient care.


Samarpita Sengupta, Charlene Supnet

Raising Researchers: Teaching the Next Generation Using Innovative Methods

Download the Poster PDF

This idea showcase is intended for faculty and staff who work with medical trainees who are required to conduct research as part of their training, in an interdisciplinary medical center and/or emerging research center. The session will focus on tools to develop and implement non-traditional platforms for disseminating research concepts to medical trainees. The presentation has three main objectives: present the barriers and successes associated with creating non-traditional platforms for disseminating research concepts, discuss the importance of engaging medical trainees to get their ideas and include them in the process, and provide a guide for implementing a similar research development program that can be molded to fit any organization. The information presented in this workshop will be delivered utilizing three components: lecture, interaction, and discussion. In the lecture component, the presenters will discuss the barriers to developing a research platform dissemination plan that is engaging for medical trainees. Specifically, the presenters will address how to ensure that research education is received when there are many graduate medical education requirements. The presenters will also discuss the successes of creating a non-traditional research development program and disseminating the information in a way that is engaging for medical trainees, specifically how to include the medical trainees in the process of creating the research development platform so the medical trainees are interested and excited to participate. As a result, they are more inclined to conduct research. We will discuss the strategy needed to develop an effective research dissemination platform for medical trainees and provide the audience with a guide to implementing a similar research development program in their organization.


Heather McIntosh, Krista Kezbers

Research Development MacGyver’s: Creative Problem Solving to Build Personal and Organizational Resiliency

The modern academic workplace is a fluid cacophony of shifting and often competing priorities. Increasingly universities are encouraging academics to think creatively and develop new innovative and multidisciplinary research teams. Universities are also watching the funding landscape shift in unanticipated ways, new models for undergraduate education being rapidly adopted, global administrative and scientific challenges are manifesting themselves on a local level. Finding practical ways to develop the skills necessary to adjust quickly to these challenges can be difficult. Many times new thinking or new ways of tackling this fluid landscape are needed. This idea showcase will introduce the Creative Problem Solving Process as one possible framework to increase the capacity for resilience, often needed in our modern environment. This posterwill focus on behaviors that can be easily adopted to enhance creativity, tackle wicked challenges, model innovative behaviors, and facilitate new and ideational thinking. In this fun and engaging session participants will have the opportunity to learn this methodology through participatory skill development geared at modeling creative behaviors. New approaches to exploring ideas and giving useful feedback will be demonstrated as well as other tips and tools that participants can use by the time they leave.


Donnalyn Roxey, Andy Burnett

Research Development Professionals and Research Librarians Partnering to Grow the Research Enterprise by Supporting Faculty Development

Research development professionals and librarians both leverage office-specific strengths to support research institutions’ health and sustainability. Given the pressures of a shifting research landscape and low or dwindling institutional resources, RD staff and librarians need to consider partnering to grow the research enterprise. At North Carolina A&T State University, which is an R2, HBCU, and land-grant institution, the Office of Research Services and Project Management and F. D. Bluford Library have been partnering for years to support faculty development for research. Three years ago, we initiated a more integrated partnership that, as it has grown, has revealed areas in which our office strengths complement each other. It has also allowed us to begin to form further collaborations, infusing the principles and initiatives of the research enterprise into more of the campus’s culture. We have also learned more about faculty needs while working together than we could have separately.

In this idea showcase, we will describe how to bring together these two units’ expertise to better support an institution’s research enterprise. First, we will describe the synergies between the research development and library professions that helped us work together, delineating the general model we followed. Second, we will share the specific stages our relationship underwent, with examples to help RD professionals identify promising points at which to initiate and/or build a partnership with their librarian colleagues. Third, we will note challenges we have faced and explain how those might affect other RD departments’ planning. Finally, we will provide an overview of the faculty development activities that we coordinated together, showing how those and similar activities can benefit any institution’s research enterprise.

For attendees, the end takeaway will be a faculty development model and materials for adapting to their home institutions’ specific situations.


Paul Tuttle, Nina Exner

Risks and Rewards in Developing Clinical Trial Research Programs

Download the Poster PDF

This poster presents an overview of sponsor and investigator roles and responsibilities in clinical trials research. The unique role of a sponsor-investigator is highlighted to illustrate the risk and rewards in developing an infrastructure to support this type of complex clinical trial. Developing sponsor-investigator trials requires a resilient understanding and implementation of the FDA definitions because their interpretation has had an impact on court decisions in cases where a claim of injury is made.

Developing a clinical trial research infrastructure is a complex task for a research development officer. Clinical trials research promises the highest rewards, but there is significant risk. Development officers who succeed with clinical trials research build some of the most significant research portfolios. But, they are also tasked with creating and overseeing the appropriate and effective institutional infrastructure that is required to achieve success. Everyone should know their obligations, understand what they have to do, and be the right person for the job. This poster outlines the foundations on which the development officer measures risk and rewards for promoting this resource, in general, and implementing projects in particular. Some basic legal theory will show how these complex requirements have mattered in particular claims of injury, and how understanding the foundations will help the development officer to quickly recover from difficult situations.


Doug Mounce

Scaling Best Practices in Research Development to Fit the Needs of a PUI

In this idea showcase, a research administrator and a research developer will discuss how to right-size research development operations to meet the unique needs of a primarily undergraduate institution (PUI). Many PUIs are setting ambitious goals to expand their research portfolios at a time when federal research dollars are declining and competition is increasing. Whether to enrich student development with hands-on research experiences, increase the visibility of the faculty and the institution, or close budget shortfalls, more PUIs are beginning to recognize the value of sponsored research in supporting their institutional missions. However, university administrators may have a limited understanding of research development and its critical role in securing external funding, and there is often a perceived lack of workload or insufficient budget to support a dedicated staff member. Meanwhile, faculty at PUIs may have limited experience applying for external funding and look to their institution’s research administrators for guidance, putting PUI staff in the complicated position of providing research development “by default,” in addition to the administrative and financial functions they were hired and trained to perform.


Linnea Minnema, Jennifer Webster

Scholarly Communication Support to Increase Researcher Productivity, Discoverability, and Social Reach


Donald Samulack


Shifting the Siloed Research Paradigm: Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Teams

Download the Poster PDF

Our idea showcase poster will share strategies we as research development (RD) professionals have successfully implemented to facilitate the creation and work of Interdisciplinary Research teams at Brigham Young University. Interdisciplinary research (IDR) is part of the new funding reality, and university faculty often need RD support to develop effective, innovative IDR teams, particularly at institutions like BYU that are focused on undergraduate teaching and mentoring and that receive relatively small amounts of external funding for research.

The BYU RD team has implemented several strategies to support effective IDR groups, such as

  • hosting annual research networking events
  • developing a university-wide research interest database
  • using dedicated space and staff resources to facilitate IDR’s
  • managing a new Interdisciplinary Research Origination Awards program that will provide a significant institutional investment in seed funding for IDR projects

We will discuss how these strategies facilitate the creation and on-going work of IDR teams at BYU. Participants will learn about BYU’s efforts to create and support strong IDR groups are leading to

  • more multi-disciplinary projects
  • “out of the box” innovations
  • greater opportunities for student mentoring across majors
  • more competitive proposals for external research funding

At NORDP in 2017 we described how we share scare resources and collaborate as an informal RD team to maximize RD support for faculty in the colleges we support. The strategies we will present this year describe additional collaborative efforts across all disciplines and should be of interest to research developers who want to facilitate and support strong IDR teaming.


Jaynie Mitchell, Kristen Kellems, Conrad Monson


Strategic Initiatives to Stimulate Research, Development, and Commercialization

Download the Poster PDF

In 2015, the University of Maine System (UMS) Board of Trustees (BOT) committed funds to support research and commercialization infrastructure and strategic initiatives via the Research Reinvestment Fund (RRF). The goal of the program is to strengthen research, development and commercialization activities that are tied to businesses and industries. An initial $10.5M was committed to be distributed over a five year period, with a significant portion of the funds set aside for internal competitive funding programs. An Advisory Board was formed to oversee the granting programs and ensure that funds are producing the greatest impact on research and economic development for the State of Maine. This oversight includes creating program guidelines (RFPs), establishing review processes, and setting award criteria consistent with the goals of the initiative. After three years of operation, the RRF program has received 298 proposals from faculty and researchers spanning all seven campuses of the UMS. Of these, 95 projects have been competitively selected for award totaling $3.5M in grant funding. The awards are distributed over four different funding mechanisms: Seed Grants; Planning Grants; Graduate Assistantships; and Undergraduate Assistantships. Key outcomes that have resulted thus far from these funded efforts include 66 follow-on grants submitted to external sponsors requesting $30.8M of which 18 were funded for a cumulative total of $8.4M. Of the 95 funded projects, 31 are funded at the larger Seed Grant level of ($50 - $100k for 12 months) and included 42 external collaborators representing critical sectors of Maine’s economy. For the last two years of program funding, significant program enhancements have been added to accelerate research commercialization outcomes. These include: faculty professional development on research commercialization and the creation of a technology accelerator designed to advance commercial outputs of projects within the funded portfolio.


Jason Charland, Luke Doucette

Telling the Story of Research: Four Key Components of Effective Research Websites

Changing funding patterns mean that the long term growth of the research enterprise requires effective, strategic communications about the value of university-led research. Yet, there are a variety of obstacles that make communicating about research challenging. Institutions need to communicate research to a much broader set of stakeholders who may have different interests, priorities, and levels of understanding. And faculty are not always effective at communicating their research to lay audiences. This presentation will offer a framework for contemporary communication, as well as case studies and solutions for:

  1. How to coordinate communications efforts with staff across campus
  2. Engage and train faculty
  3. Craft effective communications online and in print to effectively articulate the value and impact of an academic institution's research."


Ramón Steven Barthelemy

What Do the Data Say? Results from Quantitative Analysis of Faculty Research Development Impacts at a Comprehensive, Land-Grant Institution

The Office of Research and Economic Development (ORED) at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) established its Research Development Fellows Program (RDFP) in 2009. The goal of RDFP is to provide pre-tenure faculty with the information, resources, and approaches necessary to prepare competitive grant proposals. The program has three primary components: 1) learning activities to help fellows conceptualize project plans, interact effectively with program officers, identify funding opportunities, plan and draft proposals, and develop an understanding of the proposal review process; 2) one-on-one consultations with senior research administrators, faculty colleagues, and proposal development staff who provide advice to fellows regarding the proposal development process, including the creation of a concept paper and elevator pitch; and 3) group travel to Washington, D.C., so fellows may network with program officers. Over time, ORED has informally collected information about the value of RDFP – in some cases using this information to guide program refinement. While this has helped to inform RDFP planning and programming, it has been mostly qualitative or anecdotal, with fellow feedback and ad hoc suggestions taking center stage. In recognition of an increasingly competitive funding climate, a growing reliance on using metrics to evaluate performance, and an interest in strategically deploying its limited resources, ORED has started to conduct quantitative analysis of RDFP’s outcome impacts. The analysis provides a picture of RDFP’s influence on a number of factors related to faculty success, including: size of proposal budget requests, time to tenure and promotion, and retention. This poster will summarize the results of this analysis and discuss how this information is being utilized to guide future strategic planning. It will be an excellent follow-on to a panel presentation featuring RDFP delivered during the 6th Annual Research Development Conference in Portland.


Tisha Mullen, Nathan Meier, Matthew Dwyer

What We Did Last Summer (So Chairs Could Know What PIs Did Last Summer): Developing a Faculty Funding Development and Grant Activity Report

As research institutions collect and track more and more data points, there is a growing call from department chairs and leadership to provide a single source where information on faculty grants activity can be monitored. Over the past year, the MSK Grants & Contract unit in collaboration with our division’s information technology department, RTM-IT, has developed a Funding Development and Grant Activity Report (FDGAR) that offers a new approach to visualizing submission activity and grant success rates. The report provides chairs a way to monitor their department’s sponsor-base, inter-department collaborations, and submission frequency over time. This poster will review the impetus behind the development of the FDGAR, the multiple systems queried by the report, lessons learned in specification drafting, and information gleaned from stakeholder feedback and the G&C/RTM-IT collaboration process. Our experiences in creating this barometer of a department’s “submission health” may offer attendees a guide to building a similar resource as well as best practices in collaboration across multiple central offices.


David Widmer