CEC technical reports on this page include:
In this technical report, we report results of power calculations conducted to determine the smallest differences in outcomes between BUILD-exposed students and students not involved in BUILD that can be detected with 80% power, given the sample sizes of students at BUILD institutions that are expected to be available for longitudinal analysis.
This technical report details coding recommendations for well-represented groups (WRG) and under-represented groups (URG) that are consistent with groups that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have identified as underrepresented in the biomedical research enterprise. Specifically, the report describes the coding of WRG and URG being implemented in the consortium-wide survey data that is being used in the DPC-wide evaluation.
The original Mentor Competency Assessment (MCA) scale was published as "The mentoring competency assessment: validation of a new instrument to evaluate skills of research mentors" in 2013 by Fleming et al. in Academic Medicine, a Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. The 26-item scale measured six sub-domains of mentor competency: maintaining effective communication, aligning expectations, assessing understanding, addressing diversity, fostering independence, and promoting professional development. The original MCA was used in the national longitudinal Enhance Diversity Study (Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Faculty Annual Follow-up Survey 2017-2108 and 2019; National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) Annual Follow-up Survey 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2019) as part of the evaluation of the Diversity Program Consortium, supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH U54GM119024).
Funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) features a set of 10 linked awards granted to undergraduate institutions, each of which developed approaches intended to determine the most effective ways to engage students from diverse backgrounds in biomedical research. These awards also intend to prepare students to become potential future contributors to the NIH-funded research enterprise. The Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC) at UCLA has been charged with conducting a longitudinal, multi-method evaluation of the BUILD programmatic interventions designed to diversify the biomedical workforce (Davidson, Maccalla, Afifi, et al., 2017). This technical report documents the methodology for the qualitative analysis employed by the CEC case study evaluation team. See our other white paper for details on the protocols and data collection process.
Funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), BUILD (BUilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity) is a set of experimental training awards designed to learn how to attract students from diverse backgrounds into the biomedical research workforce and encourage them to become future contributors to the NIH-funded research enterprise. There are 10 primary BUILD grantees that include 11 institutions. This technical report describes the procedures used to identify comparator institutions for each of the BUILD institutions and reports the number and characteristics of the matched institutions. In particular, we describe (1) the formation of the candidate pool of potential comparator institutions; (2) the institutional characteristics used as matching variables; (3) the use of a matching procedure called coarsened exact matching to identify potential comparator institutions matched to BUILD schools; (4) refinement of the comparator list based on qualitative review; and (5) the final list of BUILD and comparator institutions. Due to confidentiality concerns, names or other identifying information of the comparator institutions are not provided.
Download PDF Version