Diversity Program Consortium 2017 Annual Conference Evaluation Topline Report

Share this posting on social media!

Contact Info: NECalderon@mednet.ucla.edu and jfrank@chpr.em.ucla.edu

Diversity Program Consortium 2017 Annual Conference Evaluation Topline Report

The Diversity Program Consortium (DPC) met in Bethesda, MD, from October 9-11, 2017.  The annual grantee's conference brought together over 100 people from the BUILD, the NRMN, the NIH and the CEC.  This report presents the topline evaluation findings from their 2017 annual conference.

Data was collected onsite daily, with 63 participants completing evaluation forms for the October 9th Welcome Reception poster session and October 10th (Day 1), representing a 61% response rate.  Of the 63 participants completing the evaluation form, 44 were from BUILD centers, six were from the NIH, four represented the CEC and six people did not indicate their affiliation.   

The poster session during the Welcome Reception was highly valued by the 42 participants who completed this item.  Sixty-two percent of responders rated its usefulness as excellent or above average.  Another 33% rated the session average and only 2 people rated its usefulness below average.  Of note, 88% of the responders (n=44) rated the opportunity to interact with colleagues either excellent or above average. 

After welcomes and opening remarks on October 10th, the meeting offered a number of small breakout sessions, including Advancements in Mentor Training, BUILD models; NET Library, Resources for the DPC; Theories of Change: Measuring Institutional Climate Transformation; and Developing & Leveraging Intensive Partnerships.  Each of the sessions was rated highly on the criteria of usefulness, as shown in Table 1, below.

Table 1:  October 10 Morning Breakouts

Session

Percent Rating Excellent or Above Average

Usefulness

Interaction

Advancements in Mentor Training

100

100

NET Library

90

62.5

Theories of Change

83

72

Developing & Leveraging Institutional Partnerships

93

73

 

       

The afternoon of October 10th offered another set of small breakout sessions.  These included Culturally Responsive Approaches to Teaching; Developing Research Capacity in Teaching Intensive Institutions; Consortium Data Available for Analyses; and Hearing Student Voices, Use of Qualitative Data.  Ratings for usefulness and opportunity to interact are presented below in Table 2.

 

Table 2:  October 10 Afternoon Breakouts

Session

Percent Rating Excellent or Above Average

Usefulness

Interaction

Culturally Responsive Approaches

100

100

Developing Research Capacity

100

100

Consortium Data Available

87.5

69

Hearing Student Voices

90

100

 

 

Day 1 ended with a DPC Poster Session.  Of the 46 participants who responded, 89% rated its usefulness excellent or above average and 91% rated the opportunity to interact as excellent or above average.

 

On October 11 (Day 2), the meeting began with small group breakout sessions.  The topics were: Inclusion of Graduates and Post-Docs in Student Training; Sustainability: Scalable, Low- Cost, High Impact Strategies; Evaluation Working Group; General Program Management and Institutionalizing Best Practices, Undergraduates in STEM.  In Table 3, data is presented for these sessions.

 

Table 3:  October 11 Morning Breakouts

Session

Percent Rating Excellent or Above Average

Usefulness

Interaction

Inclusion of Graduates and Post-Docs

83

83

Sustainability

64

82

Evaluation Working Group

71

86

General Program Management

100

100

Institutionalizing Best Practices

77

92

 

        

The luncheon keynote speaker on Day 2, Dr. Maggie Werner Washburne was highly rated, with 90% of respondents (n=48) rating the usefulness of her presentation as excellent or above average.  However, only 12% of respondents (n=68) found the usefulness of the closing session on Dissemination to be either excellent or above average.  Of note, 71% of responders found the usefulness of the Dissemination session below average or poor.

 

General meeting evaluation data was provided by 48 participants: 93% of participants rated the organization of the meeting as excellent or above average; 79% rating the opportunity to interact at the meeting as excellent or above average; and 85% rated overall annual meeting experience as excellent or above average.

 

POST CONFERENCE DEBRIEF FINDINGS

A Debriefing Session with the Annual Conference Planning Committee  (ACPC) and with the Communications Working Group was held on November 14th using a “Thorns and Roses” feedback framework. The debriefs resulted in a compilation of lessons learned and highlights of successful elements. Overall comments were very positive and constructive. Some of the most important takeaways included the following:

  1. Parallel preparation for student conferences (SACNAS and ABRCMS) and annual grantees conference is very important for 2018.
  2. Participation from the larger NIH team on the initiative is insightful and strongly recommended for all conferences moving forward.
  3. Continuing to have a consortium-wide planning committee and timely decisions for planning is crucial.
  4. The inclusion of the full consortium for all conference activities created a sense of community and shared responsibility in a constructive way.
  5. Breakout sessions were highly rated and there was a sense that they should continue to be a core activity with even more time for the report back.
  6. A full pre-conference day and greater attendance/participation (e.g., communications editors/specialists) should be considered for 2018.
  7. Opportunity to interact with each other and to learn from each program through a poster session was valuable for presenters and attendees.
  8. Use of photos provided by BUILD/NRMN sites into the program, posters, and other materials was creative and much appreciated.

Some sites even took them to put in the Dean’s office!

  1. Overall organization and communication with facilitators (e.g., reminders, etc) pre and post conference was helpful in preparation for each session and sharing of materials.

Each section is highlighted in this newsletter and includes the location of the materials available.    

 

The Diversity Program Consortium Coordination and Evaluation Center at UCLA is supported by Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health / National Institutes of General Medical Sciences under award number U54GM119024.