Mapping Sponsored Collaborations Sylvia Kwon, PhD Schools of Health Evaluation Program University of California, Davis AEA Annual Conference October 29, 2016 Atlanta, GA In this presentation, I’ll be discussing a collaboration map I designed using information our team collected for a national results-based accountability project.

Results-Based Accountability (RBA) As most of you probably already know, results- or outcomes-based accountability, also known as RBA, is a system that identifies and defines expected results (or outcomes) and requires regular collecting and reporting of data to demonstrate whether those results are achieved. http://alwaysbeans.com.au/default.html

Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program Catalyzing Innovation ncats.nih.gov/ctsa Turning scientific discoveries into health benefits takes too long. To help get more treatments to more patients more quickly, the Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program supports an innovative national network of more than 50 medical research centers that work together to improve the translational research process. Led by the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the CTSA Program is designed to tackle system-wide scientific and operational problems to make the clinical and translational research enterprise more efficient. CTSA Program research centers serve as hubs locally and regionally to catalyze innovation in training, research tools and processes. CTSA Program Hubs This past summer, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, launched its own version of RBA called the Common Metrics Initiative at all 62 of its Clinical and Translational Sciences Awards centers, also known as or CTSCs or CTSAs. CTSA Program hubs collaborate with each other to develop, demonstrate and disseminate innovative methods and technologies to turn scientific discoveries into clinical advances more efficiently.

One of the initial results or outcomes NCATS identified for the Common Metrics Initiative is percent of subsequent publications for pilot projects funded by all CTSA centers starting from 2012. Since 2006, the CTSC at UC Davis has provided funding for almost 100 pilot programs led by mostly new and ideally multidisciplinary research teams.

Filling in the scorecard prompts, We immediately decided that we would make the most of all this time and effort by not only collecting data for determining outcomes but also collecting data, such as disciplinary background of researchers, to understand the pilot program from a process evaluation perspective, or more specifically, to describe how pilot programs result in publications.

Which types of pilot projects result in publications? Do more multidisciplinary collaborations lead to increased publications? How can we visually represent these collaborations and results? As part of our internal process evaluation project, we came up with three overarching questions regarding the pilot program at the UC Davis CTSC.

www.lucidchart.com

Which types of pilot projects result in publications? Do more multidisciplinary collaborations lead to increased publications? So to go back to our first two guiding questions.

Strategic Planning Questions What do we value as a program? How much do we want to conform to RBA? How do we create opportunities to do process evaluation?

Thank you Sylvia Kwon sekwon@ucdavis.edu