1. Transforming “Mr. Jefferson’s” Institution
Overview of CHARGE Results & Future Plans
Welcome remarks from Gertrude
Any introductions of sr. leadership that need to be made (emphasis these are only the initiative leaders, here to answer specific questions related to their word, there are other team members not here)
Gertrude into Pam

2. Outline CHARGE Overview CHARGE Results New Projects & Future Plans
U.Va. Context
CHARGE Goals & Activities
CHARGE Results
Social Science Research Project
Academic Search Portal
Faculty Search Seminars
Enhancement Grants
In Progress
Other Activities
New Projects & Future Plans
Allies & Advocates
P&T Policy Review
Mentoring
Future Plans
Get Involved
Review the presentation outline
Purpose is to give you all overview of the program: accomplishments, what’s in progress, challenges and strategies we used to overcome them and a SWOT analysis; conclude with update on institutionalization and dissemination plans
If you have questions; please ask
The leaders of all of the activities are here today to answer your questions
And our evaluators are here to in case you have questions

3. CHARGE overview
Going to start with a brief overview of the CHARGE program and its context

4. U.Va. context Overview Results New Projects Get Involved
Women not Admitted Until 1971
Gap between institutional goals & practice for faculty diversity
Faculty Demographics
2010: 13.7% (n=40) of all STEM/SBS faculty were women
2013: 18.6% (n=80) of all STEM/SBS faculty were women
Surveys & Focus Groups
Women STEM faculty report feeling unrecognized, isolated, trapped in a place of male privilege
Gendered traditions protected & practiced as normative behavior
Some Change
1st female President
Important to keep in mind that uva did not admit women until 1971 and faculty diversity has not kept pace with changing population demographics
There have been some improvements
% of all STEM faculty were women
In 2013 the number rose to 18.6% as illustrated by our figures here
However when we began this grant, surveys of faculty showed women felt unrecognized, isolated, and trapped in a place of male privilege
Further, the “traditions” of UVA are highly gendered and tend to protect male privelege. For example, you will notice that none of the name plates in any uva building say “phd” and you will hear faculty referred to as mr. and ms. Not doctor or professor; even President sullivan is called ms by the board of visitors; another tradition often mentioned by women faculty is how the university runs business based on the old boy network; a system of exclusion and privilege based on networks, power, access to resources,
Bring up examples----grounds, first years, we celebrate his birthday--newcomers don't fit in, HR orientation gives quizzes
Since 2010 we’ve seen some change
And this fall, gender became a primary discussion point as the university came to terms with gender-based violence among students and the highly gendered culture on Grounds, whether a student of faculty member
In december, CHARGE team members submitted our EAB report with a cover to president sullivan reaffirming our commitment to address the structural violence that female faculty face
So how is CHARGE addressing these gender inequalities
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

5. 2007 to 2013 Comparisons of AAU & ADVANCE Grant Institutions
AAU Comparison Data
2007 to 2013 Comparisons of AAU & ADVANCE Grant Institutions

6. Comparison of % Women & URM TTT Faculty at U.Va., 2007 through 20131
While U.Va. ranked 52 out of 61 AAU Universities in 2007 (ranking above 9 others) for representation of women, we improved to 47 out of 60 in 2013 (ranking above 13 others)
1Data from the peer rankings in % women and % URR TTT faculty at all institutions in the Association of American Universities from 2007 to 2013
Note: This data is for ALL women and URM TTT faculty, not just STEM faculty

7. CHARGE GOALS & ACTIVITIES
Goal 1, Departmental Diversity: To strengthen and support departmental efforts to create a positive environment for all faculty with an emphasis on women
Structured Dialogues
Training Chairs and Deans
P&T Policy Review
Mentoring
Goal 2, Recruitment & Hiring: To increase the gender diversity of STEM/SBS departments
Equity Consultants
Academic Search Portal
Faculty Search Seminar
Goal 3, Tournament of Ideas: To generate & implement creative, grassroots solutions from across Grounds to barriers preventing the hiring & retention of women STEM/SBS faculty
Tournament
Review goals and activities that support them
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

8. CHARGE GOALS & ACTIVITIES
Goal 4, Enhancement Grants: To provide departments and women STEM/SBS faculty with resources to support hiring, recruiting, retention and professional development
Enhancement Grants
Recruitment Grants
Goal 5, Voices & Visibility: To increase the sense of belonging of STEM/SBS women faculty among their schools and departments
Social Science Research
Oral Histories with STEM Women Faculty
Photo Exhibit
Symposium (Year 5)
Review goals and activities that support them
Overview
Results
New Projects
Sustainability

9. 3rd Year site visit March 2015 Results Overview Results New Projects
Mid-program review to assess implementation of the grant, program effectiveness, and recommend course corrections
55 UVA faculty, senior administrators, and staff were interviewed by 6 NSF Site Visitors
Results
Successful site visit; very positive feedback
Report with recommendations in May
Will be changes and adjustments to program
Possible new projects
Adjustments or conclusion of current projects
Overall impressed with our accomplishments to date
Review goals and activities that support them
Overview
Results
New Projects
Sustainability

10. CHARGE Results
Now let’s turn to some of CHARGE accomplishments

11. Social Science Research
Safer Grounds
Survey Results
55% of female faculty and 60% of female students have concerns about safety
40% of female faculty and 42% of female students felt Grounds were too dark at night
Dark Grounds at night:
Less likely to use public and work spaces, such as labs
Less likely to feel “at home” at the University
20% of women faculty said they would be more likely to use University facilities at night if the Grounds were better lit
Introduce with introducing Sophie Trawalter, co-PI
SS Research (This is part of Goal 5---Voices and Visibility)
We believe CHARGEs social science research project is exploring a new variable in STEM women faculty’s success and advancement: perceived (and real) safety and its correlation to the use of space
Our question is this: (READ)
Surveys of faculty and students showed that female members of these populations overwhelmingly have concerns about their safety on Grounds and specifically they felt Grounds were too dark. Leading to the correlation that safety concerns and sense of place are negatively correlated—if you don’t feel safe you don’t feel like you belong
29% faculty survey response rate (n=250)
1102 student survey responses: 56% female
Leading us to our question about productivity especially given the amount of lab work and time—often at night—that STEM women faculty and post docs must log
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

12. Social Science Research
Result
Collaboration with Housing, Facilities Management, Office of the Architect, Parking & Transportation to use research data as evidence to install lighting across Grounds
Next Steps
Pre and Post-lighting project assessments
Do lighting projects impact felt safety?
Swipe card access data from buildings & labs
Do lighting projects impact building use by women?
Do reported crimes impact building use by women?
The social science research team took light meter readings across grounds including out front of this building where the readings were 0.5 foot candles; to give you a comparison, the average light at dusk is 1 foot candle
So our campus is darker than dusk a good part of the time
The social science research team has been partnering with several offices to improve the lighting; lights have now been installed in several areas, including in front of this building and in the partking lots out front.
Next steps for the researcH
even though men havent thought about it ----this will improve the prespection of safety for all on grounds
this is sustainability---institutionalization
Whitehead Road, north side, from Geldard Drive to Rice Hall
Light meter reading as measured in foot candles (Fc):
Average- 0.5 Fc
Maximum Fc
Median- 0.1 Fc
Mode- 0 Fc
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

13. Academic Search Portal
Launched
September 2014
Interactive Content
Implicit bias
Dual career
Conducting a search
Required training
Search committee tools & resources
EOP requirements
Step-by-step checklists
Results
287 users totaling 479 sessions
Search committees working with Equity Consultants using the Portal
28% of all visitors use the dual career & search committee tools & resources
318 downloads of articles, committee tools
…building on other ADVANCE programs work---This is Part of Goal 2- Recruitment and Hiring
Launched at our Faculty Search Seminar in September it has interactive training, research, and search committee tools to support faculty searches from start to finish
You will have the opportunity to learn more about this and test drive it
Inability to tryly measure impact of using this---but we hope to see it through the department demographics (data from search symp show their intent to use it)---we recognize these are shortterm results and we have to have outcome results next year
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

14. Faculty search seminars
Fall 2013
93 attendees, 68% faculty
Results: 1 year after attending, participants (n=54) reported
63% spoke out when witnessing implicit bias happening
77% increased their bias literacy; paid more attention to their own bias
Fall 2014
61 attendees, 84% faculty
54% on search committees; 100% SEAS Dean search committee
UNH Power Players interactive performances of Faculty Search and Managing as a Dept. Chair
78% of respondents (n=14) believed the Academic Search Portal would lead to more fair and equitable faculty searches
91% of department chair respondents (n=13) report increased awareness of:
How language affects department climate
The role of leadership in creating department culture and climate
The role of leadership in building community
The search portal works in concert with the faculty search seminars---also Part of Goal 2- Recruitment and Hiring
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

15. Enhancement grants Grants
Grants up to $5000 for career development and advancement
15 awarded to date; 6 grants completed
Results
Awardees expand their research networks, enter new research areas and take risks, collaborate on new grants, advise UK government
Report they feel valued and visible at U.Va. and in field
More positive toward career & institution
We are extremely pleased with the early outcomes for the Enhancement grants---this is part of Goal 4
Addressing "years in rank" we decided to have this program
15 awardees, 6 completed their grants and what we are hearing from them is that these grants are “making them visible” that they feel someone at the university is valuing their work, allowing them to take risks in new research areas, and supporting their intellectual efforts
Importance of asking the women "what do you need to be successful?"
The importance of that conversation with the dept chair about "what do I want to do" helps the applicants
It is a small amount of money with a huge impact
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

16. Enhancement grants Overview Results New Projects Get Involved
“This funding was essential to help me keep my work (and therefore me) visible at a time in my life where it is easy to fade into the scientific background due to my family responsibilities. I was subsequently awarded an NSF grant to continue this project, and I suspect that the visibility that the Enhancement funds helped to provide was important in this process.” –Kelsey Johnson, Assoc. Prof. of Astronomy
In their own words,
Kelsey went on to take over as lead of this initiative
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

17. Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry, Linda Columbus
In progress
Oral Histories
16 interviews
12 transcribed & coded for analysis
Results
Risk taking and exploration drive commitment to science
Empowered to take action, mentor others, support junior colleagues
The oral histories (part of Goal 5—voices and visibility) are revealing interesting motivational variables for why women not only get into STEM fields but what makes them stay despite the difficulties.
One that comes up is the risk taking and exploration. But as we are hearing from the Enhancement grant winners that risk taking and exploration is often inhibited by depts and colleagues who want you to stay in a well defined research box and not explore new areas or take new risks
One result we are seeing from the oral histories is a greater recognition for the mentors in women’s lives and they are now empowered to take action and give back; reaching back to work with younger colleagues and scholars
Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry, Linda Columbus
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

18. in progress Recruitment Grants Equity Consultants
14 searches in 7 departments
6 closed, 8 ongoing
Results: Using best practices
Adopting interview & evaluation rubrics
Openly discussing implicit gender bias
Expanding job announcement locations
17 grants in 12 departments
Results
11 searches closed
8 departments made offers
2 candidates accepted
Our equity consultants and recruitment grants are seeing some results
Equity consultants work with faculty search committees in SEAS and these committees have been adopting best practices, using the portal, discussing implicit bias and mitigating it during their search process
The recruitment grants provide depts with funds to either advertise their announcements in broader places or to bring a women candidate on grounds;
So 11 searches have closed that used one of our recruitment grants and this yielded 8 offers to these female candidates. While we can not guarantee these women would not have been invited w/o our support, we believe a large no would not have and thus these 8 offers to women is a huge increase for us. Now only 2 of the 8 accepted, with dual career challenges being a large part of the reasons, so we are now putting increased efforts in this area.
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

19. In progress: Tournament
Women Candidates
Decline Offers
Tournament of Ideas
Program assumption
Women candidates accept offers
Reality: Dual career challenges
Major reason women candidates decline offers
No central dual career office
AY , AY
Several searches made offers to multiple women candidates who declined
2014 Focus: Dual Careers
11 submissions, 4 finalists
Vice provost, UHR & deans collaborating
Follow-on
Possible case study Darden
Partnerships with Provost, Deans, HR to implement solutions
Our qualitative evaluation data showed that women were declining offers due to dual career challenges
For example, chemical engineering made offers to 4 women who all declined
We knew if we didn’t solve this issue then we would not meet many of our long term goals or the goals of ADVANCE
As a result, we focused the tournament of ideas on solving this issue
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

20. In Progress Structured Dialogues Photography Project 5 departments
True change requires you to go to uncomfortable places
Faculty find discussions about dept. culture difficult, highly political
Portraits of STEM/SBS women faculty
Part of future exhibit
Structured Dialogues (part of Goal 1—departmental diversity) Pam TELLS story of roseanne ford dept doing this
Point out they will be interviewing chairs and faculty who took part in these before and after the change
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

21. Department Demographic Data Sheet: BioMed Engineering AY2013-2014
Other activities
Department Demographic Data Sheet: BioMed Engineering AY
Department Demographic Sheets
Metric for CHARGE and Departments to assess progress against goals, PhD/postdoc pipelines, & other institutions
Data challenges affecting evaluation of Equity Consultants, Recruitment Grants, faculty search data
We began making these dept demographic data sheets as an evaluation tool and to share with depts for their own assessment. It was a way to counter the argument that the pipeline would fix all problems
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

22. Future plans
So let’s take a look at some of these challenges and how we are addressing them

23. Future Plans Sustainability Possible 2015-2016 Focus Overview Results
Internal Advisory Board (IAB) partnering with multiple offices to institutionalize the following activities:
Equity Consultants
Faculty Search Seminar
Academic Search Portal
Space Allocation, Salary, & Offer Letter studies
Department Demographics reports
Possible Focus
Advocates & Allies
P&T Policy Review
Overview
Results
New Projects
Get Involved

24. Get involved
CHARGE is looking for faculty to support our efforts. You can be a:
Volunteer at events
Implementation Team member helping to implement projects
Project Leader, leading faculty teams to implement projects
For more information, contact:

25. Comparison of U.Va. Rank in % Women and URM TTT Faculty, 2007 through 20131
While U.Va. ranked 52 out of 61 AAU Universities in 2007 (ranking above 9 others) for representation of women, we improved to 47 out of 60 in 2013 (ranking above 13 others)
1Data from the peer rankings in % women and % URR TTT faculty at all institutions in the Association of American Universities from 2007 to 2013
Note: This data is for ALL women and URM TTT faculty, not just STEM faculty

26. Change in AAU Rank from 2011 to 2013 in % Women TTT Faculty at NSF ADVANCE Institutions1 sorted by 2015 U.S. News & World Report “Best Colleges” Ranking2 (decreasing from left to right)
Cohort 1 (2001)
Cohort 2 (2003)
Cohort 3 (2005)
Cohort 4 (2008)
Cohort 5 (2010)
Cohort 6 (2012)
Legend
1Data from the peer rankings in % women and % URR TTT faculty at all institutions in the Association of American Universities from 2007 to 2013
2Data from the 2015 annual report on “Best Colleges” by U.S. News & World Report
Note: This data is for ALL women and URM TTT faculty, not just STEM faculty

27. Change in AAU Rank from 2011 to 2013 in % URM TTT Faculty at NSF ADVANCE Institutions1 sorted by 2015 U.S. News & World Report “Best Colleges” Ranking2 (decreasing from left to right)
Cohort 1 (2001)
Cohort 2 (2003)
Cohort 3 (2005)
Cohort 4 (2008)
Cohort 5 (2010)
Cohort 6 (2012)
Legend
1Data from the peer rankings in % women and % URR TTT faculty at all institutions in the Association of American Universities from 2007 to 2013
2Data from the 2015 annual report on “Best Colleges” by U.S. News & World Report
Note: This data is for ALL women and URM TTT faculty, not just STEM faculty