A mentor training workshop focused on fostering diversity engenders lasting impact on mentoring techniques: Results of a long-term evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Trainees and investigators from underrepresented minority (URM) backgrounds face unique challenges to establishing successful careers in clinical and translational research. Structured training for mentors is an important mechanism to increase the diversity of the research workforce. This article presents data from an evaluation of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Center for AIDS Research (CFAR) Mentoring the Mentors program aimed at improving mentors' competency in working with diverse mentees in HIV research. METHODS: Mentors from around the USA who had in one of seven separate 2-day training workshops conducted from 2013 to 2020 were invited to participate in an online evaluation survey of their experiences with the training and their subsequent mentoring activities. RESULTS: There was a high response rate (80%) among the 226 mentors invited to complete the survey. The 180 respondents were diverse in demographics, professional disciplines, and geographic distribution. Quantitative and qualitative data indicate a lasting positive impact of the training, with sustained improvements documented on a validated measure of self-appraised mentoring competency. Respondents also endorsed high interest in future, follow-up training with continued focus on topics related to mentoring in the context of diversity. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of the UCSF CFAR Mentoring the Mentors program showed lasting impact in improving mentoring practices, coupled with high interest in continued in-depth training in areas focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Development and implementation of a workshop to enhance the effectiveness of mentors working with diverse mentees in HIV research.

Abstract A growing body of evidence highlights the importance of competent mentoring in academic research in the field of HIV, particularly for early stage investigators from diverse, underrepresented backgrounds. We describe the development and implementation of a 2-day intensive workshop to train mid-level and senior-level investigators conducting HIV-related clinical and translational research across multiple academic institutions on more effective mentoring, with an emphasis on techniques to foster mentees of diversity. The workshop was focused on training mentors in techniques designed to improve the effectiveness of the mentor-mentee relationship, and included didactic presentations, interactive discussions, and small-group problem-based learning activities. Mid-level or senior-level faculty involved or planning to be involved in significant mentorship activities related to HIV research were eligible. Surveys and formal actions plans allowed for workshop evaluation and laid the groundwork for subsequent workshops. Twenty-six faculty from 16 U.S.-based institutions participated, with good representation across discipline, gender, and race/ethnicity. The sessions were highly rated and discussions and evaluations revealed important barriers and facilitators to mentoring, challenges and solutions related to mentoring mentees from diverse backgrounds, and specific tools to enhance mentoring effectiveness. The Mentoring the Mentors training program for HIV researchers focusing on early career investigators of diversity was the first of its kind and was well attended, was rated highly, and provided guidance for improving the program in the future. This training program fills an important gap in the HIV researcher community and offers guidance for training mentors interested in diversity issues in settings outside of HIV.

The status of interprofessional education and interprofessional prevention education in academic health centers: a national baseline study.

PURPOSE: Given the emphasis on prevention in U.S. health care reform efforts, the importance of interprofessional education (IPE) that prepares health professions students to be part of effective health care teams is greater than ever. This study examined the prevalence and nature of IPE and interprofessional (IP) prevention education in U.S. academic health centers. METHOD: The authors extracted a 10-item survey from the longer published IPE Assessment and Planning Instrument. In September 2010, they sent the survey to 346 health professions leaders in health sciences schools and colleges at 100 academic health centers. These institutions were identified via the online membership list of the Association of Academic Health Centers. The authors conducted descriptive statistical analysis and cross-tabulations. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 127 contacts at 68 universities in 31 states and the District of Columbia. IPE was more prevalent than IP prevention education in all categories of measurement. Respondents affirmed existence of IPE in courses (85.0%) and in clinical rotations/internships (80.3%). The majority reported personnel with responsibility for IPE (68.5%) or prevention education (59.8%) at their institutional unit, and 59.8% reported an IPE office or center. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that IPE and IP prevention education exist in academic health centers, but additional attention should be paid to the development of IP prevention education. Sample syllabi, job descriptions, and policies may be available to support adoption of IPE and IP prevention education. Further effort is needed to increase the integration of IP and prevention education into practice.

Using the Clinical Prevention and Population Health Curriculum Framework to encourage curricular change.

The Healthy People Curriculum Task Force was established in 2002 to encourage implementation of Healthy People 2010 Objective 1.7: "To increase the proportion of schools of medicine, schools of nursing and health professional training schools whose basic curriculum for healthcare providers includes the core competencies in health promotion and disease prevention." In 2004, the Task Force published a Clinical Prevention and Population Health Curriculum Framework ("Framework") to help each profession assess and develop more robust approaches to this content in their training. During the 6 years since the publication of the Framework, the Task Force members introduced and disseminated it to constituents, facilitated its implementation at member schools, integrated it into initiatives that would influence training across schools, and adapted and applied the Framework to meet the data needs of the Healthy People 2010 Objective 1.7. The Framework has been incorporated into initiatives that help promote curricular change, such as accreditation standards and national board examination content, and efforts to disseminate the experiences of peers, expert recommendations, and activities to monitor and update curricular content. The publication of the revised Framework and the release of Healthy People 2020 (and the associated Education for Health Framework) provide an opportunity to review the efforts of the health professions groups to advance the kind of curricular change recommended in Healthy People 2010 and Healthy People 2020 and to appreciate the many strategies required to influence health professions curricula.

Model approaches for advancing interprofessional prevention education.

Healthy People 2010 included an objective to "increase the proportion of … health professional training schools whose basic curriculum for healthcare providers includes the core competencies in health promotion and disease prevention." Interprofessional prevention education has been seen by the Healthy People Curriculum Task Force as a key strategy for achieving this objective and strengthening prevention content in health professions education programs. To fulfill these aims, the Association for Prevention Teaching and Research sponsored the Institute for Interprofessional Prevention Education in 2007 and in 2008. The institutes were based on the premise that if clinicians from different professions are to function effectively in teams, health professions students need to learn with, from, and about students from other professions. The institutes assembled interprofessional teams of educators from academic health centers across the country and provided instruction in approaches for improving interprofessional prevention education. Interprofessional education also plays a key role in implementation of Healthy People 2020 Education for Health framework. The delivery of preventive services provides a nearly level playing field in which multiple professions each make important contributions. Prevention education should take place during that phase of the educational continuum in which the attitudes, skills, and knowledge necessary for both effective teamwork and prevention are incorporated into the "DNA" of future health professionals. Evaluation of the teams' educational initiatives holds important lessons. These include allowing ample time for planning, obtaining student input during planning, paying explicit attention to teamwork, and taking account of cultural differences across professions.

Clinical prevention and population health: curriculum framework for health professions.

The Clinical Prevention and Population Health Curriculum Framework is the initial product of the Healthy People Curriculum Task Force convened by the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine and the Association of Academic Health Centers. The Task Force includes representatives of allopathic and osteopathic medicine, nursing and nurse practitioners, dentistry, pharmacy, and physician assistants. The Task Force aims to accomplish the Healthy People 2010 goal of increasing the prevention content of clinical health professional education. The Curriculum Framework provides a structure for organizing curriculum, monitoring curriculum, and communicating within and among professions. The Framework contains four components: evidence base for practice, clinical preventive services-health promotion, health systems and health policy, and community aspects of practice. The full Framework includes 19 domains. The title "Clinical Prevention and Population Health" has been carefully chosen to include both individual- and population-oriented prevention efforts. It is recommended that all participating clinical health professions use this title when referring to this area of curriculum. The Task Force recommends that each profession systematically determine whether appropriate items in the Curriculum Framework are included in its standardized examinations for licensure and certification and for program accreditation.

What it takes for Congress to act.

A thriving democracy requires engaged citizens. Although voting is one aspect of participating in the democratic process, it is not sufficient if one wishes to be truly involved in shaping and influencing policy. Congress, the body of elected officials representing the citizenry, works not just for the people but also with the people. Working with Congress requires participation--as experts, as advocates, and as citizens who have an interest in their community. This article is aimed at those who wish to actively work with the Congress. Thus, instead of giving a comprehensive description of Congress, it focuses on those aspects that are essential to effective advocacy. Part 1 presents basic information about the structure of Congress and the nature of the legislative process. Part 2 presents some observations about the basic structure and process that have implications for advocates. Part 3 translates these observations into concrete strategies for effective advocacy.