Metrics for Success: Strategies for Enabling Core Facility Performance and Assessing Outcomes.

Core Facilities are key elements in the research portfolio of academic and private research institutions. Administrators overseeing core facilities (core administrators) require assessment tools for evaluating the need and effectiveness of these facilities at their institutions. This article discusses ways to promote best practices in core facilities as well as ways to evaluate their performance across 8 of the following categories: general management, research and technical staff, financial management, customer base and satisfaction, resource management, communications, institutional impact, and strategic planning. For each category, we provide lessons learned that we believe contribute to the effective and efficient overall management of core facilities. If done well, we believe that encouraging best practices and evaluating performance in core facilities will demonstrate and reinforce the importance of core facilities in the research and educational mission of institutions. It will also increase job satisfaction of those working in core facilities and improve the likelihood of sustainability of both facilities and personnel.

Best practices for core facilities: handling external customers.

This article addresses the growing interest among U.S. scientific organizations and federal funding agencies in strengthening research partnerships between American universities and the private sector. It outlines how core facilities at universities can contribute to this partnership by offering services and access to high-end instrumentation to both nonprofit organizations and commercial organizations. We describe institutional policies (best practices) and procedures (terms and conditions) that are essential for facilitating and enabling such partnerships. In addition, we provide an overview of the relevant federal regulations that apply to external use of academic core facilities and offer a set of guidelines for handling them. We conclude by encouraging directors and managers of core facilities to work with the relevant organizational offices to promote and nurture such partnerships. If handled appropriately, we believe such partnerships can be a win-win situation for both organizations that will support research and bolster the American economy.

Pilot investigation of a model for canine atopic dermatitis: environmental house dust mite challenge of high-IgE-producing beagles, mite hypersensitive dogs with atopic dermatitis and normal dogs.

Although canine atopic dermatitis (cAD) is common, few models are available. The aim of this study was to evaluate high-IgE beagles epicutaneously sensitized to house dust mite (HDM) as a possible model for cAD. Six high-IgE beagles were environmentally challenged with HDM using various doses and protocols. Similar challenge protocols were used in positive and negative control dogs: three dogs with naturally occurring cAD and positive intradermal skin test (IDT) to HDM and three normal dogs without history of skin disease and negative IDT to HDM. All high-IgE beagles and all atopic dogs developed severe cutaneous lesions and pruritus after challenge. Lesions were erythematous papules and macules in contact areas such as face, ears, ventral abdomen, groin, axillae and feet. They were first visible after 6 h and increased in severity over time. No normal dog developed pruritus or lesions. Biopsies of representative lesions in the high-IgE beagles were taken for histopathology and immunohistochemistry. There was superficial perivascular dermatitis with mononuclear infiltrates and spongiosis. Lymphocytes and eosinophils accumulated in small epidermal micro-abscesses with hyperplasia of epidermal IgE-bearing dendritic cells. These findings suggest that this colony of high-IgE beagles develops a dermatitis that clinically, histopathologically and immunologically resembles the naturally occurring canine disease. It is also concluded that this modality of challenge is not irritating to normal dogs but induces flare-ups in hypersensitive atopic dogs.

Atopy patch test reactions in high-IgE beagles to different sources and concentrations of house dust mites.

Protocols for atopy patch testing (APT) were evaluated on six high-IgE dogs sensitized to house dust mites (HDM) using various concentrations and sources of HDM. Two sources of HDM were compared: Heska slurry and four concentrations of Greer HDM. Saline was used as a negative control. Patches were removed after 48 h and the sites evaluated at 0, 6, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h for erythema, macules, papules and pustules. Each sign was scored from 0 to 3 (0 = absent and 3 = severe). Total score was used for analysis. Mean total scores significantly increased for both Greer and Heska HDMs from 6 h, peaking at 48 h for G100 (100 mg mL(-1)), G300 and G668, and at 72 h for Heska and G31.25. Across all times, Heska HDM scores were significantly higher than those of G31.25 with the largest difference at 96 h. Heska scores, however, were significantly lower than those of other Greer concentrations (G100, G300 and G668) particularly at 96 h. No reactions were noted at saline sites. It is concluded that Greer-HDM at 100 mg mL(-1) is the most suitable concentration for APT in dogs because it induces reactions comparable if not higher than more concentrated HDM preparations.