Evaluation Core (EC)

项目摘要/摘要 评价核心(EC)提案概述了其对协调和协调的总体目标的贡献 加州大学洛杉矶分校(CEC)评估中心，作为整个NIH多样性计划联盟(DPC)的一部分及其目标 加强国家卫生研究院资助的劳动力的多样性。与其他CEC核心和DPC合作 对于受赠人，欧委会负责联合体级别的短期、中期和长期评估 跨学生、教师和院校级别的受赠人项目以及以前资助的项目的成果 关于中期和长期成果的NRMN组成部分。欧共体继续更新经DPC批准的 成功的标志，并完善整个联合体的评价计划，以指导我们的工作。我们的多种方法 评估建立在多个案例研究、跨站点分析、稳健的准实验设计的基础上 多层次统计分析和关键数量指标的趋势分析。有关个人级别的数据，请参阅 建立参与者，我们整合来自高等教育研究所(HERI)调查的信息 CEC对建筑工地的年度调查，活动级别，一年级学生和全国教职员工 关于项目参与度、机构记录(IR)和国家IPEDS数据的“跟踪”数据。我们用这个丰富的 一组数据，用于比较构建参与者和非参与者在相同情况下的特征完成情况 制度，跨建立机构，以及在建立和非建立机构之间。纵向数据集 而广泛的协变量提高了我们将因果关系归因于干预的能力。国家机构 来自IPEDS的涵盖多年的级别数据支持通过以下方式分析潜在的机构级别变化 比较构建站点和类似的非构建站点的趋势。对于NRMN，我们利用由以下机构收集的基线数据 来自参与者的NRMN，并补充CEC年度调查，以评估 特征，比较特定项目参与者对特征的统计调整结果 与那些在NRMN数据库中没有参与特定计划的人相比。创新方面的 我们的评估设计包括：(I)在国家调查中建立既定指标的可及性和灵活性 本科教育；(2)使用社会网络分析，更好地描述职业生涯的结果 发展战略，以及(Iii)分析多个机构的建设计划，以提供 统计能力，以分解特定干预组成部分的结果并确定差异 对亚群体的影响，包括来自代表性不足群体的计划参与者。与DCC联合， EC将支持对数据收集工具和流程、特征和分析进行任何必要的更新 确保对建设(第一阶段和第二阶段)和NRMN影响进行全面评估的方法 (第一阶段)活动。此外，教统会亦会致力发展和推广新教育。 以及培训工具，供BUILD和NRMN获奖者以及DPC以外的其他人使用。

PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT The Evaluation Core (EC) proposal outlines its contributions to the overall aims of the Coordination and Evaluation Center at UCLA (CEC), as part of the overall NIH Diversity Program Consortium (DPC) and its goal of enhancing the diversity of the NIH-funded workforce. In collaboration with the other CEC cores, and DPC grantees, the EC is responsible for the consortium-level evaluation of the short, medium, and long-term outcomes of BUILD grantee programs across student, faculty, and institutional levels, and of previously funded NRMN components on medium and long-term outcomes. The EC continues to update DPC-approved Hallmarks of Success and refine the Consortium-wide evaluation plan to guide our work. Our multi-method evaluation builds on multiple case studies, cross-site analysis, a robust quasi-experimental design using multilevel statistical analysis, and trend analyses of key quantitative indicators. For individual-level data on BUILD participants, we integrate information from the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) surveys of freshman and senior students and of faculty nationally, CEC annual surveys of BUILD sites, event-level “tracker” data about program participation, institutional record (IR) and national IPEDS data. We use this rich set of data to compare the achievement of Hallmarks for BUILD participants with nonparticipants at the same institution, across BUILD institutions, and between BUILD and non-BUILD institutions. The longitudinal dataset and extensive covariates improve our ability to attribute causality to the interventions. National institutional level data covering multiple years from IPEDS supports analysis of potential institutional-level changes by comparing trends at BUILD versus similar non-BUILD sites. For NRMN, we draw on baseline data collected by NRMN from participants and supplement it with CEC annual surveys to assess the long-term outcomes of Hallmarks, comparing the statistically adjusted achievements of Hallmarks by specific program participants versus those in the NRMN database who did not participate in the particular program. Innovative aspects of our evaluation design include: (i) access and flexibility to build on established metrics in HERI national surveys of undergraduate education, (ii) use of social network analysis to better characterize the outcomes of career development strategies, and (iii) the analysis of BUILD programs across multiple institutions to provide the statistical power to disaggregate the outcomes of specific intervention components and identify differential effects on subpopulations, including program participants from underrepresented groups. Jointly with the DCC, the EC will support any needed updates to data collection tools and processes, Hallmarks, and analytic approaches to ensure the comprehensive assessment of the impact of BUILD (Phase 1 & 2) and NRMN (Phase 1) activities. The EC will also contribute to the CEC's development and dissemination of new education and training tools for use by BUILD and NRMN awardees and others from outside the DPC.