Fostering Cohort Recruitment (FCR) Virtual Forum

Fostering Cohort Recruitment (FCR)

Virtual Forum

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Office of the Director (OD)

Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce

Diversity (COSWD)

February 23–24, 2022

PROCEEDINGS

NIH Scientific Workforce Diversity Seminar Series

#SWDSS

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 i

Table of Contents

Executive Summary and Background Information ............................................................................................................ 1

Day 1: February 23, 2022 ........................................................................................................................................................ 2

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................2

Opening Remarks ......................................................................................................................................................2

Leadership Viewpoints on Creating Culture Change Through Cohort Recruitment .........................................3

Re-Envision the Norm: Cohort Hiring ........................................................................................................................ 3

Cultural Change Through Diversity ............................................................................................................................ 3

Thematic-Based Initiatives to Address Local, Regional, and

Global Societal Challenges (2015–2021) ................................................................................................................... 4

Reaction to Panel Presentations ....................................................................................................................... 5

Questions and Answers ............................................................................................................................................. 6

Successes and Challenges of Cohort Recruitment as

Part of the Larger DEIA Mission ............................................................................................................................... 8

Lessons Learned with Faculty Cohorts ..................................................................................................................... 8

Is Cohort Recruitment the Right Action?................................................................................................................... 9

Cohort Recruitment: Successes and Challenges ..................................................................................................... 9

Reaction to Panel Presentations ..................................................................................................................... 10

Questions and Answers ........................................................................................................................................... 11

Day 1 Adjournment ..................................................................................................................................................13

Day 2: February 24, 2022 ...................................................................................................................................................... 14

Opening Remarks ....................................................................................................................................................14

Questions and Answers ........................................................................................................................................... 15

Identifying Resource Needs for Cohort Recruitment and Professional Development .................................... 15

Building and Sustaining a Learning Community of Native Scholars ...................................................................... 15

Cohort Hire Program at the University of Wisconsin .............................................................................................. 16

Enhancing Faculty Diversity and Inclusion at the University of California,

San Diego (UCSD) Health Sciences ........................................................................................................................ 17

Reaction to Panel Presentations ..................................................................................................................... 18

Questions and Answers ........................................................................................................................................... 19

Tracking Cohort Outcomes—Collecting Data on the Experiences of Faculty Members ................................22

Collecting Data on the Experience of Faculty Members ........................................................................................ 22

A Personal Perspective of the Cohort Experience .................................................................................................. 22

Tracking Outcomes of Institution Research and Career Development Programs ................................................. 23

Reaction to Panel Presentations ..................................................................................................................... 25

Questions and Answers ........................................................................................................................................... 26

Wrap-Up .................................................................................................................................................................................. 28

Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................................. 28

References ............................................................................................................................................................................. 29

Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................................................... 30

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 1

Held on February 23 and 24, 2022, the FCR Virtual Forum was a special, expanded event constructed as part of the

Scientific Workforce Diversity Seminar Series (SWDSS) within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Chief Officer for

Scientific Workforce Diversity (COSWD) office.

The idea for the FCR Virtual Forum arose after the one-hour SWDSS seminar, “Achieving Equity in Faculty—Pros

and Cons of Cohort Recruitment,” held on December 8, 2021. It featured presentations from Sibby Anderson-

Thompkins, Ph.D., Michelle M. Camacho, Ph.D., and Carla Freeman, Ph.D., and included reactant comments from

David Acosta, M.D. This lineup of distinguished speakers is notable not just for the speakers’ content, but also

because all four speakers were invited to serve as reactants for the FCR Virtual Forum’s main sessions, as described

in these proceedings.

In the words of Marie A. Bernard, M.D., COSWD, both the topic and organization of the December SWDSS event

were intended as a briefer “amuse-bouche” for the longer, fuller discussion that followed at this forum. There was a

natural progression from the themes introduced at the December SWDSS event. Therefore, the sessions described

below capture both the discussion from the FCR Virtual Forum and the spirit of the conversation held in December.

The two-day format for this FCR Virtual Forum allowed adequate time to explore each of four main themes of

cohort recruitment: leadership viewpoints on creating culture change; cohort recruitment as a component of a larger

diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) program; resource needs; and outcome tracking.

Each thematic area included a round of presentations from three experts followed by comments from one of the

reactants described above. The four-person panels then participated in question-and-answer discussions by each

providing a response to the same question. This round-robin format showcased the wealth of knowledge and

experiences generated by the diverse group of panelists.

The organization of these proceedings follows the format of the FCR Virtual Forum. Beginning with Day 1 and

then continuing to Day 2, the proceedings continue theme by theme by briefly summarizing the key points of each

presentation and reactant comments. The “Questions and Answers” sections list each question and then the

panelists’ responses in the order they responded to the moderator. To provide variety, the order of panelist responses

rotated after each question.

Dr. Bernard wrapped up the FCR Virtual Forum by acknowledging the work of the Planning Committee (see the

Acknowledgements section) and summarizing the rich discussions about cohort recruitment and its variation among

institutions and organizations (see the Wrap-Up section).

Presentation materials and recordings are available on the COSWD website.

Executive Summary and Background Information

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 2

Day 1: February 23, 2022

Introduction

Marie A. Bernard, M.D., Chief Officer for Scientific

Workforce Diversity (COSWD), National Institutes of

Health (NIH)

Dr. Bernard welcomed attendees to the two-day event

and introduced the scientific endeavor behind achieving

workforce diversity. Scientific workforce diversity and

institutional culture change can be enhanced through

various cohort recruitment or cluster hiring practices.

Academic evidence suggests that programs for recruiting

members of underrepresented groups (URGs) can make

science and medicine more inclusive while fostering

collaborative and supportive working environments

(Laursen and Austin, 2020; Sgoutas-Emch et al., 2016;

Urban Universities for Health, 2015).

1, 2, 3

The NIH Distinguished Scholars Program (DSP)

is a good example of a cohort recruitment initiative

that has successfully enhanced diversity and inclusion

among NIH tenure-track intramural scientists. In

fact, distinguished scholars representing several

NIH Institutes and Centers (ICs) meet monthly for

support while receiving extra mentoring and laboratory

resources. Because of the success of the DSP

in contributing to enhanced diversity of the NIH

Intramural Research Program (IRP), the NIH Common

Fund extended a cohort recruitment opportunity to

external institutions in 2021 through the Faculty

Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable

Transformation (FIRST) program funding opportunity

announcement. The Institutional Research and

Academic Career Development Award (IRACDA)

and the Maximizing Opportunities for Scientific

and Academic Independent Careers (MOSAIC)

programs have also been successful in enhancing

diversity at various career stages.

Scholars with a wide range of expertise in cohort

recruitment presented the topics in this forum. Panel

discussions were designed to galvanize the wider

scientific community around successful cohort

recruitment models and allow each institution to move

forward in its own way to enhance faculty DEIA.

This event is part of the COSWD Scientific Workforce

Diversity Seminar Series (SWDSS), which runs from

September through May each year. The purpose of the

SWDSS is to share the latest research and evidence

on scientific workforce diversity topics by engaging

with interested professionals and researchers at NIH

and beyond.

Opening Remarks

Roberta Diaz Brinton, Ph.D., Director, University of

Arizona Center for Innovation in Brain Science, and

Chair, NIH Advisory Committee to the Director (ACD)

Working Group on Diversity

In her presentation, “NIH Diversity: Cohort Recruitment,”

Dr. Brinton shared her experiences in fostering inclusive

excellence, which she termed an “all brains on deck”

endeavor. Diverse perspectives drive creativity,

innovation, and solutions. They also drive people to

think differently, to ask questions differently, and to

arrive at novel conclusions. Diversity is not a luxury; it

is a necessity for solving problems. President Barack

Obama saw diversity as a solution for restoring

America’s competitiveness.

Precision medicine is diverse medicine, because one

size will not fit all. Dr. Brinton commended Dr. Bernard

for her leadership, noting that it only takes one person to

listen, stand up to racism and discrimination, encourage

and lead a paradigm shift. NIH success in enhancing

diversity will be a success for all and provide a roadmap

for other large institutions to become DEIA communities.

The NIH UNITE initiative was established to identify

and address structural racism within both the NIH-

supported and the greater scientific community. The

initiative aims to establish an equitable and civil culture

within the biomedical research enterprise and reduce

barriers to racial and ethnic equity in the biomedical

research workforce. This is a noble cause and an

absolute necessity for addressing the challenges in

health and beyond.

Fostering inclusive excellence is a data-driven concept.

Statistics show that the scientific community benefits

from scientific workforce diversity in the questions

asked, discoveries made, and solutions provided

for health issues. Having a common mission and

purpose and building trust over time create a sense of

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 3

community that evolves into a worthwhile and diverse

community. A clear vision is a unifying force that can

guide actions and decision making and be the catalyst

for engagement and greater innovation. A community of

trust is built by embedding trusting relationships into all

decision-making, recruitment efforts, and organizational

culture. All communications must be honored and

respected; listening is critical. Enabling technologies

and capabilities can be established and then deployed

across multiple projects.

Developing the leaders of tomorrow (students and

early-career faculty) depends on learning opportunities

and experience-driven mentorship at each stage of

career development. For example, high school students

are effective mentors for elementary students, and

predoctoral fellows are good mentors for graduate

students. Each level mentors the next generation of itself.

Dr. Brinton’s lessons learned include the following:

• Do the experiment, test the hypothesis, and collect

the data. The data will indicate success or failure.

Negative results offer lessons. Provide proof of

concept before conducting a broad experiment.

• Write a mission statement to define the metrics

of success and break the mission down into

incremental steps to achieve the goal.

• Build trust at each level.

• Continue to learn.

“Each level

mentors the

next generation

of itself.”

Leadership Viewpoints on

Creating Culture Change

Through Cohort Recruitment

Re-Envision the Norm:

Cohort Hiring

Joan Y. Reede, M.D., Dean, Diversity and Community

Partnership, Harvard Medical School (HMS)

Dr. Reede described the HMS cohort hiring strategy,

which is based on the school’s mission and community

values for DEIA and social justice. Reimagining the

search process involved engaging the full leadership

of the school and its affiliated institutions and asking

department chairs to set common goals and values,

creating intentionality to disrupt the norm, embracing

inclusive excellence, expanding recruitment beyond

traditional networks, establishing common assessment

procedures, and creating a transparent process.

Disrupting the norm meant moving from a predefined

departmental perspective to crossing boundaries

between departments. The school engaged the

community to hire four tenure-track assistant and

associate professors. Ultimately, HMS and its affiliates

made eight employment offers; six have been accepted.

The HMS cohort hiring process has built bridges

across disciplines and departments while creating

internal connections between applicants, new faculty,

and offices within the medical school. All new hires

expressed a deep interest in DEIA issues. HMS plans to

continue to use this model to build inclusive excellence.

Cultural Change Through Diversity

Julian Vasquez Heilig, Ph.D., Dean, University of

Kentucky College of Education (UKCOE)

As Dean Vasquez Heilig described in his 2019 publication

in the Hispanic Journal of Law and Policy,

the elephant

in the room is the limited progress made in enhancing

faculty diversity in U.S. research institutions; in fact, data

show diversity decreased in many organizations during

the study period of 10 years.

As a smaller college with

a limited budget, UKCOE is using a model of hiring

junior and senior faculty members together as a cluster.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 4

This model of hiring cultivates better infrastructure,

community, and support for new faculty of color,

especially in departments where there has historically

been a lack of diversity.

Dean Vasquez Heilig benefitted from cluster hiring

when he was recruited to the University of Texas at

Austin in 2006. It is an effective strategy for clarifying

and setting goals, creating collaborative accountability,

driving professional development and leadership,

addressing isolation, and promoting networking and

social camaraderie. Instead of exerting hierarchal

authority, department leaders must build equitable,

transparent networks and relationships that give diverse

faculty the ability to lead and contribute through ideas

and influence. This type of leadership attracts clusters

of faculty and builds positive institutional reputations for

people of color across the country.

The University of Kentucky has launched several

initiatives to attract diverse faculty, including an

Education and Civil Rights collaboration with the

National Association for the Advancement of Colored

People (NAACP) to amplify civil rights research. UKCOE

has made several advances to enhance faculty diversity:

• Hiring the first associate dean for diversity and

student success.

• Hiring Blacks/African Americans as one-third of the

new faculty in 2020, with faculty of color representing

two-thirds of new hires.

• Hiring Blacks/African Americans as 40% of new faculty

and people of color as 80% of new faculty in 2021.

• Hiring only faculty of color in 2022 to date.

• Achieving a rate of 29% faculty of color at UKCOE.

Thematic-Based Initiatives to

Address Local, Regional, and

Global Societal Challenges

(2015–2021)

Stephen Lanier, Ph.D., Vice President for Research,

Wayne State University

Dr. Lanier described Wayne State University’s efforts

to increase strategic integrative research and nurture

the broad ecosystem for scholarly inquiry, discovery,

creativity, and knowledge application. The university

worked with the city of Detroit to develop strategies to

leverage the university’s academic strengths, community

engagement mission, and urban location. The resulting

six initiatives were designed to align with the mission

and role of the university as a public, urban research

university; cut across research, education, training, and

community anchors; and involve integration across

distinct schools, colleges, and centers and institutes

on campus. The six initiatives included the following

thematic focus areas: biomedical engineering and

imaging, brain health and translational neurosciences,

cardiovascular and metabolic health and disease,

environmental health sciences, information sciences,

and social and behavioral determinants of health.

The initiatives’ aim was to create a mission-driven,

enabling culture for faculty and students. Each initiative

included faculty recruitment, educational programs,

and strategic partnerships. In 2016, the university

began with the goal of recruiting upwards of 30 new

faculty, with position announcements that did not

indicate a specific department. There were no previously

established mechanisms for approving broad searches

or for hiring faculty into undefined departments or cross-

departmental positions. The template for the offer letters

had to be rewritten. Excitement for the initiatives grew

over time, including among the candidates.

The initiatives led the university to ultimately recruit

39 faculty (6 professors, 9 associate professors, and

24 assistant professors), of whom 10 were given joint

appointments. Twenty of the new faculty members were

female, 19 were male, and 20% of the recruits were

from URGs in the sciences.

The success of the program was a long-term journey,

not an overnight phenomenon. It involved a culture

change and a significant change in processes. Doors

were opened for new ideas and approaches from

leaders with diverse backgrounds. It was a disruptive

intervention that opened new paths for leadership and

program development, which will be important for

targeted improvement going forward.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022

REACTION TO PANEL PRESENTATIONS

David A. Acosta, M.D., Chief Diversity and Inclusion

Officer, Association of American Medical Colleges

Dr. Acosta noted that the speakers on the panel

highlighted the most important keys to success,

which have also been validated in the literature. First,

leadership matters. Including deans and faculty

allies and champions for DEIA across institutions

and departments is critical, as is leveraging their

influence early in the process. Second, intentionality

for diversity must be articulated in the campus mission

statement, values, goals, initiatives, and expectations.

Third, infrastructure must be built for interdisciplinary

collaborations. This work includes designating

individuals to lead programs and coordinate events in

designated and safe meeting spaces that provide spatial

equity, neutrality, and freedom of personal expression.

Lastly, disrupting the norm and giving up the status

quo are essential for producing real change. Hiring

teams must go beyond traditional recruitment networks,

reimagine the search process, and reward leaders who

take action to enhance diversity.

Dean Vasquez Heilig was quotable when he said, “Give

them a reason for wanting to come here.” This is critical,

and the NAACP collaboration is a great incentive.

Genuine institutional investment begins with addressing

issues that matter to the people institutions are trying

to recruit, and these issues can be addressed only with

multiple perspectives at the table.

Integration across programs and departments is

essential. The intellectual clusters at the University

of California, Berkeley, and climate equity and

environmental justice groups are examples of effective

integration that also function as recruitment tools.

Cluster hiring does not end after an offer is made; it is an

ongoing journey.

“Give them a

reason for

wanting to

come here.”

Continued success depends on providing a work

culture and environment that permit authenticity and

prevent the fear of judgment and retribution, allowing

for continuous relationship building, and ensuring

ongoing community networking opportunities. Inclusive

excellence must be aligned with an institution’s mission

and core values. Mentoring must be re-envisioned and

provided in and outside of the institution.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 6

Questions and Answers

How can cohort hiring best be

implemented across a university

(e.g., different disciplines or schools)

without having only one or two recruited faculty in

each of the areas? Should cluster hiring happen

within one field at a time so that faculty are not

isolated within their home departments?

• Dr. Lanier: Create a community with a thematic

focus area, or anchor. Recruit faculty at different

ranks (i.e., professor, associate professor, and

assistant professor) to create both near-peer and

senior mentors.

• Dr. Reede: Build intentional and deliberate

institutional spaces for diverse faculty and their

families to meet, network, communicate, collaborate,

and support one another. These connections are

extremely powerful for faculty and for their families.

• Dean Vasquez Heilig: Budget to match institutional

priorities and ask for broad administration support for

cluster hiring.

• Dr. Acosta: Use and learn from hiring cluster

models developed by other universities and colleges,

including innovative cost-sharing, grant-matched,

and decentralized models.

• Dr. Brinton: Add more “science, technology,

engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education

survivors” to the hiring pool by investing in youth

programs.

Enhancing DEIA and STEM is important

to younger generations of scientists.

Is there advice you can give for growing

appreciation in older, majority scientists and

leadership?

• Dr. Brinton: Recruit older scientists who are

champions of diversity, because they are full of

wisdom and are phenomenal mentors. Build

communities that contain more flexibility for ways to

engage.

• Dr. Acosta: Try to understand and “unpack”

the resistance generated by older scientists and

leaders, then build trusting relationships and have

conversations to generate buy-in and enthusiasm.

Understand and acknowledge generational

differences and then educate others.

• Dean Vasquez Heilig: Provide everyday learning

opportunities on the value of diversity. Adopt the

mantra, “Where knowledge ends, listening and

learning begin.”

• Dr. Reede: Meet people where they are, let them

offer what they can, and help them learn and

grow. Consider the possibility that they might be

fearful about not knowing what to say or do when

interacting with younger scientists. Understand that

there are multiple ways to engage mentors but avoid

engaging with the wrong types of mentors (e.g.,

“dementors,” “tormentors”). Allow people to take

other roles (e.g., speakers, sponsors, and guides).

Provide older scientists with an opportunity to

experience the joy of changing someone’s life, which

may be one of the reasons they entered the field.

• Dr. Lanier: Encourage older scientists to use their

talents and experience to help contribute to the

culture of change.

Please comment on the accessibility

aspect of diversity. Many faculty are

reluctant to disclose being disabled. As

leaders, how do you recruit them, and how do you

connect them with other faculty who share their

identities?

• Dr. Acosta:

This is a challenge that needs to be

addressed more often. Conscious awareness

and humility can help us better understand the

experiences of others, but we need to turn down our

internal voices to truly understand what others are

saying about their experiences and learn about their

skill sets.

• Dr. Reede: Institutions must change their culture

and climate around disability issues. Make disability

topics, including the cross-section of disability and

diversity, more visible by creating regular inclusive

conversations and workshops around them.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 7

• Dean Vasquez Heilig: Think about how university

environments (e.g., 100-year-old buildings,

meeting spaces) are experienced by faculty with

disabilities. Wheelchair users should not have

to enter through the back door, and that lack of

access can serve as a metaphor for this work

(i.e., it should be front and center).

• Dr. Brinton: Be open to scientific learning from

faculty who have disabilities about the disabilities

that are being studied at universities and provide

opportunities for those faculty to contribute to

related projects.

Is it possible to apply the cohort

recruitment models that have been

discussed to organizations outside of

academia (e.g., government, private industry)?

• Dr. Lanier: Y

es, if you create a mission, vision,

values, and goals around thematic focus areas.

• Dr. Brinton: Yes, diversity across the spectrum

is not a luxury; it is a necessity that is critical to

success.

• Dean Vasquez Heilig: Yes, if you create an

environment with networking, social camaraderie,

and support that allows employees to thrive (not just

survive) and that is conducive to success. No one

wants to be “the only one” in any setting.

• Dr. Reede: Yes, it is already being done in

government (e.g., NIH). Cohort recruitment is based

on how willing an organization is to move beyond

its stated mission and values to actualize them with

intentionality. The organization must move forward to

examine and change practices and undo exclusive

structures, policies, and practices. Organizational

leaders must be willing to take the risk of change for

the better.

• Dr. Acosta: Yes, the business industry is ahead of

academia for inclusion. Their cluster hiring concept

has been around longer, and academia can learn

from it.

What are one or two things that you hope

the audience will take away from this

session? Do you have a pearl of wisdom

about retention?

• Dr. Lanier: Disrupt legacy pr

ocesses to enable

successful cohort recruiting and allow new faculty to

become leaders.

• Dr. Brinton: Community is important: Together we

are stronger and smarter. None of us knows it all, but

together we know a lot. Allow everyone to share their

perspective. Recruit people with diverse areas of

expertise who can form a tight-knit community.

• Dr. Acosta: We cannot keep doing the same thing

but expect different results. We must disrupt the

system. We do not have a choice anymore. It takes

courage and risk to disrupt the equilibrium.

• Dean Vasquez Heilig: Be aware that successful

cohort recruitment will create backlash. Not all

people care about all diversity. Strategy and vision

without courage is an illusion.

• Dr. Reede: There is no alternative. Recognizing the

value of DEIA is foundational to all organizations. It

must be addressed for us to be our best. We cannot

achieve the best of ourselves unless we include

everybody.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 8

Successes and Challenges of

Cohort Recruitment as Part of

the Larger DEIA Mission

Lessons Learned with

Faculty Cohorts

Sherilynn Black, Ph.D., Associate Vice Provost for

Faculty Advancement, Duke University

Dr. Black said that because research shows that

cohorts improve the student experience (e.g., belonging,

retention, productivity, and science identity), particularly

for students in URGs, those data are now being

applied to faculty hiring initiatives (Sto. Domingo et al.,

2019; Sgoutas-Emch et al., 2016; Maton et al., 2016;

Summers and Hrabowski, 2006).

2, 5, 6

At Duke University,

lessons learned for faculty cohort hiring include the

following:

• Create institutional and departmental climates that

are conducive to cohort success.

• Train people working with faculty cohorts in cultural

sensitivity and awar

eness.

• Understand that cohorts can benefit from larger

numbers and flexible structur

es.

• Provide cohort-specific support rather than a one-

size-fits-all solution.

• Measure cohort success beyond publications and

grants.

For faculty to be primed for success, they must be

brought into systems and structures that ar

e designed

for their advancement. The entire institution must be

willing and able to address challenges and benefit from

the unique opportunities that come from enhancing

faculty diversity. To broaden institutional support, Duke

provided faculty education (workshops and multiple

short courses) on equitable hiring practices and

improving departmental climate. The university also

conducted a campus-wide climate survey for all faculty,

staff, and students that was paired with a full-day

retreat for all campus leaders. With support from the

Office of the President and Office of the Provost, each

school within the university wrote a diversity strategic

plan that included multifaceted approaches to reach all

departments.

All faculty should consistently be in academic spaces

that support their authenticity and identity so they

can best contribute to the intellectual culture of their

institution and their broader discipline. Education and

ongoing capacity building are key for all faculty to

contribute to the longitudinal sustainability of equity.

Keep in mind that academic spaces were not originally

built for the success of all. Dr. Black developed a short

course on dismantling racism to teach 150 members of

the faculty practical skills related to cultural awareness

and climate. It was received well and resulted in

significant longitudinal change.

After hiring a new cohort, the new faculty can benefit

from introductions across schools and disciplinary and

identity lines. Members of each cohort should have

agency in the decisions about the group’s structures

and needs. Duke provides faculty seed grant initiatives,

a Writing and ReseArch Productive (WRAP) Group

for Black Faculty, and a Black Think Tank to create

cross-disciplinary collaboration, build community, and

enhance belonging. When providing faculty support,

scientific and personal identities should not be treated

as separate entities.

To increase faculty agency and fulfillment in its School

of Medicine, Duke piloted a novel, culturally aware

coaching program for URG faculty to create and

implement individual development plans (e.g., personal,

professional, and scientific productivity) that incorporate

cultural identity. Because cohorts’ benefits extend

beyond scientific productivity, traditional measures are

unlikely to capture the full benefit of cohort programs.

Duke measures the benefits of the cohort by examining

its impact on both the participants and the institution

and captures metrics on systemic change, culture,

identity, and human impact.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 9

Is Cohort Recruitment the

Right Action?

Beth Ruedi, Ph.D., Director of Operations, STEMM

Equity Achievement (SEA) Change, American

Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

After conducting a comprehensive review of the

literature, Kimberly A. Griffin developed a framework

called the Institutional Model for Faculty Diversity, which

describes the impact of institutional structures, policies,

and interactions with faculty colleagues and students

on the experiences of men and women of color who are

being recruited and hired into academia (Griffin, 2020).

Barriers to equitable inclusion occur at specific points in

the faculty journey. The Griffin model has been used as a

guide for developing several systemic change initiatives,

and it is a good model for faculty cohort recruitment.

Institutions must consider career and professional

development, flexibility, career breaks, climate, culture,

and DEIA policies at each of the following key career

transition points:

• Recruitment

• Hiring or matriculation

• Promotion and tenure candidacy

• Retention and completion

Faculty cohort recruitment is only the first transition

point of this model; it should not be used in isolation

as an institution’s only diversity effort. Institutions must

understand the full context before undertaking a faculty

cohort recruitment intervention, and administrators must

ask why their campus is considering it as an action.

The cohort hiring process involves self-assessment,

understanding, taking action to address barriers, and

reflection as critical implementation steps.

Leaping from awareness to action has been shown to

be ineffective. To create meaningful change, institutions

should use suites of coordinated interventions rather

than isolated interventions. This approach can also help

prevent backsliding when faculty transition to new roles

or different institutions.

The AAAS SEA Change program can support

systemic transformation by performing a holistic

assessment of the multiple barriers to DEIA. SEA

Change has developed several different tracks (e.g.,

biomedicine, health sciences, and institutional awards)

for organizations to consider, and each is tailored to

the needs of the institution. SEA Change criteria and

guidelines for self-assessment and action planning

are designed to occur at the key transition points (i.e.,

recruitment; hiring or matriculation; promotion and

tenure candidacy; and retention and completion).

Interventions are important pieces of a systemic

transformation. Institutional context includes faculty

climate, satisfaction, cohort recruitment, retention, and

workload. Organizations must look at the full picture

before focusing on a specific area. Without each piece,

the puzzle is not complete.

Cohort Recruitment:

Successes and Challenges

René Salazar, M.D., Chief Equity Officer, Broad

Institute of MIT and Harvard

Dr. Salazar was unable to present at the forum due to

unforeseen circumstances, but his slides are available

on the COSWD website.

REACTION TO PANEL PRESENTATIONS

Sibby Anderson-Thompkins, Ph.D., Vice Provost for

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Sewanee: The University

of the South

Dr. Anderson-Thompkins said that she was excited by

both presentations, because in her role as Sewanee’s

chief diversity officer, she is charged with driving

institutional change and transformation. Reviewing

literature related to organizational change provides

fresh perspectives on this work and illuminates the

bigger picture beyond tactics and initiatives. The

presentations offered important lessons learned and

provided exciting examples from work that is being

done at Duke and AAAS.

Damon Williams, Ph.D., has conducted research and

developed a diversity leadership strategy that makes

DEIA fundamental to institutions’ missions (Williams,

2013).

He says that policies, practices, and systems

that enable all faculty, staff, and students to thrive and

be successful must be created with intentionality. Siloed

or singular approaches do not work; the approach must

be robust and integrated. Evidence-based, data-driven

efforts must include accountability, which is paramount

to this work. A deep and intensive review must be

completed before any action is taken.

Communities must have a high level of cultural

intelligence to support diverse faculty and create

true partnerships. The body of literature on high-

impact student initiatives is extensive and has greatly

contributed to the expansion of pathways into science;

applying these practices to faculty diversity is a

good idea. Dr. Black shared suggestions for asking

participants to provide feedback on cohort design

and activities and measuring research productivity

and human impact. Fostering feelings of belonging,

structurally supporting the development of organic

relationships, and creating culturally aware development

plans for individuals are incredibly important to faculty

of color. These types of initiatives truly benefit the

institutions. Emphasis on capacity building is critical

because capacity building creates readiness for change.

Dr. Ruedi made excellent points about not rushing

into change or leaping from awareness right into

action. Time is needed to develop a more complete

understanding of the issues, build capacity, and create

readiness. The new ecosystem that is created must

ensure long-term sustainability and success.

Regarding metrics, more emphasis on measuring

human impact is important. It would be good to

learn more about the multipronged institutional- and

departmental-level interventions at Duke, which could

serve as models for cultural and climate change for

many other institutions.

If he had been able to attend, Dr. Salazar would have

discussed the challenges and concerns faced by

institutions that are attempting to implement cohort

recruitment programs. He would have challenged the

group to truly define the cohort and the hiring initiatives

in ways that reflect the culture and unique qualities of

the institution and its research environment.

Another discussion topic is the internal investments

that have been made to support the senior faculty who

are leading the individual development and retention

intervention programs mentioned by Dr. Black (e.g., the

Black Think Tank, the WRAP group). These invisible

responsibilities fall disproportionately on women and

faculty of color, increasing their workload and burden.

As Dr. Ruedi mentioned, structural change must

start with education and awareness. The model that

she presented is worthy of further discussion. Finally,

applying an equity lens to established norms (i.e.,

barriers) around tenure, promotion, and leave policies

and practices could be further discussed.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022

Questions and Answers

How can we tackle issues related to

climate and retention while addressing

issues with an institution’s hiring and

recruitment strategies?

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: Incentivize change

and accountability

. Have an institutional DEIA

strategy that is applied throughout the organization.

Ensure that the institution’s leadership is driving the

change. Use metrics that are connected to pay and

reappointment.

• Dr. Black: Change human behavior by getting to

the root cause of the problem. Partner structural

changes with human behavioral changes to create

a longitudinal effect. Gain an understanding of the

issues by evaluating the data and then assess the

needed behavioral changes before implementing

any initiatives. Change the embedded biases,

assumptions, and norms by simultaneously building

institutional and individual capacity for change.

• Dr. Ruedi: Invest a lot of time in the process and

allow time to reap the benefits. Pay attention to the

experiences of the r

ecruits. Be transparent about

existing challenges and the ways that they are being

addressed.

How do we partner with the city where

our university is located, which is not

appealing to candidates from URGs due

to a lack of diverse peer social networks and

support (e.g., schools, churches, and

social groups)?

• Dr. Black: Acknowledge the history of the country

and the history of the area where the university is

located. Be creative and think outside the box when

forming cohorts. Create a cohort that will succeed

in the established community (instead of creating

a cohort to create a community). Look across

departmental lines (each with URG faculty of

n = 1) to create a cross-sectional grouping and then

combine resources with city or regional programs.

Create faculty engagement in the art, education,

religious, and entertainment communities beyond

the university. Give a voice to the people we say we

want to help. Ask the recruits what they would like

to experience and to whom they would like to speak

(i.e., be recruit-centric instead of institution-centric).

• Dr. Ruedi: Ask the members of the cohort what

appeals to them and provide them what they need.

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: T

o address long histories

of distrust between institutions and communities,

provide r

esearchers with courses or training on

racial equity, diversity, inclusion, and engaging with

diverse communities. Create relationship-building

opportunities between the university and city to

partner, collaborate, and coexist.

When evaluating candidates for hiring

or promotion, how do you balance

the evaluation of scientific work

(e.g., publications, presentations) with

DEIA-related activities?

• Dr. Ruedi: Redefine merit using institutional values.

Use promotion and tenure packages that r

ecognize,

define, and quantify DEIA efforts (e.g., like the tenure

track at Indiana University–Purdue University in

Indianapolis).

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: Review tenure policies

and make them discipline-specific via the leadership

of the Office of the Provost. Incorporate community-

based research into the algorithm for promotion

and tenure process. Apply an equity lens to tenure

policies. Make systemic changes to what is valued

and privileged. Ask disciplines and professional

associations to define valuable academic outputs.

• Dr. Black: Revise tenure standards. Create process-

oriented guidelines and policies to eliminate bias from

the hiring and pr

omotion processes. Understand the

biases (e.g., in subjects and disciplines) that prevent

faculty of color from receiving NIH funding or grants.

Examine the root causes of the issues rather than

fixing superficial symptoms.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 11

What is the best strategy to mitigate

bias in the hiring process when selecting

from a diverse group of candidates? This

bias can include selecting talent only from R1

institutions.

• Dr. Black:

Understand what we perceive to be

meritorious, who we think belongs in our ranks, and

whom we are willing to call colleagues. Look at a

dossier in its entirety to determine what contributes

to a community’s intellectual aspects. Openly and

honestly evaluate the entire recruitment process.

Do not make assumptions about what interests a

candidate. Treat candidates as scholars and treat

every candidate the same, in accordance with

institutional values. Do not refer to a candidate as a

diversity hire or initiative hire (i.e., separate from the

norm).

• Dr. Ruedi: Do not take the focus away from the

science.

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: Ensure readiness by

not bringing in faculty of color to do the hard work of

changing climate and culture. Blind the application

review process so that other reviewer’s comments

and ratings cannot be seen. Control or limit reviewer

access to applicant degree, pedigree, and gender.

Align actions with newly changed institutional values,

priorities, and mindsets.

How do you encourage long-term,

more senior faculty and colleagues

with power to commit to supporting

diversity-enhancing initiatives?

• Dr. Ruedi:

Allow the students, faculty

, and staff

members on campus to be the levers for community

change.

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: Provide the needed

training and education while acknowledging that not

everyone will change. Do not reappoint department

chairs or deans who do not support institutional

initiatives or act on them. Truly prioritize and embed

DEIA into all actions and activities. Release faculty

and colleagues who are blockers and resistors.

• Dr. Black: Revamp leadership hiring and promotion

practices. Observe people’s actions to determine

where they truly stand. Use evidence-driven data

and employ scientific rigor to influence behavioral

changes. Leave emotion out of leadership practices

and encourage data-driven tactics. Lean on the

expertise of scholars who study diversity issues.

What are the main

takeaway messages

from this panel?

• Dr. Ruedi: Look at context holistically and make

data-driven decisions before acting. Contact

AAAS SEA Change staff to learn more about the

frameworks for implementing cohort diversity plans.

• Dr. Anderson-Thompkins: Create leadership

alignment with institutional priorities for DEIA.

Critically examine policies and practices to identify

barriers to the implementation of DEIA initiatives.

Employ a strategic and integrated approach to

implement DEIA initiatives within an institution. Move

from symbolic gestures to intensive actions. Invest in

education and cultural awareness training.

• Dr. Black: Determine the root causes (“below

the surface”) of the organization’s diversity issues.

Specifically address the identified implicit biases to

achieve behavioral change. Encourage leaders to

truly empower the changemakers. Give agency to

those whom you seek to help by engaging the URG

faculty already at your institution. Evaluate the data

to determine needs and address those needs fully

and honestly before launching cohort hiring initiatives.

Be honest with recruits about the existing challenges

and allow them to make the choices that are best for

them. Do not underestimate your peers’ willingness

to engage in equity work. Provide rigorous activities

and capacity-building resources for existing faculty to

learn and empower them to be part of the change.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 12

Day 1 Adjournment

Dr. Bernard mentioned several of NIH’s data-driven

initiatives for enhancing scientific workforce diversity,

including UNITE, the Federal Employee Viewpoint

Survey, and the new DEIA performance expectation that

is an element of the evaluation of all NIH IC Directors.

As a component of the DEIA performance standard,

every NIH IC must develop a racial and ethnic equity

plan that is submitted to the NIH Director and Principal

Deputy Director by April 1, 2022; implemented by May

1, 2022; and analyzed and revised annually. These

expectations align with Executive Orders from the

current administration.

Additional plans include the revision of metrics

throughout NIH. The Center for Scientific Review has

taken a lead, with initiatives to enhance diversity of

peer reviewers and evaluate the impact of anonymizing

grants, and a new proposed approach to scoring

grants.

“Reflections on race, ethnicity, and NIH

research awards,” an essay that was recently published

in Molecular Biology of the Cell, provides a good

perspective on these issues (Ginther, 2021).

Although

momentum has developed, there is still a lot of work

to do within NIH and beyond. Creating behavioral and

institutional change is a long, complex, and challenging

process.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 13

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 14

Day 2: February 24, 2022

“People should

not be brought

into situations

where there is

less willingness

to collaborate

and more

encouragement

to compete.

We cannot bring

people into

institutions and

drop them into the

same culture.”

Opening Remarks

Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D., Senior Advisor to the CEO

and Director, SEA Change, AAAS

Dr. Malcom began her remarks with a question that a

young child had asked her when she spoke at a charter

school during Black History Month: What was it like to

attend school when nobody else looked like her? She

responded that it was scary at first, because she did

not know what to expect, but things improved once

she found things in common with others. She reflected

on her experiences as a faculty member, when she

felt incredible isolation and was not sure who would

understand how to frame the issues she wanted to

discuss. Being both a woman and a person of color

made it even more challenging for her to find community

and belonging. Dr. Malcom said it would have been

great to be with others who could talk about similar

experiences and challenges. Early support is crucial.

NIH is investing in several programs to build community

and a sense of belonging, but these changes must be

coupled with changes to the system.

Anna Jane Harrison, Ph.D., a past president of AAAS

and the American Chemical Society, had difficulty

getting hired after completing her Ph.D. in chemistry.

The belief at the time was that women would not “stick

with it.” Dr. Harrison wanted to see a transformation,

a cultural change, and promotion of interdisciplinary

thinking and diversity as a different way to approach

science.

Federal funding is not only about the research but also

about the research environment. Promoting belonging,

problem solving, and a thriving faculty are crucial.

Changes are needed to make DEIA normative. Changes

in policies, processes, programs, and procedures are

needed to achieve the strengths that cohort work can

introduce into systems. Cohort work can be the catalyst

for needed changes and must involve the highest level

of leadership at institutions to undo some toxic aspects

of the culture that make it difficult to recruit people

who want to make a difference in the world. People

should not be brought into situations where there is less

willingness to collaborate and more encouragement

to compete. “We cannot bring people into institutions

and drop them into the same culture,” Dr. Malcom said.

The pandemic presented an opportunity for change,

reinvention, rediscovery, and reimagining, including

thinking about culture change as people learned more

about the need for balance in their lives. With the

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 15

possible end of the pandemic, will family-friendly policies

remain in place? Will there be meaningful retention

strategies?

SEA Change is trying to undo the biases and structures

that have been baked into the system over hundreds

of years. A problem cannot be solved with the same

thinking used to create it. The best research requires an

inclusive and supportive environment.

Questions and Answers

How can NIH and AAAS collaborate

even more effectively around programs

like SEA Change and other DEIA efforts?

• Part of SEA Change is focused on capacity building

and intr

oducing people to these programs. Also,

the alignment between NIH and AAAS signals that

excellence is directly connected to DEIA. To do

excellent research and advance science, there is a

need to think about the environment in which the

research is being done and to work together to make

necessary changes.

What institutional support or resources

need to be in place for cohort hires to

be successful in both recruitment

and retention?

• People need mentoring, transparency, and the

opportunity to get feedback on how well they ar

doing, as well as opportunities to form trusting

relationships. Tenure should not be determined only

by the number of grants or publications, but by a

more holistic view of what constitutes scholarship.

Innovation and interdisciplinary efforts will be the

drivers of 21st century science.

Identifying Resource Needs

for Cohort Recruitment and

Professional Development

Building and Sustaining a Learning

Community of Native Scholars

Spero M. Manson, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor of

Public Health and Psychiatry and Director, Centers for

American Indian and Alaska Native Health, University of

Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

Dr. Manson discussed the resources needed to

promote and sustain the research careers of URG

and disadvantaged scientists while seeking scientific

workforce diversity. One of the first resources needed

for a successful, lasting program is a conceptual

framework, such as Dr. Manson’s model (Manson,

2009).

Cohort recruitment is often thought of as

recruiting individuals to the same physical institution.

This model was tried over the years to bring American

Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) scholars to institutions but

was not successful, largely because of demands on

the lives of the young people. In a distributed model,

individual members of faculty development programs

are distributed across the country and brought together

in various ways to allow a sense of coherence.

Two examples of operationalizing a cohort model are the

Native Investigator Development Program (NIDP,

started in 1997) and the Grantwriting Uncovered:

Maximizing Strategies, Help, Opportunity,

Experience program (GUMSHOE, started in 2014).

Both are funded by NIH ICs and are ongoing (Manson,

Goins, and Buchwald, 2006; Jones et al., 2017).

12, 13

Components of both programs include four group

meetings each year and a series of didactic sessions

on topics such as statistical techniques, proposal

preparation, and fiscal and personnel administration.

Additional components include intensive biweekly

mentoring interactions with primary and secondary

mentors, a statistical mentor, and a science-writing

mentor, as well as peer-to-peer support. The programs

emphasized secondary analyses of relevant data sets

and primary data collection studies.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 16

NIDP outcomes included support of 56 AI/AN M.D.s,

Ph.D.s, and J.D.s in 12 cohorts; 91% were retained

over a two-year training cycle. To date, 24 have received

tenure at major research universities and have acquired

more than $210 million in NIH and other funding.

GUMSHOE had 101 M.D.s, Ph.D.s, and Dr.P.H.s in

more than six cohorts; 92% were URG or rural early-

stage investigators, 72% submitted research grants to

NIH and other sponsors, and 40% of their submitted

grants were funded. The GUMSHOE structure has been

incorporated into a variety of NIH pilot study programs.

An analysis of the learning community from 1998 to

2015 showed how the community grew over time

(Buchwald and Dick, 2011).

Mentors and mentees

worked collaboratively on publishing manuscripts. Keys

to success included the following:

• Critical mentor characteristics, such as NIH R01

funding, involvement of both Native and non-Native

scientists, publications, mentoring experience,

connections with potential sponsors, positions of

leadership, and valuing diversity.

• Critical trainee characteristics, such as mastery of

self-reflection, the ability to consider the perspective

of others and take constructive criticism, and

adequate scientific preparation and writing skills.

• Critical program features, such as the ability to

provide clarity and extensive structure regarding

expectations linked to short- and long-term

goals; an emphasis on deadlines, accountability,

and an interlocking nature; efficiencies and

time management; group collaboration and co-

teaching; demystification of grantsmanship; help

in restructuring discouraging circumstances; and

addressing tensions among personal, professional,

and social goals.

Ultimately, participants will achieve community-based

partnerships and develop strategies for outreach and

dissemination of findings. Mobilizing career development

programs to benefit both mentees and mentors is

possible and can be successful. Mentoring is a lifelong

process, an obligation, and a privilege.

Cohort Hire Program at the

University of Wisconsin

Beth Meyerand, Ph.D., Vice Provost for Faculty and

Staff Affairs, University of Wisconsin–Madison

Dr. Meyerand provided an overview of the cluster hire

cohort model program at the University of Wisconsin.

Since 2018, the university has authorized 25 clusters

across the biological, physical, and social sciences and

the arts and humanities. Each cluster is composed of

at least three faculty and is given the same total dollar

amount to be used toward salaries. There are currently

45 faculty in clusters, and 20 positions are unfilled.

The cluster hire program was put on hold during the

pandemic, with no hiring last year. The overall goal of

the cluster hire program was to improve institutional

excellence by breaking down silos, reallocate resources

to benefit the whole institution, and attract nontraditional

scholars.

The cluster hiring process must involve different schools

and colleges within a cluster. It is driven by faculty and

includes the following steps:

• The process begins with a call to all faculty for cluster

ideas. Ideas must be vetted by the dean’s office

because clusters are permanent faculty lines, initially

paid by the central campus but later by the school or

college.

• The provost appoints a 10-person interdisciplinary

Faculty Cluster Hire Committee that evaluates

proposals based on their potential to enhance

faculty diversity and their relevance to the university’s

mission, potential for success, and quality.

• A pool of finalists is submitted to the chancellor,

provost, and graduate school dean, who make the

final decision for which to fund.

• Upon approval of a cluster, the provost’s office

identifies a lead dean for that cluster, who then

appoints a search committee.

• The committee identifies candidates who meet the

needs of the cluster as well as the needs of potential

tenure home departments.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 17

The process is complicated, because there may be

multiple potential tenure homes for a single candidate,

possibly in different schools and colleges. When the

search committee identifies its choice for the position,

the tenure home department must vote in favor of the

cluster candidate. Like non-cluster faculty candidates,

cluster faculty candidates also have start-up costs,

which are not covered by the cluster program.

Lessons learned for successful cluster hiring include

the following:

• Make diversity goals explicit and develop supporting

strategies to achieve those goals.

• Ensure early buy-in from the department chairs and

deans.

• Engage faculty members early in the process and

follow the lead of professors; silos may form without

their buy-in.

• Establish clear expectations for cluster hires from the

beginning; discuss promotion and tenure guidelines

and available resources.

• Credit cluster hires for their work in the tenure and

promotion process.

• Establish an infrastructure to support interdisciplinary

collaboration, such as holding regular events that

allow informal social networking.

• Communicate the value of the program to

stakeholders across the institution.

• Develop a plan for sustaining the program throughout

leadership changes.

Dr. Meyerand gave a quote from Sam Walker of

The Wall Street Journal:

“…[C]luster hiring offers a tangible alternative to some

of the classic hiring mistakes. Some companies still

hire every team member separately, and largely for

their qualifications, without investigating how well they

might work with the others. Some continue to hire for

‘culture’ or ‘fit,’ which can be a great way to crush

diversity and breed a toxic culture. In the end, I think

the point is this: Maybe the best way to assemble a

great team is to let the team assemble itself.”

Enhancing Faculty Diversity

and Inclusion at the University

of California, San Diego (UCSD)

Health Sciences

JoAnn Trejo, Ph.D., Professor of Pharmacology,

Assistant Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences Faculty

Affairs, UCSD

Dr. Trejo discussed efforts at UCSD to enhance faculty

diversity and inclusion in health sciences. UCSD Health

Sciences has about 1,800 faculty in three professional

schools: the School of Medicine, the Skaggs School

of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, and the

Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human

Longevity Science. An institutional cluster hire, the first

at UCSD Health Sciences, was conducted in 2019. The

goal was to build a more diverse faculty and foster a

diverse and inclusive community of scholars to enhance

academic and research missions. The program was

open to any academic unit in the health sciences.

Positions were open to new faculty at any rank, with a

strong preference for recruits at the assistant professor

level. Outreach strategies included several social media

platforms and interactions with networks with high

representation of URG scientists. The program received

81 applications from qualified candidates (60% female,

56% URG). A search committee of 12 Health Sciences

faculty members reviewed and ranked 15 applications.

Offers were made to five candidates; four URG faculty

were hired. Two appointments were joint efforts

between departments and/or schools.

On arrival, new hires joined the Hispanic Center of

Excellence (HCOE) program, which is open to all URG

faculty within Health Sciences. HCOE was started in

2017 to provide educational and training opportunities

focused on increasing the enrollment of URG students

and faculty recruitment and retention. The program is

administered through the Office of Faculty Affairs and

includes career development planning, workshops on

academic review and promotion, development of core

area projects with a mentor, and mentorships with

senior faculty and near-peers. There is also a two-year

program for URG medical students in which mentors

and other faculty participants receive stipends for

their involvement. After the first year in the program,

faculty have opportunities to engage in other types of

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022

programs, such as professional development (through

the National Center of Leadership in Academic Medicine

[NCLAM]), research development and grant writing,

mentorship training, and leadership training.

HCOE outcomes have been good, with 86% of

eligible faculty participating. Many have submitted

grants, received leadership positions, and trained URG

mentees. A quantitative analysis of the initiatives and

programs showed that the greatest increase in the

quality of mentoring received was for URG faculty (Trejo

et al., 2021).

There was also a substantial increase in

morale for URG faculty, as well as in their perceptions

of a supportive environment. A qualitative evaluation

from program participants showed that networking and

meeting other faculty and mentors created a sense of

community, especially for female faculty. Having senior

mentors helped with career and grant development;

having more diverse peer mentors helped address

immediate challenges and barriers. Achievements

were attributed to HCOE resources, mentored project

development, and funding.

REACTION TO PANEL PRESENTATIONS

Michelle M. Camacho, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology,

University of San Diego

Dr. Camacho began by noting Dr. Malcom’s comments

about the importance of intersectionality and the

need to not only adopt structures for faculty success

but also undo the existing toxicity. She said that the

distributed model discussed by Dr. Manson is unique in

its emphasis on the saturation of mentoring. Inclusion

of primary and secondary mentors, statistical mentors,

and science writing mentors addresses all the elements

that mentees need for their success. NIDP and

GUMSHOE yield a high return on investment, in terms

of both funds brought into the institution and long-term

faculty retention. The focus on a holistic approach

to supporting faculty by considering self-reflection,

personal growth, and the relevance of their work is tied

to the value of providing strategies for community-based

partnerships. Faculty of color have deep connections to

the communities that they serve and represent. Having

that concept embedded in the mentorship process is

integral, because it adds another layer of service and

leadership for the institution and enables the scholar to

contribute to their home campus.

Dr. Meyerand’s discussion of the cross-disciplinary

approach was exciting in terms of the strategy and

overall approach across the institution to break down

silos and attract nontraditional scholars. The cohort

approach directly addresses the National Science

Foundation’s (NSF) idea about the importance

of convergence research and cross-disciplinary

translational ideas in enriching the approach to science

and building upon existing knowledge. Dr. Meyerand

also stressed the importance of faculty buy-in. Faculty

were asked to contribute ideas about cluster themes,

and experts were brought in to serve on cross-campus

committees. Another key focus was accountability,

which the literature shows leads to a greater likelihood

for sustaining the program. Finally, a contingency plan

for changes of leadership should be in place to mitigate

potential problems. Dr. Camacho said she would be

interested in hearing more about how Dr. Meyerand’s

campus dealt with resistance to the ideas and how the

panelists work with shared mentor models.

Dr. Trejo’s presentation on the UCSD’s postdoctoral

program illustrated a wonderful mechanism for

attracting applicants and replenishing the pipeline. The

discussion featured the strong role of and reliance on

external structures. For example, having NCLAM serve

as a source and provide a grant-writing course took

the onus off individual mentors and allowed a more

distributed model. Another strategy involved bringing

in external visiting scholars to provide mentorship, in

the absence of diverse leadership on campus. Digging

deeply into culturally responsive mentorship is integral

for serving faculty hired in a diverse cluster.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 19

Questions and Answers

What are the best cost-effective

strategies for running cohort recruitment

and retention programs? How does one

ensure the medium- and long-term sustainability

of a diversity cluster hire initiative?

• Dr. Manson: Return-on-investment (ROI) analyses

e critical in justifying the investments made with

such initiatives. The University of Michigan pioneer

an ROI analysis of career development programs and

showed both the tangible and intangible benefits,

all of which can be monetized to varying degrees.

The analysis demonstrated the accrual of external

sponsors of research, the ability to retain faculty

over time, and extension of collaboration with other

institutions.

• Dr. Meyerand: It was important to get buy-in for

cluster hiring from both the department and the

dean at the very beginning. The department should

be listed as a possible tenure home for a cluster

hire faculty member before the position is even

advertised. The department and the dean’s office will

have intense conversations about finances and ability

to pay for start-up costs (e.g., space renovation) for

potential cluster hires. Departments will be listed

in the ad for a cluster position only if they commit

on Day 1 to doing everything necessary to hire the

faculty member and ensure that they thrive during

their career.

• Dr. Trejo: One of the key aspects of cost-

effectiveness was to split the costs across the

institution. Buy-in was needed not just from the

chancellor for health sciences but also from the

executive budget council. The proof of success was

the ability to recruit high-quality URG investigators.

Initiatives are now in place to move forward with

additional cluster hires.

• Dr. Camacho: It is especially important to focus on

the project’s long-term sustainability

. Attracting faculty

and having start-up packages is very resource-

intensive. Preparing department chairs and deans

to think critically about retention and supporting

faculty members holistically is important so that the

leadership understands why it is beneficial for the

campus and research to have diverse faculty clusters.

• Dr. Malcom: Trustees of institutions look at a long

timeline and try to understand which faculty will be

leaving and when (e.g., whether there ar

e faculty

who might be interested in a buyout or phased

retirement). Rather than “plopping people on the

current faculty,” the need is to configure the faculty

for the long term and address sustainability. New

faculty need to be positioned for success not only to

avoid the institution’s reputation as “a revolving door”

but also to be cost-effective in terms of resource

allocation.

Do you think that distributed clusters

with virtual meetings will be sustainable

after the pandemic? This could reduce

cost per participant and allow scale-up.

• Dr. Manson: Cluster models that focus on only a

given institution and limited geographic ar

ea are a

concern. Younger scholars live in a broader universe

of both social and research relationships, and these

interactions should be expanded and supported.

Virtual platforms have served that need, and there

are many creative and innovative ways to employ

them, in terms of presenting posters, mobilizing

images, and blending them together in written and

spoken narratives. Moving forward, there will likely

be more emphasis on a hybrid approach that blends

these different modalities to complement each

other, leading to not only great efficiency but also to

cost savings, with minimal loss to the outcomes of

interest.

• Dr. Trejo: There are many benefits to a virtual

platform, and hybrid platforms are likely. Thr

NIH-funded faculty development programs that had

convened every summer were converted to virtual

platforms, offering cost savings and making the

program more accessible to individuals with family

and caregiving responsibilities.

• Dr. Malcom: Virtual platforms can also address

issues related to spousal hires, which can af

fect

recruiting and retention. Also, small groups in various

locations can work together. For example, the Laser

Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory

is based at the California Institute of Technology

but has operational components in Louisiana and

Washington state, as well as international partners.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 20

• Dr. Manson: Technology allowed him and his

colleague/spouse to work in different states and still

collaborate.

• Dr. Camacho: Dr. Manson’s data analysis

suggested that a distributed model can be beneficial

not only for the scholar but also for growing the

network over time. There is also the potential for new

publications focusing on best practices.

• Dr. Bernard: The COSWD office plans to do

all conferences and seminars virtually through

2022 (see the COSWD blog post on the topic).

Data showed that larger numbers of women and

individuals from URGs were able to participate in

scientific meetings during the pandemic.

What are best practices for onboarding

faculty who are recruited via clusters or

cohorts? How can these practices be

connected to resources and places outside of

the university?

• Dr. Meyerand: A cluster hire committee meets with

the chairs of the receiving departments to discuss

onboarding, space allocation, and equipment. If a

faculty member will be in two different departments,

questions about how they will work between different

buildings, schools, or campuses and about the

challenges they might encounter are addressed. The

senior faculty on the committee smooth the path for

new hires.

• Dr. Trejo: One of the biggest challenges is having

the faculty understand what is needed for promotion

and tenure. The HCOE program can be seen as an

onboarding program to discuss faculty promotion

and advancement and learn about challenges and

struggles from peers. Near-peer mentoring from

those who went through the process recently is

invaluable.

• Dr. Camacho: Onboarding begins in the negotiation

process. One approach used in cluster hires has

been to provide a negotiation template to allow for

transparency in the process.

• Dr. Malcom: The current process places the entire

burden of negotiation on the person being hired.

Baselines and structures are needed to ensure that

inequities do not “come in the door” and build up

over time. Onboarding needs to include and maintain

equity across the group.

• Dr. Manson: Much of the work is about a person–

environment interaction. A young faculty member

must first figure out the environment to acquire the

necessary skills to navigate it. The institution bears

an equal responsibility to allow the young scholar to

navigate realistically.

Is the potential for scholarly collaboration

within the cluster a factor for hiring?

How critical is it for the clusters to be

across departments or colleges? Can there

be synergy from being placed within the same

department?

• Dr. Trejo: Her cluster hir

e involved individuals

working in diverse disciplines. The HCOE program,

which can be viewed as a cohort, has had multiple

collaborations.

• Dr. Camacho: Her cluster hire had eight individuals,

and relationships and friendships have evolved. The

cohort theme was interdisciplinary across STEM,

and the organization was successful in having

interdisciplinary grants written and retaining faculty.

• Dr. Meyerand: The clusters at her institution are

highly collaborative. It is exciting for people to know

that they will have colleagues doing related work and

entering at the same time. This provides a ready-

made peer group to push scholarship forward.

Department chairs have said that it is easier to hire

their top candidates if the candidates know they will

be part of a cluster.

What has been done to truly integrate

these groups and their cultures into

legacy-backed groups and their

cultures—that is, how do you avoid the notion of

“our group versus their group”?

• Dr. Meyerand: Clusters at her institution tend to

be collaborative within themselves. Ther

e is not

an “us versus them” mentality, but the clusters are

sometimes so fascinated with their group’s work

that they do not look outside. The department itself

tends to be highly collaborative, without impermeable

siloes. When the annual report of the cluster is

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 21

written, the department chairs are asked how the

cluster integrates within the research fabric of the

unit, so the leadership tends to be mindful about

forming connections within the campus as a whole.

The cluster groups must feel that they are part of the

fabric of the university.

• Dr. Trejo: This issue is addressed by well-integrated

senior faculty mentors who are often high-profile

researchers. They help junior faculty connect with

other researchers to learn about different training

programs and research centers. Junior faculty can

also serve as mentors in training programs, which

also foster interactions and collaborations.

• Dr. Camacho: Having the cohort faculty fit in

with the legacy groups is part of the charge of the

department chairs and deans. One of the most

effective ways to build bridges is with project-

based programming that allows for collaborations

in service projects or committee work across

diverse groups. The deans and chairs should be

championing these efforts.

“The cluster

groups must

feel that they are

part of the fabric

of the university.”

What sort of special programming should

be in place to retain mid-career faculty

just after tenure?

• Dr. Trejo: Several pr

ograms have helped her mid-

career faculty, but there is not much emphasis on,

or many resources targeted to that group. The issue

needs more attention.

• Dr. Camacho: There is often a lot of programming

for getting faculty through the tenure process but less

for helping them toward full professorship. The NSF

has launched a new program for mid-career faculty.

Many faculty members are starting to think about

other professional development opportunities for

leadership, such as for the role of department chair

or associate dean. Professional associations also

have leadership program opportunities.

• Dr. Meyerand: Her office has two popular programs

for mid-career faculty. One is a mid-career chat

program that addresses topics such as expanding

the research portfolio and moving on to leadership

positions in the university or a scientific society

or foundation; the other is a mentoring program,

where mid-career faculty are paired with a campus

administrator or a faculty member in a different area.

Please talk about the top two or three

things that you hope people will take

from this panel discussion.

• Dr. Camacho: Accountability and sustainability

Someone must be formally responsible for the

program and any consequences. To keep the

momentum going, data must be collected and

outcomes shared with the broader campus

community. This contributes to the cycle of

acceptance, guards against resistance, and provides

needed feedback so the programs can grow and

thrive.

• Dr. Meyerand: Getting buy-in for cohort or

cluster hiring from all stakeholders (e.g., faculty,

chairs, deans) at the very beginning and ensuring

accountability, which should include regular check-

ins with all.

• Dr. Trejo: The impact of the initiatives on the

URG faculty. There are many examples of success

that can be used and adapted to the culture of a

particular institution and tailored to meet its needs.

Evaluation and assessment are needed to show the

impact, so leadership will be more generous with

resources.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 22

Tracking Cohort Outcomes—

Collecting Data on the

Experiences of Faculty Members

Collecting Data on the

Experience of Faculty Members

Idethia Shevon Harvey, Dr.P.H., Associate Professor

of Health Sciences and Faculty Fellow for Inclusive

Excellence, University of Missouri

Dr. Harvey discussed the experiences of minority and

diverse faculty members she encountered as a faculty

fellow for diversity, equity, and inclusion. She noted that

new faculty want to feel a sense of belonging to the

institution, but efforts to improve DEIA are not a “quick

fix” or confrontational.

Diversity does not only refer to race and ethnicity but is

also about culture (e.g., religious beliefs, sexual identity,

and orientation). A focus on inclusion means creating

a climate in which the person coming in can thrive

not only in research but also in personal endeavors.

Many new hires are excited and passionate about their

work but do not understand the infrastructure of their

environment or how to ensure that their research is not

considered an outlier to the unit’s mission. Some hires

who do not feel welcome either go to another institution

or leave academia altogether.

Institutions, and especially small units within larger

organizations, need to stop being “revolving doors” that

bring in one minority faculty member only when another

leaves. New hires who feel they must be the catalyst

for changing the department culture carry a heavy

burden, especially during the tenure-track process. The

university and the department must be committed to

cultural change.

Strong mentoring is critical. Some new faculty learn

about their department’s culture only after making a

mistake. Junior faculty need mentoring to understand

the unwritten rules for promotion and tenure. The focus

on retention should begin as soon as an individual signs

the appointment letter. A welcoming work environment

allows an individual to thrive while they conduct

research. The person must not feel that their research is

“niche” and not part of the majority research endeavor.

A Personal Perspective of the

Cohort Experience

Alberto A. Rascón, Jr., Ph.D., Associate Professor of

Biochemistry, San José State University

Dr. Rascón, a first-generation Mexican American,

shared his story about becoming a principal investigator

and how NIH programs helped him feel a sense

of having a cohort and belonging. After majoring

in chemistry as an undergraduate in California and

receiving encouragement from a professor, he pursued

a graduate degree at the University of Arizona. At

the beginning, he felt like an imposter who did not

fit in. Fortunately, he was part of the NIH Initiative for

Maximizing Student Development (IMSD) program,

where he met other people of color. Having this

cohort and a URG faculty mentor gave him a sense of

belonging. Through an R01 Minority Supplement grant,

Dr. Rascón received support for three years, which

allowed him to travel to meet other scientists. This

boosted his confidence in talking about his research.

After a setback in his first graduate lab, he almost left

the program, but he found a new graduate advisor and

began his work on the Aedes aegypti mosquito midgut

protease project. In addition to learning new lab skills,

he became involved in writing manuscripts and grant

applications and teaching postdocs.

Dr. Rascón was then accepted into the NIH IRACDA

program at the University of California, San Francisco,

and San Francisco State University, which gave

him more teaching experience and allowed him to

develop into a strong independent scientist. Learning

to disseminate information properly through teaching

also made him a better grant writer. The NIH programs

provided him with mentors who guided him through

applications for faculty positions. He decided to accept

a position as an assistant professor at San José State

University in 2013 and was tenured in 2019.

At San José State University, Dr. Rascón wanted

to provide a cohort experience to his students to

make sure his lab was a safe space in a nonjudging

community. With help from his undergraduate students,

he collected enough preliminary data to receive funding

for the National Institute of General Medical Sciences

(NIGMS) Support of Competitive Research (SCORE;

SC3) program in 2016. With the goal of “paying

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 23

it forward,” Dr. Rascón got involved in other NIH

programs, serving as a mentor and co-coordinator in

the Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement (RISE)

program. He was also a mentor in the NIH Maximizing

Access to Research Careers (MARC) program and

other minority programs, such as the California State

University Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation

(CSU-LSAMP) and the Chicanx/Latinx Student Success

Center, or Centro.

Although Dr. Rascón’s imposter syndrome still rears its

head sometimes, the cohorts helped give him a sense

of belonging. He wants to ensure that his students have

similar opportunities.

Tracking Outcomes of

Institution Research and Career

Development Programs

Angela Wandinger-Ness, Ph.D., Professor of

Pathology and Associate Director for Education,

Training, and Mentoring, University of New Mexico

Comprehensive Cancer Center

Dr. Wandinger-Ness discussed the benefits and

outcomes of programs like IRACDA that serve as

early-career cohort models. She noted that Clifton

A. Poodry, Ph.D., a former director of the NIGMS

Division of Training, Workforce Development, and

Diversity, envisioned and launched the IRACDA cohort

model for postdoctoral development in 1999. The

current IRACDA network encompasses 21 programs

at research-intensive academic institutions across

16 states. An annual conference connects the entire

network around best practices in research, education,

and advancement of workforce diversity. Fellowships

in Research and Science Teaching at Emory University

(a program called Emory FIRST) and Seeding

Postdoctoral Innovators in Research and Education

(SPIRE) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel

Hill were among the inaugural programs.

IRACDA training begins with the recruitment of cohorts of

3 to 10 fellows from URGs in STEM. Fellows participate

in structured research, teaching, and professional

development activities over three to four years. Teaching

activities must take place at a formally partnered minority-

serving institution. The fellows serve as important role

models, bringing their stories to students who may not

have considered STEM-gained knowledge in career

paths. Assessment of IRACDA outcomes considers

the impact on individual fellows, the cohort of fellows,

the institutions, the students served, and the national

community of scholars and faculty.

The SPIRE program features structured training,

which includes teaching experiences, professional

development, and experience balancing teaching

with research. The program significantly increased

the participation of women to 69%, compared with

national postdoctoral training data showing that 40% of

participants were women.

Data on the career outcomes of IRACDA scholars

compared with F32 awardees over a 15-year period

(1999–2014) showed an increased representation of

women across the entire IRACDA network. The data

also showed that 40% to 50% of IRACDA scholars who

pursued careers in science and academia were from

traditionally URGs, compared with 5% of F32 awardees.

Seventy percent of IRACDA fellows assumed careers

in academia, compared with 65% of F32 awardees.

Career outcomes of Emory FIRST scholars showed that

a large portion took faculty appointments at minority-

serving institutions. Composite outcome data showed

that structured training had a significant impact on

enhancing scientific workforce diversity.

The Academic Science Education and Research

Training (ASERT) program, the IRACDA program at the

University of New Mexico, includes structured mentoring

and targeted skill development, with monthly meetings

to encourage interdisciplinary dialogue and coursework

and workshops on topics such as grant writing and

responsible conduct in research. The program uses a

logic model to guide the evaluation of short- and long-

term outcomes. An independent expert serves as an

evaluator. Scholars are trained in diverse disciplines,

such as anthropology, ecology, engineering, and

biomedical sciences.

Demographic data show that 47% of ASERT fellows

are from URGs. There were 15 AI/AN scholars trained

across the entire network over the 15-year period.

The opportunity to work with AI/AN students was a

draw for five of the scholars. ASERT career outcomes

reflect those of national trends: The 45 ASERT alumni

in 19 states have assumed careers in academia; 49%

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 24

remained in New Mexico. Scholars averaged 3.3

publications each. Fellows at Emory FIRST averaged

1.0 publications per year (Eisen and Eaton, 2018).

In the SPIRE program, scholars transitioned to faculty

positions at a rate three times higher than the national

average, with a higher proportion of URG and female

scholars. Both the SPIRE and Emory programs had

a significant impact on undergraduate education and

broadening STEM participation (Rybarczyk et al., 2011;

Rybarczyk et al., 2017).

17, 18

A Tufts University IRACDA

and five others piloted a web-based partner impact tool

built collaboratively with minority-serving institutions.

A final crucial impact of IRACDA is the building of

a community that provides structured support and

peer networks through formal and informal sharing. In

summary, IRACDA programs:

• Attract and retain women and other URGs in

science through intensive, structured professional

development in both research and teaching that has

a durable, long-term impact on trainee self-efficacy,

career attainment, and satisfaction.

• Highlight the benefits of enhancing scientific

workforce diversity in academia and related science

professions. Partnered faculty and students benefit

through interactions with scholars who share an

interest in teaching and education pedagogy and

serve as relevant role models.

• Coalesce communities of practice through explicit,

structured training and shared teaching and research

experiences.

Key limitations in outcomes assessment include the need

for relevant comparator groups, prospective analyses,

and more uniform use of self-efficacy surveys (note: for

context involving another, different postdoctoral program,

see Faupel-Badger et al., 2017).

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022

REACTION TO PANEL PRESENTATIONS

Carla Freeman, Ph.D., Goodrich C. White Professor of

Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies and Executive

Associate Dean, Emory College of Arts and Sciences,

Emory University

Dr. Freeman said that measuring the success of efforts

to diversify faculty requires doing the experiment,

testing the hypothesis, collecting the data, tracking the

incremental steps, and identifying clear measures of

success. There is a need for more qualitative measures

to assess not just the number of URG scientists added

but also the quality of the experience at every stage of

the scientists’ professional lives. Meaningful support and

engagement are needed at each distinct chapter of an

individual’s career.

All the panelists highlighted multiple genres of

mentorship. A key takeaway is the importance of

training mentors. Simply holding a higher rank or

having a pleasant chat in the mailroom does not

constitute mentoring. Structured programs are needed

to address each phase of the professional life cycle,

highlight the experiences of URG scientists, and

provide specific mentoring for academic, industry, or

government spheres. Expanding the candidate pool to

break down silos, rethinking the interview and review

process, examining implicit biases, and using the

cohort approach have become best practices on many

campuses and provide an opportunity to diversify faculty

across every field. In the past six years, including the

pandemic, Emory University gradually increased URG

faculty from about 14% to 38% to 50% in a given year.

The percentage of URG tenure-track faculty doubled in

the same period.

The panelists emphasized the inextricable relationship

between recruitment and retention. Many factors

determine whether faculty will not just stay but thrive.

Retention is dynamic, multifaceted, and too often

thought of as a onetime gesture, such as when a faculty

member is courted elsewhere. A single snapshot,

such as an institutional survey, reflects only a partial

picture of a specific moment. Elements that matter

most to an individual may change over time. Retention

must be approached as building a relationship with

the individual in the form of recognition, professional

development, and a sense of community. Diversifying

faculty is an investment in changing the culture of

academic life. Cultures do not change overnight or

due solely to mission statements from leadership. To

assess cohort hiring and capture the complexities of

success, the scope of the methods used needs to be

broadened. People have myriad reasons for staying or

leaving, often having little to do with the institution or

specific resources. Faculty need to feel valued by their

department and supported by the chair, regardless of

how many university-wide structures are in place to

support DEIA. A new project at Emory is studying the

most meaningful modes of engagement at the individual

and collective levels. Success will be assessed not only

by having scientists remain in institutions and make

new discoveries but also by having new generations of

inspired students, as well as academic communities that

are challenged to change and develop in new directions.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 26

Questions and Answers

How satisfied are faculty who are

recruited via cohort strategies? How do

you measure that satisfaction? What are

other psychosocial or socio-emotional metrics of

success for faculty cohort recruitment?

• Dr. Freeman:

Her institution routinely checks in

with faculty hired through cohort strategies. Some

structured measures, such as annual reviews, are

used, but informal conversations with department

chairs and faculty are critical. Faculty hired through

the initial STEM cluster six years ago often changed

their interests and concerns over the years. The

priorities are to capture the dynamism in the life

course of every faculty member and keep pace with

the changes in their trajectories.

• Dr. Wandinger-Ness: Her institution has held exit

interviews with faculty to learn their motivations for

leaving, and now uses the feedback to structure a

more positive environment.

• Dr. Rascón: His institution has not yet had a cohort

cluster hire. As a faculty member, he appreciated

senior colleagues’ help with the tenure promotion

process, but he still felt alone. After a year, he and

another faculty member created a junior faculty

cohort and hired several people. In addition to

sharing experiences about the lab, publications,

and students, discussing work-life balance was also

important.

• Dr. Harvey: New faculty need to feel valued as

humans as well as researchers and understand

that the infrastructure allows them to thrive and be

creative. Even though their research may differ in

some ways, it is important that they feel respected

for bringing something new or nontraditional to the

department or institution.

Is there a way to share resources on

making promotion and tenure criteria

more transparent? For example, how

have other schools revised their criteria over time

and shared accountability specifics with university

leadership?

• Dr. Harvey: Units and departments must begin

to build a matrix or infrastructure so that faculty

understand the measures used for promotion.

Some institutions may not be willing to have such

transparency, but it is imperative that they do so.

• Dr. Rascón: A holistic approach that plays to

a person’s strengths is needed. Teaching and

mentoring, for example, need to be considered along

with research and publications. Focusing on what

one loves to do reduces the burden of worrying

about tenure.

• Dr. Wandinger-Ness: Her academic medical center

has a mix of basic scientists and clinical colleagues,

and promotion guidelines vary. For researchers, the

emphasis is on research, education, scholarship, and

some service; for clinicians, the focus is on clinical

expertise, scholarship, and teaching. The school

of medicine, the largest school at the center, has

a faculty affairs office that provides programming

for faculty on promotion and tenure. A structured

approach begins at the school level and goes down

to the departments. Junior faculty usually have senior

faculty mentors.

• Dr. Freeman: Transparency and legibility of the

institution’s expectations are keys to successful

tenure. Some anxiety can be removed when the

institution is open about expectations. Individual

faculty members should seek mentorship at the

department, school, and university levels, because

they will be reviewed at all three. It is crucial to learn

how to communicate about their science and its

importance. All institutions want committed and

transformative teachers as well as scholars and

researchers. Faculty should have access to a library

of exemplary tenure dossiers.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 27

Most of the initiatives discussed have

been top-down leadership initiatives. Do

you have any suggestions for getting

buy-in from senior leadership through a middle

management approach?

• Dr. Rascón: It has been difficult to broach the

subject with much of the upper administration. Some

conversations have begun, but follow-through is

challenging.

• Dr. Harvey: Departments must have total buy-in to

the process and a strategic plan for implementing

cultural changes. If faculty do not feel they belong

or are welcome, no amount of resources will

convince them to stay. Middle management must be

committed to changing themselves when they realize

the system is not one in which people can thrive.

• Dr. Freeman: Institutions need to jettison the

replacement model of hiring (i.e., approaching the

dean to approve a line to replace someone who

is retiring or leaving) and think creatively about

constellations of scientists and scholars who

cohere around a particular theme. She has not

encountered opposition to the idea of cluster hiring

at her institution, and there is actually competition to

participate. The key ingredient has been engaging

relevant individuals at the department level from the

moment the vision is established. If they participate in

conceiving the vision, there is often no opposition.

• Dr. Wandinger-Ness: It is possible to have a

grassroots initiative led by a group of interested

faculty that secures grant funding. Her IRACDA

program, which is now in its third cycle of funding,

has shaped how postdoctoral scholarship is done

at her institution. She and her husband were part

of a cohort faculty hire at the mid-level. This led

to a funded comprehensive cancer center at the

University of New Mexico and a clinical translational

science center.

Are there any unforeseen issues when

recruiting, hiring, and retaining a faculty

cohort who may be devoted to research

topics relevant to diverse backgrounds? Why or

why not? Is there an issue of potential backlash as

a result of these sorts of hires?

• Dr. Wandinger-Ness: She has not seen backlash,

but coordination among multiple units can be

challenging. The University of New Mexico now has

a College of Population Health, likely an outgrowth of

the many researchers spread across the School of

Medicine, the College of Pharmacy, and other units

that were doing population-based work.

• Dr. Rascón: He has not been involved in such an

approach. Hires at his institution have been based on

needs in specific areas. There was a large cohort hire

in computer science at his institution.

• Dr. Harvey: It can be challenging to bring in a

faculty member who has a narrow focus on a

research topic with a diverse population if there is

no senior person available who can guide them.

This is important for those who seek NIH Career

Development awards, or K awards, because

applicants need a mentor doing similar work.

• Dr. Wandinger-Ness: Another example of a

special initiative for building interdisciplinary research

initiatives from the ground up is a spatial temporal

modeling center that spanned her institution’s two

campuses and brought in groups of junior faculty

members and the Mountain West Consortium.

• Dr. Freeman: She has not seen the focus on

diversity topics causing any concern for marginality

or skepticism, but she emphasized that isolation

of any junior scholar is a red flag. Faculty have left

because of feeling extremely isolated and have

sought other opportunities with a large group of

scientists working with the same methodologies and

focus. Care must be taken not to put a junior person

at risk by recruiting them where they will be an island.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 28

Wrap-Up

Dr. Bernard thanked the panelists and attendees, noting

that the rich discussions highlighted the nuances of

cohort recruitment and its variation among institutions

and organizations. She summarized the key themes:

• Cohort recruitment efforts require institutional

commitment from leadership and can be developed,

particularly with the use of data on their effectiveness.

• Change does not happen immediately. Patience is

needed.

• Institutions must be open and honest with potential

recruits about the actual state of the organization.

• A small number of like-minded individuals can

develop efforts that lead to propagating concepts

of cohort hiring that can take hold throughout an

organization.

• Pivotal influencers may not necessarily be the

provost or department chair but rather individuals

further down the line.

• Cohort recruitment efforts need to be data oriented

and focused.

Acknowledgements

The members of the FCR Planning Committee include:

• Albert Avila, Ph.D., National Institute on Drug

Abuse

• Vence L. Bonham, Jr., J.D., National Human

Genome Research Institute

• Jessica Calzola, Ph.D., PMP, National Cancer

Institute

• Rina Das, Ph.D., National Institute on Minority

Health and Health Disparities

• Jessie A. DeAro, Ph.D., National Science

Foundation

• Jessica Faupel-Badger, Ph.D., M.P.H., National

Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

• Alison Gammie, Ph.D., National Institute of General

Medical Sciences

• Michelle Jones-London, Ph.D., National Institute

of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

• Patricia (Trish) Labosky, Ph.D., Office of the

Director, Division of Program Coordination, Planning,

and Strategic Initiatives

• Charlene Le Fauve, Ph.D., Office of the Director,

COSWD office

• Michael Sesma, Ph.D., National Institute of General

Medical Sciences

• Nadra Tyus, Dr.P.H., M.P.H., National Institute on

Minority Health and Health Disparities

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 29

References

Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. Faculty Cluster Hiring for Diversity and Institutional Climate. 2015.

Accessed July 29, 2022. https://www.aplu.org/members/commissions/urban-serving-universities/student-

success/cluster.html

Sgoutas-Emch S, Baird L, Myers P, Camacho M, Lord S. We’re not all white men: using a cohort/cluster approach to

diversify STEM faculty hiring. Thought Action. 2016;32(1):91–107.

Laursen S, Austin AE. Building Gender Equity in the Academy: Institutional Strategies for Change. Johns Hopkins

University Press; 2020.

Heilig JV, Flores IW, Barry JC, Souza A, Barcelo S. Considering the ethnoracial and gender diversity of faculty in US

college and university intellectual communities. Hisp J Law Policy. Published online January 1, 2019. Accessed July 31,

2022. https://www.academia.edu/39655897/Considering_the_Ethnoracial_and_Gender_Diversity_of_Faculty_in_

US_College_and_University_Intellectual_Communities

Sto. Domingo MR, Sharp S, Freeman A, et al. Replicating Meyerhoff for inclusive excellence in STEM. Science.

2019;364(6438):335–337.

Summers MF, Hrabowski FA. Preparing minority scientists and engineers. Science. 2006;311(5769):1870–1871.

Griffin KA. Institutional barriers, strategies, and benefits to increasing the representation of women and men of color

in the professoriate. High Educ Handb Theory Res. Published online 2019.

Williams DA. Strategic Diversity Leadership: Activating Change and Transformation in Higher Education.

Stylus Publishing; 2013. Accessed July 31, 2022. https://styluspub.presswarehouse.com/browse/

book/9781579228194/Strategic-Diversity-Leadership

Brynes N. NIH Center for Scientific Review. Review Matters: Race & Peer Review. Published June 12, 2020.

Accessed July 31, 2022. https://www.csr.nih.gov/reviewmatters/2020/06/12/race-peer-review/

Ginther DK. Reflections on race, ethnicity, and NIH research awards. Mol Biol Cell. 2022;33(1):ae1.

Manson SM. Personal journeys, professional paths: persistence in navigating the crossroads of a research career.

Am J Public Health. 2009;99(Suppl 1):S20–S25.

Manson SM, Goins RT, Buchwald DS. The Native Investigator Development Program: increasing the presence of

American Indian and Alaska Native scientists in aging-related research. J Appl Gerontol. 2006;25(1; suppl):105S–130S.

Jones HP, McGee R, Weber-Main AM, et al. Enhancing research careers: an example of a US national diversity-focused,

grant-writing training and coaching experiment. BMC Proc. 2017;11(Suppl 12):16.

Buchwald D, Dick RW. Weaving the Native web: using social network analysis to demonstrate the value of a minority

career development program. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2011;86(6):778–786.

Trejo J, Wingard D, Hazen V, et al. A system-wide health sciences faculty mentor training program is associated with

improved effective mentoring and institutional climate. J Clin Transl Sci. 6(1):e18.

Eisen A, Eaton DC. A model for postdoctoral education that promotes minority and majority success in the biomedical

sciences. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2017;16(4):ar65.

Rybarczyk B, Lerea L, Lund PK, Whittington D, Dykstra L. Postdoctoral training aligned with the academic professoriate.

BioScience. 2011;61(9):699–705.

Rybarczyk BJ, Lerea L, Whittington D, Dykstra L. Analysis of postdoctoral training outcomes that broaden participation in

science careers. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2016;15(3):ar33.

Faupel-Badger JM, Raue K, Nelson DE, Tsakraklides S. Alumni perspectives on career preparation during a postdoctoral

training program: a qualitative study. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2015;14(1):ar1.

FOSTERING COHORT RECRUITMENT (FCR) VIRTUAL FORUM | FEBRUARY 23–24, 2022 30

Abbreviations

AAAS American Association for the Advancement of Science

ACD Advisory Committee to the Director

AI/AN American Indian/Alaska Native

ASERT Academic Science Education and Research Training

COSWD Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity

CSU-LSAMP California State University Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation

DEIA Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility

FCR Fostering Cohort Recruitment

FIRST Faculty Institutional Recruitment for Sustainable Transformation

GUMSHOE Grantwriting Uncovered: Maximizing Strategies, Help, Opportunity, Experience

HCOE Hispanic Center of Excellence

ICs Institutes and Centers

IMSD Initiative for Maximizing Student Development

IRACDA Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award

K Award NIH career development award

MARC Maximizing Access to Research Careers

MOSAIC Maximizing Opportunities for Academic Independent Careers

NAACP National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

NCLAM National Center of Leadership in Academic Medicine

NIDP Native Investigator Development Program

NIGMS National Institute of General Medical Sciences

NIH National Institutes of Health

NSF National Science Foundation

OD Office of the Director

ROI Return on Investment

RISE Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement

SEA STEMM Equity Achievement

SCORE or SC3 Support of Competitive Research

SPIRE Seeding Postdoctoral Innovators in Research and Education

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

SWDSS Scientific Workforce Diversity Seminar Series

UNITE An anacronym for an NIH initiative established to identify and address structural racism

within the NIH-supported and greater scientific communities

URG underrepresented group

WRAP Writing and ReseArch Productive (group for Black faculty)