Dear HRA members, Congratulations to HRA and HRA members for being a major part of the Chronicle of Philanthropy’s lead story “Push for Diversity Among Biomedical Grant Makers Gains New Momentum”! Also, help me welcome our newest HRA member organizations! Fibrolamellar Cancer Foundation Hearing Health Foundation If you are counting – that makes 109!! Upcoming Events Note that two of the events listed below are professional development opportunities for staff of HRA members. Please use the link provided to register for these perks of HRA membership to foster your own career and broaden your network! Improving LGBTQ+ retention... read more →
New Search
If you are not happy with the results below please do another search Dear HRA members, We have quite a few events planned for this summer, including two to foster professional development for staff of HRA members. Hopefully this is one more perk you can offer to help retain your awesome employees! The event list is long so remember to scroll down to access the resources created from past events. Upcoming Events Using Logic Models – to develop programs and measure impact TODAY! (5/26/2022 1:00pm – 2:00pm ET) Learn about the value of logic models in both designing programs and measuring impact. Come prepared to ask questions and share your own... read more →
A grant review committee is a group of people assembled to review grant proposals and make decisions on awards for a grant program. Grant review committees can vary in size, expertise, and time demands depending on the grantmaker and the grant program. The grant review committee’s role is to objectively evaluate all grant applications, and collaboratively make smart recommendations regarding funding to maximize impact. Running a grant review committee: Best practices (from Submittable) Clarifying the process - This should include defining the objectives, outlining the review process, and determining the timeline. This will help to clearly communicate expectations with prospective... read more →
Page
Overview: The Health Research Alliance (HRA) has long been committed to increasing the diversity of the scientific workforce and decreasing health disparities. A lack of diversity adversely impacts researchers’ promotion rates, grant funding attainment, mentorship opportunities, and representation in leadership positions. In addition, troubling health disparities result from socioeconomic inequity, bias, and structural racism. Striving for a more diverse healthcare workforce not only improves patient care outcomes, but also allows organizations to be more productive, creative, and innovative. In an effort to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) among HRA members and across the wider biomedical research funding... read more →
Annual report: a document written and released to inform an organization’s community or to the public by an organization to describe activities related to its funding and/or grant activities. Conversely, an annual report or a progress report can also be requested or required by a funder for the grantee to report scientific progress. Progress report periods can be defined by the funder at their discretion Blinding: also known as masking; the act of deidentifying any information that may introduce bias that could influence results. Bylaws: the rules or the operating manual by which an organization follows. These can include... read more →
Page
Dear HRA Member or Potential Member! Thank you for your interest in the benefits of HRA membership. Below is a very detailed description of the perks of HRA membership - a self-guided tour if you will. But I am happy to walk you and/or other members of your team through all the perks that come with HRA membership. If you want to schedule a zoom call with me to take a “virtual tour” of HRA Activities through the lens of www.HealthRA.org please send an email to Maryrose[at]HealthRA[dot]org. Otherwise, read on for details enumerating the benefits of membership.... read more →
On Tuesday, October 6th, 2020, the HRA Grants Administration Working Group hosted a Zoom webinar around bias in peer review and potential interventions for bias reduction. With diversity and equity being at the forefront of national discussion, ensuring a fair and equitable peer review process is more important and timely now than ever. Speakers and Webinar Notes: Eileen Melnick, Director of Grants & Awards, Conquer Cancer, the ASCO Foundation; Co-Chair, Grants Administration Working Group Eileen discussed Conquer Cancer’s initial steps to reduce bias and some easy-to-implement approaches. Conquer Cancer has strategized three actions to reduce bias in peer review, but right... read more →
This session focused on the challenges and opportunities of diversity and unconscious bias that women and minorities face in peer review in academic science. Anna Kaatz, PhD is the Director of Computational Sciences at the UW-Madison Center for Women’s Health Research. Shirley Malcom, PhD is the head of Education and Human Resources at AAAS. In this position she works to improve the quality and increase access to education and careers in STEM. Sindy Escboar Alvarez, PhD is Senior Program Officer for Medical Research at the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. She manages the peer-review and evaluation of grants for early-career physician... read more →
American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) Council of Member Societies and Organizations 2016 Meeting AIBS hosted a meeting Titled “The Role of Peer Review in Informed Decision-making.” The meeting tackled questions: Do we know what we need to know about peer review? Does peer review meet the needs of the modern publication system? How effectively does peer review identify the best research proposals? Is peer review properly incentivized and are reviewers being asked to evaluate the right things? Betsy Myers from Doris Duke Charitable Foundation was a panelist at this meeting. You can read her piece called "Foundations and Peer Review:... read more →
ASAPbio, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the Wellcome Trust held a meeting to discuss the merits of transparent peer review. If it is desirable, how can it be implemented and what might be barriers to adoption? The agenda and links to the slides and talks can be found on the ASAPBio site. Recommendations included a move to a system where peer review reports are attached to the article and for funders to acknowledge applicants and grantees peer review as scholarly contributions to science.