 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
2001 - 2002 Annual Report Of Institutional Progress I. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND STRENGTHS II. PROGRESS IN STRATEGIC PLANNING III. PROGRESS IN ASSESSING EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INSTITUTE IV. OVERALL HEALTH OF THE INSTITUTE The Institute for Behavioral Research (IBR) is an umbrella organization composed of the Center for Family Research, the Center for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Services Delivery, the Contextual Research Group, the Methods and Models Group, and the Survey Research Center. In addition, the Institute sponsors working groups, including one group established last year (Study of Language, Discourses, and Communicative Practices) and two established this year (Basic Behavioral and Bio-behavioral Processes and Community, Ethnicity and Identity Group). IBR was established at The University of Georgia in 1970. Then-and-now, its missions have been: To facilitate the exchange of information and ideas across disciplinary boundaries; to enhance the research efforts of faculty members; to enhance the ability of both emerging and eminent scholars to obtain extramural funding; and to facilitate the development of young scholars. I. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND STRENGTHS Recognition of Fellows An unusual number of IBR Fellows deserve recognition for accomplishments this year. Karen Calhoun and Michael Kernis were recognized for their research as each of them received the University of Georgia's Creative Research Medal. Karen Calhoun was also elected President of the Society of Clinical Psychology (Division 12 of the American Psychological Association). Abraham Tesser received the Donald T. Campbell Award from the American Psychological Association. Beth Kotchick received the President's Award for New Researcher from the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy. Jay Bernhardt received The Early Career Award from the American Public Health Association. Celeste Condit received the Article of the Year Award from the Communication Apprehension and Avoidance Commission of the National Communication Association. She also received the Lothar Tresp Outstanding Honors Professor Award from the University of Georgia. Stacey Neuharth-Pritchett was recognized by the College of Education with the Outstanding Teaching Faculty Award while Randy Hammond was the recipient of the Franklin College Outstanding Academic Advisor Award. Robert Rhoades was elected as a North American Board Member of the Global Mountain Forum, and Marty Carr was elected as a Fellow of the American Psychological Association. Paul Roman and Velma Murry served on NIH review committees. Rex Forehand served on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Expert Panel on Adolescence and STD Prevention. Donna Alvermann received the AAUW's Senior Scholar Special Commendation of Honor from the American Association of Women. Research Funding: Another Record Breaking Year! An important goal of IBR is to stimulate funded research and its Fellows are extremely active in generating proposals. This year was no exception as 33 proposals, totaling $27,898,946, were generated by Fellows. An additional 74 contracts, totaling $726,137, were submitted by the Survey Research Center. Altogether there were 106 submissions for $28,625,083. A number of these proposals were funded. During the current year, 6 Fellow-initiated proposals, totaling $4,522,751, were funded! In addition, the Survey Research Center had 56 contracts funded for $510,952, a record high! The amount of dollars brought in by SRC is a 23% increase over the previous high. In total, IBR had 61 funded proposals for $4,890,247. (see Appendix 1, Table 1). The more usual way of accounting is to only look at the funds that actually have come to the University in the present fiscal year. These include the current part of multiple year awards granted in the past and in the current year. From this perspective, the Institute brought in $5,122,964 in extramural funds to the University. When combined with SRC income of $510,952, a total of $5,633,916 was brought in during the 2000-2001 year. This is a record high for the Institute and represents a 17.5% increase over the previous record high (achieved last year)! It is important to point out the growth in extramural grant funds over the past 18 years. Three data points will serve to illustrate the growth in extramual funds generated: 1984: $5,000; 1999: $3.5 million; and the current year: $5,633,916. Table 1 presents individual investigators and the money each brought into the University. Gene Brody, Velma Murry, Rex Forehand, Beth Kotchick, and Paul Roman were particularly successful this year. Furthermore, Gene Brody, Velma Murry, and Paul Roman have received informal approval of additional large grants to be funded in the current year as have several other IBR Fellows.
Extramural to State Funding One indicator of the success of a research institute such as IBR is the ratio of extramural dollars generated to state funding. The ratio this year was $9.94 to $1, indicating that the Institute is quite successful on this measure! Research Productivity Research funding is the most dramatic and easily documented index of IBR's current functioning. However, it is not as important as the research that is actually carried out at the Institute. Most of the work is of high quality and appears to be having an impact on the field. It is not easy to completely document this aspect of IBR functioning. One available set of indices of research functioning is a count of various achievements. Although such counts are admittedly indirect and imperfect criteria, they remain important because they are objective and clearly reflect an important part of what we mean by research productivity. The numbers associated with each Fellow's achievements are shown in Appendix I, Table 2, and the detail underlying these numbers is shown in Appendix II. IBR Fellows have been quite productive this year, publishing 148 articles and chapters with another 93 in press. They also have published 7 books and have 6 more in press. The number of publications is a record high for Institute Fellows! Several Faculty Fellows have been extremely productive. Refereed journal articles, books, and book chapters are the usual criteria for judging productivity in the social sciences. This year the people who have been most productive in terms of these activities are (numbers in parentheses indicate number of articles plus books plus book chapters published): Donna Alvermann (16), Rex Forehand (12), Steve Beach (9), Adam Davey (9), Billy Hammond (9), Robert Rhoades (8), Abraham Tesser (8), and Gail Williamson (8). IBR faculty was also creating a national and international reputation for themselves and the University of Georgia as 138 national and international presentations were made at meetings. Another index of influence on the research establishment is membership on editorial boards of scholarly journals. Again, IBR Fellows have an outstanding record. A total of 21 IBR Fellows serve on 55 editorial boards. The following Fellows serve on four or more boards: Donna Alvermann, Rex Forehand, Velma Murry, and Abraham Tesser. Perhaps the key position in the dissemination of research information is that of editor. IBR Fellows report editorship of a total of 11 journals or issues of journals. In summary, IBR Faculty Fellows are productive individuals and they are having an impact on the national and international scene.
Research Dissemination and Faculty Involvement If the Institute is to facilitate faculty research, there must be some contact between the Institute and the faculty. Therefore, faculty involvement is one index of the success of the Institute. There are a number of ways of assessing this criterion. The first way is by the number of Fellows associated with the Institute: 38 Fellows, including 12 Mentoring Fellows. In addition, there are a number of Adjunct Fellows (45) who participated in seminars and conferences. Another way of reaching faculty is by providing opportunities for them to share their research with one another in order to learn about the research of people inside and outside the University and stimulate interdisciplinary opportunities. To meet this need, IBR has a number of seminar series. The general IBR seminar series was continued and its activities are summarized in Appendix I, Table. 3. There was also a series of seminars in the Family area, in the Contextual area, in the Behavioral Health and Human Services Delivery area, and in the Methods and Models area. Three working groups (Basic Behavioral and Bio-behavioral Processes; Community, Ethnicity, and Identity; Language, Discourses, & Communicative Practices) also held seminars (see reports of each Center/Group in Appendix III). Finally, a Pink Sheet Review seminar series (chaired by Steve Beach) was held whenever Fellows or other social and behavioral scientists on campus wanted input into revisions of a grant proposal. Another way of disseminating research and reaching the faculty is through a series of colloquia with internationally recognized presenters. These presentations are open to the entire university community. The Center for Family Research sponsored a colloquium on "Rhythms, Times, and Social Locations: Variability in the Lives of Poor and Homeless Families" (Linda Burton, Penn State University and Ana Marie Cauce, University of Washington). The Center for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Services Delivery sponsored four colloquia: (1) "Birth Outcomes,
Socioeconomic Status, and Social Support: What Matters Most for Puerto
Rican Infant Development" (Bridget Gorman, University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill); (2) "Drug Trends in the Metro Atlanta
Area" (Kirk Elifson, Georgia State University); The Contextual Research Group sponsored a State-of-the-Art Conference entitled New Literacies and Digital Technologies: A Focus on Adolescent Learners Conference with five presentations: (1) "Do I have your
attention?" New literacies, digital technologies and the education
of adolescents" (Colin Lankshear, National Autonomous University
of Mexico and Michele Knobel, Central Queensland University, Australia); The tenth annual William A. Owens Lecture was held. The lecture recognizes the founder of IBR, William A. Owens, with a lecture presented by a nationally known figure in the social and behavioral sciences. This year's lecture was given by Ian Gotlib of Stanford University. The title of his talk was Information Processing Biases in Depression: Subtypes, Psychophysiology, and FMRI. The Institute also sponsored two other colloquia for the university community to encourage faculty in the social and behavioral sciences to submit grants to federal agencies. Dr. Ileana Arias, Branch Chief, Intentional Injury at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, presented a talk entitled "Prevention of Violence Against Women: A Public Health Approach". Dr. Della Hann, Associate Director for Research Training and Scientific Collaboration at the National Institute of Mental Health, presented a talk entitled "Funding Opportunities in the Behavioral Sciences at NIMH". Pat Noller (University of Queensland, Australia) was a Visiting Scholars at the Institute this year. To keep the University of Georgia faculty and administrators aware of what is occurring at the Institute for Behavioral Research, two issues of our newsletter, The Independent Variable, were circulated to the whole university community (see Appendix IV). To keep Fellows and staff at IBR updated regarding ongoing activities, our inter-departmental newsletter, IBR Analysis, was continued.
New Space The Institute acquired a substantial increase in space which was necessary to accommodate its rapidly accelerating increase in extramural grant funds. With the support and hard work of Steve Beach, Jim Bason, Gene Brody, Sharron Thompason, Karen Holbook, Hank Huckaby, Gordhan patel, Tom Bowen, and Joe L. Key, two highly successful units, the Center for Family Research and the Survey Research Center, moved off-campus into the Nichols Building on College Station Road. The move allows both of these units to continue to grow and to succeed in bringing in funds through grants and contracts. The space vacated by the Survey Research Center in Barrow Hall has allowed several other research programs to grow and has allowed the Institute to expand its services to meet the needs of Fellows, all social and behavioral scientists on campus, and administrators. Centers/Groups Within IBR The Institute for Behavioral Research is divided into four Centers or Groups, each of which is headed by a Director. Much of the success of the Institute is based on the activities that occur within the Centers/Groups. The Centers/Groups are organized around coherent themes of research (e.g., Behavioral Health, Family) or methodological issues. The Directors are responsible for facilitating the research and grantspersonship of each member of the Center/Group. This occurs, in part, through an ongoing Seminar Series sponsored by each Center/Group, annual colloquia with internationally recognized speakers, and meetings with Fellows about research, grant ideas, and feedback on grant proposals. The Directors of the Centers/Groups at the Institute for Behavioral Research during the past year are as follows: Contextual Research Group (Martha Carr and Donna Alvermann); Center for Family Research (Gene Brody); Center for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Services Delivery (Paul Roman); and Methods and Models Group (Patrick Horan). Furthermore, Working Groups on Community, Ethnicity, and Identity (Velma Murry), Basic Behavioral and Bio-behavioral Processes (Nader Amir and Steve Beach), and Language, Discourses, & Communicative Processes (Joan Kelly Hall) met. The report of each of these Centers/Groups and Working Groups is presented in Appendix III. One additional unit within the Institute, the Survey Research Center (SRC), under the direction of Jim Bason, is different from the above-mentioned Centers/Groups. The SRC serves the research, teaching, and service needs of the University and larger community by providing access to a wide range of expertise and assistance in all aspects of survey research. In the current year, the Survey Research Center provided services to university administrators, faculty, committees, and state clients, while continuing to play an active role in the support of faculty and departments offering courses in the methodology and social science research. During the 2000-2001 fiscal year, the Center had 56 completed research projects. These projects resulted in an earned income collected this fiscal year of $510,952, which is a record breaking year (See Appendix III for the report from SRC). The growth in dollars generated by the SRC deserve recognition. Three data points can be used to delineate the growth in contracted dollars: 1986-1988: average of $100,000; 1998-2000: average of $350,000; and the current year: $510,952.
The Faculty Development (Mentoring) Program The Institute for Behavioral Research, in conjunction with the Vice President for Research, established the Faculty Mentoring Program in 1990. Eleven cohorts (N = 52 mentor/mentee pairs) have now completed the program. A twelfth cohort is currently participating in the program. Appendix I, Table 4 lists the 2000-01 cohort. The purpose of the program is to facilitate the research development of faculty members with a special emphasis on extramural funding in the behavioral and social sciences. Each participating faculty member is formally paired with two senior faculty members who serve as mentors. The mentors make themselves available to provide consultation concerning grant writing. In addition, the Institute for Behavioral Research provides a series of seminars concerning research funding in the social and behavioral sciences. The mentoring fellow, in addition to his/her usual research, completes a proposal that is submitted for extramural funding. The Program is administrated through the Institute for Behavioral Research by a steering committee, headed this year by Steve Beach and Paul Roman. [See Table 5 in Appendix I for a list of program "milestones" (i.e., the program syllabus)]. The steering committee is responsible for choosing mentees, planning meetings, working with mentors and mentees, and providing feedback on grant ideas and proposals. Who Does the Program Serve? Since its inception in 1990, there have been 121 nominations from department heads. Including the 2000-2001 cohort, the program has been able to accommodate 57 mentees. Men and women are represented about equally and about 17% are minority. Moreover, mentees have come from 20 different social/behavioral science departments within seven different Schools and Colleges across campus. Who Serves the Program? The mentors are drawn from among the most talented social scientists on campus. Persons who have some overlapping interests with a mentee and who also have a record for being able to attract extramural funding are invited to participate by the IBR steering committee. Like the mentees, mentors are well dispersed on campus: The mentors, most typically current IBR Fellows, have come from 14different departments. What Does the Program Cost? The program is funded by the Vice President for Research ($20,000 per year) and other resources are provided by the Institute for Behavioral Research (administration), the mentee's department (course release or release from other obligations), and the mentor (time). A fund is set up for each mentee to facilitate accomplishing the mentee's project. It can be used for any research-related expenses, including research assistance, clerical work, summer salary, travel, and equipment. Each mentor is given discretion over a small research fund as a token to partially compensate for time given to the program. Is the Program Successful? The success of the program may be measured in several different ways. First, one may ask if the program is successful in helping faculty submit proposals for extramural funding. This is the most basic index of success, because it provides an estimate of the program's success in overcoming barriers to grant writing that stand in the way of others in the social and behavioral sciences. In addition, once a grant proposal has been written, it provides a foundation for future submissions and allows mentees to more easily continue submission of grant proposals in the future, whether through IBR or through their home department. On this index of success, the mentoring program has been very successful. Over 90% of former mentees have submitted proposals through IBR, and several have submitted proposals through other avenues. A second index of success is the amount of extramural funding awarded to mentees as a direct result of their mentoring program involvement. In this regard, our mentees do surprisingly well but it takes time and rewritten proposals. As has been noted in previous Annual Reports, first awards typically have come in approximately three years after the initial participation in the program; however, in the last two years, awards are being received much sooner. It is also noteworthy, but perhaps less surprising, that the larger awards seem to take more time. To date, the Mentoring Program has resulted in $2.4 million in funding when the mentee is PI on a grant. Two additional proposals, totaling $1.2 million, appear very likely to be awarded in the next two months. The amount of awarded funds (not including the anticipated $1.2 million) increases to $12.6 million when mentees serving as a Co-PI on grants are included. A third, more distal, index of success is the extent to which the mentoring program has helped change the climate among social and behavioral science departments to be more supportive of grant writing activities, particularly with regard to supporting the grant writing efforts of junior faculty. This index is harder to quantify than the first two, but may be as important in that support from departments is critical if the initial successes of the mentoring program are to be translated into long term gains in extramural supporting the social and behavioral sciences. At present we have only anecdotal accounts; however, these do suggest that the climate is becoming more supportive of grant writing activity. How have the most recent cohorts performed? The participants from last year's cohort (1999-2000) submitted 7 proposals, totaling $3,019,072 during the current year. One individual, Randy Hammond, had one proposal funded last year ($27,000) and one funded this year ($45,394). A second participant in that cohort, Hui-Chin Hsu, received funding this year ($143,456), while a third participant, Andrea Hohmann, has received funding ($144,800) that will appear in the 2001-2002 annual report. Two others, Anne Cordes Bothe and Kimberly Shipman, have received encouraging news about likely funding of their grants (total funds for two grants: $1,223,084). One of the participants in this year's cohorte (2000-2001), Steve Holloway, already has received funding: $140,405. These two most recent groups of mentees are clearly the most impressive to go through the program. In sum, the Mentoring Program appears to be on track in reaching out to a broad cross-section of researchers in the social and behavior sciences and helping guide them to view submission of grant proposals as both possible and desirable. The Mentoring Program appears to be useful in providing a structure that focuses energy and attention on the challenges inherent in submitting an initial proposal for extramural funding. In addition, the Mentoring Program has expanded in recent years to attend to the process of resubmission and responding to initial grant feedback (e.g. Pink Sheet Review seminars). Although the social and behavioral sciences overall continue to fall short of their potential in terms of extramural support received, the Mentoring Program appears to be useful in helping young faculty overcome obstacles to grant submissions and perhaps to begin to view themselves in a new light. Across a number of indices, the Mentoring Program appears to have been a sound investment by the Office of the Vice President for Research.
Staff Changes Leslie Alford-Buffone was hired as a one-half time Accounting Assistant. Recognition of Special Contributors to the Institute Beyond the Center/Group Directors, a number of individuals have made special contributions to the Institute this year. Steve Beach continues to contribute in many, many ways, ranging from putting Fellows up for awards to co-directing the Mentoring Program to serving as Associate Director. His efforts are truly monumental and appreciated! Paul Roman co-directed the Mentoring Program. His valuable contributions to this program and of generally enhancing our understanding of the grant process are appreciated! The Institute truly must have the highest quality staff on campus! This exceptional group of individuals, Leslie Alford-Buffone, J. J. Bau, Sandy Gary, Beverly Massey, Diana Shelnutt, and Sharron Thompson, is often overlooked but is responsible for making the Institute run as effectively as it does. II. PROGRESS IN STRATEGIC PLANNING In the six years in which Rex Forehand has served as a Director of the Institute, the following goals have been delineated and progress has been made in achieving them. 1. Facilitate high quality research of faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences. Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:
2. Promote grant writing among faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences. Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:
3. Dissemination of research to UGA faculty. Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:
4. Increase the service role of the Institute to the social and behavioral sciences and the University as a whole, as well as agencies outside the University. Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:
5. Promote the recognition of the social and behavioral sciences within the University, nationally, and internationally. Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:
III. Progress in Assessing Effectiveness of the Institute The administrative staff in the Institute for Behavioral Research constantly engages in an ongoing assessment of the Institute's effectiveness in reaching the goals that have been delineated above. In addition, outside evaluators have been brought to campus to assess the effectiveness of the Institute and identify areas to target for improvement. As a result of the assessment process, several ongoing programs were offered and several new programs were implemented during the current year or in recent years. (1.) A three-hour Grant Writing Workshop, co-sponsored by the Office of the Vice President for Research, initially was offered twice during the 1996-97 year (Winter Quarter & Spring Quarter) for faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences. Announcements were sent to all departments representing the social and behavioral sciences and 39 individuals attended one of the two workshops. In 1997-98, we tailored the workshop in the following ways. First, we offered the workshop through the New Faculty Orientation Program. Second, we moved beyond new faculty and offered the workshop to all faculty in the social and behavioral sciences. Twenty individuals attended the workshop. Formal evaluation of the workshop by participants resulted in uniformly high evaluations (mean ratings of "Very Satisfied"). We did not offer the workshop in 1998-99 as the demand for such information had been met. Last year (1999-2000) we presented the workshop to 35 faculty members. This year we decided to stimulate grant writing by bringing in speakers from CDC (Ileana Arias) and NIMH (Della Hann). Both last year and this year we presented seminars to graduate students on grant writing. (2.) We have initiated several working groups in order to provide research knowledge to the University. The Methods and Models Group, chaired by Patrick Horan, began as a working group, was formalized two years ago, and has attracted a number of participants from various colleges (e.g., College of Business, College of Family and Consumer Sciences) across campus. Donna Alvermann and Marty Carr initiated a working group on Contextual Research in 1998-1999 year and had a number of participants attend their seminar series. Based on the success of the working group, it was given formal status in the 1999-2000 academic year. Joan Kelly Hall successfully implemented a working group on the Study of Language, Discourses, and Communicative Practices last year. This year two new working groups, Community, Ethnicity, and Identity (Velma Murry) and Basic Behavioral and Bio-behavioral Processes (Nader Amir and Steve Beach), were successfully begun this year. In the coming year we plan to merge the Contextual Research Group into the Community, Ethnicity, and Identity Group as the content of the two groups overlapped more than we had expected. (3.) The Visiting Scholars Program facilitates research of our Fellows by exposing them to new ways of conceptualizing research ideas and research issues. Pat Noller, from the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, served as a Visiting Scholar for a month this academic year. In the coming year, Ann Bowen from the University of Wyoming and Marilyn Coleman and Larry Ganong from the University of Missouri will serve as Visiting Scholars for five months and one month, respectively. (4.) Progress in the arena of service was initiated last year and continued this year by the implementation of a Pink Sheet Review seminar, directed by Steve Beach. This seminar provides individuals (both Fellows and faculty outside of the Institute) who submitted grants, but were not funded, with feedback and direction for resubmission. This seminar has been very successful. (5.) The Institute has been strongly committed to the Biomedical Sciences and Health Initiative. Rex Forehand has served on the steering committee, attempting to represent the behavioral and social sciences. (6.) A new program to be called Scholar-in-Residence was implemented this year. This program is utilized with retired but active faculty (formerly IBR Fellows) who are still contributing to the scholarly literature and involved in grant writing. A Scholar-in-Residence will be provided with office space (when space is available) and some support in exchange for active participation in the Institute (e.g., grant writing, scholarly production, attending seminars) and mentoring of younger faculty members. Abraham Tesser, Patrick Horan, and Maureen Killeen serve as Scholars-in-Residence. (7.) The IBR intends to continue its service role to departments in the social and behavioral sciences during the next several years. We will work to develop programs to assist departments in the recruitment and retention of outstanding faculty members. This year we facilitated recruitment in the Psychology and Sociology Departments. In both departments, a faculty member agreed to come to the University of Georgia if membership in IBR was assured. (One of these new faculty members had to withdraw her acceptance of the job offer due to a family situation.) In addition, the Institute is discussing with the Psychology Department a joint effort to mentor more of their faculty in grant writing. (8.) The Institute plans to offer more statistical assistance to faculty in the social and behavioral sciences in the future. This is viewed as important to promote successful grant submission and research activities. The statistical assistance will be provided by a new branch of the Survey Research Center. Patrick Horan, J. J. Bau, Kathie Shinholser, and Jim Bason initially will constitute this unit of SRC.
IV. Overall Health of the Institute The major changes and new initiatives that have occurred in the past year have been delineated in the preceding sections. Our goals are to continue to serve the social and behavioral sciences and the University as a whole by facilitating high quality research, grantspersonship, and knowledge resulting from research shared through our various seminar series, conferences, and Visiting Scholars Program. With the much appreciated cooperation of Deans and Department Heads, the Institute continues on a productive course. IBR Fellows continue to be highly visible and active researchers. Each of the units within the Institute is working well. Extramural funding, research productivity, and the quantity and quality of seminars and conferences are at an all time high. However, even with success, there exists needs. Three needs are evident. First, our staff is still experiencing low salaries. We have been fortunate in attracting a high quality staff and improving salaries; however, there is still a substantial way to go. Second, as extramural funding continues to grow in the Institute, the workload of the staff to facilitate the preparation of the grants, work them through "the system," and, of particular importance, keep up with expenditures has grown. We need additional resources to hire additional staff personnel. Third, the Institute "buys" a fraction of IBR Fellow's time in order to free them to pursue their research. Until recent years, IBR's personnel budget for Fellows did not increase at all. However, during this same time, the raises of IBR Fellows were much higher than average, resulting in a shrinking personnel budget. When Rex Forehand assumed the Directorship of IBR, Vice President Joe Key made a substantial effort that began to correct this problem. However, our pool of available money to support Fellows again has lagged behind and needs to be enlarged. Three goals that we will continue to develop over the coming years are as follows. First, we hope to expand our scope beyond the social and behavioral sciences. For science to progress, cross-disciplinary efforts much occur. The IBR provides a unit for interdisciplinary research within the social and behavioral sciences; however, there are other sciences that can facilitate our efforts (as we simultaneously facilitate their efforts) to address societal problems and develop methodologies to solve these problems. A second goal is to facilitate the Provost's Biomedical and Health Sciences Initiative. We will do this by facilitating health-focused research in the social and behavioral sciences and, consistent with the first goal noted above, beyond the social and behavioral sciences. A third goal is to facilitate the efforts of the departments that constitute the social and behavioral sciences. These departments provide us with faculty members to serve as IBR Fellows and we provide the departments with course buy-out funds, a percentage of indirect cost money on grants, and the opportunity to attend seminars and conferences. It would appear that a fair exchange is in place. However, a goal of the Institute is to make the social and behavioral sciences at the University, both within and outside the Institute, the best they can be. One way to accomplish this goal is to work with departments to facilitate their efforts. This may be by enhancing recruitment efforts or providing outside speakers who are national recognized. Although we already have been involved in some of these activities to facilitate efforts of departments, we will attempt to enhance these efforts over the next several years.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
