2006 - 2007 Annual Report Of Institutional Progress

I. Accomplishments and Strengths

II. Progress in Strategic Planning

III. Progress in Assesing Effectiveness of the Institute

IV. Overall Health of the Institute

The Institute for Behavioral Research (IBR) is composed of the Center for Family Research, the Center for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Services Delivery, the Community, Ethnicity, & Identity in Context Work Group, the Methods Work Group, the Effective Intervention Work Group, the Migration & Immigration Work Group, the Neuroscience Behavior & Cognition Work Group, the Violence Work Group, the Dissemination & Community Contact Work Group and the Gene-Environment Interaction Work Group. The Institute encourages the development of new working groups to address emerging interests of faculty members as well as priority areas for funding. IBR was established at The University of Georgia in 1970. Then-and-now, its missions have been: to encourage trans-disciplinary, problem-focused research by facilitating the exchange of information and ideas across disciplinary boundaries; to enhance the research efforts of individual faculty members by providing services, support, and opportunity; to enhance the ability of both emerging and eminent scholars to further their careers and to obtain extramural funding; to facilitate the development of young scholars and introduce them to grant proposal writing; to enhance the recognition of the social and behavioral sciences as an important component of extramural funding efforts; and to build and expand the infrastructure supporting social and behavioral science research at the University of Georgia.

I. Accomplishments and Strengths

Recognition of Fellows

Several IBR Fellows were recognized by the University for their accomplishments this year. Pamela Orpinas and Jennifer Monahan received the Creative Research Medal, Virginia Nazarea received the William A. Owens Award, and Steven Beach was appointed Distinguished Research Professor. We are proud that IBR fellows were awarded prizes in every category for which they competed.

Research Funding

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 52 proposals totaling $58,542,711 were generated by Fellows. During the current year, 19 Fellow-initiated proposals, totaling $15,702,341 in new funding were awarded! (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 $12,114,248 in extramural funds to the University.

Table 1 presents individual investigators and the money each brought into the University. Gene Brody, Velma Murry, Steven Beach, Steve Kogan, Peter Brosius, Brett Clementz, Adam Goodie, Jennifer McDowell, Celeste Condit, Tina Harris, Lori Ducharme, Aaron Johnson, Paul Roman, Lillian Eby, Charles Lance, Hannah Knudsen, Carla Monroe , Ronald Simons, Leslie Simons, 

Thomas McNulty, Steve Holloway, Gail Williamson, and Steve Miller contributed to this year's successful total of new grant awards.

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 $27.8 to $1, indicating that the Institute is extremely 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. The work conducted by IBR Fellows is of high quality and is having both scientific and applied effects. 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 .

IBR Fellows have been quite productive for the twelve month reporting period in 2006-2007, publishing 195 articles, chapters and books with another 172 in press. This is an impressive amount of intellectual activity, and it has generated National and International recognition for the University of Georgia . 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 (8), Gene Brody (12), Jonathan Crystal (10) Lillian Eby (9), Joshua Miller (9) Stacey Neuharth-Pritchett (12), Dawn Robinson (8), and Ron Simons (8). IBR faculty furthered their impact at the national and international level by presenting their findings at 270 national and international meetings in the past year.

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 27 IBR Fellows served on 78 editorial boards. IBR Fellows report editorship of a total of 9 journals or issues of journals. The following Fellows served on three or more boards: Donna Alvermann, Steve Beach, Peter Brosius, Karen Calhoun, Lillian Eby, Rex Forehand, Andy Horne, Joshua Miller, Jennifer Monahan, and Jerome Morris.

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: 46 Fellows, including 24 Mentoring Fellows and 5 Adjunct Fellows. In addition, there are a number of Affiliate Fellows who participated in seminars and conferences. Because IBR functions are open to the campus it is common for them to involve as many non-IBR fellows as fellows.

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 the IBR general seminar series was continued. In addition disseminating research and reaching faculty is done through a series of colloquia with internationally recognized presenters. These presentations are open to the entire university community. and its activities are summarized in Appendix II, Table. 2. There was also a Pink Sheet Review seminar series (chaired by Steven Beach ) continued to be available whenever Fellows or other social and behavioral scientists on campus wanted input into revisions of a grant proposal. This vehicle has been instrumental in the success of several mentoring fellows and has been held up as a model by other groups on campus.

The 19th annual William A. Owens Lecture was held this year. 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. In addition, the Owens Lecture was elevated to a lecture series. The first talk in the series was “Raising Healthy Children: A Cognitive-Behavioral Prevention Program for Children of Depressed Parents: presented by Dr. Rex Forehand from the University of Vermont . The second talk will be held in November, 2007. The new seminar series format expands the legacy of the Owens Lecture even as it continues to provide a forum for the presentation of cutting edge research and emerging opportunities for funding.

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 entire university community (see Appendix III ). Likewise, to keep Fellows and staff at IBR updated regarding ongoing activities, our inter-departmental newsletter, IBR Analysis, was continued.

To maintain our contact with faculty, staff, and the public, we continue to update our IBR web-site on a regular basis and to expand its offerings. In addition, the Center for Family Research web-site continues to be a model for presenting research to the public.

Continuing Needs

The Institute for Behavioral Research continues to focus on integrating biological and genetic analyses into the ongoing research efforts of social and behavioral scientists. This is a major effort that began five years ago and has positioned the University of Georgia for increases in extramural funding. Working collaborations with genetics laboratories at other institutions have been established. More recently, the IBR has also focused on expanding the presence of social and behavioral sciences in the arena of ecology. Although under appreciated, the social and behavioral sciences have considerable potential to enhance the study of ecological practices around the world. Two new centers took initial steps to join the IBR this year and have been welcomed and supported in within the IBR structure. IBR has also recently expanded attention to both the College of Public Health and the School of Social Work in an effort to better leverage the considerable talents of the faculty in these two colleges.

Centers/Groups Within IBR

The Institute for Behavioral Research has two long-standing Centers, two new centers, and six ongoing work 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 Faculty Development (Mentoring) Program

The Institute for Behavioral Research, in conjunction with the Vice President for Research, established the Faculty Mentoring Program in 1990. Seventeen cohorts have now completed the program. An eighteenth cohort is currently participating in the program. Appendix I, Table 4 lists the 2006-2007 cohort. A Nineteenth cohort consisting of four faculty members has been accepted for the 2007-2008 year.

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.

In the coming year, the Program will be directed by Steven Beach and Aaron Johnson with the continuing assistance of Paul Roman . [See Table 5 in Appendix I for a list of program “milestones” (i.e., the program syllabus)]. The IBR Executive 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 163 nominations from department heads. Including the 2006-2007 cohort, the program has been able to accommodate 61 mentees. Men and women are represented about equally and about 28% are minority. Moreover, mentees have come from 16 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 Executive Committee. Like the mentees, mentors are well dispersed on campus: The mentors, most typically current IBR Fellows, have come from 16 different departments.

What Does the Program Cost? 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). Funds can be requested to facilitate accomplishing the mentees' project. It can be used for any research-related expenses, including research assistance, clerical work, summer salary, travel, and equipment.

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 79% 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 $14.3 million in funding when the mentee is PI on a grant, and $13.3 million when mentees serving as a Co-PI on grants are included. The total extramural funding of $27.6 million represents a 99-fold return on investment in the program by the Vice President for Research since 1990.

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. It appears that the climate has already changed in several departments. For example, the Department of Psychology has changed to a grantsmanship model and, in collaboration with IBR, has substantially increased the percentage of faculty in the department with extramural funding. Likewise, the Speech Communication Department has transitioned into a well-funded department with a strong emphasis on extramural funding.

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. It 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). The 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 continues to be a sound program.

Because funds for the mentoring program were cut in 2004, we have downsized the program to focus on fewer applicants. As an example of the success of the new focused approach, this year Lillian Eby received a $2.5 million award as PI for his work on Clinical Supervision and Turnover in Substance Abuse Training. Joseph Sabia is also a recipient of a recent $21,000 award from the Employment Policies Institute.

Web-Based Mentoring

As part of our efforts to promote grant writing, we have placed materials for self-guided proposal development on our website ( www.ibr.uga.edu ). This will provide faculty who are not part of the Mentoring Program or who are in a department not being mentored to guide themselves through the grant writing process. Sandy Gary deserves credit for this major undertaking. We continue to refine the web based materials and to make them more accessible.

Staff Recognition

We believe the Institute has the highest quality staff on campus! This exceptional group of individuals, Phyliss Ball, J. J. Bau , Sandy Gary , Diana Embler , Diane Salum , Barbara Smalley , and Sharron Thompson , is often overlooked but is responsible for making the central office of the Institute run as effectively as it does. Current staffing needs are focused on the Centers and allowing them to expand in an optimal manner.

Accolades are due to the staff within each of our centers as well and these are detailed in the appendices.

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. Paul Roman continued as co-director of the Mentoring Program. His contributions to this program and to IBR are greatly appreciated! Gene Brody has continued his effort to involve IBR Fellows in his new Center Grant. Likewise his service to IBR is most appreciated! Velma Murry has continued her remarkable grant productivity and her outstanding service to the Institute. Anne Bothe, Gene Brody, Andrea Hohmann, Velma Murry, Ron Simons, and Paul Roman have done an excellent job in their role as the IBR Executive Committee in guiding the Institute forward and making important decisions about programs, Fellow support, and the Mentoring Program.

II. Progress in Strategic Planning

The following goals have been delineated as the heart of our strategic plan.

1. Facilitate high quality interdisciplinary research of faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences.

Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:

a. Encourage interdisciplinary collaboration among social and behavioral scientists from various departments across campus.

b. Sponsor seminars and conferences with internationally known speakers and provide a Visiting Scholars Program where faculty from other universities can spend sabbaticals.

c. Create a research environment where faculty members are free to explore innovative ideas.

d. Stimulate research activity in areas with high probability of extramural funding.

2. Promote grant writing among faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences .

Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:

a. Create an environment where faculty members (Fellows) at the Institute are encouraged to write grants.

b. Provide information on how to put together grant budgets.

c. Provide seminars on grant writing and funding opportunities for Fellows.

d. Provide feedback on grant proposals written by Fellows.

e. Provide grant writing seminars and colloquia for all faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences.

f. Promote grant writing of faculty members who have not yet been successful in obtaining extramural funds (i.e., Mentoring Program).

g. Mentor departments in grant writing.

h. Provide bookkeeping on all grants funded to IBR Fellows.

3. Dissemination of research to UGA faculty .

Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:

a. Encourage more faculty to affiliate with the Institute.

b. Sponsor ongoing seminar series for faculty.

c. Sponsor national colloquia and nationally recognized speakers for all faculty on campus.

d. Provide twice yearly newsletter on research by faculty members in the social and behavioral sciences for all UGA faculty and administrators.

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:

a. Offer ongoing seminar series.

b. Sponsor colloquia by internationally recognized speakers and sponsor visiting scholars on campus.

c. Provide grant writing workshop for all members of the social and behavioral sciences.

d. Continue the Mentoring Program to teach novice faculty members the skills in grant writing.

e. Provide support and assistance with grant writing to various units on campus.

f. Mentor departments in grant writing.

g. Reach beyond the University to share UGA research findings with agencies (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

5. Promote the recognition of the social and behavioral sciences within the University, nationally, and internationally.

  Mechanisms used to achieve this goal include:

a. Nominate and facilitate applications of faculty members for UGA Creative Medals.

b. Nominate and facilitate applications of faculty members for the William A. Owens Award in the Social and Behavioral Sciences.

c. Endorse nominations of faculty members for Research and Regents Professorships.

d. Provide services (e.g., secretarial) and space to allow Fellows to contribute to their profession by assuming journal editorships

e. Bring distinguished Visiting Scholars to campus for presentations and for long term (i.e., up to a year) visits.

III. 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 exist needs.

Over the next five years we will 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.

As part of our effort to facilitate collaboration across disciplines, we will continue to facilitate the development of the Biomedical and Health Science Institute. We will do this by facilitating health-focused research in the social and behavioral sciences and, consistent with the first goal noted above, facilitate research that goes beyond the social and behavioral sciences. In addition, we will continue to develop potential collaborations with researchers at the Complex Carbohydrates Research Center , develop new connections with researchers in genetics and functional imaging, and develop productive collaborations to focus on problems of poverty and public health.

Finally, we will work to continue to facilitate the efforts of the departments that constitute the social and behavioral sciences. 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.

IV. Summary

•  Summary of Major Accomplishments

•  Numerous IBR Fellows cited for accomplishments

•  Research funding:

•  Research proposals by IBR Fellows

•  52 new multi-year proposals, totaling $ 58,542,711 , submitted.

•  19 new multi-year proposals, totaling $ 15,702,341 , funded.

•  $ 12,114,248 from research proposals brought into university during 2006-2007.

•  Research Productivity of IBR Fellows (9 month period)

•  195 articles, chapters and books published.

•  270 presentations at national and international professional meetings.

•  Faculty Involvement and Opportunities Through IBR

•  Forty four faculty members served as Fellows and 62 faculty members served as Affiliate Fellows.

•  13 seminar series held throughout the year.

•  Newsletter distributed across campus twice.

•  Mentoring

•  Faculty Mentoring Program continues to pay dividends: A proposal totaling $ 2,501,518 was funded.

•  Departmental mentoring and web-based mentoring continued.

II. Progress in Strategic Goals

•  Five goals delineated

•  Progress made in all five areas.

III. Progress in Assessing Effectiveness of the Institute

•  Programs implemented in recent years continued effectively.

•  Programs continued this year include mentoring departments, and web-based mentoring. In addition, we continued our effort to create and expand an infrastructure for the investigation of gene-environment interactions.

IV. Overall Health of the Institute

•  Good.

•  Needs met: We are able to manage the current paper work for a large number of submissions and awards.