Form 8 PI/CO-PI EXPERT PANEL MODERATOR GUIDE

Attachment 8

PI/Co-PI Expert Panel Moderator Guide

8. SCTC EXPERT PANEL MODERATOR GUIDE

OMB No: 0925-XXXX

Expiration Date: xx/xx/20xx

Collection of this information is authorized by The Public Health Service Act, Section 411 (42 USC 285a). Rights of study participants are protected by The Privacy Act of 1974. Participation is voluntary, and there are no penalties for not participating or withdrawing from the study at any time. Refusal to participate will not affect your benefits in any way. The information collected in this study will be kept private to the extent provided by law. Names and other identifiers will not appear in any report of the study. Information provided will be combined for all study participants and reported as summaries. You are being contacted to participate in this data collection so that we can evaluate the State and Community Tobacco Control (SCTC) Research Initiative.

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 90 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to: NIH, Project Clearance Branch, 6705 Rockledge Drive, MSC 7974, Bethesda, MD 20892-7974, ATTN: PRA (0925-XXXX). Do not return the completed form to this address.

INTERNAL PLANNING INFORMATION

Timing: April 2015 (in conjunction with Annual SCTC Conference held at NCI Rockville)

Participants: PIs and Co-PIs

Sessions: Two sessions (likely held simultaneously) with no more than 9 participants in each

Purpose: To explore in a group setting the kinds of things that are considered important by PI / Project Leads for collaborations to take place and be effective. To better understand how universities and community partners work together in order to help address important problems in their communities, namely tobacco control, by collaboratively developing and disseminating “applied research” products to multiple audiences; and to identify differing perspectives and their correlates as well as areas of consensus.

ROADMAP OF SESSION ACTIVITIES PLANNED

Categories of Information to be Covered	Approx. Time Set Aside
Welcome/Ground-rules/Self-Introductions	10 minutes
Issue 1. Network and Collaboration	15 minutes
Issue 2. Processes and Activities	15 minutes
Issue 3. Products	15 minutes
Issue 4. Dissemination	15 minutes
Issue 5. Looking Forward Issue 6. Close	15 minutes 5 minutes
Total Time Allotted	90 minutes

1. Acknowledgment: I want to thank you for coming to this session and thank you in advance for your willingness to candidly share your experience with the SCTC Initiative.

2. Intro: My name is ___________ and I work for Westat, a social science research firm based in Rockville, MD. Today, I will be the moderator for this 90-minute group discussion.

This expert panel is part of a greater research evaluation effort funded by NCI that explores the kinds of things that are important for collaborations to take place and be effective. Our goal is to better understand how universities and community partners work together in order to help address important problems in their communities, namely tobacco control.

Our purpose today is to discuss the progress and status of SCTC, particularly focusing on what has worked well and identifying lessons learned that can be applied to other similar NCI or NIH sponsored initiatives.

Each of you is serving as a PI or Co-PI on an NCI funded SCTC Core Project, but we recognize that your level of involvement and your unique perspective varies. Whatever your experience or perspective, we want to hear it. Your feedback today will help NCI better understand ways to ensure project success and develop stronger initiatives in the future.

We have planned for this discussion to last about 90 minutes.

3. Agenda: During our time this evening, you will be doing several things, e.g., participating in a free-flowing conversation, and helping me compile and organize lists of information pertaining to the discussion.

4. Key Characteristics about the room we are in: [unlikely to be an actual focus group room]

1. Mention mikes and taping. With your consent, the session will be recorded to enable me to write an accurate report, not of who said what but “what was said.”

You have a copy of an informed consent form at your seat. I will ask you to read and sign that before we get started.

5. Guidelines: In order to make this an efficient session, here are some guidelines for our session:

First, there are no right or wrong answers. If you have been in groups like this before, you know that our main purpose is to surface and discuss your perspectives, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes. We’re interested in hearing from all of you in your own words about challenges and successes you experienced.

Ground Rules

1. Talk in a voice as loud as mine so the recorder picks up your comments.

2. Avoid cross-talk and side conversations with your neighbors.

3. I want to hear from everyone; however, you do not have to answer every question.

4. It is OK to piggyback on someone else’s comments. In fact, please weigh in if you concur or have a different perspective. We want to uncover the range of experience as well as establish areas of consensus.

6. Collect signed consent forms

7. Self Introductions: Please introduce yourself to the group by telling us: [Given the fact that these individuals will likely already know each other, perhaps even pretty well, we might be able to skip this step]

[Have these items listed on Easel]

1. Your first name only.

2. Your affiliation / research center / university name.

3. How long you have worked with your research center.

4. Some ice breaker question (favorite DC monument / dream vacation / etc.)

ISSUE 1: Network and Collaboration

The SCTC initiative is designed to promote collaboration between and among tobacco control researchers and affiliated project partners working at the state and community levels within government, advocacy, and non-profit contexts. Together, SCTC forms a broad overarching network of stakeholders as well as more focused core (parent) teams working collaboratively on specific projects and products designed to have a direct impact on targeted populations within the community.

Can anyone start by sharing some thoughts about how this kind of approach has been working in your project?

Are all project partners equally or appropriately engaged?

Is there an alignment of mission, goals, perspectives?

To what extent has there been synergy among the partners?

Were there any issues related to establishing trust?

Can you describe what is working well in your collaborative team partnership and give some examples?

What are some of the particular challenges you’ve faced? How were these addressed?

How did collaboration with your project’s affiliated partners make a difference in your efforts? What aspects of their involvement have been particularly meaningful or important?

ISSUE 2: Processes and Activities

Thinking specifically about the processes and activities used in the development of SCTC products, what was successful and what was not successful? Let’s start by focusing on the core projects before thinking about the products emerging from the pilot projects.

Have “Core (or Parent) Project” goals changed? Why? How? Did affiliated partners play a role in the changes?

What has been the value of the pilot (developmental) projects? How do you push the envelope on developing innovative developmental projects and leverage the value they offer?

What modifications to the structure and culture of SCTC would you recommend if it were to be replicated in the future?

ISSUE 3: Products

One of the primary goals of SCTC is to create products for dissemination into the community. In what ways and to what degree have you able to successfully do that?

In what ways has knowledge and experience (or cultural beliefs, values, and practices) from the community influenced the products emerging from your core project?

How important are cultural beliefs, values, and practices from the community to your project?

How were these incorporated into your work and project products?

ISSUE 4: Dissemination

In a project like this, development of the products themselves often entails an intentional and proactive focus on being strategic about their eventual dissemination.

With respect to your Core Projects, to what degree did this take place?

How were concerns about future dissemination addressed during product development?

What would you say have been the major lessons learned with respect to dissemination of applied research products gained through your participation in SCTC so far?

ISSUE 5: Looking Forward

How will / would you measure the effectiveness of your dissemination plan? How would you suggest that NCI measure the success of Core Projects after they have been disseminated?

If another group were going to start this kind of collaborative partnership, what kinds of things would you tell them in order to help them be successful? What’s important for them to know?

What specific advice or recommendations do you have to NCI for future projects like SCTC?

ISSUE 6: Close

Is there anything we haven’t covered that you would like to discuss before we close?

Well, that concludes our discussion for today. Again, thank you so much for taking time out of your day to be with us. Please enjoy the rest of the conference and travel safely.