This subproject is one of many research subprojects utilizing the resources provided by a Center grant funded by NIH/NCRR. The subproject and investigator (PI) may have received primary funding from another NIH source, and thus could be represented in other CRISP entries. The institution listed is for the Center, which is not necessarily the institution for the investigator. A central theme of the Idaho INBRE Program is to provide research opportunities and the necessary infrastructure to train the next generation of researchers in the State. Toward this end we have included every institution of higher education in Idaho, identifying talented undergraduate and graduate students and supporting faculty to provide research opportunities in their labs. The colleges and universities engaged in this research enterprise differ by virtue of their missions and their resources. Recognizing these innate differences among the colleges and their faculty, we established three categories of research faculty: """"""""Magnet PI's"""""""" devoting 50% of their time to research;""""""""Research Collaborators"""""""" devoting 25% of their time to research and a """"""""Senior Research Mentor"""""""" who, in addition to devoting 50% of time to research, is expected to mentor junior faculty. The first four years of INBRE were designed to support researchers in these categories, and provide the necessary research facilities and infrastructure to enable them to establish productive laboratories and mentor students. In this fifth year of INBRE the research infrastructure is now in place, so that faculty and students can be productive and successful in acquiring extramural funding. One of the policies we developed in INBRE was a system of non-competitive renewals required of all participating researchers. Clearly defined criteria were established for each category of researcher, and performance was matched against these goals in the annual review process. A Senior Advisory Research Council (SARC) was established to review annual performances and make recommendations for continued funding. These recommendations were forwarded to the External Advisory Committee and the INBRE Director for final decision. Members of the SARC Committee also served as an advisory panel that met annually with each investigator. Progress toward the goals were discussed, and most importantly the quality of the mentoring process was evaluated. Each researcher was expected to identify a research mentor, maintain regular contact and eventually share the grant writing process with the mentor. Occasionally these mentoring relationships were less than successful, at which time a new mentor was identified and the relationship closely monitored. At this time all INBRE researchers are in a productive collaborative relationship with a research mentor.
Showing the most recent 10 out of 476 publications
