PUI Member Cameo: Jennifer Glass

As an organization, NORDP fosters a culture of inclusive excellence by actively promoting and supporting diversity, inclusion, and equity in all its forms to expand our worldview, enrich our work, and elevate our profession for decades to come.  

To further enable a richly diverse and robust national peer network of research development professionals as well as organizational representation, we are highlighting members from primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) in a new blog series.

Our first cameo introduces Jennifer Glass. 

Who: Jennifer Glass, Ph. D. – Research Development Officer
Where: Office of Research Development & Administration, Eastern Michigan University
Number of Years in RD: 5
Length of NORDP Membership: 5 years

What’s your history in RD? When and how did you enter the field? What kind of RD work do you do?Glass Photo - 2019.jpg

I have been in RD for 5 years. Before jumping into RD, I was a research faculty member at the University of Michigan, where I studied the effects of factors like age, drug use, and chronic pain on attention and cognition. My position at UM was broken up across several departments, which was fun and interesting, but it became a problem when funding was short. In 2014, Eastern Michigan University was advertising for a Research Development Officer. I did not know what that was, but I read the job description and knew I could do all of the things listed, so I applied!

At EMU, I helped to create a faculty grant writing fellowship. It involves a semester long grant writing seminar that I lead, where the faculty fellows work on honing their specific aims (or equivalent) and sketch out the framework for the rest of their proposals. The seminar has a mix of formal workshop presentations (some by me, and some by outside  consultants) and peer writing sessions. I think both are crucial to helping faculty become adept grant writers. We also make a trek to Washington D.C. to meet with program officers. In addition to the fellowship, I conduct workshops, publish a weekly update   with grant funding news and opportunities, publish regular award reports, plan social events (e.g., research happy hours, celebration picnics), and work one-on-one with faculty.

How do you see RD as being different/similar between a predominately undergraduate institutions (PUIs) and more research-intensive university?

I think that RD can be extremely impactful at PUI. It can also be very different than at a   research intensive institution, where RD professionals are more likely to specialize. At a  PUI, you have to help with all kinds of proposals and in some cases also help with research administration. Personally, I enjoy wearing lots of hats, so it works for me. I also really enjoy working with the faculty here. They are passionate about their research, but with the high teaching loads that come with a PUI job, they struggle to find time to write proposals and might get discouraged that they can never be successful. My job is to help where I can, and empower faculty to put together a competitive proposal. It is very fulfilling to help with the research endeavors at EMU because they are so critical to the quality of education that students receive here.

What’s your history with NORDP? How have you engaged with the organization (committee work, conferences attended/presented)?

When I was hired at EMU, my supervisor (Caryn Charter) knew about NORDP and encouraged me to join. So I have been a member since late 2014, and have attended each conference since 2015. I have been involved with the Mentoring Committee for several years and have been (and currently am) both a mentor and a mentee. Last year, I became the chair of the newly organized Affinity Group for PUI’s, which is really exciting because there are quite a few of us, and we have independently been doing a lot of the same RD activities. We have a nice list of activities to tackle in the coming years, such as   a white paper documenting RD at PUI’s, PUI focused presentations at the conference, help with recruiting to NORDP, to name a few. I also sit on the Inclusive Excellence Committee. This is really interesting for me because there is so much to learn about inclusiveness and it is more important than ever.

What relationships have you built as a result of NORDP (new colleagues, connections to institutions where you previously had no point of contact)?

Through mentoring and committee work, I have met many talented people, and RD folks are very helpful and friendly. Some work at large institutions, and some at small institutions. The affiliation through NORDP makes it easy to reach out to people at places where I previously would not have known anyone.

How has your service to NORDP enhanced your career?

NORDP has certainly enhanced my career, since I started out not knowing what RD was! Even just looking at the website listing of RD activities was helpful as I began my job at EMU. The conferences are full of really good information and I always go back with some new ideas and fresh enthusiasm. The webinars are a great source of information, and the list serve is really amazing. If you ever have a question, just put it out there and within hours if not minutes, you will have great input and insight.

How do you see that NORDP functions as a resource for RD professionals coming from PUI contexts?

Because of the ways that RD at a PUI is different (e.g., multifaceted, jack of all trades) I think that everything that NORDP has to offer is doubly valuable to RD at PUIs. You might not have a colleague across campus who is an expert on Department of Energy (or fill in your favorite here) funding, but someone at NORDP will be there to answer your questions!

What recommendations do you have for members – particularly PUI members – to get more involved with NORDP?

For anyone, the best way to get more involved is to join a committee. If you are from a PUI, then also join the PUI Affinity Group!

Compiled by Daniel Campbell, Member Services Committee

NORDP 2019 Conference Notes: Effective Meeting Facilitation, Parts One and Two

Slides: Facilitating Innovative Research 


  • Donnalyn Roxey, Knowinnovation
  • Andy Burnett, Knowinnovation

Thanks to our session scribe, Christina Howard, Texas A&M University!

As research development professionals, how can we make meetings more interesting, productive, and effective? How do we promote creative thinking? At the Effective Meeting Facilitation workshop, we entered the room to find an array assortment of squishy ducks, Slinkys, and other fidget toys on chairs throughout the room. The presenters used these along with a variety of engaging means to generate ideas and discussion among audience members. They emphasized: When designing a meeting it is important to consider what type of environment might facilitate creativity, and to recognize that different creative preferences can still achieve similar outputs.

Effective Meeting Facilitation, Part One

The focus was on the various dimensions of a creative climate and on specific ways RD professionals can encourage and facilitate each of these. Dimensions include: dynamism and liveliness; freedom; risk taking; playfulness and humor; idea time; idea support; trust and openness; conflict; debate; and challenge.

Tips for the RD professional

Some practical ways to encourage dynamism and liveliness are to move people around: get them talking to new people or interacting in new ways. For example, hold a meeting in a new or different location. One way to incorporate playfulness and humor is to allow for “mind wandering” through the use of fidget toys.

Assist with providing idea time and idea support by leveling the playing field: making sure everyone’s ideas are heard, deferring judgment (both positive and negative), and separating out divergence from convergence by listening to all ideas before reviewing and matching them with goals and objectives. Additionally, allowing time for ideas to incubate (i.e., thinking and regrouping) is critical rather than trying to cram everything all into one meeting.

Some suggestions to make meeting environments more creative were using fidget toys, holding meetings off-campus, using sticky notes, process mapping, adding a little bit of “interest” to the meeting space (i.e. in the form of potted plants).

Effective Meeting Facilitation, Part Two

The focus was on strategies for conducting virtual meetings effectively. Virtual collaboration can decrease our carbon footprint and increase affordability… if it works. There are multiple ways to collaborate virtually across space (i.e. Zoom), time (i.e. bulletin boards, computer screens for asking and answering questions), or a combination of both (i.e. Google Docs).

Tips for the RD professional

Ideas labs use a combination of virtual and face-to-face meetings to engage individuals. Have everyone participate virtually in an initial “ideas lab.” This can help gauge who will engage – and who should be present at the table in a face-to-face meeting.

Randomized coffee talks” (RCTs). These have the goal of getting people together who might otherwise never meet or interact, and provide them with a small incentive for doing so (i.e. coffee). For example, RCTs could be a good pre-meeting exercise to help meeting participants engage with each other prior to a larger proposal meeting.

An important factor to consider when organizing a virtual meeting is the length of time, in part because the cognitive load is larger in a virtual space than in a physical space. One way to alleviate this would be to schedule shorter meeting times with longer breaks in between when planning a virtual meeting. Also, encouraging meeting participants to go to an alternate location for the virtual meeting (rather than just sitting in their offices) may help participants engage more fully rather than treating the virtual meeting as if they were watching a virtual webinar.

Regardless of the meeting format (in-person or virtual), however, accessibility is key. The presenters emphasized that either all-physical or all-virtual meetings tend to work more effectively than a mix of the two (part virtual and part in-person).

Together, these two workshops provided valuable ideas and resources for helping meeting participants fully engage, whether the meeting is held in-person or virtually. KnowInnovation (fir.hub.ki) has a number of resources that can help with making meeting environments more creative, including tools, blogs, drop-ins, a virtual idea board, and an email short course on creativity and skill development, as well as another email short course on creative thinking and problem-solving.

New NORDP Board Member Cameo: Nathan Meier

Nathan Meier is one of two new appointed NORDP Board Members in 2019. We thank Nathan for his service to NORDP!

Who: Nathan Meier, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research
Where: University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Number of Years in RD: 16
Length of NORDP Membership: 8 years

When and how did you enter the field? What kind of RD work do you do?Meier.png

I began my career in RD during the fall of 2003 at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL). UNL’s Office of Research and Economic Development hired me as a proposal writer specialist following my completion of a Master of Technical and Professional Communication at Auburn University. My work in proposal development naturally (and rapidly) evolved to include other activities common across RD like funding opportunity identification; large-scale proposal project management; faculty training; federal and agency relations; supporting broader impacts and partnership development; increasing faculty nominations for prestigious honors and awards; coordinating limited submissions; managing internal funding programs; and facilitating the formation of cross-disciplinary, multi-organizational teams. The work I do currently builds on that base of experience and focuses on advancing institutional research goals and fostering faculty success. To do so, I want to help more of our faculty take strategic advantage of the many RD resources available to them and shift from grant-seeking to grant-getting. The difference is subtle but more than semantic!

What’s your history with NORDP? How have you engaged with the organization (committee work, conferences attended/presented)?

The first NORDP conference I attended was in Austin (2013). I have been at each one since, presenting at five of the last six. A couple years into my membership, I volunteered to assist the 2015 conference planning committee with abstract review and marketing. As marketing sub-committee chair, I pitched the concept of the “Conference Cameo,” which was enthusiastically received, institutionalized, and expanded. In 2017, I joined the Nominating Committee and had the privilege of providing leadership to that dedicated group through the 2018 and 2019 Board election cycles. Since 2018, I have been NORDP’s liaison to the Network for Advancing and Evaluating the Societal Impacts of Science (AESIS). I hope many NORDP members are planning to attend the October meeting AESIS is hosting in Washington, D.C., which will focus on the “Impact of Social Sciences and Humanities on Society.” In June, I was invited by Jill Jividen and Jenna McGuire to join the two of them, Eva Allen, and Michael Thompson to form the core committee for 2020 conference planning. I look forward to working with these talented member-leaders to help organize the biggest and best meeting yet.

What relationships have you built as a result of NORDP (new colleagues, connections to institutions where you previously had no point of contact)?

Like so many others, when I found NORDP, I found “my people.” Over the years, the professional connections formed as a result of my membership have enriched my work and the way we approach RD at Nebraska. For example, we have been motivated by hearing about how others implement faculty development programs or organize focused cohort programs around increasing competitiveness for specific funding programs (e.g., the NSF CAREER Award). Learning about others’ experiences and adopting best practices from the NORDP network has transformed our approach to – and success at – supporting faculty. For the last couple of years, I have really come to value informal, peer-to-peer mentoring relationships. These are excellent venues for brainstorming and information exchange that can help us all do a better job of positioning our faculty and institutions to be more successful and impactful. I learn from and am inspired by so many NORDP members that it would be foolish to try to name names.

What are you most excited about as a board member?

It is quite exciting to stand on the shoulders of the RD giants who provided the leadership necessary to establish and grow NORDP, and it will be an honor to provide input into the strategic planning process. My vision for the future of NORDP is one that is inclusive, strategic, and entrepreneurial. I want the organization to more intentionally cater to the professional needs of members across career stages, credentials, and institution types. I want every RD professional to know they can find a welcoming home in our organization and see themselves in a leadership role within NORDP or at their institution if that is something to which they aspire. I truly believe NORDP must continue to be the primary source to which RD professionals turn for the level and quality of professional development needed to make their best work better and help it evolve over time. To my mind, ensuring member-responsiveness and organizational agility are key to the long-term success of our organization.

Compiled by Daniel Campbell, Member Services Committee

A press release announcing both new board members can be found here: 2019 NORDP Board appointment release

NORDP fosters a culture of inclusive excellence by actively promoting and supporting diversity, inclusion and equity in all its forms to expand our worldview, enrich our work, and elevate our profession.

NORDP 2019 Conference Notes: Employing Tactical and Strategic Approaches to Help Faculty Maximize Broader Impacts

Slides: Employing Tactical and Strategic Approaches to Help Faculty Maximize Broader Impacts


  • Danielle Mazzeo, American Museum of Natural History
  • Nathan Meier, University of Alabama at Birmingham
  • Tisha Mullen, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  • Stephanie Hensel, University of Michigan School of Education

Thanks to our session scribe, Paige Belisle, Harvard University!

This presentation explored how different institutions address Broader Impacts requirements during the proposal development process. The National Science Foundation defines Broader Impacts as activities associated with sponsored research that will benefit our society and world. Other Federal agencies require similar components that will have impact outside of traditional academia. Meeting Broader Impacts requirements can be accomplished through the research/project itself; through activities directly related to the research/project; or through activities complementary to the research/project.

Case Study: American Museum of Natural History, New York City

This portion of the presentation focused on how the museum uses intra-institutional connections to maximize Broader Impacts activities. The museum aims to create & support interdisciplinary partnerships; leverage other departmental efforts to support new Broader Impact activities; and develop Broader Impact activities that are replicable and scalable. This is carried out by establishing links between its library and archives, cyberinfrastructure, graduate students, research projects, youth programs, and exhibitions, all of which also serve the museum’s central mission.

Case Study: University of Michigan School of Education

This section of the presentation discussed a university center which addresses Broader Impacts. The University of Michigan School of Education’s Center for Education Design, Evaluation, and Research (CEDER) “advances equity and excellence in education by providing access to high quality design, evaluation, and research services through collaborations with university, school, and community partners.” CEDER helps faculty during the proposal development, project implementation, and research dissemination stages by offering design, evaluation, and research development services. Through consultations, CEDER helps faculty consider how to approach Broader Impacts activities in K-12 classrooms.

Case Study: University of Nebraska-Lincoln

This portion of the presentation explored how the University of Nebraska-Lincoln uses a matrix approach for Broader Impacts support by providing something for nearly everyone in the community: Pre-K to seniors, formal and informal activities, and local to global impact. Their group emphasizes that there are no cookie-cutter approaches that guarantee Broader Impacts success. The presentation discussed the importance of leveraging existing partnerships and infrastructure. It  argued that a faculty member doesn’t need to reinvent themselves to successfully implement Broader Impacts activities; rather, they should focus on how their existing connections, passions, and projects might be expanded to meet the requirements.

What did you hear at this presentation that surprised you?

I did not realize that the American Museum of Natural History in New York functions as a PhD-granting research institution, and it was very interesting to hear their unique perspective on Broader Impacts.

What resources did you discover at this presentation? 

E-resources from the presentation can be found here: http://bit.ly/2ZvBtqz

The presenters mentioned that the National Alliance for Broader Impacts (NABI) offers many additional resources: https://broaderimpacts.net

What were the most interesting questions asked by an audience member, and what was the presenters’ responses?

Question: What if PIs want to focus only on training graduate students for their Broader Impacts?

Answer: While this is a very important aspect, it is typically not adequate to only focus on training graduate students in the Broader Impacts section. Generally, the proposal will need to have other Broader Impacts activities as well.

Question: How do you encourage faculty to visit a curriculum development office (or other relevant Broader Impacts resource) early in the proposal development process?

Answer: A helpful website can be a good first step in advertising your services. You can also create a “roadshow” presentation to bring to existing meetings, especially for schools and departments that may need extra help.

Question: What are the most common critiques regarding Broader Impacts in unsuccessful proposals?

Answer: A comment the presenters have frequently seen is that the Broader Impacts were interpreted by the reviewers as too broad or ambitious in scope. Proposal writers should focus on the quality of their Broader Impacts activities rather than the quantity of activities they are proposing. Goals should be concrete and attainable, not aspirational. Broader Impacts partnerships should be authentic.

NORDP NE Summer Meeting

NORDP NE held their Summer Meeting on Thursday, July 25th at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Worcester, MA. A big shout out and thank you to our hosts at WPI, especially Antje Harnisch, who served on the planning committee and presented at the meeting. Over fifty RD professionals from around Region 1 attended, accompanied by visitors from Region 2. The agenda from the meeting is below, along with a couple of select slide decks. Thanks to all who attended!

8:45 – 9:15 Registration/ Continental Breakfast Odeum A, Campus Center
9:15 – 9:30 Welcome Amy Gantt, NORDP NE Chair and Jeralyn Haraldsen, NORDP NE Chair-Elect and NORDP Member Services Committee
9:30 – 10:30 Welcome and Panel Discussion: WPI’s Institutional Engagement Model Institutional Engagement
10:45 – 11:45 Lightning Talks: Project Management in Research Development Facilitated by Anne Maglia, UMass Lowell

– Anne Maglia: Work Breakdown Structures
– Jacob Levin, MIT: Wrike Project Management Software
– Peg AtKisson, ATG Consulting: What We Learned When We Hired a Professional Project Manager
– Mary Green, UMass Amherst: Proposal Workflow Schedules
– Loren Walker, UMass Amherst: A Simple Plan
– Kate Duggan, Brown University: RD Knowledge Repository – What Have We Been Up To?

11:45 – 12:45 Lunch
12:45 – 1:15 NORDP NE News and Updates – Amy Gantt, NORDP NE Chair
– Kathy Cataneo, NORDP Board Member
– Jeralyn Haraldsen, NORDP NE Chair Elect and NORDP Member Services Committee
1:15 – 2:15 Jim Kurose, NSF Assistant Director, Directorate of Computer and Information Science (CISE) National Science Foundation Programmatics and Activities
2:30 – 3:30 Discussion & Brainstorming: Research Intelligence, faculty profiles, and information management Facilitated by Mark Milutinovich, University of New Hampshire, and Loren Walker, UMass Amherst
3:30 – 4:30 Activity & Discussion: Areas of Strength at NORDP NE Institutions Facilitated by Amy Gantt, Tufts University, and Jeralyn Haraldsen, University of Vermont
4:30 Reception Onsite at WPI with cash bar

Two New Board Members Appointed

The Board is pleased to announce the appointment of two new Board members:

  • Kimberly Littlefield, of The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, representing the Regional/MSI institutions, and
  • Nathan Meier, of University of Nebraska-Lincoln, representing the overall membership.

These members were appointed pursuant to the bylaws, Article IV, Section F  and 1) filled a seat that was vacant due to a resignation from the Board, and 2) increased the Board to an odd-number of members, in order to avoid a tied-vote situation, by filling the Board Regional/MSI designated seat.

We are excited to begin our strategic planning process with a full Board and look forward to keeping you informed. Keep an eye out for the upcoming Board cameos of your two new Board members.

We would also like to, again, thank former Board members Jan Abramson, Jeff Agnoli, Kellie Dyslin, and Karen Eck for their Board service.


Karen “Fletch” Fletcher

Karen Fletcher
Director, Grants Resources & Services
Office of Research | Appalachian State University
John E. Thomas Hall | ASU Box 32174 | Boone, NC  28608

President 2019-2020
National Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP)

It’s Here! NORDP Resource Creates Inroads into RD Careers: NROAD to RD

Why formal RD training?

Research Development (RD) is a career of strategists, planners and figure-it-outers. Most of us “fell into” the role and realized later that what we do is RD. We’ve figured out and honed our skills along the way.

However, the field is growing (if the first-ever sold-out NORDP conference is any indication!), and so a considerable need exists to shorten and ease that learning curve. Similarly, people looking at RD as a potential career may feel unsure about how to get started, or how to “test the waters” given the variability across RD offices.

With this in mind, NORDP launched a working group in June 2018 under the Strategic Alliances Committee to create a resource to help RD offices develop training programs relevant to their own needs. Indeed, the “NROAD to RD” training program framework is based on the idea that some RD-relevant skills and knowledge can be taught – and it offers a menu of options from which to choose.

The NROAD to RD, or the NORDP Resource for Organizing and ADapting a Training Program toward Developing an RD career, is the culmination of a year’s worth of work by the working group (with input from each of NORDP’s standing committees), a beta test at Duke University’s School of Medicine, and a soft launch at the 11th Annual NORDP conference in 2019.

How does NROAD to RD work?

The goals of NROAD to RD are to “provide RD offices with a framework to (1) develop their own training/apprenticeship/internship programs, and (2) employ that framework to introduce, recruit, and train individuals interested in a RD careers.” RD offices can choose among the suggested components and add additional components as necessary to ensure relevance to their individual office and institution’s missions.

The resource provides a guide for decision-making in designing an appropriate training program (Fig 1). Each decision affects the others, collectively defining parameters for the training program.

Figure 1: Decisions to be made while designing an NROAD-based RD training program.

NROAD to RD also offers curriculum modes, or training delivery methods, from which to choose (Fig 2). Most programs will likely include a range of delivery methods, from self-study to shadowing to live or simulated work projects, as suits their goals and mentoring capacity.

Figure 2: NROAD’s recommended curriculum modules

Curriculum suggestions include RD basics; navigating large grants, individual grants, and limited submissions; project management; team science; diversity and inclusion; and other institutional/research-related/career related topics. The curriculum module section is further broken down into sub-categories with recommended reading resources and suggested assignments for each.

Finally, NROAD to RD offers suggestions for program and trainee evaluation to ensure refinement and success.

Interested in NROAD to RD?

The NROAD to RD framework is available to all NORDP members and may be requested via email to Dr. Samarpita Sengupta (samar.sg@gmail.com). In the coming months, the “Phase II” working group under the auspices of the NORDP Professional Development Committee will create additional resources (e.g., case studies and job simulations), navigate the logistics of hosting these resources on the NORDP website, and evaluate resource usage.


The Phase I working group was chaired by Samarpita Sengupta, and consisted of the following members: Peggy Sundermeyer, Trinity University; Joanna Downer, Duke University; Page Sorensen, then at the University of California San Francisco; Sharon Pound, University of Tennessee, Knoxville; Rebecca Latimer, University of Virginia; Nicole Frank, University of Utah; Beth Moser, Maricopa County Community Colleges District; and Sarah Messbauer, University of California, Davis.

NROAD to RD was developed initially using resources generously shared by UT Southwestern Medical Center’s NeAT program (Samarpita Sengupta), University of California San Francisco’s Internship program (Page Sorensen), The University of Tennessee, Office of Research & Engagement’s Onboarding Resources (Jennifer Webster), and University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Onboarding Resources (Kathryn Partlow).

Current Phase II WG members are Joanna Downer, Rebecca Latimer, and Samar Sengupta with several new members: Danielle Matsushima at Columbia University; Elaine Lee, Boston University; Maile Henson, Duke University; Alexis Nagel, Medical University of South Carolina, and Dawn McArthur, BC Children’s Hospital Research Institute. Peggy Sundermeyer remains on the WG as a consultant with supplementary assistance from Jacob Levin, MIT.

Submitted by Samarpita Sengupta

NORDP fosters a culture of inclusive excellence by actively promoting and supporting diversity, inclusion and equity in all its forms to expand our worldview, enrich our work, and elevate our profession.