Month: February 2025

Pictured from left to right are Amber Mason, Tekla Smith, Kelly Ann Moore, and Dena Reinoso.

Who:

Kelly Moore, Director, Training Grant Support Office, Emory University

Amber Mason, Associate Director of Evaluation, Training Grant Support Office, Emory University

Dena Reinoso, Assistant Director, Training Grant Support Office, Emory University

Tekla Smith, Project Support Specialist, Training Grant Support Office, Emory University

Where: Emory University

Number of years in research development: Kelly 4 years, Dena 3 years, Amber & Tekla 2 years each

Length of NORDP membership: Same as above!

The NORDP Innovation Award recognizes individuals, groups, or teams, functional units, or organizations who leverage unique skills or resources to kick-start innovation in research development and advance the profession or the field in ways that generate evidence of promise or demonstrable results. Innovators leverage partnerships, experiment with tools and techniques, or generate and share knowledge to advance NORDP and the work of its members.

The interview was conducted with Dr. Kelly Moore, on behalf of the Training Grants Support Office Team.

What is the Training Grant Support Office and how did you first become interested in establishing TGSO?

The Training Grant Support Office (TGSO) at Emory University is dedicated to bolstering the sustainability of our current training programs while also identifying and fostering new areas for program development. We achieve this by providing specialized expertise, tools, and resources that are essential for the success of our research training initiatives. I founded the TGSO in December 2020, driven by a strategic vision from Dr. Deborah Bruner, Emory’s Senior Vice President of Research, who recognized the critical need for enhanced support of research training within the larger research ecosystem at Emory.

Prior to joining Emory, I was involved in training grant and fellowship support as part of a broader set of responsibilities at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences. There, I was managing a training grant, everything from processing payroll for trainees to programming, running their seminars, bringing in speakers, etc. That’s what really got me into this world of training grants and being in an academic environment, although it was in the Dean’s office, so we looked at it from a very different perspective, that is, from an educational standpoint. As part of my other duties, I started helping students and faculty apply for fellowships and training grants. At that time, it was a small portion of what I did, but that’s what started to get me interested in extending more full time into training grants. After a few years, some duties shifted, and my fellowship and training grant responsibilities expanded, and then that’s when I saw the position at Emory to start the TGSO.

Moving from an academic to an RD office was really interesting. Being in a Research Office, we are able to provide equitable support to everyone, regardless of where they are located in the University and across career stages to include predoctoral and postdoctoral grants. 

The opportunity to establish the TGSO allowed me to focus exclusively on this vital area. I was particularly drawn to Emory because it provided the platform to not only enhance the support for training grants but also to create and implement comprehensive, university-wide initiatives that would strengthen our programs for years to come.

What was the process of building out TGSO and how did your membership in NORDP play a role in your efforts?

Building out the Training Grant Support Office (TGSO) was a strategic and iterative process. We started small, but with a clear vision. Initially, it was just me, but over time, we’ve expanded to a team of four dedicated professionals. In the early stages, we focused on engaging with stakeholders across the university to understand the existing landscape of training grant support. This involved assessing what resources were already in place, identifying gaps, and determining where there was room for improvement.

To get started, I did a listening tour with our faculty and our central research offices. I also consulted with the Graduate School and the Office of Postdoctoral and Mentored Trainee Education, the Office of Sponsored Programs, and Research Compliance to learn what was currently happening at Emory. When I looked behind the curtain, I began to realize that training grants are really important to a small corner of the world.

At Emory, last fiscal year, we secured over $1.1 billion in sponsored research awards, with $15.6 million of that coming from training grants. While training grants represent a very small piece of the pie, it’s a really, really important piece.  These grants play a critical role in sustaining and advancing the research ecosystem by cultivating the next generation of researchers and ensuring the long-term vitality of Emory’s research enterprise. A lot of Emory’s processes and policies are built for the big piece of the pie — the research grants. There were no specific policies and procedures for training grants, and so a lot of my work was looking at what had been done, because within a particular department or division, training grants may be been managed very well. I wanted to learn from what as working well and amplify it to all of the programs.

Getting started, we had to be strategic in our approach, so we chose to focus first on pre-award services, knowing that a solid foundation here would be crucial before we could effectively build out post-award supports. A key principle throughout this process was ensuring equity among our programs—we were committed to not offering a service to one program unless we could ensure it would be available to all.

I didn’t know about RD until I met my Dr. Kim Eck, my supervisor.  NORDP really helped me gain an understanding of the institutional standpoint: What is our capacity for taking on training? What areas are we strong in? What are our core research areas that we focused in? And how can we develop programs on top of those core research areas? We used a lot of competitive intelligence to determine our top funding areas and to find natural groups of faculty that we can build programs around.

My membership in NORDP has been instrumental in shaping TGSO’s approach. Nationally, training grant support is often housed within academic-based offices, such as a university’s graduate school or postdoctoral affairs office. Emory is unique in that TGSO is situated within the Office of Research Development, which gives us a distinct advantage. Having previously worked within an academic affairs office, my perspective on training was rooted in traditional academic frameworks. However, through NORDP, we’ve been able to integrate these educational approaches with RD principles, creating a hybrid model that enhances the support we offer for training grants at Emory.

What relationships have you built as a result of NORDP, and how have these relationships influenced your work?

The relationships I’ve built through NORDP have been incredibly rewarding and have significantly influenced my work. In addition to my role with the TGSO, I’m the co-founder and current Vice President of the National Training Grant Community of Practice (NTGCOP). Founded in early 2021 by training grant support offices from Emory, Georgetown University, Northwestern University, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison, NTGCOP aims to support leaders nationwide through tri-annual meetings focused on NIH guidelines, resource sharing, and training grant administration.

We started NTGCOP because training grants can be a very lonely space. NIH guidelines, like most federal guidelines, are muddy at best. A lot of it’s open to interpretation and experiences. Having someone you know to ask best practices, or, how do you read this, was really important to us, and it didn’t exist from an administrative space. NIH is very faculty heavy, and they have lots of groups and conferences for the faculty, but not so much for the administration. NORDP was a huge factor in our growth, because, as all of my counterparts all sit in academic offices, they didn’t even know what NORDP was. We took our presentation to NORDP, and there was a light bulb moment in the room; everyone was like, oh my gosh, help with training grants!  Today, we have nearly 500 members from over 100 institutions, many of whom are also NORDP members. These relationships have been integral to our growth and success.

We’ve submitted some responses to NIH requests for information that relate to training grants, and we were told that one of the letters and RFIs that we submitted actually had an impact on changes NIH has implemented. We’ve now built some strong relationships with NIH, both within particular institute’s like NIGMS, some various program managers, and also with Dr. Ericka Boone, Director of the NIH Division of Biomedical Research Workforce.

More recently, we’ve co-presented with the Federal Demonstration Project (FDP) and the NIH on reducing administrative burdens for NIH training grants. We’ve also recently become a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, which is a significant milestone for us. It was a NORDP member who connected us with the FDP, whose purpose is to evaluate administrative burden in research. We connected this effort with NIH, and the three organizations co-presented on training grants, with over 600 people attending. We conducted a survey of the audience and came up with a one pager of tips and tricks for first time applicants that we’re now sharing as a resource.

One of NORDP’s greatest strengths is its strong and supportive community. Since joining, I’ve developed numerous connections through my participation in the NORDP Mentoring Training Series and as a recent member of the NORDP conference planning committee. These connections have provided invaluable insights, collaboration opportunities, and support, greatly enhancing my work with TGSO and NTGCOP.

What other innovations have you observed within NORDP (or the field of research development) since you first joined?

One of the most impactful innovations we’ve embraced since joining NORDP is the use of competitive intelligence within research development—a strategy recognized by NORDP with a previous Innovation Award. By applying various competitive intelligence analyses, TGSO has shifted from a reactive to a proactive approach, working closely with faculty to initiate and develop strategic, multi-departmental, and multi-institutional proposals. This approach has also led to the integration of new training program expectations into all major Senior Vice President for Research investments, such as centers and university-wide initiatives.

We have a small group of US private institutions with medical schools that we benchmark against, and we will do a lot of competitive intelligence reporting on that to benchmark where we are make decisions on what type of programs we should be focusing on. And that competitive intelligence piece has been really critical, because if we have the data to back up a decision, it is much more palatable for the faculty. For example, if we can come back and tell them, that lately, applications that go in without any sort of refined career development for trainees only have x percent of success, the faculty are much more inclined to rethink what they’re doing.

The results have been tangible and impressive. Emory is now ranked among the top 20 institutions in the country for NIH-funded training grants. We’ve seen our training grant submissions double, and the average scores of these submissions have improved by 30%, often falling at or below the current NIH funding lines. Notably, Emory has achieved a perfect score (10) on multiple training grant proposals for four consecutive years—something that hadn’t been accomplished in over a decade. In FY22, the Emory TGSO experienced a 125% increase in awarded proposals, more than doubling the number funded in FY20 and FY21.

What advice do you have for NORDP members leading their own innovative initiatives within the field of RD?

My number one piece of advice would be to embrace ambition. Don’t be afraid to pursue bold and ambitious ideas. Some of the most impactful innovations come from daring to think big. If you believe in your idea, pursue it with confidence, knowing that innovation often requires stepping outside of the conventional. Also, it is important to build a strong network. Collaboration is key in RD. Cultivate relationships with key stakeholders, both within your institution and across the wider RD community. Networking can provide valuable insights, resources, and support as you navigate the challenges and opportunities of leading your own innovative initiative.

Personally, I wouldn’t be here where I am today without being ambitious and taking the shot. And so that’s my biggest piece for anyone, especially for moving into leadership in any capacity. Whether you lead a team or you’re a part of a team, bring up your ideas. Don’t feel like any ideas you know not good enough to pursue, because if someone told me it’s absolutely crazy for y’all to be reaching out to the NIH about this, then I would not be where I am today, in partnership with NIH to help make change.

I have to say, NORDP, hands down, is my absolute favorite professional organization I’ve ever been a member of. We have a great sense of community and heart and care for members. I did the NORDP mentor training series earlier this year, and the relationships I built with everyone there were fascinating. Moving forward, there’s a lot to pursue at the intersection of training grant support from an academic perspective and training grant support from a research perspective. We are happy to help others working in that area, however that may be.