Goal #6: Enhance training programs 

In July 2025, 21 community health workers (CHWs) completed the pilot of the Community Health Worker Certification Program, an initiative developed by the University of Southern California Office of Health Affairs and Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. The program was created to strengthen the CHW workforce in Southern California by equipping participants with the skills and knowledge needed to address chronic disease, promote health, and connect community members to care.&nbsp;The six-week program was led by a facilitation team that included community outreach coordinators from the Community Engagement Core at the Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute (SC CTSI), along with additional staff who supported instruction and coordination…&nbsp;Read the full article <a href="https://sc-ctsi.org/news/community-health-workers-graduate-from-usc-chla-certification-program" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">here</a>.&nbsp;

Southern California Clinical and Translational Science Institute

Image of graduating class of community health workers from USC CHLA

small_Community-Health-Workers-Graduate-from-USC-CHLA-Certification-Program-Graphic-JUL212025.png

thumbnail_Community-Health-Workers-Graduate-from-USC-CHLA-Certification-Program-Graphic-JUL212025.png

Community-Health-Workers-Graduate-from-USC-CHLA-Certification-Program-Graphic-JUL212025.png

University of Southern California

Community Health Workers Graduate from University of Southern California-Children's Hospital Los Angeles Certification Program

- Any -

CCOS is pleased to continue our hub spotlight series featuring the innovative clinical and translational science coming out of the CTSA Program. Here we feature Duke Clinical and Translational Science Institute’s work to build both capacity and confidence in scientific writing among its staff.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The Duke Clinical and Translational Science Institute (CTSI) is leading a transformative effort to enable staff development through scientific writing. By offering structured training and peer-mentorship, the CTSI is building institutional capacity and fostering a culture where staff are equipped to contribute meaningfully to scholarly communication and dissemination.&nbsp;&nbsp;A Vision Rooted in Capacity Building&nbsp;This initiative began in December 2023 with the Manuscript Writing Team Management Workshop, hosted by Duke CTSI and led by <a href="https://ctsi.duke.edu/personnel/cinthia-e-sanchez-phd" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Cinthia Sanchez, Ph.D.</a>, <a href="https://ctsi.duke.edu/personnel/stephanie-freel-phd-pmp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Stephanie Freel, Ph.D., P.M.P</a>, and <a href="https://ctsi.duke.edu/personnel/amanda-mcmillan-mph-ma" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Amanda McMillan, M.P.H, M.A.</a> The event brought together 15 staff members to explore the fundamentals of collaborative manuscript development and team-based writing strategies.&nbsp;Aptly titled “Herding the Cats: The Art of Managing a Writing Project Team,” the workshop introduced 15 staff members to the complexities of collaborative manuscript development.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The session covered essential topics such as:&nbsp;&nbsp;<ul><li>Understanding the scientific literature and the publication process&nbsp;</li><li>Authorship criteria and ethical considerations&nbsp;</li><li>Defining roles within a writing team (e.g., first author, writing project manager, senior author)&nbsp;</li></ul>Participants learned practical strategies for managing multi-author publications, determining author order, resolving authorship disputes, and maintaining momentum throughout the manuscript lifecycle. The workshop emphasized the importance of clarity, collaboration, and accountability—skills that are especially valuable for staff contributing to programmatic, operational, or translational science publications.&nbsp;&nbsp;Building on the momentum of that workshop, Duke CTSI partnered with Duke AI Health to launch the Foundations of Scientific Writing for Staff Members course, led by <a href="https://aihealth.duke.edu/rusincovitch/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Shelley Rusincovitch, MMCi, FAMIA</a>. This course was designed to provide a foundational introduction to scholarly writing in biomedical research settings. Developed through the Duke AI Health Community of Practice in collaboration with the CTSI, the course equips staff with the knowledge, mentorship, and tools needed to actively participate in developing, authoring, and publishing scholarly works—including posters, abstracts, and peer-reviewed manuscripts.&nbsp;&nbsp;Course Structure and Philosophy&nbsp;The course is structured around a culminating class project in which participants select a topic of interest—ranging from formal research to educational or operational innovations—and develop it into a formal poster. These posters are then presented in a showcase event, giving staff the opportunity to share their work with peers and leadership.&nbsp;Instructional content is delivered through 4–5 virtual sessions that blend lectures with interactive discussions. Each session was designed to reinforce learning through hands-on application and peer feedback. Topics include:&nbsp;<ul><li>Introduction to scholarly writing and peer review&nbsp;</li><li>Organizing and structuring scientific content&nbsp;</li><li>Writing abstracts and IMRaD-style papers&nbsp;</li><li>Visual design and scientific graphics&nbsp;</li><li>Publication practices and authorship ethics&nbsp;</li></ul>Impact and Outcomes&nbsp;Since its launch, the course has been offered twice, with a third session planned for fall 2025. Participation has grown to include staff from across Duke’s research enterprise.&nbsp;&nbsp;The results speak for themselves. Evaluation surveys show that participants consistently report increased understanding of key scientific writing concepts. In the winter 2023–2024 course, 100% of respondents reported improvement in at least one area, with 79% noting gains in six or more. In fall 2024, 75% of respondents reported improvement in five or more areas.&nbsp;Participants shared that the course helped them feel more confident in presenting their work and better equipped to contribute to scholarly projects. One participant noted, “I feel much more equipped and less afraid to present in the future.” Another shared, “It helped me develop a concrete communications tool for sharing programmatic achievements and also lessons learned during a five-year program pilot phase.”&nbsp;&nbsp;These publications reflect the meaningful contributions staff are making to the scholarly landscape, transforming training into tangible research outputs.&nbsp;&nbsp;From Training to Publication&nbsp;The initiative has already led to a growing body of peer-reviewed publications authored or co-authored by staff. Below are just a few examples:&nbsp;<ol style="list-style-type:decimal;"><li>Sperling, J., Quenstedt, S., Leiro, A., Muhigaba, P. B., &amp; McClernon, F. J. (2024). Development of TRACER: A Translational Research Accomplishments Cataloguer for Clinical and Translational Science Award hub activity tracking, evaluation, and decision-making. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 8(1), e114.<a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.545" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.545</a>&nbsp;</li><li>Efird-Green, L., Marion, E., Willis, D., Gierisch, J. M., &amp; Corsino, L. (2024). Designing and implementing a community-engaged research e-library: A case study for adapting academic library information infrastructure to respond to stakeholder needs. College &amp; Research Libraries, 85(7), 994–1005. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.7.994" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.85.7.994</a>&nbsp;</li><li>Sperling, J., Quenstedt, S., Glauber, K., Muhigaba, P. B., Ghanem, E., Saxena, T., Rodriguez, V., Sanchez, C., &amp; McClernon, F. J. (2025). The Translational Science Promotion and Research Capacity (T-SPARC) framework: Developing institutional capacity for translational science. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.563" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.563</a>&nbsp;</li><li>Muhigaba, P. B., Sperling, J., Taylor, S., et al. A qualitative evaluation of the community engagement research support voucher program. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science. (in press).&nbsp;&nbsp;</li></ol>Looking Ahead&nbsp;Duke CTSI’s investment in staff development is more than a training program—it’s a cultural shift. By creating space for staff to grow as scholars, the institute is strengthening both individual careers and the broader translational research ecosystem. This is what capacity building looks like in action: collaborative, intentional, and impactful.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Duke Clinical and Translational Science Awards

Timeline titled Building Capacity in Scientific Writing at Duke CTSI

small_Duke Spotlight.png

thumbnail_Duke Spotlight.png

Duke Spotlight.png

Duke University

Hub Spotlight: Duke University CTSI

X-logo-teal_80x66.png

ri_linkedin_fill_408497d4b5_96748f4451.png

Goal #8: Foster the development of the emerging field of translational science

CCOS is pleased to continue our series of hub highlights, celebrating innovative contributions to clinical and translational science across the CTSA Program. Today, we spotlight the Boston University Clinical and Translational Science Institute, a leader in advancing translational research, fostering teamwork, and driving meaningful health impact through cutting-edge evaluation and improvement models.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.bu.edu/ctsi/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Boston University’s Clinical and Translational Science Institute (BU CTSI)</a> has been a driving force in transforming biomedical research into real-world health solutions since its inception in 2008. With a mission rooted in innovation and collaboration, BU CTSI has consistently pushed the boundaries of what academic research can achieve for patients, communities, and society at large. Over the years, the institute has secured more than $113 million in funding, catalyzing a wide range of initiatives from policy-shaping studies and patents to workforce development and clinical advancements. Recently, BU CTSI published its approach to evaluating and improving its impact: the Wisdom-Driven Evaluation and Continuous Quality Improvement (WE-CQI) model. This framework represents a significant evolution in how translational science is measured and enhanced, not just at BU but across the broader Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program network.&nbsp;&nbsp;At the heart of this transformation is the <a href="https://translationalsciencebenefits.wustl.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM)</a>, a framework developed by Washington University in St. Louis to address a longstanding challenge in clinical and translational research: how to systematically document and evaluate the broader health and societal impacts of scientific work. Traditionally, research evaluation focuses on outputs such as publications or grant funding. While important, these metrics often fail to capture the true benefits of research for patients, communities, and policy. The TSBM, created by leaders in translational science at Washington University in St. Louis and widely adopted across the CTSA program, provides a structured way to assess impact in four key domains: clinical and medical benefits, community and public health benefits, economic benefits, and policy and legislative benefits. This framework has given CTSA programs a common language for demonstrating how research is translated into the surrounding world.&nbsp;&nbsp;As the field of translational science has evolved, it became clear that simply measuring impact was not enough. CTSA programs, funded by the NIH, are also required to implement continuous quality improvement (CQI) processes to ensure that their activities are not only effective but are constantly evolving to meet new challenges. Traditional CQI models, such as the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, have proven valuable for process improvement but often fall short in the complex, team-based environments that characterize translational science. There was a clear need for a framework that could integrate CQI with impact evaluation in a way that was collaborative, adaptive, and meaningful.&nbsp;&nbsp;BU CTSI responded to this need by developing the WE-CQI model, which weaves together the strengths of the TSBM, established CQI methodologies, and the principles of team science. Unlike traditional CQI frameworks, the WE-CQI model explicitly incorporates team science principles, encouraging shared leadership and responsibility for evaluation and improvement. The model unfolds in three interconnected phases: collaborative planning, shared action, and team reflection and learning. This structure ensures that evaluation is not a one-time event but an ongoing, collective, and iterative process. Flexibility is a hallmark of the WE-CQI model, allowing teams to adapt their strategies as needs evolve and ensuring that improvements are directly linked to meaningful clinical, community, economic, and policy outcomes.&nbsp;&nbsp;One of the key innovations of the WE-CQI model is its emphasis on co-creation. All team members are invited to participate in developing evaluation strategies, sharing responsibility for implementing improvements, and engaging in regular reflection and learning to adapt and optimize outcomes. By aligning CQI activities with the TSBM, the model guarantees that the goal remains focused on maximizing real-world impact.&nbsp;&nbsp;To illustrate the practical application and effectiveness of the WE-CQI model, BU CTSI applied it to its Regenerative Medicine Training Program (RMTP). This initiative prepares scientists for careers in cutting-edge medical research and serves as a living laboratory for the new evaluation framework. The evaluation team employed a mixed-methods approach, combining interviews, document analysis, bibliometric and policy analysis, and surveys to assess the program’s impact from 2015 to 2023.&nbsp;&nbsp;The results of this case study were compelling. Clinically, 91% of RMTP graduates remain in regenerative medicine research, contributing to the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. In terms of community impact, graduates are actively translating research into science-based health education for public and community audiences. The program has also generated significant economic benefits, including new patents and industry partnerships that advance cost-effective treatments for organ failure and infectious diseases. On the policy front, RMTP activities have influenced formal quality assurance standards for various health study approaches and treatments.&nbsp;&nbsp;The WE-CQI model also made several improvements within the RMTP. For example, in response to trainee feedback regarding a lack of community, the program introduced annual luncheons and networking events, which improved peer connections and fostered a stronger sense of belonging. When trainees requested more formal feedback on professional development, the program implemented annual performance reviews and individualized career development plans, providing structured guidance and support for a variety of career pathways.&nbsp;&nbsp;These changes, guided by the WE-CQI model, were directly linked to improved outcomes and greater impact across all TSBM domains. The model’s emphasis on shared responsibility and continuous learning created an environment where meaningful improvements could be made and sustained.&nbsp;&nbsp;As public health challenges become increasingly complex, the need to accelerate the translation of research into practice has never been more urgent. CTSA programs are uniquely positioned to bridge this gap, but only if they can effectively evaluate and improve their work. The WE-CQI model offers a roadmap for making evaluation more collaborative, adaptive, and impactful. By sharing their approach and findings, BU CTSI is not only advancing its own mission but also providing a valuable resource for the entire CTSA community. The WE-CQI model stands as a testament to the power of team science, continuous improvement, and a focus on real-world impact.&nbsp;&nbsp;Check out the <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1581205/full" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">full publication</a> to learn more about BU CTSI's work on the WE-CQI model.

Boston University Clinical and Translational Science Institute

Cycle diagram titled Wisdom-driven Evaluation and Continuous Quality Improvement. It shows 3 phases: Collaborative Planning, Shared Action, and Team Reflection & Learning, linked by arrows with the center emphasizing improvement and impact.

CTSA CCOS

Home

About

CTSA Groups and Meetings

Resources

News

Help

CTSA News

Date

Share this News Post

Community Health Workers Graduate from University of Southern California-Children's Hospital Los Angeles Certification Program