Colorectal Cancer Control Program Workgroup Emory University Cochair

Colorectal Cancer Control Program Workgroup Emory University – Co-chair Harvard University of CA Los Angeles – Co-chair University of CO University of NC University of SC University of Texas Houston University of WA – Chair Washington University at St. Louis

CRCCP Workgroup Goals Study EBI adoption, implementation, maintenance Implement Annual Grantee Survey 2011 -2014 Develop additional studies Collaborate with CDC evaluation team

Annual Grantee Survey Goals 1. Understand how grantees are implementing CDC’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) 2. Establish a baseline to assess how implementation changes each year 3. Collect information related to technical assistance and training needs

Collaboration with CDC Evaluation Team Develop Annual Grantee Survey & additional studies Data collection, analysis, and interpretation Integrate survey findings with other evaluation activities Feedback to grantees (highlights report, webinars) Broader dissemination

What We Did 2011 -2014: annual grantee survey (2014 TBD, OMB) 2012: surveyed 24 of 33 unfunded states and tribes. 2013 -2014: conducted interviews with 14 grantees to deepen understanding of EBI implementation efforts 2014 -2015: collaborating with CDC on other components of CRCCP evaluation

What We Accomplished, So Far 3 peer-reviewed publications, 1 under review 4 scientific meetings (5 presentations/posters) Shared findings with grantees in their annual grantee highlights report (prepared by CDC) Prepared brief for Dr. Kathi Wilson as part of a CPCRN Report that could be shared with Congress to demonstrate research and practice activities related to the Community Guide

How We Worked Together Organization and leadership Chair + 2 Co-chairs, research staff Participation 9 centers, varying roles and levels Contributions Lots of survey development/drafts, especially at first Tried to have funded participants doing most “grunt” work Productivity Proposed papers shared with group; authors based on interest

What Worked What worked well… Opportunity to develop strong collaboration with CDC CRCCP staff Activities still generating publication opportunities Co-chairs enjoyed working together What could have worked better… Late development of publication expectations Project activities still ongoing, how does transition in CPCRN member centers fit in?

Lessons Learned Be open to new opportunities/shifts in workplan Build strong relationships with co-chairs Plan for IRB: multicenter issues and CDC sign-off Agree on publication expectations early on What “counts” for authorship Number of authors per center Think carefully about staffing needs for subprojects

Thank you! Discussion