Common Bottlenecks in Research Reporting

Jeremy Shapiro
Product Manager, Forte
June 20th, 2018

In discussions with cancer center research administrators, we frequently hear complaints about the same two bottlenecks encountered when creating internal and external reports that demonstrate research outcomes and initiatives: accurate attribution of investigators to publications, and assigning grants to appropriate cancer relevance. In many cases, the process for uncovering these two reports can come to a grinding halt if key staff members are busy or unavailable. Because these employees play vital roles in the organization and often have sizable workloads, relying on them as the single source for this information can cause significant delays or gaps in your reporting.

Challenge #1 — Investigators and Publications:

Investigators are in the best position to know what they’ve published. Oftentimes, they are also the only people who know which funds and shared resources contributed to their work. Publications are vital output research administrators use to demonstrate return on investment to federal sponsors and internal leadership, but investigators are only indirectly involved in those reporting processes. Because their time is spent prioritizing research, getting them to efficiently respond to requests for information can be a challenge.

Challenge #2 — Leadership and Reviewing Grants:

Research administrators face a similar challenge when leadership are tasked with reviewing grants. Showcasing cancer relevance in an organization’s research portfolio is essential to obtaining NCI funding. Some grants may be obviously related to cancer research and to specific research programs, and others are clearly not cancer-relevant. However, when the remainder aren’t so obvious, someone is responsible for reviewing that data and determining cancer relevance based on what’s justifiable in the eyes of the NCI. That task typically falls to center leadership, whose time is incredibly constrained.

Based on the cancer center administrator discussions mentioned above,  we have developed a solution to address these challenges. Our Forte Research Evaluation System (EVAL) helps you easily track investigators, grants, pilots and publications, to name a few. The system serves as a dynamic repository that lets your staff track research outcomes and the staff, funding and resources that influenced those outcomes. EVAL also streamlines the process for determining cancer relevance and allows you to reach out to your investigators efficiently to ensure quick and accurate publication review.

Learn more about how the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center uses EVAL to demonstrate research ROI and streamline reporting

Clinical Research Technologies Efficient Clinical Trials

No Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *