 Okay, well good afternoon. So on behalf of the training team, I'd like to present and propose a reissue of an RFA to continue to support a data analysis and coordinating center for NHGRI's research training and career development programs. And first, I'd like to start with an overview of our current data analysis and coordinating center, or DAC. The DAC was funded in 2009 under a U01 cooperative agreement. The current P.I. is Dr. Treba Rice at Washington University. And the initial purpose of the DAC was to develop a database to track and analyze those students participating in NHGRI's diversity action plan, or DAP. And then during the course of the grant, students participating in institutional T32 training grants were later included. So the DAC has been collecting information for a little over five years now. And some of this information being brought to Council's attention in the past. And analysis of data in the last year led to some recommendations to modify the DAP program. So first, participation, there are three large grant classes that require to have a DAP program, the SEGs, the large scale sequencing centers, and the databases. And some of these programs were having difficulty in meeting their program goals. And so participation is now optional and yet strongly encouraged. And grantees of these programs would have to provide a strong justification for opting out of the program. And then second, the DAP program has supported seven career levels, high school students to faculty, but there is a decision to reduce down to supporting three career levels only, undergraduates, post-bacs, and graduate students, as this was viewed as a better focal point to attract underrepresented minorities into a genomics-related career. And then last, in keeping with the expanded training mission of NIH, we expanded the DAP goal beyond preparing students for just an academic genomics research career, but to produce PhDs and MD PhDs who can then go on to pursue a variety of genomics-related careers. And so details of these changes can be found in a notice that we published last summer. So the current DAP under Dr. Rice has been effectively meeting all objectives. And so the scope and objectives of the DAP include collecting and analyzing data about the career paths of individuals. The DAP has developed a database based on RedCap software, which allows grantees to enter data into the system. And if a different DAP were to be awarded under this RFA, then transfer of the data into the new DAP would be necessary. The DAP effectively works with grantees to provide up-to-date information into the database on a regular basis. They assist grantees to developing foreign consents as institutional IRB approval is necessary in order to, for data entry, along with this ensuring confidentiality of all information in the database. The DAP occasionally provides reports in order to evaluate individual and collective program successes and outcomes. And also the DAP provides scientific input to NHGRI staff in helping to refine definitions of successful outcomes and then adjusting any data collection parameters as necessary. So the reissued RFA will continue to have all of these scopes and objectives, but we would like to increase the responsibility of the DAP to include not only tracking of DAP and Genomic Sciences T32 trainees, but to track all trainees. So fellows and career development awardees as well as any future genomic medicine and LCT32 trainees. In addition, the annual program meeting, which was previously limited to grantees and training coordinators, has been restructured to include all trainees. And so we would like the DAP to take on primary responsibility of organizing this expanded annual program meeting. And this would include the development of a website to improve meeting communications. So to summarize, the changes reflected in the proposed RFA, this would continue to be an open competition cooperative agreement, but under the U24 mechanism instead, the U24 being for resource-related research projects. The 2008 RFA was published at up to 300K direct costs. And with the expanded scope, we'd like to increase this modestly to 325,000 direct costs per year for each of five years. And for the annual meeting, the DAP is just responsible for traveling themselves and consultants to the meeting, but we would like them to handle all logistical support. And then again, for tracking, we'd like to expand to include all trainees, and this would include folding in any future LCT32 trainees. And so the proposed timeline would be a July release of the RFA, mid-October receipt of applications. We would have an accelerated review, and then the applications would be brought to February Council with an anticipated award made in the spring of next year. And so I'd like to thank my training colleagues, Heather, Betty, and Bianca, and then also for the LCT for their input on the concept. So if I can now have discussion from Council, any questions? And if I may, can I ask Jim to lead us off? Sure. So I, this is an effort that I support. I think that we, you know, we spent almost $10 million on training during FY 2014. And we're talking about a price tag here. It's about 3% of that. And I think that figuring out what people do with this training, where they go, is unbelievable. It seems kind of silly to say that's important. It's really important to know what's being done because that's going to inform, presumably, better ways to use this information. I think that expanding who's tracked is important. And I like, as we discussed at the, I think it was the last Council meeting, right, or maybe the one before, that restructuring the annual meeting is important because I think that allowing the trainees to come does, it's kind of an added value in the sense of possibly helping those people make contacts, etc., using the infrastructure that is tracking. I think that, you know, one question I have, so I'm very much in support of it, is, it'd be good to see some detail as this is developed with regard to how to get those who are tracked really involved in the reporting, right, because I'm sure there's some laws to follow up, etc., so it'd be nice to have some carrots and sticks to ensure that the tracking is going to be successful. And then fleshing out how that will be used in the future, or asking, you know, applicants how to use this information then to learn from it and change and adjust training, etc., so those would be my specifics. Okay, thank you. Amy? So I'm also generally in support of this. I think it's an important thing to do. And it seems like from sort of the concept that was put out that the primary activities of this group is to track and sort of evaluate, have some sort of measures of are we doing a good job, it would be a good thing to know sort of how they were going to do that on what basis, what we're looking for. I think it would be really important to, this kind of goes to your carrots and sticks thing, but not only to get the trainees to contribute to the reporting, but potentially to be able to facilitate more sort of interaction and maybe networking among this cohort of people, because they're all sort of coming up in the field. And then are there ways to sort of, I know that there are certain databases that can actually sort of show interesting webs of connection of different topic areas that people are interested in or that they're working on, or somehow let them know about each other and what they're doing. I was curious, it seems like there's at least one component here about providing some support for these trainees or people who were trainees through helping them with informed consent documents that seemed like a pretty specific and kind of random thing. I'm not sure what, I mean it might be better to sort of provide them with the support that they need depending on what they're doing. I don't know if informed consent documents are the most obvious thing that would be supported. I like the idea of providing some sort of support and that might be your carrot to get them to stay engaged and involved. But again, just informed consent documents stood out as a little bit odd as the thing that you would pick to do that. The question that I had was, do you have any sense of sort of the numbers of past trainees or current trainees we're talking about? Is this like in the 10s, 100s, 1000s? I mean, what are we there's been about 1400 participants since 2002? Okay. And then the the DAC came online, you know, again, only in 2009. And so there was, you know, of the missing data, a lot of that was pre DAC. Excellent. And I just say my last thing is I'm extremely supportive of expanding this out to the other trainees in the other programs. I think that's a really great idea. And I'm very supportive. I guess I looked at it differently. I asked myself, what would it be like if you did not have this coordinate? And I think if you did not have it, it would make program evaluation almost impossible. You'd be comparing apples, oranges, the bananas, etc. Even if you gave them standardized forms, you'd get the data counted in a very different ways, almost each program, because they would be trying to put their best foot forward in their opinion. So having a coordinating center allows for program evaluation, which is really important in this area. Okay. Carol, a little bit more about the annual meeting. Just a little more details on what that meeting does, what it is and the changes that might be proposed here when you say all logistical support. So they would handle the travel of any consultants and also any of the individual fellows as well who are not on institutional grants. So is it a full day meeting? It'll be a day and a half. And so the first one in this new venue will be April 7 and 8 of next year in Bethesda. And there is support for the trainees to come? There will be. There'll be, you know, if the institutional or the T32s and the DAPPs do not have enough travel money in their budget, they'll be allowed to submit a supplement request to request additional funds. Yeah, I think going to the point of the networking, it's really, really critical for the trainees to be fully integrated in these things, because that's where the networking starts. I think the expansion to include the other trainees makes a whole lot of sense. A uniform way of tracking all of this trainee sort of activity seems really logical. Betty? Just just to add a little bit more about what we're planning to do with the annual meeting. So in the past, we had a meeting of just the training coordinators and the T32 program directors, and it was sort of tied to the SIGs annual meeting that presented lots of problems, which I won't go into. But the thought about this new meeting is that we will invite the trainees and some of the things we're thinking about are one, we'd like to invite some scientists who are forward looking to sort of give the trainees an idea of where the field is going. We are hoping that we can have the trainees do poster sessions and then maybe some of them to do platform presentations as a way of getting them involved and engaged in what you really do. We are also thinking about something with grantsmanship so that they will have a preview of the NIH infrastructure. What do we mean when we say there's what an application has good features, some of the issues around the review of applications. And this, we also would like for them to have the opportunity to network with the training program directors that are there. And what we have in mind when we think about the grants writing workshop is that we'll kind of have a general session and then break it down into maybe the case who would be getting ready to do their research grant applications and say the graduate students who are thinking about F31s or postdocs F32s so that it's sort of tailored to their interests and their needs. It also seems like a great opportunity to engage them on the LC type questions as a community as well. Any other questions? Okay, can I get a motion to approve the concept? Second? All in favor? Any opposed? Any abstentions? Thank you. Thank you, Tina. All right, we're going to recaffeinate you. So before the cafeteria upstairs closes, let's get back at 320. It gives you 15 minutes, please. Thank you.