This version may be subject to change during the production process.

IntroductionUMHealthResearch is the University of Michigan’s digital health research recruitment platform. It allows health researchers to connect efficiently with potentially eligible volunteers.MethodsIn 2013, the UMHealthResearch team strategically adapted a consumer behavior model, the buying funnel, to create the Digital Health Research Participation Funnel. The Digital Health Research Participation Funnel was then used to design a more active way for potential participants to volunteer for research studies through UMHealthResearch.ResultsIn the 5 years before the redesign (2007–2012), an average of 1844 new accounts were created every year, whereas in the completed years after the redesign (2013–2016) the annual average improved to 3906, an increase of 111%.ConclusionAlthough a randomized design was not possible in this instance, these preintervention and postintervention data suggest that the focus on user experience is an effective strategy for improving web-based research recruitment platforms.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe how the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR), a Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan, is adopting human-centered design (HCD) to advance the science of community engagement in translational research and CE’s programmatic efforts. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The MICHR CE Program supports academic-community partnerships to transform translational research across the state of Michigan. As the team aims to better engage partners to help guide the direction of their work, CE is collaborating with MICHR’s Design and Innovation Core to incorporate human-centered design (HCD). HCD is an approach that prioritizes the needs, values, and perspectives of direct users during the creation of a new product or service. The MICHR team created interactive HCD activities for two statewide retreats to elicit feedback from community and academic members on ways to enhance community-engaged research (CEnR). Retreat participants worked on a variety of problems, such as barriers to partnering and defining impact for CEnR. These activities generated authentic, contextual, and multi-view data captured in various artifacts for systematic analysis. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In the first retreat, a HCD activity had participants reflect on their own barriers to partnering in research and potential solutions. In the second retreat, an HCD activity facilitated participants interviewing each other on their views of the impact in CEnR. Results from the first activity identified a set of common barriers to CEnR, some related to partnership formation, communication, and partner equity, among others. These led the CE Program to specific programmatic efforts, such as designing a statewide partnership platform, hiring a communication program manager, and sponsoring community partners to join national conferences. The second retreat activity produced rich data to identify overlaps between different perspectives to inform how impact can be defined and measured in CEnR. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: HCD activities provide means to include community and academic members in the science of CEnR. They allow systematic ways to gather information directly from the diverse set of current or prospective partners of community engagement programs about their needs, experiences, and values, which can be translated to programmatic innovation.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Explore perceptions of Flint stakeholders on the water crisis regarding trust and the capacity of faith and community-based organizations providing public health services to address community needs. Analyze the community’s voice shared at (1) 17 key community communications (community/congressional meetings and events), and (2) during 9 focus group sessions, in which residents, faith-based leadership and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address them. Develop a framework that defines core theories, concepts and strategies recommended by the community to help rebuild trust and the quality of life in Flint, Michigan, and support other communities experiencing environmental stress. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Study population: faith-based leaders, seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino and African American stakeholders, and others experiencing inequities in the city of Flint. Convene 9 focus group sessions (recorded and transcribed) to learn community perceptions on trust and ways to address it. Validate accuracy of the transcriptions with community consultants to reconcile any inaccurate information. Through a community engaged research (CEnR) process, review and analyze qualitative data from the 9 focus group sessions, and quantitative data from 2 surveys documenting (1) demographic backgrounds of focus group participants, and (2) their perceptions on trust and mistrust. Prepare a codebook to qualitatively analyze the focus group data summarizing community input on trust, mistrust, changes in service delivery among community and faith-based organizations, and ways to re-build trust in the city of Flint. Transcribe the community’s voice shared during 17 key events, identified by a team of community-academic stakeholders (i.e., UM Flint water course, congressional and community events, etc.), in which residents and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address it. Qualitatively analyze the transcriptions, using a CEnR process to prepare a codebook on key themes from the community’s voice shared at these events, and recommendations on ways to address it. Compare and contrast findings between the two codebooks developed from (1) the focus group data and (2) qualitative analysis of community voice during public meetings and events. Synthesize this information into a framework of core theories, concepts and rebuilding strategies for Flint, Michigan. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: It is important to note many undocumented immigrant populations in Flint fear deportation and other consequences, hampering their ability to obtain service and provide community voice. Through our purposive sampling approach, we will hear from community voices not often included in narratives (i.e., seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino residents). The presentation will present findings documenting levels of trust and mistrust in the city of Flint; and a framework of recommendations, core theories and concepts on ways ...

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: One of the most significant challenges to community engagement experienced by Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions is inadequate capacity of academic and community partners to engage in collaborative research. Several CTSAs within the consortium provide consultation services to help address this gap. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: For over 10 years, the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), a CTSA at the University of Michigan, has provided CEnR-specific consultations to partners seeking support for a variety of needs. Consultations can be requested for assistance with identifying potential partners, developing partnership infrastructure, finding CEnR funding opportunities, and incorporating CEnR approaches into research plans. When a consultation is requested, MICHR’s Community Engagement (CE) Program responds by planning a meeting with staff and faculty who have relevant skills, expertise, and connections. After the initial meeting, the CE Program provides follow-up communication and support based on the needs of the specific request, and often facilitates connections with potential partners. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The two most frequent types of consultation requests involve 1) making connections with potential researchers or community partner organizations, and 2) providing guidance on research grant applications that involve community engagement. MICHR provides approximately 50 CEnR consultations each year, which have resulted in development of new partnerships, grant submissions, and research projects that utilize CEnR principles and address community-identified health priorities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This presentation will describe the evolution of MICHR’s CEnR consultation process and highlight successful outcomes and lessons learned over its 12-year history. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: NA