OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Community Engagement Advisory Boards (CEAB) serve as a vital resource for engaging and partnering with communities in research. The purpose of this project is to describe the perspectives of members of a long-standing CEAB in providing input and promoting research that aligns with the needs, experiences, and concerns of the communities they represent METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Three 90-minute focus groups were conducted with a subset of a CEAB(n=17)(M years spent with CEAB =7.3) affiliated with the Center for Clinical and Translational Science at the University of Illinois-Chicago. Members areas of expertise include perspectives from faith-based organizations, community organizing, public health and working with diverse populations. Transcribed audio recordings of the focus groups were coded using thematic analysis wherein two authors coded independently, followed by audited discussion and final consensus codes. Main themes were identified after reviewing final codes. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: CEAB members described the bi-directional nature of their role serving as a conduit between research institutions and their communities, identified strategies to promote research literacy in communities, called for researchers to take a proactive approach in forming and sustaining community partnerships, and helped identify opportunities to promote community engagement in more creative and feasible ways. Additionally, CEAB members identified perceived opportunities for the board as a whole to be more involved in Chicago communities to further their role as a liaison between the university and the community. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These findings may have implications for investigators to better address community priorities in research by understanding unique local realities as well as help other CTSA hubs’ to leverage their communities’ expertise.

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: CTSIs around the country rely on Community Engagement Advisory Boards (CEABs) to bridge research and communities. The history of this 22-year-old board offers insight on 1) how it was created and has been sustained over time 2) its evolution, and 3) members’views of their contributions to translational research at UIC. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: As founding members began to step down from this long-standing board, we started to document its history and members’ narratives and perspectives of the work conducted at UIC since its inception. Using an Oral History methodology, we conducted three virtual focus groups with 13 short and long-term members (n=6, n=4, n=3) to learn about changes within CEAB and in members’ roles, and individual semi-structured interviews with three long-standing members to expand on the origin and evolution of CEAB. Focus group data was coded and analyzed. We also extracted data on key events from archived files including grant proposals and CEAB meeting notes. A steering committee of three CEAB members helped guide this process. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The CEAB was founded at the UIC College of Nursing in 2001 under the Center for Research on Cardiovascular Respiratory Health, with a grant from the National Institutes of Nursing Research (NINR). It was established as college-wide advisory board of community experts to help engage underserved communities and to contribute to research beyond recruitment and retention. In 2009, upon receipt of a Clinical Translational Science award that established the Center for Clinical Translational Science (CCTS), the CEAB became a campus-wide board. Over 30 community organizations and many non-affiliated community members have contributed to translational research at UIC throughout the board’s history. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Over twenty years later, the CEAB continues to help bridge researchers and communities, and to raise awareness about community needs, the importance of cultural relevance, and the inclusion of underserved communities in research. Long-term members have played a key role in providing continuity over the years.

The National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) has defined translation as the process of turning observations into interventions that are adopted, sustained, and improve health. Translation must attend to research and community systems and context at multiple levels, and to key stakeholders. Dissemination and implementation (D&I) sciences are informed by an understanding of the critical role of people and systems in disseminating, adopting, and sustaining innovations within real-world settings. Thus, the D&I sciences provides a set of principles that can guide the translational work of Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) programs from basic research to public health. In this special communication, our cross-domain working group of the CTSA consortium, comprised of experts in methods and processes, workforce development, evaluation, stakeholder engagement, and D&I sciences, share a vision of how CTSAs can enhance translation across the translational spectrum through the integration of D&I sciences into the critical areas of methods and processes, workforce development, and evaluation. We propose a set of recommendations for NCATS national and local leaders that are intended to move D&I sciences out of a position of unfamiliarity and ancillary value and into the core identity of who CTSAs are, how they think, and what they do, to advance translation and health.

A primary barrier to translation of clinical research discoveries into care delivery and population health is the lack of sustainable infrastructure bringing researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and communities together to reduce silos in knowledge and action. As National Institutes of Healthʼs (NIH) mechanism to advance translational research, Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) awardees are uniquely positioned to bridge this gap. Delivering on this promise requires sustained collaboration and alignment between research institutions and public health and healthcare programs and services. We describe the collaboration of seven CTSA hubs with city, county, and state healthcare and public health organizations striving to realize this vision together. Partnership representatives convened monthly to identify key components, common and unique themes, and barriers in academic–public collaborations. All partnerships aligned the activities of the CTSA programs with the needs of the city/county/state partners, by sharing resources, responding to real-time policy questions and training needs, promoting best practices, and advancing community-engaged research, and dissemination and implementation science to narrow the knowledge-to-practice gap. Barriers included competing priorities, differing timelines, bureaucratic hurdles, and unstable funding. Academic–public health/health system partnerships represent a unique and underutilized model with potential to enhance community and population health.

1. Iron deficiency was induced in albino rats by a milk-powder diet. Control groups were given milk powder plus an iron source.

2. The haemoglobin content of the blood was determined once each month. When the haemoglobin level fell to 10 g/100 ml or less in the deficient animals, determinations were made of the vitamin C content of 24 h urine as well as of liver, kidney, adrenals, brain and blood. Additional studies were made of in vitro synthesis of the vitamin by liver homogenate.

3. The urine and tissues of the deficient animals were found to have a higher concentration of the vitamin than those of the control animals. The difference in enzyme synthesis was in the same direction, but was not statistically significant.

4. The results are interpreted as suggesting an increased requirement, by rats, of the vitamin in iron deficiency; this increased requirement is met by increased synthesis.