Report of the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Workgroup on

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Research Training and Health Disparities Research

II

NationalInstitute

of MentalHealth

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE NATIONALINSTITUTES OF HEALTH

An Investment in Americaís Future

Racial /Ethnic Diversity in

Mental Health Research Careers
The National Advisory Mental Health Council Workgroup on Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Research Training and

Health Disparities Research conducted these deliberations and prepared this report.

Recommended Citation:

The National Advisory Mental Health Council Workgroup on Racial/Ethnic Diversity in

Research Training and Health Disparities Research, “An Investment in America’s Future:

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Mental Health Research Careers.”

Washington, D.C.: 2001.

Single copies of this report are available through:

The National Institute of Mental Health

Office of Communications and Public Liaison

6001 Executive Boulevard, Room8184

Rockville, MD 20892-9663

Telephone: 301-443-4513

and are available online at www.nimh.nih.gov/council/diversity/pdf
Report of the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Workgroup on

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Research Training and Health Disparities Research

II

National Institute

of Mental Health

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

An Investment in America’s Future

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in

Mental Health Research Careers

Contents

Preface ..................................................................................................................................................... i

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 1

Chapter I. Prologue ............................................................................................................................ 9

Workgroup Charges and Focus Areas ................................................................................. 11

Strategic Plan for Reducing Health Disparities .................................................................. 11

Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................. 12

Workgroup Composition .................................................................................................... 12

Workgroup Procedures and Process ................................................................................... 12

Report Organization .......................................................................................................... 13

Acknowledgment .............................................................................................................. 13

Chapter II. The Importance of Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Mental Research and

Research Training Programs .............................................................................................. 15

The Importance of a Diversified Racial/Ethnic Mental Health

Research Community ......................................................................................................... 15

Ethnic Minorities and Disparities in Mental Health ............................................................ 18

Expanding the Scientific Knowledge Base by Increasing

Racial/Ethnic Minority Participation in Research Protocols ................................................ 19

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 20

Chapter III. The Educational Context of Racial/Ethnic Minorities .......................................................... 21

Faculty .............................................................................................................................. 21

Students at Graduate/Professional Schools and Colleges/Universities ................................. 22

High School and Earlier ..................................................................................................... 25

Barriers to Positive Educational Outcomes: Qualitative Data ............................................. 25

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 25

Chapter IV. Progress in NIMH Support of Racial/Ethnic Minority Researchers and Trainees ................. 27

NIMH Investigator-Initiated Applications and Awards by Race/Ethnicity ........................... 27

Research Training and Career Development Funding Mechanisms ..................................... 30

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 38
Chapter V. Mentoring and Model Programs ......................................................................................... 39

Mentoring and Tracking .................................................................................................... 39

Model Programs ................................................................................................................. 40

Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 40

Chapter V. Action Plan ........................................................................................................................ 43

Recommendation No. 1 ..................................................................................................... 43

Recommendation No. 2 ................................................................................................... 44

Recommendation No. 3 ..................................................................................................... 45

Recommendation No. 4 ..................................................................................................... 46

Recommendation No. 5 ..................................................................................................... 46

Recommendation No. 6 ..................................................................................................... 47

Concluding Comment ........................................................................................................ 47

References and Further Reading ............................................................................................................... 49

Appendices Appendix A. 1999 National Advisory Mental Health Council ............................................. 53

Appendix B. National Advisory Mental Health Council Workgroup .................................... 55

Appendix C. National Advisory Mental Health Council ....................................................... 58

Appendix D. October 1999 NIMH Workshop ...................................................................... 60

Appendix E. Special Consultants ........................................................................................ 64

Appendix F. Research Training and Development Timetable (Funding Mechanisms) .......... 65

Appendix G. Native American Colleges ............................................................................... 66

Appendix H. America’s Predominantly African-American Colleges and Universities ........... 68

Appendix I. Hispanic-Serving Colleges and Universities ..................................................... 73

Figure, Table, and Box References ..................................................................................... 78
v

Preface

Eliminating disparities in mental health treatment outcomes among various population groups and

training a scientific workforce for research on mental disorders that reflects the full racial and ethnic

diversity of the Nation are separate but related challenges, and the National Institute of Mental Health

(NIMH) is committed to addressing each. This report on Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Mental Health

Research Careers, prepared by the National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Workgroup on

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Research Training and Health Disparities Research will be a useful tool toward

both of these ends.

The NIMH has a long history of supporting minority research training. In light of this history, two

particularly significant contributions of this report are found in its analysis of where we have invested

training funds over the past several years and in the glimpse it affords us of the yield of this investment

in the form of active minority researchers. As enlightening as they are, the available data make it clear

that we must find more effective strategies for following the progress of our trainees if we are to monitor

trends in the increasing diversity of mental health researchers. The data also make clear the need to

develop new strategies for overcoming the barriers that impede career progress of minorities at various,

identifiable points along the career continuum. Removing these barriers will require the collective effort

of many agencies, organizations, and the private sector, all of which stand to gain from having wellprepared minority citizens as members of research, research education, and health practice teams,

working in the best interest of all Americans.

We thank the Council and its Workgroup for developing this report. NIMH will review it carefully and

will make every effort to respond productively to the recommendations. 

Steven E. Hyman, M.D.

Director, NIMH

1

Executive Summary

Mental disorders adversely affect individuals,

family systems, our national infrastructure, and

the global economy. In the United States, mental

disorders account for more than 15% of the

burden of disease from all causes (Murray &

Lopez, 1996), and their respective direct costs and

indirect costs are estimated to be $69.0 billion

(Mark et al., 1998) and $78.6 billion (Rice &

Miller, 1996). These data (as noted in USDHHS

Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General,

1999) indicate the social effects of mental

disorders and reflect their staggering economic

impact on our Nation in its entirety. There exist,

however, a paucity of empirical data that describe

the impact and effects of mental disorders on our

Nation’s racial/ethnic minority groups, defined in

this report as African Americans, American

Indians/Alaska Natives, Asian/Pacific Islanders,

and Hispanics. Members of these groups remain

underrepresented or unreported in most studies of

mental illness, although they are overrepresented

among the conditions thought to generate

susceptibility to, or prolong the effects of, mental

illness, such as poverty, racism, homelessness,

incarceration, substance abuse, and poor access to

health care. Thus the burden of mental illness

falls disproportionately on minority groups. The

Workgroup believes that an important component

in reducing that burden will be to bring a diverse

population of research investigators to the task.

Women and other groups, including persons with

disabilities, are underrepresented among

researchers receiving independent investigator

support from the NIMH, and targeted efforts are

needed to increase their numbers. This report,

however, focuses on only one aspect of diversity,

race/ethnicity.

Since its creation in 1946, the National Institute

of Mental Health (NIMH) has introduced a variety

of innovative funding mechanisms designed to

facilitate career development for mental health

researchers in general, and racial/ethnic minority

investigators, specifically. Today, NIMH remains a

leader at the National Institutes of Health in

providing funds for research training and research

for racial/ethnic minority scientists. Despite the

Institute’s efforts, however, the number of

racial/ethnic minority investigators in mental

health related fields is considered insufficient to

meet current or projected demands.

In 1999, the National Institute of Mental Health

(NIMH) Director, Steven E. Hyman, M.D., called

for an assessment of the Institute’s progress in

developing racial/ethnic minority investigators. He

initially asked staff to convene a workshop that

would include interested members of the National

Advisory Mental Health Council (NAMHC), junior

and senior minority investigators, consultants

with expertise in diversity training, NIMH-funded

training program directors, NIMH training

program administrators, and others concerned

with these issues. Upon issuance of a staff report

on the workshop findings, the NAMHC established

a Council Workgroup to continue the assessment.

This group, whose membership mirrored the

workshop participants, identified eight focus areas

for follow-up study. The foci were clustered into

three general domains: (a) the educational context

of the racial/ethnic minorities who constitute the
2

trainee, faculty, mentor, and investigator

“pipeline” in the United States; (b) the progress

and status of racial/ethnic minority trainees and

investigators supported by the NIMH; and (c)

recommended actions the NIMH can take to

improve racial/ethnic minority representation

among trainees and investigators. 

The Workgroup analyzed qualitative and

quantitative data relevant to each of these

domains. To interpret the quantitative data, the

Workgroup used several reference points. In all

cases, the representation of minorities among

NIMH support mechanisms was compared to their

representation within the Nation’s population.

Given that racial/ethnic minorities are frequently

underrepresented within latter stages of the

educational pipeline, it is important to apply a

second reference point, specifically the ethnic

group’s representation in the pool from which the

next career stage draws. The former represents an

aspirational goal, whereas the latter reflects the

available pool from which institutions currently

draw to promote minority representation. 

The Workgroup met periodically to review

findings, consult with subject matter experts, and

generate recommendations. 

Rationale for Increasing Diversity

The Workgroup developed a three-pronged

rationale for increasing the number of racial/ethnic

minority scientists. Because these rationales are

interrelated, the order of presentation is not meant

to suggest their relative merit. 

The first rationale derives from information and

recommendations developed by the National

Research Council (NRC Report, 2000), which

recently recommended that there be no aggregate

increase, in the United States, of Ph.D.’s in basic

biomedical research, behavioral and social science

research, or other fields traditionally associated

with clinical research, in light of projections that

the current inventory of scientists is sufficient to

meet demands until the year 2005. At the same

time, however, the NRC recommended that NIH 

a) increase efforts to identify and support

programs that encourage and prepare

“underrepresented” minorities for careers in basic

biomedical research (p. 30); b) continue efforts to

identify and support programs that prepare and

encourage underrepresented minorities for careers

in behavioral and social science research (p. 41);

c) intensify efforts to train and retain physicians

in clinical research (p. 52); and d) increase efforts

to identify, support, encourage, and prepare

underrepresented minorities for careers in clinical

research (p. 52). The Workgroup also took note of

a National Science and Technology Council report

(NSTC, 2000) that projects a shortfall in the

scientific workforce by the year 2050 if corrective

actions—including an increase in the Nation’s

supply of racial/ethnic minority scientists—are

not implemented. 

The second rationale for this report is grounded in

a consensus that more racial/ethnic minority

mental health researchers are needed to address

the disparities in access to and quality of health

care experienced by the majority as well as

minority populations in the United States. 

The third rationale for an increase, closely related

to the second, reflects the need to enrich the

scientific knowledge base through increased

participation, in every research arena, of both

racial/ethnic minority investigators and research

participants. The presence of more minority group

investigators would encourage more racial/ethnic

minority individuals to participate in research.

Moreover, both empirical and anecdotal evidence

reveals that racial/ethnic minority investigators

often have a particular commitment to research

designed to address health care disparities. 
3

Major Findings 

Racial/ethnic minority groups are

underrepresented among the mental health

research workforce. Although the efforts of NIMH

(particularly in comparison to those of other

National Institutes of Health [NIH] components)

to increase their representation are noteworthy,

the limited data that are available indicate that

progress has been and remains slow. Precise

information about the effectiveness or

shortcomings of initiatives designed to increase

diversity in the mental health research career field

is lacking for several reasons, including a) several

key initiatives have not been in effect long enough

to allow for a full transition from the level of

research trainee to that of independent

investigator/grantee; and b) an effective trainee

tracking system is not in place to determine

outcomes.

The Educational Context 

Relative to their representation in the U.S. census,

American Indians, African Americans and

Hispanics are underrepresented among faculty

and graduate/professional students. In contrast,

the number of Asian/Pacific Islander faculty and

post-baccalaureate students is proportionally

greater than in the population at large. At the

four-year college level, American Indians, African

Americans, and Hispanics are still

underrepresented, albeit to a lesser extent than in

the post-graduate environment. Only among

community college students is

underrepresentation either eliminated or nearly

eliminated for these three groups. Analyses of

high school data reveal that the greatest attrition

in the educational development of racial/ethnic

minorities occurs prior to high school graduation.

According to 1999 census data, nearly half of

Latino adults, a third of American Indian adults,

and a quarter of African American adults did not

complete high school. The exception, again, were

Asian/Pacific Islanders, whose graduation rate

(85%) exceeded the national average. 

Available evidence indicates that the career path

for racial/ethnic minority mental health

researchers, particularly American Indians,

African Americans, and Hispanics, has numerous

points of attrition that extend from high school

through post-doctoral training and into careers in

academia/research. 

The increase in numbers of American Indians,

African Americans, and Hispanics enrolled in

community colleges, which now approximates the

proportion of these groups in the Nation’s

population, is encouraging. This trend suggests

that, with proper encouragement and support,

programs that remove impediments to higher

levels of education can help improve graduation

rates and lead, in turn, to a larger pool of

potential investigators.

Progress at NIMH

At present the representation of minority group

members among NIH/NIMH-funded researchers

and trainees parallels minority representation

within U.S. educational institutions. Few minority

investigators submitted research applications in

1999 and even fewer were funded. American

Indians, African Americans, and Hispanics, who

account collectively for some 24% of the U.S.

population, submitted only 5.2% of all

applications to NIMH that year and, ultimately,

accounted for only 3.9% of funded applicants.

Asian/Pacific Islanders again are an exception;

they made up 3.7% of the 1999 U.S. population

and 5.5% of NIMH grant recipients in the same

year. When compared to an estimate of the

potential pool of applicants, that is, minority

representation among faculty members (8.4% for
4

American Indians, African Americans, and Latinos

combined, and 5.8% for Asian/Pacific Islanders),

under-representation of minority grant

applications is still apparent, though

significantly reduced.

Overall, the general pattern of racial/ethnic

minority representation among submitted and

funded applications observed at NIMH holds true

across all the NIH Institutes and Centers. This is a

disappointing outcome given that NIMH

investments in minority training historically have

been and remain considerably higher than the

NIH average. 

Two key institutional grant programs (T32s) are

the Underrepresented Minority Fellowship

Programs (UMFPs) (National Research Service

Award [Institutional NRSA]) and University-Based

Programs (UBPs). Although there are fewer UMFPs

(N = 6) than UBPs (N = 197), the UMFPs

contribute disproportionately to the training of

future minority investigators, especially African

Americans. African Americans and Hispanics are

not fully represented in UBPs according to their

numbers in the U.S. census. 

In 1998, American Indians, African Americans,

and Hispanics made up 24% of the population and

together accounted for 16.9% of NIMH-funded

trainees in all T32 training programs. Given that

these three groups generated only 13.6% of

baccalaureate recipients in 1997—an estimate of

the available pool—NIMH appears to be

supporting a substantial number of racial/ethnic

minorities on the T32 training programs.

Outcomes for Asian/Pacific Islander trainees were

much better than the outcomes for the other

racial/ethnic groups. The proportion of

Asian/Pacific Islanders among NIMH trainees

(7.5%) exceeds both their representation within

the U.S. population (3.6%) and among

baccalaureate recipients (5.7%). It is encouraging

to note that in all cases the proportion of funded

racial/ethnic minority trainees exceed the groups’

proportion of baccalaureate recipients. However,

minority groups’ representation in training

programs continues to fall short of most minority

groups’ national representation.

In addition to the two key institutional grant

programs (T32s), NIMH supports a variety of

individual training mechanisms designed to play

a key role in the career advancement of

racial/ethnic minorities. These include the

Mentored Scientist Development Award for New

Minority Faculty (K01), Minority Supplements,

Individual Minority Fellowship Awards (F31), and

Minority Dissertation Awards (R03), as well as

generic career development awards (K01, K08,

K23, etc.) that are available to individuals of any

racial/ethnic group. 

Available data indicate that the Minority

Supplement is used quite effectively. In 1998 and

1999, NIMH allocated a greater percentage of its

minority research training expenditures to

Minority Supplements than did any other NIH

component. Although the time frame of this

evaluation (1997-2000) is limited, early outcomes

for recipients of the Supplements strongly suggest

their promise as a tool for developing independent

investigators. Longer-term follow-up of awardees

is critically important to determine postsupplement career activity. 

The principal finding regarding other individual

training and research development awards,

particularly the minority-focused mechanisms, is

that they attract few applicants. The extent to

which racial/ethnic minority investigators and

trainees apply for and receive the generic career

development awards is not clear.
5

Conclusion

Training racial/ethnic minority mental health

scientists is critical to the quality of the Nation’s

health care as well as to our broader national

economic welfare. The current and projected

numbers of racial/ethnic minority investigators

and faculty are insufficient to fill future shortfalls

in the Nation’s science and science education

workforce. The dual needs to address health

disparities among racial/ethnic minorities and to

make the human participant base much more

diverse underscores the importance of strategies

for dramatically increasing the numbers of

underrepresented racial/ethnic minority scientists.

Moreover, increasing diversity in the active

training pool will have a sensitizing impact on the

training environment, resulting in a better trained

and appropriately sensitive mental health

workforce to serve all of the Nation’s citizens

more effectively.

The attrition of racial/ethnic minorities at various

points along the progression from student to

faculty and from NIMH-supported trainee to

NIMH-funded investigator must be addressed.

Current efforts within higher education and at

NIH/NIMH are not meeting the Nation’s needs for

a racially and ethnically diverse pool of

researchers overall, and of mental health

researchers in particular. This is true even though

NIMH has committed a relatively larger proportion

of its available dollars toward training and career

development than has its sister Institutes. 

Multiple initiatives clearly remain necessary to

enlarge the pool of racial/ethnic minority

investigators. That said, the Workgroup attaches

particularly high priority to its recommendations

for 1) systemic improvements in methods for

tracking the academic and career paths of trainees

so that training programs can be optimized for

successful outcomes and so that career assistance

can be focused at critical transition periods, and 

2) encouraging and strengthening the roles of

research career mentors. The Workgroup views

decisive action in these areas as essential

cornerstones to all of the recommendations

presented in this report. 

Recommendations

The NAMHC Workgroup for Initiatives on

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Training and Health

Disparities Research urges NIMH to continue its

leadership and commitment to training for

diversity. Common to all of the recommendations

that follow is the Workgroup’s perception of the

need for a fundamental reorientation of NIMH

racial/ethnic minority research training priorities

that would result in the successful incorporation

of diversity training into the fabric of America’s

mental health research agenda. 

The Workgroup applauds Congress and the NIH

for the emphasis now assigned to reducing and

ultimately eliminating health disparities. This

report is timely in that it links training and career

development to the need for researchers who will

address these issues. The NIMH must combat

what 1999 workshop participants and some

members of the Workgroup perceive as a tendency

on the part of the larger scientific community to

devalue research addressing the ethnic and

cultural health issues that are important to

reducing health disparities.

The reorientation must recognize the fact that the

information revolution has raised questions about

the belief that meritorious research can only be

performed at category I and II research

universities (i.e., those institutions which award

50 or more doctoral degrees annually and receive

at least $40 million and $15.5 million in annual

Federal research support, respectively), with

mentoring and trainee infrastructure onsite. 
6

The Workgroup believes that given persistent

constraints on resources and the urgent need to

increase the number of racial/ethnic minority

researchers, the Institute must place special

emphasis on research training support at the

doctoral and post-doctoral levels. 

The multiple challenges of enhancing ethnic

minority mental health research training require

that a redirection of the NIMH program be

visionary and robust; to have a significant impact

on the quantity of racial/ethnic minority

researchers, it must be operationalized by

scientists in the laboratory, through the tenure

track system in academia, to the career patterns of

service center professionals. 

A successful reorientation will enhance the

Institute’s ability to recruit, sustain, advance, and

retain racial/ethnic minority mental health

researchers at the independent investigator level.

Finally, successful approaches to racial/ethnic

minority research training would encompass

mechanisms required to study causal factors in

health disparities, and would inculcate the

fundamental concept that racial/ethnic diversity in

the learning environment is a pedagogical factor

that enriches the quality of the learning

experience for every person in the educational

environment.

The Workgroup believes that systemic

improvements in two key areas—tracking training

outcomes and strengthening mentorship

capacities—are critical if NIMH is to rectify the

paucity of racial/ethnic minority investigators.

Recommendations regarding these needs are

cornerstones of the Action Plan. 

Recommendation No. 1

Create a tracking system to monitor the

career progression of NIMH-supported

trainees through the investigator level so

that training can be optimized based on

outcomes. 

Though the analysis of the training data in this

report reflects a positive academic progression for

the majority of the trainees, further analysis of the

talent pool is not possible due to the absence of

standardized information about trainee

performance and post-graduate activity. This type

of information would be readily available in a

centralized trainee tracking system that this

Workgroup recommends for implementation. The

system would support a partnership between the

NIMH, mentors, trainees, and investigators. A

trainee tracking system provides early

identification of education transition points and

issues that influences attrition, stimulates

specialty selection, and contributes to trainee

advancement to the next level of career

progression. Most importantly, a trainee tracking

system would indicate which funding mechanisms

are successful and which need revision or

elimination. 

Trainee tracking would contribute to a more

thorough analysis of the NIMH research portfolio

and of the return on investment of its training

dollars. 

In summary, without the ability to track the

progress of trainees funded by the NIMH, the

outcomes of all the interventions put in place to

help ensure the success of trainees in furthering

their careers toward the end of becoming

independent researchers, research academicians,

clinician scientists, and so on cannot be reliably

determined or readily improved.
7

Recommendation No. 2

Establish a national mental health

research mentorship program devoted to

training racial/ethnic minority

investigators.

One facet of the program would be to develop a

national mentorship network of successful

minority and non-minority senior investigators

within the context of specific research projects.

Mentorship networks are encouraged to promote

junior investigators and trainees between class I

and II research universities and other colleges and

universities. Some mentors would be available

through the R25 (see Appendix F for definition)

and T32 mechanisms to mentor racial/ethnic

minority investigators or trainees over an

extended period of time. 

Another facet of the mentorship program would

be the creation and maintenance of a centralized

career development system that uses a team of

managers at NIMH to track and guide the progress

of racial/ethnic minority trainees and scholars.

The career managers would identify minority

applicants in need of additional support (e.g., a

racial/ethnic minority investigator whose

application fell just short of funding, re-entering

investigators, or field switchers in critical shortage

areas such as child psychiatry). Another suggested

component of the mentorship program is the

provision of technical assistance (TA) by NIMH

staff, through a 1-800 TA/referral hotline.

Recommendation No. 3

Concentrate more new resources at the

later stages (post-doctoral and beyond) of

career development.

Given the complexity of research today, it appears

that most trainees need to have post-doctoral

training and supervised research career

development if they are to develop their full

capacity to do independent, innovative research.

This recommendation complements the emphasis

of the proposed national mentorship program that

is directed at the later years of career

development.

Recommendation No. 4

Encourage new and strengthen existing

networks and partnerships to enhance

science training goals that exceed NIMH

resource capabilities.

Among institutions with which NIMH might

encourage networks are the Department of

Education, the Department of Justice, the National

Science Foundation, Native American tribal

colleges, Hispanic-serving institutions,

predominantly African American colleges and

universities, and pharmaceutical industries.

Partnering within the NIH (e.g., National Institute

of General Medical Sciences [NIGMS] and NIMH)

and intramural and extramural programs can be

strengthened. A particularly rich opportunity for

recruitment of minorities into the research career

pipeline is the community college system.

Educational outreach needs to be formed to help

forge bridges between the NIMH-supported high

school Career Opportunities in Research Education

and Training (COR) Program (R25), community

colleges, and the COR Honors Undergraduate

Training Program (T34) for college juniors and

seniors.

Recommendation No. 5

NIMH is encouraged to a) ascertain that

Initial Review Group memberships are

diverse and, where relevant, possess
8

expertise needed to evaluate research in

minority populations/communities and 

b) enforce sanctions for programs that fail

to attract racial/ethnic minority trainees

when such criteria are stipulated in the

funding mechanisms. 

During the preparation of this report the

Workgroup noted constituency concerns about the

application review process, racial/ethnic minority

membership on review panels, and health

disparity issues. The scientific review of grant

applications and contract proposals is a key

element in the fair

and relevant distribution of NIMH funds to the

national research and research training

community. It is essential that the membership of

each review group reflect the cutting-edge

scientific knowledge necessary to judge the merit

of research and research training methodologies;

it is equally critical that review group members be

alert to cultural nuances and influences that, if

unchecked in the group’s review process, can lead

to systematic variance—and bias—in research

approaches. 

Recommendation No. 6

We encourage NIMH to conduct an annual

review of plans for racial/ethnic diversity

in mental health research careers and of

the strategic plan for reducing health

disparities to assess progress made in

implementing the action plans. NIMH

should then report its findings to NAMHC.

The Workgroup wishes to emphasize the

importance of continuous assessment and

reporting of a) outcomes of racial/ethnic minority

research training and research initiatives, and 

b) trainee/investigator progression. 

The Workgroup believes the information

summarized above and detailed in chapters II

through VI will help the NIMH recruit, train, and

retain racial/ethnic minority mental health

researchers.
9

Chapter I.

Prologue

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)

has a long history of concern with the lack of

ethnic diversity among mental health researchers.

Over the years—and particularly since the 1960s,

when the Civil Rights movement called the

Nation’s attention to patterns of racial

discrimination in American society—NIMH has

taken a number of steps to increase the

representation of ethnic minorities among

investigators. In the sixties, NIMH supported over

600 individual fellowships and had a professional

staff of three psychologists and an anthropologist

to work with individual fellowship applicants and

awardees. However, the number of minority

students who applied for fellowships was

disappointingly low. University-Based Programs

(UBPs) (T32s) supported by NIMH also had

difficulty in recruiting persons from diverse ethnic

groups.

By the late sixties and early seventies, groups of

minority students and faculty had begun to

pressure mental health professional organizations

to be more responsive to the needs of minority

communities. For example, an ad hoc group of

African American sociologists challenged Dr. N.

Jay Demerath, the Executive Director of the

American Sociological Association (ASA), to

increase the number of African Americans within

the profession. By way of response, Dr. Demerath

proposed to NIMH that the Institute fund a

training grant to the ASA that would enable the

organization to recruit minority students into

graduate programs in sociology, to mentor them

while they were in graduate school, and to

provide some financial support while seeking

partial tuition support from universities. The

arrangement would constitute a three-way

partnership involving ASA, NIMH, and university

departments. This program was initially funded in

1972, and models of it were adopted by other

professional organizations. By 1974, NIMH had

awarded over $5 million to five professional

organizations to provide support for fellowships

designated for minority students in graduate

training programs in sociology, psychiatry,

psychology, nursing, and social work. In the late

1980s, a program in neuroscience was added.

These programs are referred to as

Underrepresented Minority Fellowship Programs

(UMFPs).

In 1980, Congress enacted the Mental Health

Systems Act (P.L. 96-398), which authorized

NIMH to establish a position of Associate Director

for Special Populations. NIMH subsequently

established an Office for Special Populations (OSP)

that would be responsible for overseeing activities

at NIMH concerning underrepresented groups,

including ethnic minorities. 

Over the years many initiatives have been

undertaken at NIMH, including the introduction of

new grant mechanisms designed to specifically

target ethnic minority trainees and investigators.

Numerous technical assistance workshops have

been conducted to recruit minority trainees and

investigators into the career field. Steps have been

taken to increase minority representation among

review committees. Despite these and other

efforts, the number of minority researchers who
10

have obtained investigator-initiated research

grants has been less than expected. 

In 1999, concerned about the slow rate of

progress, the National Advisory Mental Health

Council (NAMHC) (see Appendix A for a list of

members in 1999) formed a Workgroup (see

Appendix B for a list of members) to examine the

Institute’s efforts in this area and to recommend

ways to improve the yield of those and related

efforts.

This Workgroup’s report to the NAMHC (see

Appendix C for a list of current members) defines

racial/ethnic minority groups in accordance with

the description of underrepresented minorities

used by the Office of Management and Budget.

These groups include African Americans,

American Indians/Alaska Natives, Asian/Pacific

Islanders, and Hispanics (Latinos). The

Workgroup recognizes that there is great diversity

within each racial/ethnic group. For example, the

aggregate Asian/Pacific Islander group subsumes

several specific ethnic groups, from the largest

groups of Chinese and Filipinos to the smaller

groups of Hmong and Cambodians (Lee, 1998).

Since within-group data are rarely analyzed, this

report will present the data for the four main

racial/ethnic groups only.

The Workgroup is aware that women and other

groups, including persons with disabilities, are

underrepresented among investigators receiving

research support from the NIMH, and targeted

efforts are needed to increase their numbers.

However, this report focuses on race/ethnicity

only.

The Workgroup chose to use the combined

terminology “race/ethnicity” to refer to

underrepresented minority groups. Some

investigators consider “race” to be a necessary

term because it refers to the social meaning that

Americans tend to ascribe to groups, which in 

some instances reflect prejudice and racism (e.g.,

Jones, 1991). Other researchers are open to

possible biological factors associated with

race—for example, the relationship of race to

differential rates of metabolizing psychotropic

medications (e.g., Lawson, 1986; Lin, Poland &

Anderson, 1995). Historically, the biological study

of race, however, has been fraught with problems

in both method and conceptualization (American

Anthropological Association, 2000; Owens &

King, 1999; Zuckerman, 1990). Factors associated

with race are sometimes

presumed—erroneously—to be causal in nature

when, in fact, the relationship between race and

biology is weak at best. Risks inherent in

implicating biological factors in understanding

race have prompted others to recommend phasing

out the term “race” and using “ethnicity” or

“ethnic origins” to describe the identities of

different groups in the United States (American

Anthropological Association, 2000). The

Workgroup strived to balance sensitivity to these

diverse perspectives with the focus of this report

on minority groups within their social context,

and thus selected the term race/ethnicity as a

social construct in describing the four groups

under study—African Americans, American

Indians/Alaska Natives, Asian/Pacific Islanders,

and Hispanics.

Against this backdrop, the goals of the NAMHC

Workgroup are to:

 Explain the importance of having a sound

plan to recruit, sustain, and retain racial/ethnic

minority researchers.

 Detail initiatives already undertaken by

NIMH to produce racial/ethnic minority mental

health researchers.

 Recommend goals, objectives, and an

action plan that will result in a significant

increase in the number of ethnic minorities who

become independent investigators.
11

Workgroup Charges and Focus Areas

In 1999, the NAMHC requested that the Institute

examine its efforts to support minority trainees

and investigators. Similar, earlier requests had

resulted in thorough, useful analysis of disparate

NIMH research programs including childhood

mental disorders, prevention, mental health

services, and behavioral/social sciences. Acting on

the Council’s request, NIMH Director Steven E.

Hyman, M.D., charged the Workgroup to address

three general domains: (a) the educational context

of minorities in the United States, (b) the current

status of minority trainees and investigators at

NIMH, and (c) recommendations to improve

minority representation among trainees and

investigators. In addition to addressing the three

general domains, the Workgroup gave itself a

fourth charge—to articulate a clear rationale for

increasing the racial/ethnic diversity of minority

investigators funded by NIMH. 

The four charges and the specific focus areas

within each domain are as follows:

RATIONALE FOR DIVERSITY

Develop a clear rationale for increasing

the racial/ethnic diversity of minority investigators

funded by NIMH.

EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT OF RACIAL/ETHNIC

MINORITIES

 The career life cycle of ethnic minority

mental health scientists.

 The recruitment mix at each part of the

training pathway.

 Factors related to ethnic minority

underrepresentation among full-time faculty.

CURRENT STATUS OF RACIAL/ETHNIC

MINORITY TRAINEES AND INVESTIGATORS

SUPPORTED BY NIMH

 NIMH’s support of racial/ethnic minority

scientists throughout the career life cycle.

SUBJECT AREAS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

TO IMPROVE MINORITY REPRESENTATION

AMONG TRAINEES AND INVESTIGATORS 

 The best way to access the training

pipelines.

 How NIMH can improve training

outcomes at each level along the research career

development pathway.

 Where NIMH can have the greatest impact

along the career life cycle to increase the number

of minority researchers.

 Methods NIMH can use to stop losses

during the later years of career development.

 Alliances NIMH should foster to help meet

training needs.

Strategic Plan for Reducing Health

Disparities

As the Workgroup addressed training and

research matters for minorities, the NIH

leadership team of Harold Varmus, M.D., Director,

NIH, and Ruth Kirschstein, M.D., Deputy Director,

NIH, established research on health disparities as

a prominent NIH-wide initiative. The Workgroup,

with its significant expertise in minority issues,

was asked by Dr. Hyman to identify ways to

improve the NIMH Strategic Plan for Reducing

Health Disparities and to suggest priority areas for

FY 2001, and that task resulted in a second

important product of the Workgroup: the NIMH

Strategic Plan for Reducing Health Disparities

(located at http://www.nimh.nih.gov/strategic/

strategicdisparity.cfm). After extensive review of
12

the draft NIMH Strategic Plan for Reducing Health

Disparities, the Workgroup offered

recommendations for enhancing it, identifying

research training as the top priority. 

Guiding Principles

Three principles guided the development of this

report:

 The Workgroup believes that empirical

observations are essential for NIMH to evaluate its

programs. Therefore, to the extent possible,

recommendations are data driven.

 The primary business of NIMH is to

support investigator-initiated research and to

train investigators to carry out its research

mission. The Workgroup recognizes that

enhancing the researchskills of high school,

undergraduate, and pre-doctoral students is

critical to generating a pool of potential

investigators; however, this report focuses on

ways to provide post-doctoral and young

investigators with the necessary skills to conduct

independent research. The Workgroup believes

that this focus will result in the greatest impact

on increasing the number of minority researchers

and, ultimately, the improved health of all

Americans.

 While acknowledging the key role that

NIMH plays in addressing the Nation’s mental

health research and research training needs, the

Workgroup also recognizes that the Institute must

collaborate with other NIH components and with

educational institutions, professional

associations, private foundations, and mentors.

Intra-NIMH collaborations (i.e., cross-divisional)

also are essential. Effective collaborations will

enable NIMH to apply its limited resources most

effectively at the critical junctures identified

through ongoing evaluations. Finally, a

collaborative spirit likely will strengthen existing

partnerships and suggest opportunities for new

ones needed to address training areas (e.g.,

kindergarten through community college) that are

beyond NIMH’s resource capabilities.

Workgroup Composition

The Workgroup was composed of interested

NAMHC members, training site program

administrators, and researchers whose knowledge

and skills complemented those of the Council

representatives. Members’ expertise encompassed

psychology, neuroscience, psychiatry, social work,

anthropology, sociology, and public health.

Council member Javier Escobar, M.D., served as

Chair, and Council member Roy Wilson, M.D.,

served as Co-chair of the Workgroup.

Workgroup Procedures and Process

The Workgroup used three approaches to carry

out its charges. First, NIMH sponsored a

workshop in October 1999 to collect both

quantitative and qualitative data regarding the

progress of minority trainees and investigators. A

summary of the workshop proceedings is at

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/minority

training.pdf and a roster of participants can be

found in Appendix D. 

At the workshop, NIMH staff presented in-house

data regarding the Institute’s support of minority

trainees and investigators. The information was

particularly helpful in identifying how minorities

fare in discrete NIMH components as well as in

the Institute in its entirety. Data presented at the

workshop subsequently were updated and are the

foundation of many of the analyses presented in

this report. In addition, the workshop involved

junior and senior investigators and training

directors, who reported their personal experiences

and qualitative and quantitative data. These

presentations were useful in identifying the

barriers to research careers as well as the steps
13

that can facilitate such careers. After the

workshop, the NAMHC established the Workgroup

to further assess the issues. 

A second procedure used in developing this report

was a review of national reports, national

databases, and scientific literature concerning

training (e.g., The Chronicle of Higher Education,

2000; the National Science and Technology

Council Report, 2000; the National Research

Council Report, 2000; and various NIH

databases). These sources were particularly

helpful in identifying the educational outcomes of

racial/ethnic minorities from high school through

graduate education. 

A third essential step in developing the report was

a series of periodic meetings by Workgroup

members to analyze materials, discuss, and draft

several iterations of this final report. These

meetings were augmented with input from outside

consultants (Appendix E), conference telephone

calls, electronic mail messages, and subgroup

meetings.

Report Organization

This chapter introduces the need for and the

processes involved in preparing the report. 

Chapter II presents the rationale and importance

to the United States of racial/ethnic minority

trainees and investigators. Chapter III provides an

overview of the status of racial/ethnic minorities

throughout the educational system. Data are

presented regarding students—extending from

high school to the graduate level—and faculty. In

Chapter IV, the focus shifts specifically to NIMH

and examines how minority trainees and

investigators fare across the various funding

mechanisms (see Appendix F for a list of

frequently used mechanisms). Chapter V considers

the importance of mentorship and trainee tracking

to the success of a research career, and Chapter VI

presents the Workgroup’s recommended Action

Plan. The Action Plan is an elaboration of the

Workgroup’s principle recommendations, and it is

intended to suggest how the NIMH can contribute

to building a stronger, ethnically diverse pool of

independent mental health researchers.

Acknowledgment

The Workgroup extends its appreciation to all

who contributed to its understanding of the ethnic

minority training issues, health disparity

challenges, and national science workforce

demographics. 

15

Chapter II.

The Importance of Racial/Ethnic

Diversity in Mental Health Research

and Research Training Programs

Among the many challenges that confront the

Nation in the 21st century, one of the most urgent

is to address health and health care disparities

experienced by many citizens and

disproportionately by members of racial/ethnic

minority groups. Central to the challenge of health

disparities are the related problems of insufficient

scientific information about racial/ethnic minority

groups and of a low number of racial/ethnic

minorities who attain advanced academic degrees.

Sustained attention and a commitment to

resolving these issues are imperative to the

economic soundness and scientific leadership of

the Nation and to the health of its people. Toward

that end, this section of the report presents salient

issues that undergird an action plan intended to

improve the outcome of the Nation’s efforts to

produce independent racial/ethnic mental health

researchers. 

The Importance of a Diversified

Racial/Ethnic Mental Health

Research Community

A recent analysis of demographic data relevant to

America’s Science, Technology, and Engineering

(ST&E) workforce warns of a “national crisis” that

will occur by the year 2050 unless aggressive

recruitment, training, career development, and

employee retention activities needed to sustain

America’s entire ST&E workforce are immediately

initiated among ethnic minority groups. The

projected crisis will stem from the “aging” of

America’s ST&E workforce, combined with a

current inability to replenish from American

citizens in general, and its ethnic minority

citizenry in particular, key segments of the

workforce that require individuals with advanced

scientific training and education. The challenge of

buttressing the scientific workforce is formidable,

yet the Nation’s racial/ethnic minority groups

contain the talent pool needed to accomplish the

task and their development is essential.

A vitally important component of ST&E capacity, of

course, is seen in health research, broadly defined.

The urgency of expanding the ethnic diversity of

the Nation’s mental health research community

has been expressed in diverse forums. The National

Research Council (NRC), for example, recently

analyzed the national need for biomedical and

behavioral scientists and provided findings and

recommendations to NIH (NRC Report, 2000). The

NRC determined that there should be no increase in

the aggregate number of Ph.D.s. and that the

extant supply of Ph.D.s in basic biomedical,

behavioral, and social science research is sufficient

to meet current demands. However, the NRC

recommended to the NIH that it should:

 Increase efforts to identify and support

programs that encourage and prepare

“underrepresented” minorities for careers in basic

biomedical research (p. 30).
16

 Continue efforts to identify and support

programs that prepare and encourage

“underrepresented” minorities for careers in

behavioral and social science research (p. 41). 

 Intensify efforts to train and retain physicians

in clinical research to reverse an ongoing decline in

the supply of physician scientists and health care

doctorates (p. 52).

 Increase efforts to identify, support,

encourage, and prepare underrepresented

minorities for careers in clinical research (p. 52).

The importance of racial/ethnic minority

communities to a successful resolution of the

projected shortfall in the scientific workforce was

underscored with enactment of the Minority

Health and Health Disparities Research and

Education Act of 2000. The new law established a

National Center on Minority Health and Health

Disparities Research at NIH. It mandates research

on ethnic minority health issues as well as the

education and training of minority health

professionals. Language in the Act reports that

only 15.5% of the behavioral research-oriented

psychology doctorate degrees and 17.9% of the

practice-oriented psychology doctorate degrees

were awarded to minority students in 1997 (S.

1880-3).

Barriers to attainment of higher ST&E education

were addressed recently also by the National

Science and Technology Council (NSTC, April

2000). This analysis showed that the ST&E

workforce is sustained by the entry of people

approximately 22 years of age who have science

and engineering degrees. 

According to Bureau of the Census projections as

depicted in Figure II-A (NSTC, 2000), non-Hispanic

White males, who at present constitute the

majority of the U.S. ST&E workforce, will decline

as a percentage of the workforce population, ages 

18 to 64, from 37% in 1995 to 26% by 2050.

During this same period, racial/ethnic minorities

are projected to increase from approximately 25%

to 48% of the workforce. Specifically, the

percentage of African Americans is projected to

increase from 12% to 14% and that of Hispanics

will more than double (10% to 24%). The

percentage of Asian/Pacific Islanders will also

more than double (4% to 9%). Native Americans

will remain less than 1%, while non-Hispanic

Whites are projected to decline from 74% to 52% of

the workforce population. 

A forecast of the ST&E workforce for the year

2050 shows that in the absence of a successful

intervention that will increase the rate of

graduation-age people who earn Science and

Engineering (S&E) bachelor’s degrees, the

calculated fraction of 22-year-olds who earn an

S&E bachelor’s degree and enter the workforce

will decline 9% from 1995 to 2050. Should this

decline occur, two plausible courses of action

would be either to send ST&E jobs offshore or to

increase reliance on the immigration of ST&E

workers into the United States.

Though the United States remains the recognized

leader in the global business and ST&E community, the rest of the world continues to advance.

However, to keep pace with global competition,

the United States has had to rely on a variety of

initiatives that include increasing the number of

temporary visas (H-1B visas) for skilled foreign

workers. In fact, the number of H1-B visas nearly

doubled between 1998 and 1999 to 115,000, and

an allowance of 200,000 annually was proposed

for succeeding calendar years (NSTC, 2000).

The Nation’s increasing dependence on

immigration to meet its ST&E workforce needs

may prove to be shortsighted if the immigration

conduit becomes unreliable. In the 1980s,

between 500 and 1,000 scientists, including Nobel
17

!"#$%&'(()*+'',$%&-$'./'01&'2&34$4'5.5$6-0".3'5%.7&80".34'/.%'01&'&013"8'-39'#&39&%'

#%.$54:'-#&4';<'='>?'@&-%4

!"!!!

!"!#!

!"$!!

!"$#!

!"%!!

!"%#!

!"&!!

!"&#!

!"'!!

$((# %!!! %!!# %!$! %!$# %!%! %!%# %!&! %!&# %!'! %!'# %!#!

A&-%

/%-80".3

)*+,-.*/ 01*2345-6374.8.9)*+,-.*/4 401*234:3;-6374.8.9)*+,-.*/

<6-/=74.8.9)*+,-.*/4 >+*-.

Figure II.

Bureau of the Census Population Projections for the Ethnic and Gender Groups, Ages 18–64 Years

Prize winners, returned to Taiwan to serve as

senior faculty and directors of laboratories, often

in national centers of excellence. In recent years,

moreover, the majority of science and engineering

graduates from Korea and Taiwan have returned

to their countries of birth upon completion of

graduate studies in the United States. Just as the

United States benefits from an ethnically diverse

ST&E workforce, the Nation must maintain its

global perspective through the presence of diverse

foreign students and researchers in support of

international academic, research, and industrial

ventures. 

It is the opinion of the Workgroup that increased

diversity in the national science workforce will

help to produce the economic and psychological

well-being necessary to advance U.S. interests in

the 21st century. An ethnically diverse workforce

should have the capability and confidence needed

to sustain the national economy and the national

will during times of crisis (e.g., natural disasters 

and technological accidents, political and

economic uncertainty, as well as diplomacy

failures, military misadventures, and hostile

actions that threaten the Nation’s vital interests). 

Strategies for enhancing diversity in the labor

pool are already evident in many areas of private

industry, science, education, Federal and State

government, and the military. The national

competition for the best and brightest ethnic

minority talent is tremendous. Incentives such as

large monetary bonuses, reimbursement for

relocation expenses, health plans, spousal

employment preferences, loan forgiveness,

definitive career patterns, and generous family

education packages are among the techniques

being used to lure the “best and brightest” from

one career field to another. 

Source: National Science and Technology Council Report, 2000.
18

The Action Plan presented in this report will serve

as an effective tool to direct the recruitment,

sustainment, and retention of ethnic minority

investigators required for national science and

public health initiatives. The recommendations

serve to bolster the Nation, rather than to

establish racial preferences, set quotas, or redress

prior social injustices. 

Ethnic Minorities and Disparities

in Mental Health

The mission of the NIMH is to reduce the burden

of mental illness through research on brain, mind,

and behavior. NIMH also takes the lead in

understanding the impact of behavior on HIV

transmission and pathogenesis, and in developing

effective behavioral preventive interventions. In

the United States and globally, mental disorders

are associated with an immense burden of

disability. Major depression, schizophrenia,

bipolar disorder, and obsessive-compulsive

disorder rank among the 10 leading causes of

disability in the world (Murray & Lopez, 1996).

Although these and other severe mental disorders

appear to have largely equivalent prevalence rates

across majority and minority populations, they

exert a disproportionate impact on racial and

ethnic minority groups (USDHHS, 1999). Access

to adequate services is uneven at best within the

communities where minority populations reside.

Where data do exist, outcomes of illness as well

as treatment available to minority groups have

been shown to be poorer than in majority

populations. 

To address these issues, the NIMH has placed

increased emphasis on achieving a more

ethnically diverse pool of investigators and

caregivers. One compelling rationale for this

action is the likelihood that racial and ethnic

minority researchers possess the necessary

motivation, persistence, and insight to effectively

address disparities in mental health care. NIMH is

aware, too, that an important outcome of diversity

in the active training pool is the pedagogical

impact of a training environment in which

racial/ethnic minorities enrich the attitudes and

insights of non-minority mental health

investigators and caregivers. 

A review of the literature suggests that disparities

in the Nation’s mental health care system (i.e.,

specialty care providers, primary care and general

medical providers, voluntary organizations, and

the human services sector) can be attributed to a

variety of factors. One is an insufficient supply of

health care resources. In addition, the cost and

access to care, the complexity and duration of

treatment, the setting of care, and stigma and fear

compound the issue of health disparities among

ethnic minority populations.

Many members of ethnic minority groups feel ill at

ease within a mental health system that has been

shaped, in large part, by middle-class cultural

values and beliefs that are grounded in theories,

procedures, research, and jargon derived primarily

from European experiences and culture (Surgeon

General, 1999). Racial/ethnic minorities’ concerns

about the appropriateness of care and provider

competence can be exacerbated when patients

encounter providers who do not understand the

nuances of language, traditional beliefs, social

customs, and religious perspective.

Services provided by the mental health care

system are intended to have positive outcomes,

but they can also be associated with negative

consequences. Behaviors may be defined as a

“clinical mental condition” that is subject to

mitigation due to a diminished personal

responsibility or as a “personality disorder” that is

subject to sanctions due to the assumption of full

responsibility for willful behavior. The outcomes

(e.g., voluntary or involuntary hospitalization,

continued access to or loss of benefits, and

diversion or incarceration) in either case depend

on the ability of the mental health provider to
19

render the appropriate diagnosis and correct

mental health care (Lopez, 1989;

Snowden & Cheung, 1990). Clearly, it is crucial

that mental health diagnostic and clinical

procedures be grounded in the best available

science for all racial/ethnic groups.

The Workgroup considers it essential that

translational research linking basic and applied

sciences include studies that reflect the rich racial

and ethnic diversity of the United States. Health

disparities research likely both contribute to and

benefit from pharmacogenomics research in so far

as evidence suggests that certain racial/ethnic

minority group members may metabolize

psychotropic medications at different rates than

the average rates seen in the majority population.

The findings could have major clinical

implications (Frackiewicz et al., 1997; Collazo et

al., 1996). Among other important research

opportunities are hypotheses that cultural

differences are expressed in the affective,

cognitive, and behavioral symptoms of mental

disorders; through research, it might be possible

to ascertain and reduce the potential for

misdiagnosis due to miscommunications. The

hypothesis that diagnosticians of a cultural

background similar to that of the patient provide

more accurate diagnoses and better treatment

outcomes needs to be tested. Research conducted

to date has not adequately addressed this

hypothesis. In neurobiology, research examining

the neurocircuitry of anxiety may prove to be

relevant to an understanding of disparities

(Goddard & Charney, 1997; Coplan & Lydiard,

1998; Sullivan et al., 1998). Racial/ethnic

minority group overrepresentation in exposure to

stressful and fear-producing life events can

contribute to and benefit from advances in

research on neurotransmitter alterations in

situational anxiety reactions, anxiety disorders,

and post-traumatic stress disorders. Similarly, the

potential factors involved in mitigating or

buffering the effects of stress and anxiety among

minority groups need to be examined.

The Workgroup believes that ethnic minority

investigators who present an interest in studying

diverse populations and who are competent in

engaging ethnic minority communities in the

research process will contribute significantly to

research on health disparities. With respect to this

and other research goals, the Workgroup

emphasizes that expanding the pool of mental

health scientists from underrepresented ethnic

minority groups is not simply a matter of

affirmative action or of achieving proportional

representation. More critically, in the study of

health disparities and other topics, these

investigators will a) contribute a sensitizing

influence on attitudes and insights of nonminority mental health investigators and

caregivers, b) enhance the scientific basis of our

understanding of human behavior, and c)

contribute to better health for all Americans.

Expanding the Scientific Knowledge

Base by Increasing Racial/Ethnic

Minority Participation in Research

Protocols

To address racial/ethnic disparities in mental

health, it is important that research participants,

as well as investigators, reflect the diversity of our

country. Relatively few published research reports

focus on ethnic minorities. Graham (1992) found

that among the 14,542 quantitative papers

published in six flagship journals of the American

Psychological Association from 1970 to 1989,

only 3.6% focused on African Americans. For this

small number of articles, the investigators either

specifically stated that African Americans were the

population of interest or the data were analyzed

by race/ethnicity. It is worth noting, moreover,

that since the early 1970s there has been a

significant decline in the number of published
20

articles with a specific focus on African

Americans. In 1974, 49 such articles appeared in

the journals surveyed; by 1989, only 11 reports

that focused on African Americans were published

in the same journals. There has been even less

research concerning Hispanics. In nearly identical

analyses of the same leading journals, Castro and

Ramirez (1997) found that less than 1% of the

published articles over a 25-year period (1970-

1994) focused on Hispanics. While recent trends

showing increased ethnic/minority participation in

clinical trials are encouraging, efforts still should

be made to identify those specific research

questions where it may be important to ensure the

involvement of minorities in sufficient numbers to

permit informative subgroup analyses.

The consistency of the evidence suggests that,

historically, the empirical basis of our

understanding of human behavior, its disorders

and treatment, has largely excluded analysis of

ethnic minorities. Since March 1994, NIH has

required the inclusion of racial and ethnic

minorities in research studies involving human

subjects. Continued vigilance in implementing this

requirement is expected to yield increased

knowledge about racial/ethnic minority

populations.

Conclusion

The Workgroup developed a three-pronged

rationale for increasing the number of racial and

ethnic minority scientists. The first compelling

reason is to help make up the projected shortfall

associated with the aging of the largely White

scientific workforce and the declining birthrate of

Whites; failure to address these trends will

jeopardize the Nation’s most important scientific

and technological enterprises. Second, more

racial/ethnic minority mental health researchers

are needed to address the health and mental

health disparities that plague our Nation.

Although scientists of any race/ethnicity can

address this national priority, racial and ethnic

minority investigators are particularly likely to

possess the necessary motivation and persistence

to study health disparities. Minority investigators

will bring to the task insights into the distinctive

needs and strengths of minority populations. In

many cases, contributing to the welfare of their

own communities serves as an important

motivation for this line of inquiry. Third, increases

in the number of racial/ethnic minority scientists

will help to broaden the diversity of study

populations and deepen our understanding of

human behavior. 
21

Chapter III.

The Educational Context of

Racial/Ethnic Minorities

To more fully understand the recruitment mix of

current and potential investigators, it is important

to examine how racial and ethnic minority groups

are represented throughout the educational

system, from high school to university faculty

positions. This chapter reviews national data on

the status of minority faculty and students at key

junctures in their career development. To interpret

the data, the Workgroup used two reference

points. In all cases, the representation of

minorities within each stage of the pipeline was

compared to their representation within the

Nation’s population. Given that racial/ethnic

minorities are frequently underrepresented at later

stages of the pipeline, it is important to apply a

second reference point, specifically the ethnic

group’s representation in the pool from which the

next educational stage draws. The former

represents an aspirational goal, whereas the latter

reflects an estimate of the available pool from

which institutions select trainees. In addition,

qualitative data obtained from the workshop

participants are used to point out some of the

barriers to successful careers for racial/ethnic

minority investigators.

Faculty

Figure III-A depicts the representation of

ethnic/racial minorities among full-time faculty in

1992 within three science areas: health, natural, 

and social sciences. Relative to their proportion

within the national population, American Indians,

Hispanics, and African Americans are significantly

underrepresented. For instance, American Indians

make up from .2% to .5% of 1992 faculty in the

different sciences relevant to mental health

(health, natural, and social sciences) and .7% of

the U.S. population in the same year. The

proportion of ethnic minority groups among

faculty members is in general more favorable

when compared to 1993 doctorate recipients than

when compared to the U.S. census figures. For

instance, the percentage of African American

faculty in the health sciences (5.2%) and social

sciences (5.8%) is greater than the proportion of

doctorate recipients across disciplines in the 1993

survey (4.5%). Underrepresentation compared to

doctoral recipients is still seen, however, in two of

the science domains for American Indian and

Asian/Pacific Islander faculty and the three

science domains for Hispanics.

An analysis of 1997 faculty data across all

disciplines (Figure III-B) indicates that assistant

professor was the predominant rank for each

minority group. Full professorships were

predominant only for White faculty. It is

noteworthy that assistant professors are likely to

have more teaching and administrative

responsibilities and, therefore, less time for

research than full professors. These two factors

suggest that the number of racial/ethnic minority

investigators available to submit applications and

mentor future scientists should increase as their

representation among tenured faculty increases. 
22

"#$

% &#$

$

'%#%

"#(

'#)

(#* )#'

'%#*

"#& (#( &#' $#+

'+#+

"#*

+ *#& (#*

'(#'

"#+ (#)

))#, ,#&

+*#'

-./01234!546134 -713489321:12!57;346/07 <;32= >17?3412 @A1B/

"

$"

*"

%"

'"

)""

>/3;BA!C21/42/7

D3BE03;!C21/42/7

CF213;!C21/42/7

GF2BF03B/!H/21?1/4B7

I#C#!J/47E7

Figure III-A. 

Percentage of Full-Time Faculty by Academic Discipline and Ethnicity 

Compared to 1992 Census

Sources: The Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac, September 1, 2000, p. 38. National Academy of Sciences (1995). Summary

Report 1993: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities, Washington, DC. U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates,

Population Division, August 23, 2000.

Students at Graduate/Professional

Schools and Colleges/Universities

A pattern similar to that observed in faculty can be

seen among students enrolled in graduate and

professional schools. African Americans and

Hispanics are particularly underrepresented

relative to their proportion in the U.S. population.

For instance, African Americans accounted for 7.5%

of all students enrolled in graduate and

professional schools while they represented 12.1%

of the Nation’s population. However, when

considering the pool from which graduate and

professional schools draw, that is, baccalaureate

recipients, the picture of representation improves

for both African American and Hispanic groups

(e.g., 7.5% of African American baccalaureates are

in graduate and professional school versus 7.8% of

all college degree recipients). Asian/Pacific

Islanders and American Indians are equally or near

equally represented when considering their

proportion in the U.S. census or among

baccalaureate recipients. For example, American

Indians make up 0.6% of graduate and

professional school students, 0.6% of

baccalaureate recipients, and 0.7% of the U.S.

population (see Figure III-C). Thus, among

graduate and professional school students, the

representation of American Indian and

Asian/Pacific Islander students are at least

consistent with their proportions among college

degree recipients and within the U.S. population.

On the other hand, African Americans and

Hispanics are underrepresented when compared

to their proportion in the U.S. census but much

less so when considering their representation

among recipients of the baccalaureate degree.

Examination of the student demographics for

four-year colleges and universities granting

baccalaureates with two-year community colleges
23

0

10

20

30

40

50

Am. Indian Asian/PI Black Hispanic White

Percentage

Professor

Associate

Assistant

Figure III-B.

Within-Group Percentage of Nation’s Full-Time Faculty by 

Rank and by Ethnicity, 1997

granting associate degrees indicates that the twoyear colleges do a slightly better job in enrolling

and graduating minority students, particularly

American Indians, African Americans, and

Hispanics (see Table III). For instance, the

percentage of African American students in twoyear colleges (enrolled, 11.5%; graduated, 9.2%) is

greater than the percentage in four-year

institutions (enrolled, 10.1%; graduated, 7.7%).

Although the overall percentages of

underrepresented minority college students are

beginning to resemble the national population

profile, rates continue to lag at four-year

institutions. Finally, the higher representation of

minority students in the community college

system suggests that this education level may be a

source of potential mental health scientists and a

useful location in which to promote mental health

research careers. Although the Workgroup does

not recommend that NIMH conduct research

training initiatives at the community college level,

the Workgroup emphasizes the need on the part

of faculty, the scientific community, and Federal

agencies for more effective communication and

outreach to two-year college students. These

entities should encourage community college

students to continue their education at colleges

and universities where research training

opportunities and resources are available.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (1997). Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System, Fall Staff Survey#
24

B+>

C+> D+C

?+C

DE+E

F+>

B+>

C+D D+<

C+E

D?+F

B+D

G+>

;E+; ;B+F

DE+D

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

American

Indian

Asian/ Pacific

Isles

Black Hispanic Caucasian Foreign

Percentage

Grad & Prof School Enrollment

Baccaluareate Recipients

US Census

Figure III-C.

Minority Group Representation in Graduate and Professional School

Enrollment, Baccalaureate Recipients, and U.S. Census, 1997

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates, Population Division, August 23, 2000; The Chronicle of Higher Education

Almanac, September 1, 2000, p. 24; and National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Data System.

*H&%"8-3

(39"-3

*4"-3I

J-8"/"8

(46-39&%4

*/%"8-3

*H&%"8-3 K"45-3"8 L1"0&

M.3)

N&4"9&30

*6"&3

N-8&

O3P3.Q3

!.$%)A&-%

R3%.66H&30 "#' &#+ )"#) &#' ++#% K K

S&#%&&

2.3/&%%&9 "#% &#* +#+ *#, +&#, (#$ $#*

TQ.)A&-%

R3%.66H&30 )#$ &#' ))#& ))#( +"#$

S&#%&&

2.3/&%%&9 )#" *#) ,#$ %#+ +&#) )#' $#)

Table III.

Percentage of Enrollment in Four-Year and Two-year Colleges and Universities, 

and Degrees Conferred by Ethnicity and Resident Status, 1995-1996 

United States Citizens and Resident Aliens
25

High School and Earlier

High school represents the final segment of the

educational pipeline that the Workgroup

considered. Census data (1999) on the

educational attainment of adults 25 years and

older show that Hispanics (56.1%) and African

Americans (77.4%) graduate from high school (or

earn a general equivalence diploma [GED]) at

lower rates than the national average (83.4%)

(Newburger & Curry, 2000). High school

graduation rates for Whites and Asian/Pacific

Islanders were 88% and 85%, respectively.

Although American Indians/Alaska Natives were

not included in the 1999 analyses, 1990 census

data for adults ages 25 years and older found the

high school graduation rate for American Indians

to be 66% (The Chronicle of Higher Education,

2000).

Although there are exceptions, it is likely that for

many students an interest in science emerges

prior to completing high school and may have

roots in the elementary school years. Clearly,

appropriate and effective science education in the

early years of schooling is very important if the

Nation is to increase the numbers of students of

all backgrounds who are interested in science and

in science career fields.

Barriers to Positive Educational

Outcomes: Qualitative Data

The comments of trainees, junior and senior

investigators, and training directors at the

aforementioned NIMH-sponsored October 1999

workshop confirmed the quantitative evidence

that the career pathways of minority researchers

are likely to be interrupted at different stages. A

combination of career obligations and life

experiences can cause delays, departures, and

subsequent returns to the career pathway.

Obstacles to uninterrupted educational trajectories

for students include financial and academic

problems, marriage, births, divorce, responsibility

for aging parents, tenure requirements, family

problems, and National Guard or Reserve

activation for military service.

Workshop participants also cited as barriers the

perceived effects of discrimination, which can lead

to 1) limited access to mentors and the informal

networks of communication at the more

prestigious levels of science; 2) inadequate

communication between minority research

programs and university academic departments;

3) insufficient racial/ethnic minority role models

who portray mental health science as a

prestigious and profitable career field; and 4)

inadequate basic science, mathematics, reading,

and writing skills. Related to the educational

deficits experienced by some students, limited

English language skills were described as a barrier

for some minority students who possess the

aptitude but lack the exposure to fundamental

concepts, constructs, and vocabulary that serve as

the underpinnings of statistical computations,

research methodology, and theoretical

frameworks. Interventions to address the wide

range of obstacles and barriers are necessary to

prevent delays or departures from becoming

permanent losses.

Conclusion

The career path for racial/ethnic minority mental

health researchers is wrought with significant

points of attrition or “leaks in the pipeline.” The

greatest attrition occurs prior to high school

graduation. The fact that nearly half of Hispanic

adults, a third of American Indian adults, and

nearly a quarter of African American adults failed

to complete high school is a major loss to the

development of scientists. Available data suggest

that losses continue at each subsequent transition

point, including college graduation,

graduate/professional school enrollment,
26

employment as faculty, and promotion within the

faculty ranks. 

It is encouraging that enrollments in community

colleges are beginning to approximate the

representation of American Indians, African

Americans, and Hispanics in the United States.

Addressing the educational barriers that

minorities encounter at each level of the

educational system is likely to retain more

minorities in the pipeline.
27

Chapter IV.

Progress in NIMH Support of

Racial/Ethnic Minority Researchers

and Trainees

Given the value of minority investigators to the

Nation’s workforce and its health and scientific

knowledge base, the Workgroup examined the role

and effectiveness of the full array of mechanisms

used by NIMH to support minority researchers and

trainees. This section reviews available data on

NIMH-supported independent investigators and their

ethnicity, and on trainees now “in the pipeline.” To

provide a broader context, the report presents data

on ethnic minorities in faculty positions, in graduate

school, in college, and in high school—information

and perspectives that help NIMH identify both

progress it has made and areas that need additional

attention to ensure NIMH achieves the best return

on its investments. Similar to the examination of the

educational context, two reference points will be

used to interpret how well minority trainees and

investigators fare within NIMH. Minority

representation within the different NIMH programs

will be contrasted to (a) the specific group’s national

representation and (b) their representation in the

specific applicant pool under review (e.g., faculty

and doctorate recipients). Whereas national census

figures may reflect a major goal of any program

striving to increase diversity, figures from the

specific applicant pool reflect the educational context

in which NIMH works to recruit and engage minority

trainees and investigators.

NIMH Investigator-Initiated

Applications and Awards by

Race/Ethnicity

NIH supplied available data regarding minority

investigators’ success with competing research

project applications. These data aggregate all

Research Project Grant (RPG) mechanisms for 1999,

from the small grant (e.g., R03) to the senior

investigator awards (e.g., R01). Multi-site projects

and cooperative agreements also are included. 

Table IV-A presents the data organized by

race/ethnicity and representation among the number

of grant applications submitted to NIMH, the

number of applications funded, and the specific

ethnic group’s success rate. “Success rate” is defined

as the number of applications funded divided by the

number of applications submitted. Few applications

were submitted by American Indians, African

Americans, and Hispanics, and fewer grants were

awarded to investigators in these respective

racial/ethnic minority groups. The corresponding

proportions of funded applications from these ethnic

groups are considerably less than their

representation in the 1999 census (American

Indians, 0.2% versus 0.7%; African Americans, 1.0%

versus 12.1%; and Hispanics, 2.7% versus 11.5%). A

somewhat different picture is identified when

comparing minority representation among grant

recipients with that of postsecondary education

faculty at the assistant professor, associate

professor, and professor levels in 1997 (the most

recent data available). Underrepresentation is still 
28

Table IV-A.

Number and Percentage of NIMH Applications for

Competing Research Projects Submitted and Awarded by Race/Ethnicity, 1999

Ethnicity

Number

Submitted

Percentage of

Applications

Submitted

Number

Awarded

Percentage

Awarded

Within-Group

Success Rate

American

Indian

3 0.21 0.2.33

Asian/ Pacific

Islander

97 5.3 27 5.5 .28

Black 31 1.7 5 1.0 .16

Hispanic 61 3.3 13 2.7 .21

White 1483 80.7 414 84.5 .28

Unknown 1628.8 30 6.1 .19

Total 1837 100% 490 100% .27

Source: NIH

Table IV-B.

Number and Percentage of NIH Applications for Competing Research Projects

Submitted and Awarded by Race/Ethnicity, 1999

Ethnicity

Number

Submitted

Percentage of

Applications

Submitted

Number

Awarded

Percentage

Awarded

WithinGroup

Success

Rate

American Indian 34 0.1 11 0.1 .32

Asian/Pacific

Islander

3164 12.0 890 10.4 .28

Black 338 1.3 63 0.7 .19

Hispanic 626 2.4 195 2.3 .31

White 20267 76.7 6880 80.4 .34

Unknown 1980 7.5 518 6.1 .26

Total 26409 100% 8557 100% .32

SourceU'NIH
29

evidenced among African Americans (1.0%

versus 4.6%) but no longer observed among

American Indians (2.0% versus 0.3%) and

Hispanics (2.7% versus 2.3%). Also, within-group

success rates for African American (16%) and

Hispanic (21%) applicants fell below NIMH’s

overall funding rate of 27%. One of the three

applications submitted by American Indian

investigators was funded, accounting for a

relatively high success rate (33%). The low

number of investigator-initiated applications and

the lower-than-average success rates leads to the

comparatively small number of approved grants,

especially to African American and Hispanic

researchers. 

Asian/Pacific Islanders’ representation among

applications funded (5.5%) was higher than their

proportion in the U.S. population in 1999 (3.7%)

but slightly lower than their representation

among faculty in 1997 (5.9%). The success rate

of applications from Asian/Pacific Islander 

investigators was identical to that of Whites

(28%). The proportion of funded applications that

went to White investigators (84.5%) was above

their representation in the population (71.9%)

and nearly identical to their representation

among the noted faculty ranks (84.9%).

It is informative to compare these NIMH trends

with the experiences of racial/ethnic minority

investigators across the NIH (Table IV-B). Both

similarities and differences are evident. One

similarity is that the percentage of total

applications submitted and funded from

American Indian, African American, and

Hispanic investigators is low for NIH as well as

for NIMH. Among the main racial/ethnic groups,

African Americans have the lowest success rate

for both NIMH (.16) and NIH (.19). Another

similarity between NIMH and NIH is that the

percentage of applications submitted by and

awarded to White investigators is above their

representation in the 1999 U.S. population.

There are important NIMH-NIH differences as

well. With regard to applications from American

Indians, African Americans, and Hispanics

combined, NIMH received a greater proportion

(5.2%) than did NIH overall (3.8%). This

differential also occurs among applications that

are awarded: The percentage of NIMH-funded

investigators from these three minority groups

(3.9%) slightly exceeds the comparable NIH-wide

figure (3.1%). NIMH both attracts and funds a

greater proportion of research applications from

minority investigators than does NIH. In both

settings, however, the percentages are still

significantly lower than the groups’

representation in the Nation’s population and to a

much lesser degree than the groups’

representation among the Nation’s faculty. 

One important qualifying feature of NIMH’s

apparently better record is that the success rate of

applicants from these three minority groups is

lower at NIMH (20%) than at NIH (27%). In other

words, although the proportion of submitted and

funded applications from minority researchers is

greater at NIMH, applicants from these minority

backgrounds are less likely to be funded than are

those applicants to all of NIH. One possible

explanation for this seemingly contradictory

finding is that NIMH overall has a lower success

rate (27%) than does NIH (32%). Another NIMHNIH difference is that Asian/Pacific Islanders fare

better at NIH than at NIMH with respect to

submitted applications (NIH, 12%; NIMH, 5.3%)

and for funded applications (NIH, 10.4%; NIMH,

5.5%).

One limitation of these data is that NIH does not

require applicants to report their ethnicity. With

each application, principal investigators

(PIs)/program directors are asked to submit a

voluntary self-report of their race/ethnicity,

although a substantial number of PIs decline to do

so. Of the 1,837 applications for competing

research projects at NIMH in 1999, 328 (17.9%)

did not indicate the PIs ethnicity. Among funded
30

applicants, 8.6% did not report ethnicity. The

number of applications for which the

investigator’s ethnicity is unknown (N = 42) is

nearly identical to the number of applications in

which PIs identified themselves as racial/ethnic

minorities (N = 43 or 8.8%). Because the

proportion of minority scholars is small, any

increase in their numbers significantly affects the

representation of ethnic minority investigators

among NIMH grantees. The NIH drew from other

databases (e.g., earned doctorate files) in an effort

to fill in the picture. For 1999, this search reduced

the number of PIs with unknown ethnicity from

42 to 30. The additional information regarding

ethnicity is useful, but it remains important to

recognize the limitations of these data.

A second limitation is that the unit of analysis

was number of applications rather than number

of applicants. Submission of multiple grants by an

individual could alter proportions, and the effect

would be particularly noticeable for ethnic

minority investigators. A third limitation is that

available data describe only one year and may not

be representative of previous years. While such

limitations require caution in interpreting the

results of the analysis, the potential benefits of

shedding light on NIMH’s review and funding

processes outweigh the potential risks in reporting

limited data. As noted in a section that follows,

consistencies among these data regarding the

racial/ethnic sources of investigator-initiated

grants and comparable career development and

trainee data as well as for NIMH and overall NIH

patterns argue for their inclusion in this report.

Limitations of the available data notwithstanding,

they consistently point out the paucity of

racial/ethnic minorities among NIMH-funded

research projects relative to their representation in

our Nation as a whole. However, when compared

to the proportion of minorities among college and

university faculty, only African Americans are

significantly underrepresented among grant

applicants. 

Research Training and Career

Development Funding Mechanisms

Ethnicity data are available for grants targeted to

ethnic minority investigators and trainees. These

include the New Minority Faculty K01 awards, the

Minority Supplements, and Underrepresented

Minority Fellowship Programs (T32s). Together

with this information from institutional training

grants (T32s), these data provide some evidence

of NIMH’s record in supporting minorities in

career development and training. Missing has

been information on the ethnicity of those who

received the individual non-minority (i.e., generic)

career development (K01, K08, K23) and

individual fellowship awards (F30, F31, F32). The

available data cover the more advanced trainees

(Scientist Development Awards for New Minority

Faculty) to the least advanced trainees (high

school students).

The Mentored Scientist Development Award for

New Minority Faculty (K01) parallels the

Mentored Research Scientist Development Award

(generic K01) that is available to both minority

and non-minority investigators. Both grant

mechanisms were initiated in 1996 to assist new

faculty members develop research programs. As

seen in Figure IV-A, the number of New Minority

Faculty K01-funded applications in a given year

has ranged from 0 to 5, in contrast to 1 to 18

funded applications for the Scientist Development

Awards (K01s). For both awards there is a

corresponding greater number of applications

each year for the generic award than for the

minority award. 

In calendar year 2000, for example, there were 40

applicants for the generic Scientist Development

K01 and 10 applications for the New Minority

Faculty K01. The success rate for the generic

award is 32% and for the minority grant is 38%.

The NIMH is urged to work more vigorously to

encourage minorities to submit applications for

these award mechanisms. NIMH does not know 
31

Figure IV-A. 

Number of NIMH Funded and Total Applications for New Minority Scientist Awards 

and Generic New Investigator Awards by Year

the race/ethnicity of the recipients of the

minority and non-minority grants because

Federal privacy laws limit the collection and

use of such information and it is difficult to

access these data from NIH. Information

about recipients’ race/ethnicity clearly is

important for evaluation purposes. Such

data will enable NIMH to determine whether

a minority-focused mechanism increases the

production of minority investigators above

and beyond the generic mechanism.

The intent of the Minority Supplement is to

encourage PIs to mentor trainees and investigators

so that they later become independent

investigators. A Supplement is granted to

investigators who have at least two years

remaining on a major NIH-funded research project.

The PI applies for the grant to support a minority

investigator or trainee who will work on research

related to the major research project. This section

provides data from 1998/99 to assess the success

of this mechanism at the NIMH. Particular

attention is given to post-doctoral and investigatorlevel recipients as they are more advanced in their

career development and more prepared to submit a

research application within a short period of time

after receiving the Supplement award.

In FYs 1998 and 1999 the NIMH awarded 113

and 110 Minority Supplements totaling $5.4

million and $5.8 million, respectively. Over 50% of

the awards were made for post-doctoral trainees

and investigators (1998, 50.4%; 1999, 58.2%). In

FY 1998, the pattern of distribution of Minority

Supplements was investigators, 17.7%; postdoctoral, 32.7%; pre-doctoral, 41.6%; and college,

8.0%. 

The distribution was similar the following year:

investigators, 18.2%; post-doctoral, 40%; predoctoral, 35.5%; and college, 6.4%. Although high

school students are eligible, none were awarded

supplements in 1998 or 1999. NIMH is the

leading NIH Institute in its use of minority

supplements. In 1998 and 1999, NIMH devoted

the largest percentage of its eligible research

grants to Minority Supplements: 1.08% and

1.01%, respectively (Table IV-C).

CFE02/L!D5M>
32

Table IV-C.

Expenditures for Minority Supplements as a Percentage of Eligible

Research Grants by Institute (1998-99)

INSTITUTE

Percentage

in 1998

Percentage

in 1999

Mean Rank

Order

1998-99

National Institute of Mental Health )#"'! )#") )

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!DE0714N!H/7/302A "#+% "#%+ (

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F4!-N14N "#+% "#%% (

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!G/4B3;!346

J0341F:3213;!H/7/302A

"#,+ "#%$ (#&

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F4!G0EN!-OE7/ "#+( "#%& *#&

D3B1F43;!>/30BP!QE4N!346!<;FF6

547B1BEB/

"#%( "#&, +

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!R/4/03;!M/6123;

C21/42/7

"#%( "#&( +

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!G13O/B/7!S

G1N/7B1T/!346!U164/V!G17/37/7

"#%% "#*' +

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!-0BA01B17!S

ME72E;F7=/;/B3;!S!C=14!G17/37/7

"#*% "#(, ))

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!JA1;6!>/3;BA!346

>E.34!G/T/;F?./4B

"#*+ "#(% ))#&

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F4!G/3:4/77!S!WBA/0

JF..E4123B1F4!G17F06/07

"#&* "#($ )$

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!-;;/0NV!346

54:/2B1FE7!G17/37/7

"#(' "#(+ )$

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!D/E0F;FN123;

G17F06/07!346!CB0F=/

"#(* "#*% )$#&

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!-;2FAF;!-OE7/!346

-;2FAF;17.

"#$$ "#*+ )(

D3B1F43;!XV/!547B1BEB/ "#(' "#() )*#&

D3B1F43;!J342/0!547B1BEB/ "#$+ "#($ )&

D3B1F43;!547B1BEB/!F:!X4T10F4./4B3;

>/3;BA!C21/42/7

"#(% "#$* )%

D3B1F43;!>E.34!R/4F./!H/7/302A

547B1BEB/

"#)+ "#$' )+#&

Source: NIH

Note: The 1998 data for Asian/Pacific Islanders were not reported.
33

The representation of the four major ethnic groups

among awardees of Minority Supplements from

1995 to 1998 is generally consistent with these

groups’ distribution among the four main

racial/ethnic groups (see Figure IV-B). The

reference point used in this report is the

percentage of each minority group within the

overall proportion of minorities for 1997.

Although NIMH receives high marks in its use and

distribution of the Minority Supplement relative to

its sister institutes, the more important outcome is

the number of Supplement recipients who go on

to become independent investigators supported by

NIMH or another NIH Institute. The Workgroup

identified Supplement recipients for the period

January 1997 through December 19, 2000, and

examined NIMH and NIH databases to determine

if recipients (a) ever submitted a grant

application, (b) were awarded any type of grant,

and (c) were awarded an independent investigator

award (R01). Given the relatively short period of

time during which the supplement has been

available, it is unreasonable to expect many

undergraduate or graduate students to have

submitted research grant proposals. Therefore, the

analysis focused only on post-doctoral and

investigator recipients. Figure IV-C summarizes

the main findings.

A total of 82 supplements were awarded to postdoctoral and investigator-level researchers during

this period. A similar number (83) was awarded to

undergraduate and pre-doctoral trainees. Of the

82 advanced recipients, 30 (37%) submitted grant

proposals and 11 applicants were successful. Four

persons submitted R01 applications. One

investigator was successful on the first try, and

one investigator is awaiting the outcome of the

review/funding process. The other successful

grantees obtained R03, R21, R29, and training

and career development awards (F32, K01, K23).

One possible explanation for the small number of

applicants is that those who receive Minority

Supplements from NIMH may obtain subsequent

research support from other NIH Institutes.

Indeed, an examination of the entire NIH database

indicated that 11 of the post-doctoral or

investigator-level recipients submitted

applications to other NIH Institutes. Of those, six

had also submitted an application to NIMH, thus

resulting in five new applicants. Five of the 11

applicants were successful in obtaining support

for their research (R01 and R21) or training/career

development projects (K14 and two F31s).

Another investigator submitted an R01

application and is awaiting the review/funding

decision. When considering data from both NIMH

and other NIH Institutes, 43% (35 of 82) of

Minority Supplement recipients have submitted

applications, 20% (16 of 82) have been funded, 7%

(6 of 82) have submitted R01 applications, and 2%

(2 of 82) were awarded R01s.

NIMH invests substantially in the Minority

Supplement mechanism and, except for Hispanics,

the four main racial/ethnic groups are well

represented among the recipients. Still, the

outcome data are mixed. On the one hand, over

two-fifths apply to NIH for subsequent research

funding and one-fifth are funded. On the other

hand, few minority investigators have submitted

R01 applications and only two have been

successful. It is clear that more must be done to

increase the number of supplement recipients who

submit their own successful research applications.

INSTITUTIONAL (National Research

Service Awards [NRSA]) TRAINING GRANTS

(T32s). 

Another funding mechanism widely used to

support minority research training is the

institutional training grant (T32) for pre- and

post-doctoral level trainees. NIMH funds two

types of such programs, University-Based

Programs (UBPs) and a smaller category of

national programs administered by four

professional associations that specifically recruit

trainees from minority groups, referred to as the 
34

Figure IV-C. 

Outcomes of NIMH Minority Supplement Recipients: 

Investigator and Post-Doctoral Levels 1997-2000

Figure IV-B. 

Percentage of Minority Supplements Awarded 1995-1998 by 

Ethnic Group Compared to 1997 U.S. Census*

Sources: NIH

*The census data represent the proportion of each racial/ethnic group among the four minority groups combined.

Sources: NIMH and U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates, Population Division, August 23, 2000.

Note: The 1998 data for Asian/Pacific Islanders were not reported.
35

Underrepresented Minority Fellowship Programs

(UMFPs). 

The UBPs train students from all ethnic

backgrounds, and together they support a large

number of trainees (e.g., N = 844 in 1998 of

which 136 were from underrepresented minority

groups). The professional association-based

UMFPs are much smaller (e.g., N = 98 trainees in

1998). These are administered by the American

Psychiatric Association, the American

Psychological Association, the American

Sociological Association, the Council on Social

Work Education, and the Society for Neuroscience.

The American Psychological Association

administers two separate programs, a generic

psychology research training program and a

neuroscience training program.

The race/ethnicity of the trainees was examined

by the type of program (UBP or UMFP) separately

and combined. The separate analysis identifies

how well each program type is doing in recruiting

minorities from diverse backgrounds whereas the

combined analysis indicates how effectively NIMH

is supporting minority trainees overall. Figure IVD depicts minority representation within UBPs

only and within UBPs and UMFPs combined. U.S.

census data from 1997, the same year from which

the training data were obtained, are included to

show the extent to which trainees at this level

reflect the ethnic diversity of the United States. In

the UBPs, American Indian and White trainees

approximately mirrored their proportional

presence in the overall population, while

Asian/Pacific Islander trainees represented nearly

twice their proportion in the U.S. population (7.0%

versus 3.6%.). The two largest racial/ethnic

minority

groups, African Americans and Hispanics,

however, were underrepresented. African

Americans and Hispanics made up only 4.7% and

3.6% of UBP trainees whereas they were 12.1%

and 10.9% of the 1997 U.S. population. Thus, the

UBPs fall considerably short in training African

American and Hispanic pre-doctoral students if

the reference point is the U.S. census. Combined

analysis of the UMFPs and UBPs yields a

significantly different ethnic distribution of

trainees. When combined, UBP and UMFP

numbers total 24% of minority trainees on T32s,

in comparison to their census representation of

25%. The most striking change is observed with

respect to African Americans, whose percentage

more than doubled, from 4.7% to 10.6%,

approaching their proportion within the United

States (12.1%). Hispanics’ representation among

trainees also increased, although to a lesser

degree. The percentage of Whites fell below their

representation within the U.S. population in the

combined analysis. Even when the UMFPs are

tallied, a shortfall remains in representation of

minority pre-doctoral students, particularly

among African American and Hispanic trainees.

(Data for pre-doctoral training programs that

contained or excluded UMFP data were less than

100%, because 10.9% and 10% of the trainees for

each data set chose not to report their ethnicity.) 

It is clear that the UMFPs contribute significantly

to the training of racial/ethnic minorities. A closer

examination of these programs is possible because

the administrative organizations (e.g., American

Psychological Association, Council on Social Work

Education) collect detailed information regarding

their trainees. Most importantly, graduates of

these programs primarily go on to

academic/teaching positions in the following

specialties: neurosciences, 50%; psychiatry, 79%;

psychology, 50%; social work, 66%; and sociology,

71%. Smaller proportions, ranging up to 15% of

trainees for a given discipline, obtain researchonly positions (NIMH, Interim Staff Report, 2000;

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/council/minority.pdf).

Acquiring academic, teaching, or research

positions oftentimes facilitates the development of

independent investigators, as most persons with
36

such positions are required to develop their

scholarly activities. The UMFPs do an excellent job

of recruiting African Americans who, in 1998,

were nearly two-thirds of UMFP trainees. In

contrast, Hispanics were underrepresented

relative to their census representation among the

four main racial/ethnic groups, and American

Indians and Asian/Pacific Islanders approached

their relative proportion among minority groups.

While the combined data of the UBPs and UMFPs

point to a shortfall in the number of NIMHsupported minority trainees relative to the

respective groups’ 1997 census levels, the picture

improves if the reference point used is the

available applicant pool, namely, baccalaureate

recipients. Recent data (1997) suggest that all

groups more closely approximated their

representation among baccalaureate recipients.

For example, Hispanics’ representation within

UBPs and UMFPs (5.5%) is low compared to the

representation of Hispanics in the Nation (10.9%)

but higher than their representation among

college degree recipients

(5.2%). The 1997 census data were used to

coincide with the most recent available data on

baccalaureate recipients (Figure IV-D). The

Workgroup believes that as the size of the

racial/ethnic minority baccalaureate recipient

pool—and, thus, the UBP and UMFP applicant

pool—increases, the number of racial/ethnic

minority trainees will also increase.

However, underrepresentation of African

Americans and Hispanics persists. The

representation of Asian/Pacific Islanders and

American Indians is consistent with their

representation in the Nation. Given the

importance of the T32 training for generating a

pool of potential scientists, it is important that the

data from other years be examined carefully. 

INDIVIDUAL MINORITY FELLOWSHIP

AWARDS (F31). 

Another means of supporting pre-doctoral

investigators is the individual pre-doctoral

fellowship award. There is an F31 generic grant

and an F31 grant for ethnic minority applicants.

The minority fellowship was first announced in

1995 (PA 95-029, revised PA 00-069), whereas

the generic grants have been in existence for a

longer period of time. At this time, data for the

minority F31 indicates that from 1995 to 1998 no

applications were submitted to NIMH. In 1999,

one of two submissions was funded; in 2000,

three of four applications were awarded, and one

was pending as this report was in final

preparation. The low number of applications in

response to the minority F31 may be due to

applicants applying for the generic mechanism,

not knowing about the alternative F31 or not

wanting to be identified as an awardee of a

minority mechanism.

MINORITY DISSERTATION RESEARCH

AWARDS (R03). 

The last pre-doctoral mechanism that the

Workgroup analyzed was the Minority

Dissertation Research Award. This was

established in 1994 (PA 94-053) and updated in

1999 (PA 99-139). On average, slightly more than

three awards have been funded annually since

1995. The ratio of applications to awards for the

six-year period is as follows: 1995, 2:2; 1996,

15:4; 1997, 14:4; 1998, 11:2; 1999, 0:0; 2000,

10:4. In the first six months of FY 2001, 12

applications have already been received. In

contrast to the individual pre-doctoral fellowship

(F31), a consistent number of applications are

being submitted each year for this mechanism,

with the exception of 1999, when for no clear

reason, no applications were received. The

racial/ethnic identity of these awardees is not

known at this time.
37

CAREER OPPORTUNITIES IN RESEARCH

(COR) HONORS UNDERGRADUATE

RESEARCH TRAINING (T34) GRANT. 

The COR Honors Undergraduate Training Program

began in 1979. Institutions with substantial

racial/ethnic minority enrollments can apply for these

awards. 

One objective of the program is to increase the

number of well-prepared minority undergraduate

students who can compete successfully for entry into

doctoral-level mental health research training

programs. A second objective is to develop and

strengthen mental health related curricula and

research training opportunities at these institutions. 

Data from program directors of all 15 funded

programs as of October 1999 indicate that a total

of 895 trainees have completed training and 540

(60%) have completed graduate school (including

master’s degrees).

The undergraduate COR programs recruit junior

and senior majors in psychology, biology,

chemistry, sociology, and social work, along with

a few students in anthropology and education.

The students must maintain a 3.0 or better grade

point average on a 4.0 scale. Each program has a

special COR curriculum with 20+ hours of

required coursework in addition to the regular

required courses for the college program degree.

The students conduct research projects under

supervision of faculty mentors and present oral

and poster presentations at scientific meetings.

They also participate in summer research

internships and special enrichment activities that

are sometimes conducted at other institutions.

Academic and career counseling sessions are

constants throughout the course of the program. 

Data on all trainees beyond the baccalaureate

degree are not complete. However, available data

for 11 of the 15 COR undergraduate programs

were analyzed for outcomes. The 11 programs

have been available for 4 to 20 years, with 10

having been in operation more than 10 years. 

The undergraduate COR programs data, although

incomplete, show the number of students entered

and graduated from the 11 programs in terms of

1) the number known to have entered and/or

completed advanced degree programs, 2) the types

of advanced degrees they earned, and 3) the

number currently in graduate or medical school.

The data indicate that an average of five trainees

entered per year and five completed each program.

An average of 85% (719/844) of trainees who

entered the 11 programs graduated (range, 69%-

100%) as of October 1999. Of 719 graduates, 290

are known to have obtained specific advanced

degrees: 39% (N = 113/719) received a Ph.D., 

14% (N = 42/719) received an M.D., and 41% 

(N = 120/719) received a master’s. The remaining

5% (N = 15/719) received miscellaneous

professional degrees (D.D.S., J.D., D.S.W.). 

In general, NIMH’s success in enrolling and

graduating COR baccalaureate degree students is

impressive. The available statistics that indicate

the number of minority students that go on to

pursue advanced degrees is likewise encouraging,

even in the absence of complete data. For

instance, three programs reported a large

proportion of graduates (71%, 81%, and 96%,

respectively) that were accepted into graduate

school, but their final dispositions are not known.

HIGH SCHOOL HONORS COR (R25)

PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS. 

The high school component of COR provides an

opportunity for institutions funded for an

undergraduate training grant to offer mentoring

and role modeling of up to six racial/ethnic

minority high school students per year. The high

school students interact with undergraduate COR
38

D

?+D G+>

DG+;

;B+F

B+<

D+C

;B+>

C+C

>C+>

; B

B+>

C+D

D+<

C+E

D?+F

E+? B+D

G+>

;E+; ;B+F

DE+D

B+D

B

; B

E B

G B

? B

C B

> B

D B

< B

* H & % "8 -3'(3 9" -3 * 4 " -3I 'J -8 " /" 8 '(4 6 -3 9& % 4 * /% "8 -3'* H & % "8 -3 K" 4 5-3" 8 L 1" 0& O3 P 3 .Q3

O, J 4

O, J 4 '-3 9'OV!J 4

; F F > )F D', -88-6-$%& -0& 'N & 8"5"& 304

; F F D '2 & 34 $ 4

"

"#)

"#$

"#(

"#*

"#&

"#%

"#+

"#'

- ./ 012 3 4 !54 6 13 4

J&%8&30-#&

students and faculty of institutions that have COR

Honors Undergraduate Training Grants. 

The High School Honors COR Program began in

1994, and by October 1999, 72 students had

completed the seven programs. Program directors

report that all of the 72 students had entered

college with 12 (17%) already graduated and the

remainder still in college. Subsequently, the seven

high school COR programs reported 88 students

entering and completing college, with 99%

enrolled in college and 87% graduated. Those who

had not yet graduated were still in college.

Though these findings are impressive, the

Workgroup notes that it believes a more thorough

and informative program analysis could be

conducted with the implementation of a student

tracking system.

Conclusion

Although there is much room for improvement,

the available data reveal a growing, diverse cadre

of trainees and investigators who have received

support from NIMH for either research training or

career development. However, minority

investigators are poorly represented among

investigators approved R01 research grant

applicants. A plausible explanation for the

discrepancy is that minority investigators are

having a difficult time making the transition from

trainee to independent investigator. While

resolving this discrepancy may be a function of

time—that is, within 5 to 10 years, there may be

a substantial increase in the number of research

applications submitted by and funded to minority

investigators—the Nation can ill afford to wait to

see if time resolves the problem. Initiatives are

needed both to strengthen the mentoring of future

and current investigators and to build on existing

training, career development, and research

mechanisms.

CFE02/7L!D5M>Y!I#C#!J/47E7!<E0/3EP!9F?E;3B1F4!X7B1.3B/7P!9F?E;3B1F4!G1T171F4P!-ENE7B!$(P!$"""Y!D3B1F43;!J/4B/0!:F0!X6E23B1F4

CB3B17B127P!54B/N03B/6!9F7B7/2F4630V!X6E23B1F4!G3B3!CV7B/.P!JF47F;163B/6!CE0T/V#

Figure IV-D.

Predoctorial Trainees by Ethnicity vs. 1996-97 Baccalaureate Recipients 

and 1997 U.S. Census by Ethnicity
39

Chapter V.

Mentoring and Model Programs

Despite the number of initiatives to support

minority trainees and investigators, the number of

funded applications from minority investigators is

very small. In considering both qualitative and

quantitative data, the Workgroup concluded that

improved mentoring is needed to translate the

gains at the earlier level of training into gains in

fundable grants or faculty positions. Providing

funds for training is not sufficient. It is critical to

enhance the mentoring associated with training,

with Minority Supplements, and with other

training endeavors. 

Mentoring and Tracking

Mentorship is defined as assisting novices to

become experts by helping them navigate personal

and professional obstacles, develop professional

relationships, and learn the subtle aspects of the

work environment (Bowman et al., 1999). With

the aim of developing clear recommendations

regarding mentoring, the Workgroup identified

model programs that focus on establishing strong

mentoring relationships with trainees. 

An important point raised at the Workshop was

that mentors help students to translate their

aspirations and expectations into tangible results

and to see that there are opportunities that can be

achieved. Oftentimes students, especially those

that are younger, have unrealistic expectations

about what it takes to become a scientist. A young

scientist might anticipate for example, conducting

research to cure a disease, frequently a disease

such as AIDS, diabetes, or cardiovascular disease

that is prevalent in their community. When a

student has not foreseen the rigors and course of

scientific training, he or she may feel frustrated

when, instead of working on the disease, they are

compelled to understand the basics of science and

mathematics. Workshop panelists noted that

students’ early ambitions should be channeled

and addressed in a step-wise fashion so that

students can understand that to achieve their

goals they must first become competent in the

basics of science. At the same time, the panelists

cautioned that students’ aspirations should not be

dampened or discouraged; rather, they should be

nurtured over the course of a process that takes

considerable time.

The interest among underrepresented minority

trainees in solving health problems in their

communities is a good starting point from which

to build. Mentoring these young people is critical

for success in attracting them into and retaining

them in research careers. In 1997, the National

Academy Press published an excellent guide to

mentoring titled “Advisor, Teacher, Role Model

and Friend—On Being a Mentor to Students in

Science and Engineering.” The complete volume

can be found at http://bob.nap.edu/readingroom/

books/mentor/.

Mentors not only help students learn the

importance of basic science or of developing the

trainees’ interests in researchable questions, but

they also work closely with trainees to help them

acquire the specific skills necessary to carry out

research. Close one-to-one training is necessary,

during which careful reviews are provided of

laboratory techniques, statistical analysis, writing
40

of manuscripts and grant proposals, and

rehearsals of research presentations. Moreover,

this very specific technical skill training is

provided in a supportive relationship.

Model Programs

Two model NIMH-funded programs have

successfully incorporated mentorship. Both used,

in part, the Mental Health Education Grant (R25),

a highly flexible mechanism that lends itself to

variable activities that foster good student/mentor

relationships. The R25 can be used by itself or in

combination with other training and/or research

grant mechanisms (T32/R01). Characteristics of

the R25 mechanism (under revision) are:

 It supports “short courses” (research

experiences/workshops/seminars)

 The total direct cost is up to $150,000 per

year 

 Awards can be for up to five years 

 Institutional commitments of support are

encouraged but not required

 No stipends are provided, but support can

defray participation costs

 Evaluation plans are required

Conclusion

Mentoring is essential to the development of

successful investigators. Mentorship can take

place within a single one-to-one training

relationship or within a given program with

multiple mentors and apprentices. The sample

programs illustrate that solid mentorship of

minority investigators can lead to successful

training outcomes. Clearly, further

efforts of this kind are needed, not only in

Box V-A: Model Program I

The Family Research Consortium (currently FRC III, 

following FRC I and II), led by Dr. Linda Burton at 

Pennsylvania State University, is featured as a model 

consortium/post-doctoral training program in the National 

Academy of Sciences report “Bridging Disciplines in the 

Brain, Behavioral and Clinical Sciences.” The FRC was 

organized to promote intellectual exchange and 

collaborative research and training on 1) theoretical 

approaches that are culturally and contextually relevant to 

the study of mental health and families in diverse 

populations, 2) new advances in research designs 

measurement and statistical methodology that need to be 

incorporated in research on diversity, and 3) the extension 

of basic studies on diverse families and mental health to 

prevention and intervention research. The consortium, 

funded as an R01 grant, meets four times per year to 

discuss collaborative research for advancing the 

understanding of cultural diversity as it relates to child 

and family mental health and disorders. One of the 

meetings is open to the field to ensure dissemination and 

integration with the wider research community. The 

members of the Consortium serve as faculty on an NIMHfunded post-doctoral training grant (T32). Trainees work 

with one primary and at least one secondary mentor. Early 

in training, each trainee participates in an eight-week 

course on child and family research. This is followed by 

close mentorship with the primary mentor for the 

remainder of the training experience. The consorium holds

a summer institute each year on a different topic and 

invites approximately 100 other researchers to attend. 

Many young scholars attend for additional training and 

mentoring. One scholar has received a $2.5 million grant 

and another a $3.5 million grant from NIMH. As of FY 

2000, roughly 90% of the post-doctoral scholars from 

FRC III are in their second year of training, and all have 

written grant applications as of October 2000. The new 

cohort of post-doctoral scholars for FRC III are highly 

diverse in terms of ethnicity: two African Americans, two 

Hispanics, one Asian/Pacific Islander, and two Whites.

innovative training programs but in conventional

training programs as well. Mentoring programs

should be designed to facilitate personal and

professional networks. This will assist trainees in

becoming associated with other researchers and
41

influential people who can help advise and guide

them as they navigate their research/professional

career pathways.

Though the analysis of the training data in this

report reflects a positive academic progression for

the majority of the trainees, further analysis of the

talent pool is not possible due to the absence of

standardized information about trainee

performance and post-graduate activity. This type

of information would be readily available in a

centralized trainee tracking system, which this

Workgroup recommends for implementation. A

trainee tracking system provides early

identification of education transition points and

issues that influence attrition, stimulate specialty

selection, and contribute to trainee advancement

to the next level of career progression. The trainee

tracking system would also indicate which

funding mechanisms are successful and which

need revision or elimination. Trainee tracking

would contribute to a more thorough analysis of

the NIMH research portfolio and return on

investment of its training dollars. Once

implemented, the trainee tracking system will

assist in defining “success” for the racial/ethnic

minority trainee, as well as contributing to the

development of a “Mental Health Research Career

Life-Cycle Model.” During the preparation of this

report, the Workgroup noted that trainees,

training program managers, and NIMH staff used

different definitions for “trainee success.” For

some trainees, success meant being the first

family member to graduate from college. However,

for training program managers, “success” was

defined as those trainees who either pursued a

research career, entered academia, or put their

college education to some other use. The NIMH

staff defined success as attainment of the

independent investigator level. 

The Workgroup concluded that as the term

“success” is operationalized and trainees are

tracked, the various roles and functions that occur

in the pursuit of a mental health research career

will graphically unfold into a career life-cycle

model. The career life cycle can then more easily

be explained to prospective and current trainees

by career counselors, mentors, recruiters, and

career managers. 

Box V-B: Model Program II

An innovative NIMH-funded research training program led 

by Barbara Marin, University of California, San Francisco 

joins minority group scientists studying HIV prevention in 

minority communities with established investigators at 

mentoring institutions. This program aims to meet several 

goals: 1) to enhance the quality of HIV prevention research

to serve vulnerable ethnic minority populations; 2) to 

develop culture-specific theoretical models for preventing 

HIV disease; and 3) to increase the number of minority 

group members among principal investigators funded by 

NIH, CDC, and other agencies. The program consists of six

components: trainees spend three summer sessions at a 

host institution where they learn the nuts and bolts of 

independent research and three academic years that 

include interaction with NIH and CDC program staff. The 

academic program also includes seminars on topics 

extending from preparing and administering actual grant 

applications to recruiting participants for a study, to 

ensuring appropriate human subjects protections. The 

program, which is in place at the Center for AIDS 

Prevention Studies (CAPS) under a P50 grant mechanism, 

places special emphasis on identifying and involving 

research mentors who have experience in and sensitivity to

cross-cultural research concerns. Also, at various points 

throughout the training period, the new investigators have 

a chance to have their preliminary plans and actual 

research proposals critiqued by senior scientists from 

outside their particular fields. This procedure introduces 

the trainees to the challenges of the actual peer review 

process. In the latest progress report, CAPS reports on the 

accomplishments of the 11 trainees (about four per year) 

who began in 1997, 1998, or 1999: Three of the scientists 

have secured large multi-year funding for their research, 

and three investigators have obtained smaller research 

awards. The other five have either submitted grants for 

review or are developing grants.

43

Chapter VI. 

Action Plan 

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCREASE THE

NUMBER OF INDEPENDENT RACIAL/ETHNIC

MINORITY RESEARCHERS 

In the 21st century, the Nation faces new

challenges and opportunities in health and

medical research that will require the attention of

the best scientists we can develop, drawing on the

interests, talents, and expertise of every sector of

our society. The Workgroup urges NIMH to

continue its leadership and commitment to

training ethnic minority high school and

undergraduate students in an effort to attract

researchers into the mental health research career

pathway. At the same time, the Workgroup

assigns special emphasis to the Institute’s support

of research training at the doctoral, post-doctoral,

and investigator levels. Investing in these phases

of training will produce not only more scientists

dedicated to mental health research but also the

mentors, tenured faculty, role models, and other

infrastructure elements needed to generate

additional independent investigators. This

investment will necessitate a strong partnership

between NIMH and research and academic

institutions by way of institutional support for

mentors and trainees.

The Workgroup members also wish to emphasize

their belief that a) the creation of a tracking

system to monitor the career progression of

NIMH-supported trainees through the investigator

level is vital; b) long-term mentoring is essential

to the success of minority trainees and

investigators; c) the promotion of research career

advancement at the pre- and post-doctorate levels

is essential to removing barriers that impede

transition from one career level to the next; d) the

strengthening of networks with educational and

industrial partners to meet kindergarten through

community college science training objectives that

exceed NIMH’s resources will increase the

potential investigator pool; e) the eventual

attainment of racial/ethnic minority group

representativeness on scientific review groups will

lead to more urgently needed research on health

disparities; and f) periodic evaluation of the

Action Plan to assess its effects will improve the

likelihood of its successful implementation. To

build on NIMH’s past efforts, the NAMHC

Workgroup submits to the Council the following

recommendations: 

Recommendation No. 1: 

Create a tracking system to monitor the

career progression of NIMH-supported

trainees through the investigator level so

that training can be optimized based on

outcomes.

The Workgroup recommends the development of a

centralized tracking system to enable NIMH to

collect and maintain data and information that

will afford a better understanding of the numbers

and career progression of racial/ethnic minority

trainees and scientists. These databases should be

overseen by the Office for Special Populations,

NIMH, in conjunction with a Racial/Ethnic
44

Minority Trainee Career Management Program.

The tracking system will contribute significantly

to understanding factors related to decision

points, barriers, and impediments that influence

mental health research career decisions for

racial/ethnic minority group members and will

assist NIMH in monitoring success of particular

programs and grant mechanisms. The database

should be used to inform trainees about pending

educational decision points, associated funding

mechanisms, and timelines. Access to a given

individual’s career file should be restricted to the

trainee, to an identified “NIMH career manager,”

and to the mentor. Toward these ends, the

Workgroup urges the following actions:

ACTION 1.1: Encourage the voluntary disclosure

of racial/ethnic identity for all grantees to permit

tracking.

ACTION 1.2: Encourage the voluntary disclosure

of the Social Security Account Number (SSAN) for

all grantees.

ACTION 1.3: Develop a confidential database

mechanism to collect the racial/ethnic identity and

SSANs of all trainees and grantees funded by

NIH/NIMH and use the information contained

therein to evaluate the NIMH portfolio. 

ACTION 1.4: Develop a career management file to

monitor the progression of trainees funded by

NIH/NIMH mechanisms.

ACTION 1.5: Ensure that the database system

protects the privacy of grantees and research

participants.

ACTION 1.6: Inform each trainee and investigator

listed on the database about NIMH criteria and

procedures regarding the collection, maintenance,

storage method, retention period, and disposal

processes for their personal information.

Recommendation No. 2:

Establish a national mental health

research mentorship program devoted to

training racial/ethnic minority

investigators.

The Workgroup recommends the creation of a

national mentoring network of senior minority

and non-minority investigators. The national

network would develop extended relationships

with minority trainees and investigators to help

them transition to the next level of their career

development. The mentorship process is

understood to be a labor-intensive activity that

typically involves an experienced scientist and a

small number of protégés engaged in a set of

focused research projects. 

Innovative mentorship arrangements are

encouraged to include collaborative efforts

between researchers at class I and II institutions

and other colleges/universities, and distant

learning mentorships with support for recurring

face-to-face meetings. As the pool of trainees and

junior investigators increases, the pool of mentors

must likewise increase. The Workgroup recognizes

that mentorship duties can deflect mentors from

the organizational duties their institutions expect

them to perform. These institutions are becoming

more interested in receiving the full performance

from the mentor or compensation for time the

individual devotes to mentoring. Accordingly, the

Workgroup suggests that a viable national mental

health research mentorship infrastructure would

be more successful if a mechanism were to be

developed to facilitate the involvement of

mentors/institutions in working with students;

these efforts could entail reimbursement for

expenses associated with the mentorship process.
45

The Workgroup also believes that the development

of categorical segments of the

racial/ethnic minority investigator training

“pipeline” (e.g., high school, community college,

dual degree, health disparities research, Native

American tribal colleges [Appendix G],

predominantly African American colleges and

universities [Appendix H], and Hispanic-serving

institutions [Appendix I]) would assist new

mentors in their selection of protégés. Thus the

Workgroup urges the following actions: 

ACTION 2.1: Develop a national network of senior

minority and non-minority investigators to

develop extended relationships with minority

trainees and investigators to help them transition

to the next level of their career development.

Successful mentorship requires that the training

take place in the context of specific research

projects. The program should enlist the Nation’s

most distinguished scientists, scholars, and

industrial partners by providing tangible (e.g.,

salary or honoraria) and intangible (e.g.,

National, State, and NIH recognition, honors, and

awards) incentives (see description of Presidential

Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and

Engineering Mentoring, NSTC, 2000). 

ACTION 2.2: Establish a 1-800 support and

referral line staffed by trained NIMH personnel to

provide to any racial/ethnic minority trainee or

investigator with immediate, short-term

assistance with regard to research questions and

career development. 

ACTION 2.3: Foster and develop an array of

mentoring/education programs (e.g., sample

model programs) using existing research and

training mechanisms (e.g., R25 or the Mental

Health Education Grant) in creative and flexible

ways to meet specific needs of minority trainees

and investigators. Suitable uses of these awards

might be to further develop research proposals

and manuscripts, to help minority investigators

reenter the research enterprise and/or switch

fields, and to address health disparities.

ACTION 2.4: Endorse and nurture distant

mentorship relations with incentive packages that

provide such items as communications

connectivity, support for periodic travel, and

supplies for mentors and protégés located at

different institutions, agencies, or industrial

locations.

ACTION 2.5: Encourage, through expense

reimbursement and other means, mentors of

minority investigators. 

ACTION 2.6: Increase the number of technical

assistance workshops involving minority trainees

and investigators (and mentors) to stimulate postdoctoral trainee interest in mental health/health

disparities research.

Recommendation No. 3: 

Concentrate more new resources at the

later stages (post-doctoral and beyond) of

career development. 

Given the complexity of research today, most

trainees need and benefit from post-doctoral

training and supervised research career

development if they are to realize their full

capacity to do independent, innovative research.

To complement the emphasis of the proposed

national mentorship program that is directed at

the later years of career development, the

Workgroup recommends the following actions:

ACTION 3.1: Implement “loan forgiveness” or a

loan repayment plan for any trainee who pursues

a dual degree (i.e., M.D.- Ph.D., M.D.-M.P.H.),
46

especially in critical shortage areas such as child

psychiatry.

ACTION 3.2: Promptly reevaluate applicants with

promising proposals who “just missed the pay

line” and/or need relatively little time and

technical assistance to refine and resubmit highly

competitive applications. 

ACTION 3.3: Develop a strategic plan that allows

grantsmanship training for extramural postdoctorate level scientists (e.g., Intramural

Research Program Grant-Writing Workshop

Series) to help reduce the time it takes to obtain

an independent investigator grant (R01).

ACTION 3.4: Provide additional post-doctoral slots

to NIMH-funded Minority Fellowship Programs to

increase the rate of their demonstrated

productivity and more quickly infuse the proposed

national minority mental health research

mentorship infrastructure.

ACTION 3.5: Encourage the Minority Supplements

to include clearly delineated research

relationships between principal investigators and

more senior supplementees who work at

institutions some distance apart.

Recommendation No. 4:

Encourage new and strengthen existing

networks and partnerships to enhance

science training goals that exceed NIMH

resource capabilities.

To complement the emphasis of the national

mentorship program in the later years of career

development, the Workgroup recommends that

NIMH establish and strengthen existing national

alliances and partnerships with a wide variety of

institutions, including private industry, to

promote science careers, with particular attention

to the earlier years of development (kindergarten

through community college). To effect these

recommendations NIMH is urged to implement

these actions:

ACTION 4.1: Network with institutes and

programs that invest in the career identification

and academic development of promising students

in grades K-12 to stimulate early interest in a

mental health research career. Provide

information about the full spectrum of mental

health research career fields. The networks should

be linked with institutes and organizations such

as the Department of Education, Department of

Justice, National Institute of General Medical

Sciences, National Science Foundation, private

foundations, and other neuroscience and

behavioral science institutes.

ACTION 4.2: Encourage linkages among the

NIMH, the Nation’s community colleges, and fouryear institutions with large numbers of

underrepresented minority students (e.g., Native

American tribal colleges, Hispanic-serving

institutions, and predominantly African American

colleges and universities). These linkages will

strengthen, in turn, ties between the NIMH high

school and baccalaureate training programs. 

ACTION 4.3: Enhance linkages with the minority

fellowship programs to access career development

and progression data that denote the efficacy and

effectiveness of minority fellowship programs.

ACTION 4.4: Encourage research training

institutions, editorial boards, foundations, and so

on to promote research, research training, and

publication to promote issues related to the

mental health of racial/ethnic minority

communities.
47

Recommendation No. 5: 

NIMH is encouraged to a) ascertain that

Initial Review Group memberships are

diverse and, where relevant, possess

expertise needed to evaluate research in

minority populations/communities and 

b) enforce sanctions for programs that fail

to attract racial/ethnic minority trainees

when such criteria are stipulated in the

funding mechanism. 

It is essential that members of scientific review

groups not only have the expertise to judge the

merit of the research methodologies and

conceptual frameworks, but also have the

expertise to judge the appropriateness of the

methodologies and theories for use with

racially/ethnically diverse populations. It is

expected that this diverse body of scientists will

possess the requisite knowledge of racial/ethnic

and cultural nuances associated with mental

illness, mental health, health disparities, and

mental health research to allow rigorous, fair peer

review.

ACTION 5.1: Continue to vigorously pursue efforts

to increase racial/ethnic minority representation

on Initial Review Groups and encourage health

disparities research.

ACTION 5.2: Using the most current available

data, orient Initial Review Groups (IRGs), journal

editors, and academia to the issues of culture,

race, and ethnicity in mental health research, and

encourage IRGs to be particularly open to research

proposals in areas where gaps in knowledge and

health disparities are known to exist.

ACTION 5.3: Encourage reviewers to closely

monitor and apply existing policies that require

them to rate applications based on the success or

failure of training programs and research studies

to address minority representation among trainees

and research participants.

ACTION 5.4: Increase prioritization for highly

meritorious applications that address health

disparities when they are evenly ranked by peer

review with applications not proposing health

disparities research.

Recommendation No. 6: 

We encourage NIMH to conduct an annual

review of plans for racial/ethnic diversity

in mental health research careers and of

the strategic plan for reducing health

disparities to assess progress made in

implementing the action plans. NIMH

should then report its findings to NAMHC.

Concluding Comment

At the dawn of the 21st century, the Nation is

poised to take quantum leaps in discoveries that

increase scientific knowledge about human

behavior, the brain, diagnostics, pharmaceuticals,

communications, and many other issues that

affect the well-being of its people. The Workgroup

believes that the knowledge gained through

scientific inquiry must reflect the input of the

diversity of intellectual capital this country enjoys.

Therefore, it is imperative that participants in the

scientific enterprise represent all Americans. 

In that regard, the NAMHC Workgroup on

Racial/Ethnic Diversity Research Training and

Health Disparities offers this plan as a means of

achieving practical success in increasing the

number of racial/ethnic minority independent

investigators and in reducing health disparities in

the United States. 

49

References and Further Reading 

American Anthropological Association (2000).

Response to OMB Directive 15: Race and Ethnic

Standards for Federal Statistics and

Administrative Reporting. Updated September 18,

2000. Website: www.aaanet.org/gvt/ombdraft.htm

Bowman, S. R., Kite, M. E., Branscombe, N. R., &

Williams, S. (1999). Developmental relationships

of African Americans in the Academy. In A. J.

Murrell, F. J. Crosby, & R. S. Ely (Eds.), Mentoring

dilemmas: Developmental relationships within

multicultural organizations. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.

Castro, A., & Ramirez, M, III. (1997). The Latino

representation in the psychological literature: A

25-year review of 6 APA journals. Unpublished

manuscript.

Collazo, Y., Tam, R., Sramek, J., & Herrera, J.

(1996). Neuroleptic dosing in Hispanic and Asian

inpatients with schizophrenia. Mt. Sinai Journal

of Medicine, 63, 310-313.

Coplan, J. D., & Lydiard, R. B. (1998). Brain

circuits in panic disorder. Biological Psychiatry,

44, 1264-1276.

Frackiewicz, E. J., Sramek, J. J., Herrera, J. M.,

Kurtz, N. M., & Cutler, N. R. (1997). Ethnicity and

antipsychotic response. Annals of

Pharmacotherapy, 31, 1360-1369.

Goddard, A. W., & Charney, D. S. (1997). Toward

an integrated neurobiology of panic disorder. 

Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 58 (Suppl. 2), 4-11.

Graham, S. (1992). Most of the subjects were

White and middle class. American Psychologist,

47, 629-639.

Jones, J. M. (1991). Psychological models of race:

What have they been and what should they be? In

J. D. Goodchilds, et al. (Eds.), Psychological

perspectives on human diversity in America (pp.

7-46). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological

Association.

Lawson, W. B. (1986). Racial and ethnic factors in

psychiatric research. Hospital and Community

Psychiatry, 37, 50-54.

Lee, S. M. (1998). Asian Americans: Diverse and

growing. Population Bulletin, 53 (2). Washington,

D.C.: Population Reference Bureau. Internet site:

www.prb.org/pubs/population_bulletin/

bu53-2/53_2_intro.htm

Lin, K. M., Poland, R. E., & Anderson, D. (1995).

Psychopharmacology, ethnicity and culture.

Transcultural Psychiatric Research Review, 32, 

1-40.

Lopez, S. R. (1989). Patient variable biases in

clinical judgment: Conceptual overview and

methodological considerations. Psychological

Bulletin, 106, 184-203.

Mark, T., McHusick, D., King, E., Harwood, H., &

Genuardi, J. (1998). National expenditures for

mental health, alcohol, and other drug abuse

treatment, 1996. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse

and Mental Health Services Administration.

Minority Health and Health Disparities Research

Act of 2000. 106th Congress of the United States,

Second Session. S.1880.
50

Multicultural Student’s Guide to Colleges, rev. ed.

(1996). Canada: Noonday.

Murray, C. J. L., & Lopez, A. D. (Eds.). (1996). The

global burden of disease: A comprehensive

assessment of mortality and disability from

diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and

projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

School of Public Health.

Murray, C. J. L., & Lopez, A. D. (1996). The global

burden of disease. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

School of Public Health.

National Academy of Sciences. (1995). Summary

Report 1993: Doctorate Recipients from United

States Universities. Washington, D.C.: Author.

Internet site: http://www.nap.edu/openbook/

N1000064/html/50.html

National Academy Press. (1997). Advisor, teacher,

role model and friend—on being a mentor to

students in science and engineering. Internet site:

http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/mentor

National Advisory Mental Health Council. (1999).

Bridging science and services: A report by the

National Advisory Mental Health Council’s Clinical

Treatment and Services Research Workgroup,

Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human

Services, National Institutes of Health, National

Institute of Mental Health.

National Advisory Mental Health Council. (2000).

Translating behavioral science into action: A

report by the National Advisory Mental Health

Council’s Behavioral Science Workgroup,

Rockville, MD:

Department of Health and Human Services,

National Institutes of Health, National Institute of

Mental Health.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1999).

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, 

“Fall Staff Survey” (IPEDS-S: 1997). Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

National Institute of Mental Health. (2000). NIMH

Training Programs for Underrepresented

Racial/Ethnic Minorities: Interim Staff Report.

Bethesda, MD: (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/

council/minority.pdf).

National Research Council. (2000). Addressing the

nation’s changing needs for biomedical and

behavioral scientists. Washington, D.C.: National

Academy Press.

National Science Board, Science & Engineering

Indicators - 2000. Arlington, VA: National Science

Foundation, 2000 (NSB-00-1).

National Science Foundation. (1999). Women,

minorities, and persons with disabilities in science

and engineering: 1998. Arlington, VA: National

Science Foundation. (NSF-99-338)

National Science and Technology Council. (2000).

Ensuring a strong U.S. scientific, technical, and

engineering workforce in the 21st century.

Washington, D. C.: Office of Science and

Technology.

Newburger, E. C., & Curry, A. (2000). Educational

attainment in the United States: Population

characteristics, March 1999 (Current Population

Reports P20-528). Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Commerce.

Owens, I., & King, M. C. (1999). Genomic views of

human history. Science, 286, 451-453.

Rice, D. P., & Miller, L. S. (1996). The economic

burden of schizophrenia: Conceptual and

methodological issues, and cost estimates. In M.

Moscarelli, A. Rupp, & N. Sartorious (Eds.),

Handbook of mental health economics and health

policy. Vol.1: Schizophrenia (pp. 321-324). New

York: John Wiley and Sons.
51

Snowden, L. R, & Cheung, F. K. (1990). Use of

inpatient mental health services by members of

ethnic minority groups. American Psychologist,

45, 347-355.

Sullivan, G. M., Coplan, J. D., & Gorma, J. M.

(1998). Psychoneuroendocrinology of anxiety

disorders. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 21,

397-412.

The Chronicle of Higher Education. (2000).

Almanac Issue, August 27, Volume XLVI,

Number 1.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Resident population

estimates of the United States by sex, race, and

Hispanic origin: April 1, 1990, to July 1, 1999,

with short-term projection to July 1, 2000. 

Population Estimates Program, Population

Division. August 23, 2000. Internet site:

www.census.gov/population/estimates/nation/

intfile3-1.txt.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

(1999). Mental health: A report of the Surgeon

General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services, Substance Abuse and

Mental Health Services Administration, Center for

Mental Health Services, National Institutes of

Health, National Institute of Mental Health.

Zuckerman, M. (1990). Some dubious premises in

research and theory on racial differences:

Scientific, social and ethical issues. American

Psychologist, 45, 1297-1303. 

53

Appendices

Appendix A

1999 NATIONAL ADVISORY MENTAL HEALTH COUNCIL

CHAIRPERSON

Steven E. Hyman, M.D.

Director

National Institute of Mental Health

Bethesda, MD

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

Jane A. Steinberg, Ph.D.

Acting Director

Division of Extramural Activities

National Institute of Mental Health

Bethesda, MD

MEMBERS

Thomas J. Coates, Ph.D.

Professor

Director, UCSF AIDS Research Institute and Center

for AIDS Prevention Studies

University of California, San Francisco

San Francisco, CA

Kathy Cronkite

Mental Health Advocate

Austin, TX

Mary L. Durham, Ph.D.

Vice President/Research 

Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

Portland, OR

Mary Jane England, M.D.

President

Washington Business Group on Health

Washington, DC 

Javier I. Escobar, M.D.

Professor and Chairman

University of Medicine and Dentistry of 

New Jersey

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

Piscataway, NJ

Apostolos Georgopoulos, M.D., Ph.D.

Professor, Department of Neuroscience, Neurology

and Psychiatry

University of Minnesota Medical School

Director, Brain Sciences Center

Veterans Administration Medical Center

Minneapolis, MN

Deborah Harrison

Mental Health Advocate

Potomac, MD

Henry Lester, Ph.D.

California Institute of Technology

Division of Biology

Pasadena, CA

James McClelland, Ph.D.

Co-Director

Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition

Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, PA

Charles B. Nemeroff, M.D., Ph.D.

Reunette W. Harris Professor and Chair

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral 

Sciences
54

Emory University School of Medicine

Atlanta, GA

Anne C. Petersen, Ph.D.

Senior Vice President for Programs

W. K. Kellogg Foundation 

Battle Creek, MI

A. John Rush, M.D.

Professor, Betty Jo Hay Distinguished Chair

Department of Psychiatry

Southwestern Medical Center

University of Texas

Dallas, TX

Edward Scolnick, M.D.

President

Merck Research Laboratories

West Point, PA

Joseph S. Takahashi, Ph.D.

Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute

Walter and Mary E. Glass Professor

Department of Neurobiology and Physiology

Northwestern University

Evanston, IL

James G. Townsel, Ph.D.

Professor and Director

Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience

School of Medicine

Meharry Medical College

Nashville, TN

Myrna Weissman, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Clinical and Genetic Epidemiology

New York State Psychiatric Institute

Columbia University

New York, NY

Roy C. Wilson, M.D.

Director

Missouri Department of Mental Health

Jefferson City, MO

EX OFFICIO MEMBERS

Donna Shalala, Ph.D.

Office of the Secretary, DHHS

Secretary

Department of Health and Human Services

Washington, DC

Robert A. Mays, Jr., Ph.D.

Department of Defense

Colonel, U.S. Army

Office of the Inspector General

North Atlantic Regional Medical Command

Walter Reed Army Medical Center

Washington, DC

Ruth Kirschstein, M.D.

National Institutes of Health 

Acting Director

National Institutes of Health

Bethesda, MD

LIAISON REPRESENTATIVE

Thomas H. Bornemann, Ed.D.

Deputy Director

Center for Mental Health Services

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration

Rockville, MD

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Thomas B. Horvath, M.D., F.R.A.C.P.

Chief of Staff

Veterans Affairs Medical Center

Houston, TX
55

Appendix B

NATIONAL ADVISORY MENTAL HEALTH COUNCIL WORKGROUP

For Initiatives on Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Training and Health Disparities Research

MEMBERSHIP AND STAFF ROSTER

Javier I. Escobar, M.D., Chair*

Professor and Chairman, Department of Psychiatry

University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

675 Hoes Lane

Piscataway, NJ 08854-5636

Phone: 732-235-4440

Fax: 732-235-5158

Email: escobaja@UMDNJ.edu

Pamela Braboy Jackson, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

Duke University - Department of Sociology

Box 90088

Durham, NC 27708

Phone: 919-660-5621

Fax: 919-660-5611

Email: braboy@soc.duke.edu

James J. Jones, Ph.D.

Director, Minority Fellowship Program

American Psychological Association

750 First Street, NE, Suite 1050

Washington, DC 20002-4242

Phone: 202-336-6027

Fax: 202-336-6012

Email: jjones@apa.org

William B. Lawson, M.D., Ph.D.

Chief, Psychiatry Service

Richard L. Roudebush Veterans Medical Center

1481 West 10th Street

Indianapolis, IN 46202

Phone: 317-554-0253

Fax: 317-554-0056

Email: william.lawson@med.va.gov

____________

*Member, National Advisory Mental Health Council

Robert A. Mays, Jr., Ph.D.*

Colonel, U.S. Army

Office of the Inspector General

North Atlantic Regional Medical Command

Walter Reed Army Medical Center

Building 1, Room E102

6825 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20007

Phone: 202-782-4551

Fax: 202-782-3522

Email: robert.mays@na.amedd.army.mil

Jeanne Miranda, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Psychiatry

Psychiatry Department

608 Kober-Cogan Building

Georgetown University 

3900 Reservoir Road, NW

Washington, DC 20007

Phone: 202-687-8650

Fax: 202-687-6658

Email: mirandaj@gunet.georgetown.edu

Anne C. Petersen, Ph.D.*

Senior Vice President for Programs

W.K. Kellogg Foundation

One Michigan Avenue East

Battle Creek, MI 49017

Phone: 616-969-2278

Fax: 616-969-2638

Email: anne.petersen@wkkf.org

Edward Scolnick, M.D.*

President

Merck Research Laboratories

Sumneyton Pike

Building 26-215

West Point, PA 19486

Phone: 215-652-7229

Fax: 215-652-6143

Email: edward_solnick@merck.com
56

George B. Stefano, Ph.D.

Director, Neuroscience Institute

SUNY College at Old Westbury

Natural Sciences Building, Room S231

223 Store Hill Road

Old Westbury, NY 11568

Phone: 516-876-2732

Fax: 516-876-2727

Email: gstefano@linnet

David T. Takeuchi, Ph.D.

Department of Sociology

Indiana University

Ballintine Hall, Room 756

Bloomington, IN 47405

Phone: 812-856-5306

Fax: 812-855-0781

Email: dtakeuch@Indiana.edu

James G. Townsel, Ph.D.*

Professor and Director

Center for Molecular and Behavioral Science

School of Medicine

Meharry Medical College

Biomedical Science Center Building

1005 D.B. Todd Boulevard

Nashville, TN 37208-3599

Phone: 615-327-6847

Fax: 615-327-6179

Email: townse67@ccvax.mmc.edu

William A. Vega, Ph.D.*

Professor of Psychiatry

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

Liberty Plaza

335 George Street

New Brunswick, NJ 08901

Phone: 732-235-9281

Fax: 732-235-9293

Email: vegaw@umdwj.edu

Myrna M. Weissman, Ph.D.*

Professor

Department of Clinical & Genetic Epidemiology

New York State Psychiatric Institute

College of Physicians and Surgeons

Columbia University

722 West 168th Street, Unit 4

New York, NY 10032

Phone: 212-543-5880

Fax: 212-568-3534

Email: weissman@child.cpmc.columbia.edu

Roy C. Wilson, M.D., Co-Chair*

Director

Missouri Department of Mental Health

1706 East Elm Street - PO Box 687

Jefferson City, MO 65102

Phone: 573-751-3070

Fax: 573-526-7926

Email: mzwisor@mail.dmh.state.mo.us

NIMH STAFF

Staff Director

Richard K. Nakamura, Ph.D.

Deputy Director, NIMH

Associate Staff Director

Carolyn Strete, Ph.D.

Associate Director for Health Disparities, NIMH

Principal Authors

Carolyn Strete, Ph.D.

Associate Director for Health Disparities, NIMH

Steven R. Lopez, Ph.D.

NIMH Consultant

Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology

University of California, Los Angeles

1285 Franz Hall, 156304

Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563

Robert A. Mays, Jr., Ph.D., BCD**

NIMH Consultant

Behavioral Policy and Research Analyst

Suite 100, 3205 Awn Court

Upper Marlboro, MD 20772

Science Writer

Paul Sirovatka, M.S.

Office of Science Policy and Program Planning, 

NIMH

Art and Graphics

Catherine W. West

Office of Communications and Public Liaison, 

NIMH

Penny Kisner

Office of Communications and Public Liaison, 

NIMH

____________

**Former Member, National Advisory Mental 

Health Council
57

NIMH CONSULTANTS

Walter Goldschmidts, Ph.D.

Research Training and Career Development,

NIMH

Della Hann, Ph.D.

Associate Director

Research Training and Development

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH

Steven E. Hyman, M.D.

Director, NIMH

Enid Light, Ph.D.

Chief, Rehabilitative Intervention Program

Division of Services and Intervention Research, 

NIMH

Richard K. Nakamura, Ph.D.

Deputy Director, NIMH

Sherman L. Ragland

Deputy Director

Office of Special Populations, NIMH

Rao Rajesh

Research Assistant, NIMH

Eugene Souder

Chief, Technical Services Unit, 

Office of Communications and Public Liaison,

NIMH

Jane A. Steinberg, Ph.D.

Director, Division of Extramural Activities, NIMH

Ellen S. Stover, Ph.D.

Director, Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral 

Research and AIDS and Center for Mental 

Health Research and AIDS, NIMH

Clarissa K. Wittenberg

Associate Director for Communications, NIMH
58

Appendix C

NATIONAL ADVISORY MENTAL HEALTH COUNCIL

(All Terms End 9/30)

Department of Health and Human Services

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Mental Health

CHAIRPERSON

Steven E. Hyman, M.D.

Director

National Institute of Mental Health

Bethesda, MD

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

Jane A. Steinberg, Ph.D.

Director

Division of Extramural Activities

National Institute of Mental Health

Bethesda, MD

MEMBERS

Robert O. Boorstin (03)

Vice President

Greenberg Quinlan Research, Inc.

Washington, DC

Mary L. Durham, Ph. D.

Vice President/Research

Kaiser/Group Health and

Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

Portland, OR

Javier I. Escobar, M.D. (03)

Professor and Chairman

Department of Psychiatry

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

Piscataway, NJ

Susan Folkman, Ph.D.

Professor and Co-Director

Department of Medicine

Center for Aids Prevention Studies (CAPS) 

UCSF Prevention Sciences Group

San Francisco, CA

Ellen Frank, Ph.D. (01)

Professor of Psychiatry and Psychology

Department of Psychiatry

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Pittsburgh, PA

Henry A. Lester, Ph.D. (03)

Professor

Department of Biology

California Institute of Technology

Pasadena, CA

James L. McClelland, Ph.D. (03)

Co-Director

Center for Neural Basis of Cognition (CNBC)

Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, PA

James P. McNulty (04)

President

Manic Depressive and Depressive Association of 

Rhode Island

Providence, RI

Charles B. Nemeroff, M.D., Ph.D. (02)

Reunette W. Harris Professor and Chair

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences

Emory University School of Medicine

Atlanta, GA

Anne C. Petersen, Ph.D. (01)

Senior Vice President for Programs

W.K. Kellogg Foundation

Battle Creek, MI
59

Elaine Sanders-Bush, Ph.D. (03)

Professor

Department of Pharmacology

Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

Nashville, TN

Larry R. Squire, Ph.D. (04)

Professor

Department of Psychiatry

University of California School of Medicine and 

Research Career Scientist

Veterans Affairs Medical Center

San Diego, CA

James G. Townsel, Ph.D. (01)

Professor and Director

Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience

School of Medicine

Meharry Medical College

Nashville, TN

Ming T. Tsuang, M.D., Ph.D. (04)

Professor and Director

Department of Psychiatry

Harvard Medical School

Massachusetts Mental Health Center

Boston, MA

Roy C. Wilson, M.D. (02)

Director

Missouri Department of Mental Health

Jefferson City, MO

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS LIAISON REPRESENTATIVE

Tommy G. Thompson

Secretary

Department of Health and Human Services

Washington, DC

Ruth Kirchstein, M.D.

Acting Director

National Institutes of Health 

Bethesda, Maryland

Elspeth Cameron Ritchie, M.D., LTC, MC, USA

Department of Defense

Program Director, Mental Health Policy and 

Women’s Issues

Office of the Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs

Falls Church, VA

Michael J. English, J.D.

Director, Division of Knowledge Development and 

Systems Change

Center for Mental Health Services

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration

Rockville, MD
60

Appendix D

OCTOBER 1999 NIMH WORKSHOP ON TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR UNDERREPRESENTED

RACIAL/ETHNIC MINORITIES

Clifford C. Attkisson, Ph.D.

Professor, Medical Psychology and

Dean of Graduate Studies

University of California, San Francisco

401 Parnassus Avenue-CPT

San Francisco, CA 94143-0984

Pamela Banks, Ph.D.

Chairperson

Department of Psychology

Jackson State University

1400 J. R. Lynch Street

P.O. Box 17550

Jackson, MS 39217-0350

Guillermo Bernal, Ph.D.

Professor and Chairman

Department of Psychology

University of Puerto Rico

P.O. Box 23174, UPR Station 1

11 Margarta Street-2

San Juan, PR 00931

Thomas J. Coates, Ph.D.*

Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology

Director, UCSF MDS Research Institute and

Director, Center for AIDS Prevention Studies

University of California, San Francisco

74 New Montgomery Street

Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94105

Joe D. Coulter, Ph.D.

Associate Provost for Diversity and Director of 

Opportunity

Professor of Anatomy and Cell Biology

College of Medicine

University of Iowa

Room 224, Jessup Hall

Iowa City, IA 52242

ZZZZZZZZZZZ

*Member, National Advisory Mental Health Council

Javier I. Escobar, M.D.*

Professor and Chairman

Department of Psychiatry

UMDNJ

Robert Wood Johnson Medical School

675 Hoes Lane

Piscataway, NJ 08854-5635

E. Aracelis Francis, D.S.W.

Director, Minority Fellowship Program

Council on Social Work Education

1600 Duke Street, Suite 300

Alexandria, VA 22314-3421

Henry T. Frierson, Jr., Ph.D.

Professor, Educational Psychology

School of Education

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

CB# 3500, Peabody Hall

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3500

Ernesto A. Guerra, Ph.D.

Research Training Manager

American Psychiatric Association

Office of Education

1400 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

John B. Jemmott, Ph.D. 

Professor, Annenberg School for Communication

University of Pennsylvania

3620 Walnut Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104

Robert L. Johnson, M.D.*

Director of Adolescent Medicine

Department of Pediatrics

New Jersey Medical School-UMDNJ

185 South Orange Avenue

Newark, NJ 07103-2714

James M. Jones, Ph.D.

Director, Minority Fellowship Program

American Psychological Association

750 First Street, NE, Suite 1050

Washington, DC 20002-4242
61

Felice J. Levine, Ph.D.

Executive Officer

Minority Fellowship Program

American Sociological Association

1307 New York Avenue, NW

Suite 700

Washington, DC 22005

Steven R. Lopez, Ph.D.

Professor of Psychology

Department of Psychology

University of California, Los Angeles

P.O. Box 951563

1285 Franz Hall, 156304

Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563

Peter R. MacLeish, Ph.D.

Director, Neuroscience Institute

Morehouse School of Medicine

720 Westview Drive, SW

Atlanta, GA 30310

Barbara Van Oss Marin, Ph.D.

Center for AIDS Prevention Studies

AIDS Research Institute

University of California, San Francisco

74 New Montgomery Street

Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94105

Steven M. Mirin, M.D.

Medical Director

American Psychiatric Association

1400 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005 

Joe L. Martinez, Ph.D.

Director, Division of Life Sciences

University of Texas, San Antonio

Division of Life Sciences

6900 N. Loop -1604 West

San Antonio, TX 78249-0619

Robert A. Mays, Jr., Ph.D.*

Colonel, U.S. Army

Office of the Inspector General

North Atlantic Regional Medical Command

Walter Reed Army Medical Center

6825 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20307-5001

Edward Murguia, Ph.D. 

Director, Minority Fellowship Program

American Sociological Association

1307 New York Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 22005

Kim J. Nickerson, Ph.D.

Program Officer

Minority Fellowship Program

American Psychological Association

750 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20002-4242

David D. Potter, Ph.D.

Chair, Minority Education Training and 

Professional Advancement Committee

Society for Neuroscience

Professor, Department of Neurobiology

Harvard Medical School

220 Longwood Avenue

Boston, MA 02015

Enola Procter, Ph.D.

Professor of Social Work

George Warren Brown School

of Social Work

Campus Box 1196

Washington University

One Brookings Drive

St. Louis, MO 63130-4899

Joan V. Reede, M.D., MPH

Director, Minority Faculty Development Program

Harvard Medical School

25 Shadduck Street

Boston, MA 02215

Warren Rhodes, Ph.D.

Chairperson and Professor

Department of Psychology

Morgan State University

Hillen Road

Baltimore, MD 21251

Lloyd R. Sloan, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Psychology

Howard University

525 Bryant Street, NW

Washington, DC 20059
62

George B. Stefano, Ph.D.

Director, Neuroscience Institute

SUNY College at Old Westbury

P.O. Box 210

Old Westbury, NY 11568

David T. Takeuchi, Ph.D.

Professor

Department of Sociology

Indiana University

Ballintine Hall, Room 756

Bloomington, IN 47405

James W. Thompson, M.D., MPH

Director, Minority Fellowship Program

American Psychiatric Association

Office of Education

1400 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

James G. Townsel, Ph.D.*

Professor and Director

Center for Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience

School of Medicine

Meharry Medical College

Biomedical Science Center Building

1005 D. B. Todd Boulevard

Nashville, TN 37208

Roy C. Wilson, M.D.*

Director

Missouri Department of Mental Health

1706 East Elm

P.O. Box 687

Jefferson City, MO 65102

Gail E. Wyatt, Ph.D.

Associate Director, UCLA MDS Institute

Department of Psychiatry/Biobehavorial Sciences

University of California, Los Angeles

405 Hilgard Avenue

Los Angeles, CA 90024

Michael J. Zigmond, Ph.D.

Professor of Neurology

South 526-Biomedical Science Tower

3500 Terrace Street

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

FEDERAL PARTICIPANTS

NIMH Workshop on Minority Training

Programs

October 5, 1999

Fred Altman

Assistant Director for Fellowships

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH

Lula Beatty

Chief, Office of Special Populations

National Institute of Drug Abuse

James Blair

Center for Mental Health Services

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration

Cheryl Boyce

Psychologist

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH

Gerald Calderone

Scientific Review Administrator

Division of Extramural Activities, NIMH

Steve Foote, Ph.D.

Director 

Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral

Science, NIMH

Walter Goldschmidts

Associate Director

Research Training and Career Development

Division of Neuroscience and Basic Behavioral 

Science, NIMH

Della Hann

Associate Director

Research Training and Development

Division of Mental Disorders Behavioral Research 

and AIDS, NIMH

Kimberly Hoagwood

Associate Director for Child and Adolescent 

Research, NIMH

Bruce Cuthbert

Chief, Adult Psychopathology and Prevention 

Research Branch, DMDBA, NIMH
63

Steve Hyman

Director, NIMH

Henry Khachaturian

Associate Director, Research Training and Career 

Development, NIMH

Doreen Koretz

Chief

Developmental Psychopathology and Prevention 

Branch, DMDBA, NIMH

Earnest Marquez

Chief, Minority Biomedical Research Support 

Branch, MORE Division, NIGMS

Carmen Moten

Program Director

Office for Special Populations, NIMH

Richard Nakamura

Deputy Director, NIMH

Grayson Norquist

Director

Division of Services and Intervention Research, 

NIMH

Willo Pequegnat

Program Chief

Center for Mental Health Research on AIDS

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH

Clifton Poodry

Director, Division of Minority Opportunities in 

Research

National Institute of General Medical Sciences

Sherman Ragland

Deputy Director

Office of Special Populations, NIMH

Harold Slavkin

Director

National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial 

Research

David Stoff

Program Director

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH

Ellen Stover

Director

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS and 

Director, Center for Mental Health Research on 

AIDS, NIMH

Carolyn Strete

Associate Director for Health Disparities, NIMH

Claudia Zust

Fellowship Program Specialist

Division of Mental Disorders, Behavioral Research

and AIDS, NIMH
64

Appendix E

SPECIAL CONSULTANTS

Carl C. Bell, M.D.

Chief Executive Officer

Community Mental Health Council

8704 S. Constance 

Chicago, IL 60617

Linda Burton, Ph.D.

Pennsylvania State University

Director, Department of Human

Development/Family Studies

S-211 Henderson Building

University Park, PA 16802

Felton Earls, M.D.

Harvard School of Public Health

677 Huntington Avenue

Boston, MA 02115

Spero Manson, Ph.D.

Director

Division of American Indian and 

Alaska Native Programs

University of Colorado Health Science Center

Department of Psychiatry

Box A011-13

4455 East 12th Avenue

Denver, CO 80220

Barbara Van Oss Marin, Ph.D.

Center for AIDS Prevention Studies

AIDS Research Institute

University of California, San Francisco

74 New Montgomery Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Yvonne Maddox, Ph.D.

Acting Deputy Director 

National Institutes of Health

Bethesda, MD 20892

Lonnie Snowden, Ph.D.

Director

Center for Mental Health Services Research

Professor, School of Social Welfare

University of California-Berkeley

2020 Milvia Street, Suite 405 #5610

Berkeley, CA 94720-5610

Stanley Sue, Ph.D.

Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry

Director, Asian American Studies Program

Department of Psychology 

University of California, Davis

One Shields Avenue

Davis, CA 95616-8686
65

Appendix F

RESEARCH TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT TIMETABLE

Career Stage Frequently Used Mechanisms Career Stage Frequently Used Mechanisms1

 – Program Title

High School/

Undergraduate

Students

•R25 NIMH Career Opportunities in Research (COR) •

Honors High School Research2 

•T34 NIMH Career Opportunities in Research (COR) 

Honors Undergraduate Research Training Grant 2 

•R25 Mental Health Education Grants

•RPG3

 Research Supplements for Underrepresented Minorities 2

Graduate/

Medical

Students

•T32 NRSA Institutional Research Training Grants 

•T32Jointly Sponsored NIH Pre-Doctoral Training Program in the 

Neurosciences 

•T32 Underrepresented Minority Fellowship Programs in Mental Health2 

•F30 Individual Pre-Doctoral NRSA for M.D./Ph.D. Fellowships 

•F31 NRSA for Individual Predoctoral Fellowships 

•F31 NIH Pre-Doctoral Fellowship Awards for Minority Students2

•R03 Underrepresented Minority Dissertation Research Grants 2

•R25 Mental Health Education Grants 

•RPG3 Research Supplements for Underrepresented Minorities 2

 

Post-Doctoral/

Clinical

Residency

•T32 NRSA Institutional Research Training Grants 

•T32Underrepresented Minority Fellowship Programs in Mental Health2 

•F32NRSA for Individual Post-Doctoral Fellows 

•K01 Mentored Research Scientist Development Award 

•K08 Mentored Clinical Scientist Development Award 

•K23 Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award 

•R25 Mental Health Education Grants 

•RPG3 Research Supplements for Underrepresented Minorities 2 

Independent

Scientists:

“Early”

“Middle”

“Senior”

•R03 NIMH Small Grants Program 

•R03 Behavioral Science Track Award for Rapid Transition (B/START)

•R25 Mental Health Education Grants 

•RPG3 Research Supplements for Underrepresented Minorities 2 

•K01 Scientist Development Award for New Minority Faculty2 

•R21 Exploratory/Developmental Grant 

•R01 Investigator Initiated Research Project Grant 

•R24 Minority Research Infrastructure Support Program2

•K02Independent Scientist Award 

•K24 Midcareer Investigator Award in Patient-Oriented Research 

•K05 Senior Scientist Award 

1

 For additional programs and links to specific announcements, please go to:

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/grants/training.cfm 2

 Training and career development programs for underrepresented minorities

3

 Research Project Grants, including R01, R03, R15, R21, R37, P01, P30, P50, and others (see announcement for

additional mechanisms and specific provisions).
66

Appendix G

NATIVE AMERICAN COLLEGES

The following colleges are affiliated with the American Indian College Fund, which provided the list to

the cited reference.*

Bay Mills Community College 

Route One, Box 315A 

Brimley, MI 49715

Blackfeet Community College 

P.O. Box 819 

Browning, MT 59417

Cheyenne River Community College

P.O. Box 220 

Eagle Butte, SD 57625

College of the Menominee Nation 

P.O. Box 1179 

State Highway 47/55 

Keshena, WI 54135

Crownpoint Institute of Technology 

P.O. Box 649 

Crownpoint, NM 87313

D-Q University 

P.O. Box 409

Davis, CA 95617

Dull Knife Memorial College

P.O. Box 98 

Lame Deer, MT 59043

Fond du Lac Tribal and Community

College 

2101 14th Street 

Cloquet, MN 55720

Fort Berthold Community College 

P.O. Box 490

New Town, ND 58763

Fort Peck Community College 

P.O. Box 398

Poplar, MT 59255

____________

*Multicultural Student’s Guide to Colleges 

(see Reference List)

Haskell Indian Nations University 

155 Indian Avenue 

Lawrence, KS 66044

Institute of American Indian Arts 

P.O. Box 20007 

Santa Fe, NM 87504

Lac Court Oreilles Ojibwa Community College 

RR 2, Box 2357 

Hayward, WI 54843

Leech Lake Tribal College

Route 3, Box 100 

Cass Lake, MN 56633

Little Big Horn College 

P.O. Box 370 

Crow Agency, MT 59022

Little Hoop Community College 

P.O. Box 269 

Fort Totten, ND 58335

Navajo Community College 

P.O. Box 218 

Tsaile, AZ 86556

Nebraska Indian Community College

P.O. Box 752 

Winnebago, NE 68071

Northwest Indian College

2522 Kwina Road

Bellingham, WA 98226

Oglala Lakota College

P.O. Box 490 

Kyle, SD 57752

Salish Kootenai College

P.O. Box 117 

Pablo, MT 59855
67

Siinte Gleska University

P.O. Box 490 

Rosebud, SD 57570

Sisseton Wahpeton Community College

P.O. Box 689, Agency Village

Sisseton, SD 57262

Southwest Indian Polytechnic Institute

Box 10146, 9169 Coors Road NW

Albuquerque, NM 87184

Standing Rock College

HC 1, Box 4

Fort Yates, MT 58538

Stone Child Community College

Rocky Boy Route, Box 1082

Box Elder, MT 59521

Turtle Mountain Community College

P.O. Box 340

Belcourt, ND 58316

United Tribes Technical College

3315 University Drive

Bismarck, ND 58501
68

Appendix H 

AMERICA’S PREDOMINANTLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

ALABAMA (12)

Alabama A & M University*

Huntsville, AL 35762 

(205) 859-7011

Alabama State University

Montgomery, AL 36195 

(205) 872-4201

S. D. Bishop State Junior College

Mobile, AL 36690 

(205) 690-6412

Concordia College 

Selma, AL 36701 

(205) 872-3053

Lawson State Community College 

Birmingham, AL 35221 

(205) 925-1666

Lomax-Hannon Junior College 

Greenville, AL 36037 

(205) 382-6605

Miles College*

Birmingham, AL 35208 

(205) 923-2771

Oakwood College*

Huntsville, AL 35896 

(205) 837-1630

Selma University 

Selma, AL 36701 

(205) 872-2533

Stillman College*

Tuscaloosa, AL 35403 

(205) 349-4240

____________

*Members of the United Negro College Fund, which

provided the information in this list to the cited

reference.

**Multicultural Student’s Guide to Colleges 

(see Reference List)

Talladega College*

Talladega, AL 35160 

(205) 362-2752

Tuskegee University 

Tuskegee, AL 36088

(205) 727-8011

ARKANSAS (4)

Arkansas Baptist College 

Little Rock, AR 72202 

(501) 372-6883

Philander Smith College*

Little Rock, AR 72202 

(501) 375-3117

Shorter College 

North Little Rock, AR 72114 

(501) 374-6305

University of Arkansas/Pine Bluff

Pine Bluff, AR 71601

(501) 541-6500

DELAWARE (1)

Delaware State College

Dover DE 19901

(302) 736-4901

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (2)

Howard University 

Washington, DC 20059

(202) 806-2752

University of the District of Columbia 

Washington, DC 20008 

(202) 282-7550

FLORIDA (4)

Bethune-Cookman College*

Daytona Beach, FL 32015 

(904) 255-1401
69

Edward Waters College*

Jacksonville, FL 32209

(904) 355-3030

Florida A & M University

Tallahassee, FL 32307 

(904) 599-3225

Florida Memorial College*

Miami, FL 33054 

(305) 625-4141

GEORGIA (10)

Albany State College

Albany, GA 31705

(912) 439-4095

Clark Atlanta University*

Atlanta, GA 30314

(404) 880-8000

The Fort Valley State College

Fort Valley, GA 31030

(912) 825-6315

Interdenominational Theological Center*

Atlanta, GA 30314

(404) 522-1772

Morehouse College*

Atlanta, GA 30314

(404) 681-2800

Morehouse School of Medicine

Atlanta, GA 30310 

(404) 752-1500

Morris Brown College*

Atlanta, GA 30314 

(404) 525-7831

Paine College*

Atlanta, GA 30910

(404) 722-4471

Savannah State College

Savannah, GA 31404

(404) 525-7831

Spelman College*

Atlanta, GA 30314

(404) 681-1143

KENTUCKY (2)

Kentucky State University 

Frankfort, KY 40601 

(502) 564-2550

Simmons University Bible College 

Louisville, KY 40210

(502) 776-1443

LOUISIANA (6)

Dillard University*

New Orleans, LA 70122 

(504) 283-8822

Grambling State University 

Grambling, LA 71245 

(318) 247-6941

Southern University System 

Baton Rouge, LA 70813 

(504) 771-4680

Southern University/New Orleans 

New Orleans, LA 70126 

(504) 486-7411

Southern University/Shreveport

Shreveport, LA 71107

(318) 674-3300

Xavier University*

New Orleans, LA 

(504) 483- 7577

MARYLAND (4)

Bowie State College

Bowie, MD 20715

(301) 464-3000

Coppin State College

Baltimore, MD 21216

(301) 383-4500

Morgan State University

Baltimore, MD 21239

(301) 444-3333

University of Maryland/Eastern Shore 

Princess Anne, MD 21853

(301) 651-2200
70

MICHIGAN (1)

Shaw College at Detroit

Detroit, MI 48202 

(313) 873-7920

MISSISSIPPI (11)

Alcorn State University

Loman, MS 39096 

(601) 877-6100

Coahoma Junior College

Clarksdale, MS 38614

(601) 627-2571

Jackson State University

Jackson, MS 39217 

(601) 968-2121

Mary Holmes College

West Point, MS 39773 

(601) 494-6820

Mississippi Industrial College

Holy Springs, MS 38835

(601) 252-1750

Mississippi Valley State University

Itta Bena, MS 38941

(601) 254-9041

Natchez Junior College

Natchez, MS 39120

(601) 792-5175

Prentiss Normal and Industrial Institute

Prentiss, MS 39474

(601) 792-5175

Rust College*

Holly Springs, MS 38635

(601) 252-4661

Tougaloo College*

Tougaloo, MS 39174

(601) 956-4941

Utica Junior College

Utica, MS 39175

(601) 886-8085

MISSOURI (2)

Harris-Stowe State College

St. Louis, MO 63103

(314) 533-3366

Lincoln University

Jefferson, MO 65101

(314) 751-2325

NORTH CAROLINA (11)

Barber-Scotia College*

Concord, NC 28025

(704) 789-2900

Bennett College*

Greensboro, NC 27402

(919) 273- 4431

Elizabeth City State University 

Elizabeth City, NC 27909 

(919) 335-0551

Fayetteville State University 

Fayetteville, NC 28301 

(919) 486-1141

Livingstone College*

Salisbury, NC 28144 

(704) 633-7960

Johnson C. Smith University*

Charlotte, NC 28216 

(704) 378-1000

North Carolina A&T University

Greensboro, NC 27411

(919) 379-7500

North Carolina Central University

Durham, NC 27707

(919) 683-6100

St. Augustine’s College*

Raleigh, NC 27611

(919) 828-4451

Shaw University*

Raleigh, NC 27611

(919) 755-4920

Winston-Salem State University

Winston-Salem, NC 27110

(919) 761-2011
71

OKLAHOMA (1)

Langston University

Langston, OK 73050

(405) 466-2231

PENNSYLVANIA (2)

Cheyney University

Cheyney, PA 19319

(215) 758-6332

Lincoln University

Lincoln University, PA 19352

(215) 932-8300

SOUTH CAROLINA (8)

Allen University

Columbia, SC 29204

(803) 254-4156

Benedict College*

Columbia, SC 29204

(803) 256-4420

Clafin College*

Orangeburg, SC 29115

(803) 256-2710

Clinton Junior College

Rock Hill, SC 29732 

(803) 327- 7402

Denmark Technical College

Denmark, SC 29042

(803) 793-3301

Morris College*

Sumter, SC 29150

(803) 775-9371

South Carolina State College

Orangeburg, SC 29115

(803) 536-7013

Voorhees College*

Denmark, SC 29042

(803) 793-3351

TENNESSEE (7)

Fisk University*

Nashville, TN 37203

(615) 329-8500

Knoxville College*

Knoxville, TN 37914

(615) 524-6514

Lane College*

Jackson, TN 38301

(901) 424-4600

LeMoyne-Owen College*

Memphis, TN 38126

(901) 774-9090

Meharry Medical College

Nashville, TN 37208

(615) 327-6111

Morristown College

Morristown, TN 37208

(615) 586-5282

Tennessee State University

Nashville, TN 37203

(615) 320-3432

TEXAS (9)

Bishop College*

Dallas, TX 75241 

(214) 372-8000

Huston-Tillotson College*

Austin, TX 78702 

(512) 476-7421

Jarvis Christian College*

Hawkins, TX 75765

(214) 769-2174

Paul Quinn College*

Waco, TX 76704 

(817) 752-5891

Prairie View A & M University

Prairie View, TX 77445

(409) 857-3311

Southwestern Christian College

Terrell, TX 75160 

(214) 563-3341

Texas College*

Tyler, TX 75703 

(214) 593-8311
72

Texas Southern University

Houston, TX 77004

(713) 527-7036

Wiley College*

Marshall, TX 75670

(214) 938-8341

VIRGINIA (6)

Hampton Institute

Hampton, VA 23668

(804) 727-5231

Norfolk State University

Norfolk, VA 23504

(804) 623-8760

St. Paul’s College*

Lawrenceville, VA 23868

(804) 848-4451

The Virginia Seminary and College

Lynchburg, VA 24501

(804) 520-6572

Virginia State University 

Petersburg, VA 23220

(804) 257-5600

Virginia Union University

Richmond, VA 23220

(804) 257-5600

WEST VIRGINIA (1)

West Virginia State College

Institute, WV 25112

(304) 766-3111

VIRGIN ISLANDS (1)

College of the Virgin Islands

St. Thomas, VI 00801

(809) 774-9200
73

Appendix I

HISPANIC-SERVING COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

The following list names colleges and universities where Hispanic student enrollment constitutes a

minimum of 25% of the student body.*

ARIZONA (3)

Arizona Western College 

Yuma, AZ 85366 

(502) 344-7618

Pima Community College (Downtown Campus) 

Tucson, AZ 85709-3100 

(602) 884-6788

South Mountain Community College

7050 South 24th Street

Phoenix, AZ 85040

(602) 243-8150

CALIFORNIA (26)

California State University/Bakersfield 

9001 Stockdale Highway

Bakersfield, CA 93311-1099

(805) 664-2241

California State University/Fresno

5241 North Maple Avenue

Fresno, CA 93740-0048

(209) 278-2324

California State University/Los Angeles 

5151 State University Drive

Los Angeles, CA 90032

(213) 343-3030

Cerritos College

11110 East Alondra Boulevard

Norwalk, CA 90650

(310) 860-2451

College of the Sequoias 

Mooney Boulevard 

Visalia, CA 93277 

(209) 730-3731

___________________________________

*Multicultural Student’s Guide to Colleges 

(see Reference List)

Compton Community College 

111 East Artesia Boulevard 

Compton, CA 90221 

(310) 637-2660

Don Bosco Technical Institute 

1151 San Gabriel Boulevard 

Rosemead, CA 91770 

(818) 280-0451

East Los Angeles College 

1301 Avenue Cesar Chavez 

Monterey, CA 91754 

(213) 265-8662

Gavilan College 

5055 Santa Teresa Boulevard 

Gilroy, CA 95020 

(408) 848-4712

Hartnell College

156 Homestead Avenue 

Salinas, CA 93901 

(408) 755-6900

Imperial Valley College

P.O. Box 158, 380 East Eten Road

Imperial, CA 92251

(619) 355-6219

Kings River Community College

995 North Reed Avenue

Reedley, CA 93654

(209) 953-4000

Los Angeles City College

855 North Vermont Avenue

Los Angeles, CA 90029

(213) 953-4000
74

Los Angeles Harbor College

1111 Figueroa Place 

Wilmington, CA 90744

(310) 522-8200

Los Angeles Mission College

13356 Eldridge Avenue

Sylmar, CA 91342 

(818) 364-7600

Los Angeles Trade-Technical

400 West Washington Boulevard

Los Angeles, CA 90015

(213) 744-9000

Mount St. Mary’s College

12001 Chalon Road 

Los Angeles, CA 90049

(310) 471-9500

Mount St. Antonio College

1100 North Grand Avenue

Walnut, CA 91789-1399

(909) 594-5611

Oxnard College 

4000 South Rose Avenue

Oxnard, CA 93033 

(805) 488-0911

Palo Verde College 

811 West Chanslorway 

Blythe, CA 92225 

(619) 922-6168

Rancho Santiago Community College

1530 West 17th Street

Santa Ana, CA 92706

(714) 564-6450

Rio Hondo College

3600 Workman Mill Road

Whittier, CA 90608

(310) 908-3403

San Bernardino Valley College

701 South Mount Vernon Avenue

San Bernardino, CA 92410

(909) 888-6511

San Diego State University/Imperial

Valley Campus

720 Herber Avenue

Calexico, CA 92231

(619) 482-6301

Southwestern College

900 Otay Lakes Road

Chula Vista, CA 91910

(619) 482-6301

West Hills Community College

300 Cherry Lane

Coalinga, CA 93210

(209) 935-0801

COLORADO (4)

Community College of Denver

P.O. Box 172263

Denver, CO 80217

(303) 556-2600

Otero Junior College

La Junta, CO 81050

(303) 384-8721

Pueblo Community College

900 West Orman Avenue

Pueblo, CO 81004

(719) 549-3213

Trinidad State Junior College 

600 Prospect Street 

Trinidad, CO 81082 

(719) 846-5011

FLORIDA (10)

Barry University 

11300 N.E. Second Avenue 

Miami Shores, FL 33161 

(305) 899-3010

Florida International University Park, PC 528 

Miami, FL 33199 

(305) 348-2111

Miami-Dade Community College/

Homestead Campus

500 College Terrace

Homestead, FL 33030 

(305) 237-5010
75

Miami-Dade Community College/Kendall Campus 

11011 S.W. 104th Street 

Miami, FL 33176 

(305) 237-2222

Miami-Dade Community College/Medical Center 

Campus 

950 N.W. 20th Street 

Miami, FL 33127 

(305) 237-4025

Miami-Dade Community College/North Campus 

11380 N.W. 27th Avenue 

Miami, FL 33167 

(305) 237-1153

Miami-Dade Community College/Wolfson

Campus 300 N.E. Second Avenue, Room 1301 

Miami, FL 33132-2297 

(305) 237-3221

St. John Vianney College Seminary

2900 S.W. 87th Avenue

Miami, FL 33165-3244

(305) 223-4561

St. Thomas University 

16400 N.W. 32nd Avenue 

Miami, FL 33054 

(305) 628-6663

St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary 

10701 South Military Trail 

Boynton Beach, FL 33436 

(407) 732-4424

ILLINOIS (5)

Harry S. Truman College 

1145 West Wilson Avenue 

Chicago, IL 60640

(312) 989-6120

MacCormac Junior College 

615 North West Avenue 

Elmhurst, IL 60126 

(312) 922-1884

Richard J. Daley College 

7500 South Pulaski Road 

Chicago, IL 60652 

(312) 838-7511

Robert Morris College 

180 North La Salle Street 

Chicago, IL 60601 

(312) 836-4888

St. Augustine College 

1333 West Argyle 

Chicago, IL 60640

NEW JERSEY (2)

Hudson Community College

168 Sip Avenue

Jersey City, NJ 07306

(201) 714-2100

Passaic County Community College

One College Boulevard

Paterson, NJ 07505

(201) 684-5900

NEW MEXICO (13)

Albuquerque T-VI: A Community College

525 Buena Vista, SE 

Albuquerque, NM 87106 

(505) 224-4411

College of Santa Fe 

1600 St. Michael’s Drive 

Santa Fe. NM 87505 

(505) 473-6234

Don Ana Branch Community College 

3400 South Espina Street 

Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001 

(505) 527-7510

Eastern New Mexico University/Roswell 

Box 600, 52 University 

Roswell, NM 88202-6000

(505) 624-7111

Luna Vocational Technical Institute 

P.O. Drawer K 

Las Vegas, NM 87701 

(505) 454-2500

New Mexico Highlands University 

National Avenue 

Las Vegas, NM 87701 

(505) 454-3270
76

New Mexico State University/Grants Campus 

1500 3rd Street 

Grants, NM 87020 

(505) 287-7981

New Mexico State University/Main Campus

Box 3Z 

Las Cruces, NM 88003 

(505) 646-2035

Northern New Mexico Community College

1002 North Onate Street

Espanola, NM 87532

(505) 747-2140

Santa Fe Community College

P.O. Box 4187

Santa Fe, NM 87502-4187 

(505) 438-1201

University of New Mexico

Scholes Hall, Room 160 

Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001

University of New Mexico

Valencia Campus 

280 La Entrada 

Los Lunas, NM 87031 

(505) 865-1639

Western New Mexico University 

1000 West College Avenue 

Silver City, NM 88061 

(505) 538-6239

NEW YORK (10)

Boricua College

3755 Broadway

New York, NY 10032 

(212) 694-1000

Borough of Manhattan Community College 

199 Chambers Street 

New York, NY 10007-1079 

(212) 346-8800

Bronx Community College 

University Avenue and 181st Street 

Bronx, NY 10453 

(718) 220-6920

City College 

Convent Avenue at 138th Street 

New York, NY 10031 

(212) 650- 7000

College of Aeronautics 

La Guardia Airport Station 

Flushing, NY 11371 

(718) 429-6600

Herbert H. Lehman College 

250 Bedford Park Boulevard West 

Bronx, NY 10468 

(718) 960-8111

Hostos Community College

475 Grand Concourse 

Bronx, NY 10451 

(718) 518-4444

John Jay College of Criminal Justice 

899 10th Avenue 

New York, NY 10019 

(212) 237-8600

La Guardia Community College 

30-10 Thomson Avenue, M147 

Long Island City, NY 11101 

(718) 482-5050

Mercy College 

555 Broadway 

Dobbs Ferry, NY 10522 

(914) 674-7369

TEXAS (23)

Alamo Community College District 

811 West Houston, Suite 212 

San Antonio, TX 78207-3033

(210) 220-1520

Bee County College

3800 Charco Road 

Beeville, TX 78102 

(512) 358-3130

Del Mar College 

101 Baldwin 

Corpus Christi, TX 78404 

(512) 886-1203
77

El Paso Community College District 

919 Hunter Drive 

El Paso, TX 79915 

(915) 594-2112

Incarnate Word College

4301 Broadway 

San Antonio, TX 78209 

(212) 829-3900

Laredo Community College 

West End, Washington Street 

Laredo, TX 78040 

(210) 721-5101

Our Lady of the Lake University 

411 SW 24th Street 

San Antonio, TX 78207-4689 

(210) 434-6711

Palo Alto College 

1400 West Villaret 

San Antonio, TX 78224-2499 

(210) 921-5260

St. Edward’s University

3001 South Congress Avenue

Austin, TX 78704-6489

(512) 448-8411

St. Mary’s University

One Camino Santa Maria

San Antonio, TX 7829-8572

St. Philip’s College

1801 Martin Luther King Drive

San Antonio, TX 78203-2098

(210) 531-3200

San Antonio College

1300 San Pedro

San Antonio, TX 78284

(210) 733-2190

Southwest Texas Junior College 

Gamerfield Road 

Uvalde, TX 78801 

(210) 278-4401

Sul Ross State University 

Box C-114 

Alpine, TX 79832 

(915) 837-8032

Texas A&M International University 

5201 University 

Laredo, TX 7804 

(210) 326-2001

Texas A&M University/Corpus Christi

6300 Ocean Drive

Corpus Christi, TX 78412

(512) 994-2621

Texas A&M University/Kingsville Campus 

Box 101 

Kingsville, TX 78363

(512) 595-3207

Texas State Technical College/Harlingen 

P.O. Box 2628 

Harlingen, TX 78550

(210) 425-0601

University of Houston/Downtown

One Main Street

Houston, TX 77002

(713) 221-8001

University of Texas/Brownsville

80 Fort Brown

Brownsville, TX 78520

(512) 544-8231

University of Texas/El Paso 

500 West Street

El Paso, TX 79968

(915) 747-5555

University of Texas/Pan American 

1201 West University Drive 

Edinburg, TX 78539

(210) 381-2101

University of Texas/San Antonio 

6900 North Loop, 1604 West

San Antonio, TX 78249-0601

(210) 691-4101
78

Figure, Table, and Box References

Figure II. Source: National Science and

Technology Council, “Ensuring a Strong U.S.

Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Workforce

in the 21st Century,” 2000.

Figure III-A. Sources: The Chronicle of Higher

Education Almanac, September 1, 2000, p.38. 

National Academy of Sciences (1995). Summary

Report 1993: Doctorate Recipients from United

States Universities, Washington, DC. U.S.

Census Bureau, Population Estimates,

Population Division, August 23, 2000.

Figure III-B. Source: U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education

Statistics (1997). Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System, Fall Staff Survey.

Figure III-C. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau,

Population Estimates, Population Division,

August 23, 2000. The Chronicle of Higher

Education Almanac, September 1, 2000, p.24

and the National Center for Education Statistics,

Integrated Postsecondary Data System. 

Table III. Source: National Center for Education

Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education

System.

Table IV-A. Source: National Institutes of

Health.

Table IV-B. Source: National Institutes of

Health.

Figure IV-A. Source: National Institute of

Mental Health.

Table IV-C. Source: National Institutes of

Health. 

Figure IV-B. Sources: National Institute of

Mental Health and U.S. Census Bureau,

Population Estimates, Population Division,

August 23, 2000.

Figure IV-C. Source: National Institutes of

Health.

Figure IV-D. Sources: National Institute of

Mental Health; U.S. Census Bureau, Population

Estimates, Population Division, August 23,

2000; and National Center for Education

Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education

Data System, Consolidated Survey.

Box V-A. Source: Dr. Linda Burton,

Pennsylvania State University, 2000.

Box V-B. Source: Dr. Barbara Marin, University

of California, San Francisco, 2000.

NIH Publication No. 01-4982

September 2001