Assessing Mentor Academy Program Effectiveness using Mixed Methods

The purpose of our study was to assess how an academic health center (AHC) mentor academy program affected mentor competence and optimized mentor-mentee relationship. Mixed methods were used to assess the effectiveness of an AHC mentor program at a clinical translational science institute (CTSI). Twenty biomedical research faculty mentors took a validated survey and submitted reflective writings to discover if they corroborated or refuted statistically significant survey results. There was significant improvement in participants' confidence of mentor skills, integral mentoring quality and the extent to which they fulfill mentees' expectations. Males provided constructive feedback and helped mentees develop goal strategies more often compared to females. Reflective writings supported these findings yet refuted two survey findings. The use of a mixed methods approach offers novel insight into how mentoring programs benefit translational research mentoring capacity building and raises questions about the sole use of surveys as evidence of program effectiveness.