7

Policies, Programs, and Resources

The final session of the workshop featured brief remarks from Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30) about the importance of Black participation in STEM careers and legislative action to help promote it. Planning co-chair Gilda Barabino, Ph.D. (Olin College of Engineering), and Michelle McMurry-Heath, M.D., Ph.D. (Biotechnology Innovation Organization), then conversed about how policies, programs, and resources intersect in increasing Black participation in science, engineering, and medicine. The session closed with final reflections from the planning committee and Roundtable chairs.

CONGRESSIONAL PERSPECTIVE: REP. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Congresswoman Johnson reaffirmed her commitment to increasing the participation of Black students in STEM education and expressed her belief that the well-being and success of future generations depend on it. She noted that she has introduced legislation to promote the progress of women and minorities in STEM careers. “It is often at the heart of these communities that creativity and imagination lie, and we must ensure those students have an outlet to express their talents,” she stated. “As the first woman and first African American chair of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, I will continue to advocate for a strong diverse STEM workforce.”

“FIRESIDE CHAT”: DR. GILDA BARABINO AND DR. MICHELLE MCMURRY-HEATH

Dr. Barabino explained her conversation with Dr. McMurry-Heath was designed to better understand the interrelatedness of policies, programs, and resources in supporting Black scientists, engineers, and medical professionals. She noted that sessions throughout the workshop recognized that disparities and opportunity gaps exist and that policies are needed to

create the conditions to address these disparities and close gaps. The issues are not new, she acknowledged, referring to an article that Roundtable member Shirley Malcom, Ph.D., wrote 25 years ago entitled “Science and Diversity: A Compelling National Interest” (Malcom, 1996). In that article, which appeared in Science, Dr. Malcom wrote of the continued threat to the progress of Blacks in science absent strategic use of policies, programs, and resources, and the need for structural changes backed by policies. “A quarter-century later, those sentiments ring true,” Dr. Barabino said. “We need to seize the moment for an investment in Black talent as a compelling national interest.”

Dr. Barabino introduced Dr. McMurry-Heath as a champion for access to scientific progress as a social justice issue throughout her career spanning academia, government, and industry. Asked what drew her to policy, Dr. McMurry-Health said her parents were public health leaders in Oakland, California, and she grew up seeing the intersection of policy and medicine. In finding her own way to contribute, she saw laboratory-based science as key. At Harvard University as an undergraduate, 3 years working at the bench in addition to classes showed her a “whole privileged world that provided the opportunity to ask scientific questions in a way that could improve health that was hidden from the communities where I had grown up.” She said she made it her mission to inform both sides of the equation: scientists and communities. At Duke University, she enrolled in policy courses that made her consider such questions as who determines which projects are funded, what scientists owe taxpayers for providing public support, and how social factors influence patient care. “I’ve been asking these questions for 20 years,” she continued. “It’s been about trying to make sure the science gets done, but it is also key that communities see the power that science can offer them.”

Dr. Barabino observed that many students of color want to give back to the community and solve problems, but some are discouraged from taking time from their research. Dr. McMurry-Health said a UNCF (United Negro College Fund) fellowship, in addition to a National Institutes of Health (NIH) fellowship, provided her with independence. “That kind of academic freedom allowed me to ask the questions that were most important to me in addition to the questions that were most important to my PI [principal investigator],” she said. “I hope we find a way to give that kind of independence to more students.” She acknowledged the pressures on students and noted students may question if they are making a difference or ever will while they are in the process of laboratory-based science training. “If we don’t help those

students stay connected to that mission and purpose, we will lose them,” she said.

Dr. Barabino asked Dr. McMurry-Heath to elaborate on the connection between policies, programs, and the resources to support them. “It starts with leadership’s intention to have an impact and make change,” Dr. McMurry-Heath replied. “We have to realize that students are under a lot of social pressure. Anything we can do to help liberate them from these forces and connect with each other will go a long way toward their eventual success.” Independent funding to students provides them flexibility and independence if they do not connect with their principal investigator, if their family circumstances change, or if they want to change course for another reason. More could be done with NIH to demonstrate the value of finding diverse solutions to critical problems and being inclusive in research, she suggested. She applauded NIH’s recent proposal to rate diversity in some grant proposals.¹

“We need to make visible what is not being seen,” Dr. Barabino said. “We need to use our voices.” In this regard, she asked Dr. McMurry-Health about a study she undertook of National Science Foundation policies, programs, and personnel applicable to the workshop themes. Dr. McMurry-Heath said what was clear in this “deep dive” was the importance of providing graduate students a living wage. Studies show poor and minority students are more likely to also be first-generation scientists and have a lack of clarity about what science offers for their future. Giving students the tools to live and progress is important, she stressed. She added that what sometimes gets neglected are the increasing rates of infertility and maternal mortality among Black women, many of whom are delaying childbearing to remain in training programs, another example of making the invisible visible.

Dr. Barabino commented on the need for greater access to opportunities. Dr. McMurry-Heath said her views have shifted—before 2020, she said she would have stressed the need to build more resilient students interested in STEM, reflecting on the successful work of Freeman Hrabowski III, Ph.D., at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. However, she asserted, “another side that the events of 2020 opened our eyes to and made the invisible visible is why are we depending on young souls to be so resilient?” She noted the pressure she felt at Duke to succeed as a Black scientist and stressed:

___________________

¹ See, for example, NIH Notice Number NOT-OD-22-019: Reminder: Notice of NIH’s Encouragement of Applications Supporting Individuals from Underrepresented Ethnic and Racial Groups as well as Individuals with Disabilities.

Dr. Barabino noted that the workshop discussions centered on the need not only to strengthen individuals but also to work on institutional transformation, systems, and structures to make a difference. Another area shown to make a difference is mentorship, but it is contextual, she added. Dr. McMurry-Heath concurred that mentorship is key, but she also called attention to a concept she did not learn until the middle of her career at Johnson & Johnson: sponsorship. “In the private sector, it is common to talk not just about mentorship to impart skills and information but also about sponsorship in which someone is advocating for you behind closed doors,” she explained. She stressed the need for mentors and sponsors to break open paths. In addition, a kind word at the right time makes a difference. She recalled looking for a job in Washington, D.C., with little success, when Dr. Vivian Pinn (first full-time director of the NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health) responded with a handwritten letter. She did not have a role for Dr. McMurry-Heath, but encouraged her to keep trying. “That was what I needed to keep pursuing my goal,” Dr. McMurry-Heath recalled. “As we progress in our careers, we have to keep an eye out for burgeoning talent who are often struggling with decision points. They are pulled in different directions. Giving them support to help them make decisions that are their True North is very important.”

Dr. McMurry-Health returned to the theme of making the invisible visible. “The more we can make up-and-coming minority clinicians and scientists and engineers visible to youth behind them, the more success they will have,” she commented. She recognized the need to avoid pulling Black professionals in many different directions—doing double or triple duty when they are expected to represent every minority cause while also doing their bench work—but making their accomplishments visible.

Referring to the “dueling pandemics” of COVID-19 and systemic racism, Dr. Barabino asked how to seize momentum to make a difference. As an example, Dr. McMurry-Heath noted that her first full week as CEO

of BIO (Biotechnology Innovation Organization) coincided with the organization’s annual conference and the funeral of George Floyd. Public dialogue within the organization led to development of the BIO Equality Agenda. She described its three tenets. The first is to fight for inclusive clinical trials and diverse access to therapies, using COVID-19 as a test case. The second is making talent visible, including making sure investments by large companies are seen across the board. As an example, BIO is building a LinkedIn network of alumni of training programs across companies so that their skills and experience are visible throughout the ecosystem. She noted this is important not just for individuals but also for small biotech companies. The third is using the “power of the purse.” BIO members are huge purchasers of equipment, goods, and services, and these represent opportunities to “purchase with a conscience,” Dr. McMurry-Heath noted. A BIO program allows small companies to purchase at group rates, and the program is starting to show which suppliers have prioritized diversity and/ or are minority led. She noted that the program has been very positively received throughout the organization.

Dr. Barabino asked Dr. McMurry-Heath to expand on her belief that “science is the social justice issue of our age.” Dr. McMurry-Heath replied, “If we look at key levers for poverty reduction and opportunity expansion, it is things like clean air and water, access to nutritious food for children, and freedom from illness. All can be resolved or mitigated by science.” She noted some examples of companies that are developing technologies that can make a difference in communities and in health-care delivery.

Dr. McMurry-Heath lauded the Roundtable for putting a spotlight on the issues discussed. She cautioned, however, that “what keeps me up at night—and what I hope folks will focus on—is backsliding. As we go forward, we have to be vigilant and prevent backlash.”

CLOSING REMARKS

The planning committee co-chairs shared some takeaways they learned from the workshop. Dr. George Daley (Harvard Medical School) noted the workshop was co-organized by the Roundtable’s Public Engagement and Finance action groups, and those two themes were interwoven throughout the sessions. From a financial perspective, he pointed out, debt is a major barrier to higher education for Black scientists and physicians (see Chapter 4). He said he was encouraged by major gifts like that of the Bloomberg Foundation (see Chapter 5), but more needs to be done in both medicine and

other science and engineering fields to augment graduate stipends. Related to public education, many speakers stressed the importance of engagement of Black clinicians and scientists as role models, mentors, and persons; of diversifying faculties to have more role models; and of providing enrichment at all levels. Drawing on the importance of early interventions discussed by Dr. Raj Chetty (Harvard University) (see Chapter 2), Dr. Daley said he is compelled to think about how to engage and inspire students starting at the youngest ages. Having a bigger impact on policy is needed, and he urged finding a way to use the Roundtable to influence government policy.

Dr. Sullivan commented that philanthropic contributions to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and medical schools occurred because of donor interest. “What I come away with is that there is a level of interest among those who have resources to see where they can fit in,” he commented. “For the Roundtable, what I would like to see is not a one-off response, but a systems change.” He suggested that Roundtable members engage with leaders through the Business Roundtable, Council on Foundations, U.S. Congress, and the President’s Cabinet to work together as active problem solvers. “We should be able to find solutions and find ways to communicate with each other,” he said. “This is the time for us to have big actions and major responses.”

Dr. Barabino also noted the increase in philanthropic support and urged the Roundtable to take a leadership role in advising how to invest the resources. She reminded the group of Dr. Chetty’s findings that interventions will not have lasting impacts unless external forces that serve as barriers are removed. Referring to his comments about segregation, she noted that some people generationally talk about what was lost with integration, such as Black businesses and doctors. She asked how to avoid the harm of segregation while maintaining the resources that can keep a community together.

Dr. Theodore Corbin (Drexel University) referred to Dr. Chetty’s call for investments in housing, education, and other services. He pointed out the opportunity of the Roundtable to act as a convener and referred to the need, as discussed by Dr. Barabino and Dr. McMurry-Heath, to make visible what is invisible. Dr. Corbin also noted the need for a mentorship curriculum as a standard throughout every facet of education and the potential impact to work with the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services to develop solutions for public education. Roundtable member Dr. Shirley Malcom stressed the need for a place-based strategy to support housing, arts, economic development, health, food, and other areas. This strategy could be taken to community-based foundations that invest locally, she suggested.

Dr. Daley commented that the chat with Dr. McMurry-Heath brought out many issues. “Now we have to go out there and get things done,” he said. Dr. Louis Sullivan (Sullivan Alliance) concluded that the big problems in society are solvable, and “we are the people who should be taking the lead in solving them. Everyone has a role to play, and we can serve to facilitate the connections.” Dr. Cato Laurencin (Roundtable chair) thanked the participants and closed out the workshop by commenting on the great ideas that came out of it, including the need to create lasting solutions.

REFERENCE