This is our inaugural year for @UCSF_PROPEL, and I am so honored that about 55 (!!!) post-baccalaureate scholars with backgrounds historically excluded in the biomedical sciences will be joining us!! https://twitter.com/UCSF_PROPEL/status/1390792316835692544

For reference, across all basic science PhD programs @UCSF, 163 have URM backgrounds. Also, I am the Director of the Biological and Medical Informatics (BMI) PhD program @UCSF. BMI has a total of 49 students (n+=16 this fall!!!).

Our goal @UCSF_PROPEL is to transform the landscape of the biomedical sciences to be inclusive, equitable, and (as a result) diverse. How do we do that?

From the bottom -> up.

@UCSF is a graduate-only institution, with an amazing array of scientists transforming basic biomedical science, translational science, and health care. What we are good at is training graduate students and postdocs to do amazing science for the career that is right for them.

But the problem is, despite substantial effort, UCSF still suffers from something that almost all major research universities suffer from: underrepresented folks are hella underrepresented.

California is a majority-minority state, whereby no racial/ethnic group comprises a majority of the population. ~48% of Californians have a background underrepresented in biomedical sciences, but only 22.8% of our PhD students and less than 10% of ladder rank faculty do.

For several years, I was the ONLY Latino PhD scientist running a lab across all of UCSF. Now there are a few of us.

This subpar level of diversity is not due to a lack of effort, and it is definitely not unique to UCSF. Change. is. just. so. slow.

Why is change slow? In my opinion, change is slow because it is hard to remove the barriers that prevent diverse folks from having equal opportunities to succeed in science. And when we do succeed, we often feel tokenized (at which point imposter syndrome smacks us around).

How do we speed up change? Seriously... How?? We all need to do our part to break down barriers to equal opportunity for success. What are you going to do?

There are a number of barriers to entry for @UCSF PhD programs.

One barrier was the GRE, which has been shown to not be an effective predictor of grad student success, had biased scores across racial/ethnic groups, and folks spend $$$/time studying for the thing (plus my GRE scores stunk so I hate it).

UCSF (like many biomedical PhD programs) went through a #GRExit process, but not much changed: PhD students were just as strong and diversity continued to be elusive.

Another barrier is prior research. Premier biomedical institutions require a LOT. UCSF PhD programs typically require >2 full years of prior research to be competitive. But here's the kicker: most undergraduate research is unpaid.

So here we are talking about how bad it is that we require the GRE, which forces folks to spend a bunch of money and time preparing for a test, but then we turn around and require 2+ YEARS of unpaid work?! That's bonkers!

I was lucky as an undergrad. I landed a work-study job in a quiet library that required me to do nothing more than sit at a desk. Since I was studying applied math, I was able to do research during my work-study job!

Said slightly differently, I couldn't get paid to do mathematical research on optimal control theory for efficient administration of insulin to treat diabetes, so I worked on it while being paid to keep a desk chair warm...

But not everyone can do that. Most folks have to do experiments or have to work jobs that require active attention. This is especially true for folks like me who are #firstGen and don't even know how to ask the right questions.

So, if we have a ~requirement that folks do at least 2 years of research in order to be competitive for our graduate programs, and there is a barrier that is highly biased against underrepresented folks, then we have to do something. @UCSF_PROPEL was our thing.

The situation was really compounded by the pandemic. Last June we had a Directors meeting for all UCSF basic science PhD programs, and we were concerned that the pandemic was going to interfere with folks ability to get research experience.

Seriously, it took a pandemic to realize something so obvious: access to research experience was unlikely to be equitable.

That was it. A group of program directors started an email chain on June 23, 2020 ("Sent from my iPhone" reminding me that I was emailing about work on my daughter's birthday), and one year later we are celebrating our first class of 55!!

It is not often that one finds themself surrounded by folks who are similarly passionate about something, and overcome a pandemic to create a training program that is totally new that will provide opportunities scores of folks.

Look out biomedical PhD programs!! In 1-2 years, PROPELees will start to take flight!!