Objectives/Goals: Mainstream interest in psilocybin (“shrooms”) has grown over the past several years as two US states have “legalized” psilocybin and clinical trials are underway for use in multiple mental health conditions. We evaluated self-reported use of psilocybin among community members in North Florida and trends in use from 2012 to the present. Methods/Study Population: Established in 2011 as part of the UF Clinical and Translational Science Institute, UF HealthStreet Community Health Workers enroll community members from North Florida through outreach, conduct Health Needs Assessments (HNAs) to guide referrals to social and medical services and opportunities to participate in research. This model provides community health concerns and behaviors, which can be compared across time to direct resources based on importance to the community. Topics covered in the HNA include demographics, trust in research and researchers, food insecurity, access to medical care, health conditions, and use of various substances, from legal drugs like alcohol or opioid pain medication to illicit substances such as cocaine, heroin, or psilocybin. Results/Anticipated Results: We evaluated self-reported use of psilocybin among HealthStreet members, beginning in 2012 when psilocybin use was first assessed until October 2025. Among 12,870 participants, 1,194 (9.3%) reported using psilocybin in the past 12 months. Males were more likely to endorse psilocybin use than females (57.3% vs 42.7%), and Whites were overwhelmingly more likely to report psilocybin use (76.1%) than Blacks (12.1%) or People of Other Race (11.8%). Prevalence of psilocybin use was roughly equal to self-reported rates of use of speed or amphetamines (9.2%), but slightly higher than rates of use of ADHD medications (8.5%). Most notably, when viewed over time, self-reported psilocybin use tripled, from 6% in 2012–2013 to 18% in 2024–2025. Discussion/Significance of Impact: These community data from North Florida confirm a rapidly growing use of psilocybin across the United States. Risk factors for psilocybin use such depression, anxiety, and other drug use will be evaluated. Knowledge of current trends is essential to tailor public health messages and inform both providers and policymakers.

Objectives/Goals: The “Reducing Disability in Alzheimer’s Disease” (RDAD) intervention promotes physical function for people with dementia and reduces caregiver burden but has never been tested in adults with Down syndrome despite their 90% lifetime risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Our objective is to modify RDAD for the needs of this population using the ADAPT framework. Methods/Study Population: We worked collaboratively with families, self-advocates, and professionals to conduct a 2-phase adaptation process of the RDAD intervention materials, content, and mode of delivery. In Phase 1, we convened focus groups comprised of adults with Down syndrome, caregivers, community-based disability service professionals, and researchers to review and advise changes to the RDAD intervention and analyzed their feedback qualitatively using content and thematic analysis. In Phase 2, we conducted a 4-week usability pilot test of RDAD with 5 older adults with Down syndrome and their caregivers to gather additional feedback on intervention feasibility, usability, and acceptability using weekly surveys and a final interview. Results/Anticipated Results: In Phase 1, twelve stakeholders met for four 90-minute focus group sessions. Based on their feedback, we modified the mode of delivery (remote delivery) and changed from one-on-one to group classes to support social connectedness. In the revised materials, we addressed the broad resource needs around dementia diagnosis, healthcare, and caregiving. We updated intervention materials to make them more usable and attractive and integrated music into the live, remote exercise classes, which include a person with Down syndrome as an instructional assistant. In Phase 2, we tested the revised intervention for 4 weeks and collected preferences for the exercise classes, content for the caregiver training, and modes of delivery. We have integrated these findings into the revised intervention and renamed it CareFit-DSAD. Discussion/Significance of Impact: We adapted an evidence-based intervention to the needs of families with Down syndrome using input and evaluation by key stakeholders. The adapted intervention is now undergoing a 12-week pilot and feasibility test (n = 20 dyads) to further assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary changes in physical function and caregiver burden.

Objectives/Goals: * To identify community priorities and compare alignment with research initiatives * To connect research(ers) to community groups or members with similar priorities * To identify areas requiring outreach and/or collaboration * To build capacity and to catalyze new meaningful CTR partnerships * To evaluate ongoing collaborations for sustainability. Methods/Study Population: Together with our Medical School and Hospital, our Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (ICTR) led the development of a Community Engagement Tracker (CE Tracker). This tool tracks organizations, events, programs, and individual contacts to provide insight into current and past collaborations and capacity with the goal of building capacity and catalyzing new research partnerships with community members and organizations. We implemented a 6-stage development process involving: 1) internal stakeholder engagement, 2) initial development, 3) collaborator feedback, 4) refinement, 5) ongoing use, and 6) further refinement. Results/Anticipated Results: In the process of internal stakeholder engagement, we engaged with key internal stakeholders including the Montefiore-Einstein Offices of Community and Population Health and Community Affairs and the Comprehensive Cancer Center’s Community Outreach team to align goals and development plans. With stakeholders, we created an initial set of linked databases for tracking community engagement. We then collected feedback from 36 collaborator groups including the Montefiore Care Management Organization. Our collaborators expressed concerns about privacy, so we refined our tracker to limit data accessibility. At present, there are 36 active users and 28 community and faith-based organizations are tracked. We are collecting data to improve usability of the tracker and plan to implement dashboards in the future. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Catalyzing and sustaining community engagement work in clinical and translational research are paramount but are limited by several logistical barriers. We hope the CE Tracker can decrease logistical barriers to working with communities by building on and tracking currently existing relationships.

Objectives/Goals: The objective of this study was to identify the support needs of faculty conducting health-related community engaged research (CEnR) at the University of Michigan (U-M). Our primary goal was to develop a faculty-informed needs assessment survey. Methods/Study Population: We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven U-M faculty members engaged in health-related CEnR. Participants were affiliated with the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), represented a variety of health disciplines, and had varying levels of CEnR experience. Interviews explored research processes, challenges, and support needs. Transcripts were thematically analyzed. Findings informed the design of a university-wide needs assessment survey, to be distributed to ~1,000 faculty conducting health-focused CEnR across all three of U-M’s campuses. This formative qualitative study represents the initial phase of a broader, mixed-methods effort to strengthen institutional support for translational research through community engagement. Results/Anticipated Results: Interviews revealed key needs across the CEnR lifecycle from study design, partnership development, project management, and dissemination. Themes included the value of introductions to communities by trusted faculty, challenges sustaining partnerships between funding cycles, and the need for greater recognition of CEnR in promotion and tenure. These insights directly shaped the needs assessment survey, which aims to validate and expand on these themes. Findings from the survey will inform CE Team priorities, guide service development, and address barriers that limit the effectiveness and impact of community-engaged translational research at U-M. Discussion/Significance of Impact: By centering faculty voices, this work ensures future programming and services are aligned with real-world needs. Strengthening institutional support for CEnR will improve the systems, methods, and process that enhances its effectiveness and impact, accelerating research translation and fostering stronger university-community partnerships.

Objectives/Goals: The University of Illinois Chicago’s (UIC) Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) aimed to increase research dissemination findings to strengthen community relationships and opportunities for researchers to be in dialogue with communities. Methods/Study Population: From 2024 to present, the CCTS developed a collaboration with community and internal UIC partners connected to Auburn Gresham (AG), a predominantly African American community located in a far southside neighborhood of Chicago, to co-design a series of Community Forums. Community partners included UIC’s Neighborhood Center AG site, dedicated to supporting local stakeholders through strategic interventions, Office of Community Engagement and Neighborhood Health Partnerships (OCEAN-HP), fostering community partnerships through service, education, and research, and the Greater Auburn Gresham Development Corporation (GAGDC), a grassroots organization focused on community development in low-income communities. Results/Anticipated Results: Each community forum discussed research topics affecting the AG community by providing a safe space to foster bidirectional dialogue among community members, university researchers, and other field experts, while simultaneously bridging the gap between the community and research. Topics were identified through AG members’ community expertise and audience anecdotal/survey feedback. The forums were free and evolved to provide community resource packets and basic health screenings (e.g., blood pressure and glucose). This was an iterative engagement process (e.g., establishing relationships and trust, incorporating community feedback) to best mold the community forums to AG’s needs. The community audience and researchers/field experts have continued to express their interest in future community events. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The AG community forums have increased the interest in what research is and how to be involved among community members. Researchers/field experts have reiterated the importance of bidirectional dialogue with the community and the positive impact on research. These forums support research dissemination and community engagement.

Objectives/Goals: Community engagement is required to translate scientific discovery into improvements in health. Lived experience is essential knowledge for translational research activities. Community studios facilitate interaction between researchers and community members, but mechanisms of how lived experience integrates into research are under explored. Methods/Study Population: The community studio program at the Center for Community Health Partnership and Research was evaluated through interviews with participating community health consultants (CHCs) and researchers. Fifteen facilitated community studios held since 2023 were included. Study participation was organized by studio: invitations went to all researchers, and then to three CHCs randomly selected from each researcher’s studio. Rapid qualitative analysis methods were used to create analysis templates based on key questions from the interview guide. Interview notes were summarized according to the template and compiled into matrices for study team reflection and discussion. Responses to key questions were articulated during group discussions and iteratively refined. Results/Anticipated Results: Thirteen researchers and 25 CHCs were interviewed from April to June 2025. Eighty-six percent of researchers had a research degree, either a PhD or Master’s; 85% were associate or full professors. None reported formal training in community engaged research. Several types of knowledge gaps were filled including correction of faulty assumptions, awareness of the impacts of SDOH, and ideas for solving operational challenges. CHCs were 80% female. CHCs felt valued during the studio experience, received benefit from hearing the lived experiences of others, and gained new perspectives on their health issue. CHCs expressed a desire to know the impact their participation had on the research, and several said they would have to see it to believe it. Both researchers and CHCs appreciated the expert facilitator. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Everyone learned during studios. Eliciting lived experience filled different knowledge gaps. Sharing provided social benefits and studios functioned like a third space, a merging between the built and social environment. An expert facilitator played key roles that included fostering belonging and translation of lived experience into knowledge.

Objectives/Goals: Cross-institutional collaboration describes the development of cross-institutional partnership between two CTSI’s to overcome common challenges faced by both entities. Community engagement work discusses ways that Strategic Doing fostered sustainable initiatives to improve wellness in rural communities. Methods/Study Population: Through collaborative efforts, the Indiana and Penn State University Clinical & Translational Science Institutes were able to plan and implement community engagement initiatives to advance health outcomes among under-resourced populations in each of their respective communities. The institutions shared and utilized key principles of an educational series entitled “Strategic Doing (SD)” that provided instruction on developing and facilitating complex collaborations. Leveraging SD practices, both CTSI’s community engagement teams guided groups of local community leaders and stakeholders in meaningful, action-oriented partnerships to promote better health and wellness. Results/Anticipated Results: At Indiana CTSI, six staff completed Strategic Doing Institute Agile Leadership training. As a result, community partners in 11 counties implemented evidence-based strategies, including a community garden with cooking classes, a mobile kitchen for nutrition education, and wellness passports at community events with food samples, screenings, and educational programs. At Penn State, twelve staff (9 CTSI, 3 community partners) completed the same training. Of 8 post training evaluation respondents, 75% were extremely likely and 25% somewhat likely to apply the training to their work. Trainees are leading task forces that received CTSI funding focused on substance use, healthy aging, and public health infrastructure and health literacy. Discussion/Significance of Impact: SD trainees have reported transformative changes when facilitating community-academic partnerships. By using a scientifically based framework, task forces have experienced enhanced synergy, resulting in increased engagement and accountability that led to improved wellness in the community.

Objectives/Goals: This study aimed to develop and validate the Black Wealth-Health Framework, a community-derived model that integrates behavioral, cultural, and structural dimensions to explain and intervene on the relationship between wealth and health among Black individuals. Methods/Study Population: Using a community participatory approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 40 Black adults across diverse life contexts. Grounded theory and thematic analysis guided data collection and synthesis. Participants explored how they define and experience wealth and health across physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual domains; identified culturally grounded strategies for maintaining well-being; and described interactions with structural systems such as housing, employment, and healthcare. Results/Anticipated Results: Preliminary findings reveal that Black adults conceptualize wealth and health as multidimensional, intergenerational, and deeply relational. Themes include the centrality of cultural wealth such as mutual aid, spirituality, and community care, the burden of structural barriers, and the embodied stress of economic exclusion. These insights informed a conceptual and visual model linking systemic inequity, cultural resilience, and health outcomes. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The Black Wealth-Health Framework bridges public health, economic justice, and cultural resilience to guide clinical, community, and policy interventions that reflect the lived experiences of Black people. Translating this framework into practice offers a pathway toward wealth-health equity.

Objectives/Goals: The Clinical and Translational Research Funding Program (CTRFP) awards 12-month community-engaged pilot projects. Following cycles of proposals with underdeveloped community engagement plans, the study section recommended earlier community feedback. The CTRFP early review process integrates lived experiences in proposal development. Methods/Study Population: Each CTRFP competitive letter of intent (LOI) submission includes a partnership description with roles, project engagement plans, and aims. The early review process includes 1) match community health consultants with specific lived experiences to LOIs; 2) separately, match academics with specific community-engaged research experiences to LOIs; 3) meet with each reviewer to collect verbal feedback; 4) provide written feedback from both community and academic perspectives to applicants one month prior to proposal due date; and 5) consult with applicants as requested leading up to proposal submission. Applicants must state how they incorporated feedback into their proposal. This process is managed through the Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences’ community engagement function. Results/Anticipated Results: Three cycles of early review have been integrated into the CTRFP, involving 11 community and 5 academic reviewers. * 29% of LOIs reviewed did not submit. Two realized their partnerships were not ready and within 4 months applied for partnership development funding. * An early reviewer said, “It’s one thing to have a bird’s eye view of an issue, but another to talk to people that grew up in it and know it in their day to day. My voice is totally necessary. I break down ‘food insecurity’ from this surface concept into this issue impacting real people like me and my family.” * Applicants said feedback led to better research design and engagement activities, community benefit, and bigger partnerships. * 22% of proposals scored in the fundable range in 2021. In 2024, 66% of proposals scored in the fundable range. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Early review of CTRFP applications proposing community-engaged research demonstrates accountability to valuing lived experience. Staggering funding with programs that support community engagement, such as partnership development funding and community studios, can efficiently improve proposals not adequately prepared for submission.

Objectives/Goals: To explore patient experiences and perceptions of GLP-1 receptor agonists for weight loss, informing translational obesity care and highlighting the impact of emerging therapies on patient-centered outcomes. Methods/Study Population: This mixed-methods study included adults (≥18 years) without diabetes, pregnancy, or relevant medical contraindications. From March to July 2025, 140 participants completed a 30-item survey and ~30-question semi-structured interview tailored to six distinct GLP-1 experience groups from considering it, to actively using it, to having stopped. Participants received a $20 e-gift card. Quantitative data were analyzed using SAS; qualitative data were coded and thematically analyzed in Dedoose. The sample was predominantly white (82%), female (63%), privately insured (84%), employed full-time (74%), college-educated (75%), and married (65%), with 47% reporting income ≥$100,000 and a mean age of 45 years. Results/Anticipated Results: Distinct themes emerged across groups. Group 2 reported reduced interest in food, which influenced their food choices with mixed clinician support on nutrition. Group 4 credited GLP-1 for weight loss success but feared losing access to medication due to cost or insurance and thereby rebounding. Group 6 discontinued due to unsustainable side effects, cost, or coverage denial. Female participants (Groups 3–5) often faced stigma, with comments about “cheating” in weight loss, rarely reported by males. A reduction in “food noise” – intrusive food thoughts – was common while on GLP-1. Educational support from clinicians varied widely. Despite media portrayals, nearly all participants had long struggled with weight and were actively pursuing healthy lifestyles with exercise and nutritious food while on GLP-1. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Findings reveal strong patient enthusiasm for GLP-1 therapies and emphasize the need for consistent education and policy reform to support equitable, sustainable obesity care. Patient-centered insights can inform translational strategies in obesity treatment.

Objectives/Goals: Trust among stakeholders is vital for effective implementation, boosting collaboration, and ensuring long-term commitment to a program. In the past decade, PRx has gained traction, but trust between farmers and healthcare clinics remains understudied. This study aims to identify facilitators and barriers to building trust for PRx implementation. Methods/Study Population: We partnered with 3 primary care clinics within a healthcare system in Atlanta, GA, conducting 7 one-hour focus group discussions (FGDs) with providers, residents, and staff (6-8 participants each), and 13 one-hour semi-structured interviews with healthcare administrators. Seventeen organic fruit and vegetable farmers within 2 hours of Atlanta were recruited via Georgia Organics and snowball sampling for 1-hour semi-structured interviews. FGDs and interview guides were based on the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework’s preparation phase. FGDs were held in person; interviews were in person/Zoom. Sessions were recorded, then transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription company. The data were analyzed using a team-based rapid qualitative analytic approach. Results/Anticipated Results: Farmers and healthcare personnel stressed the importance of communication for building trust in a partnership for PRx implementation. They both value commitment but are concerned about mutual engagement and reliability in the PRx. Healthcare personnel worry about unmet patient needs and disappointment, and farmers worry about unsold produce and financial losses. Farmers feel that healthcare systems do not understand their operations due to differences in work culture, bureaucratic barriers, and staff turnover, which hinder trust. Healthcare workers want to understand farmers’ operations but lack the experience to initiate discussions and to integrate them into their workflow. Both reported that building trust involves having early conversations to establish alignment with their mission and workflows. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Findings highlight that building trust is crucial for farmers and healthcare personnel in PRx, starting with setting shared goals, recognizing sector differences, and promptly addressing barriers early in the partnership. Future efforts could involve stakeholders in co-design to foster mutual understanding and strengthen PRx implementation.

Objectives/Goals: Mentoring is essential for the development of investigators, and while many mentorship programs exist, few focus exclusively on the challenges associated with community-engaged research (CER). This program focused on forging lasting mentoring relationships with CER experts and strengthening connections with community partners. Methods/Study Population: The 9-month program focused on: Exclusive focus on CER mentorship. The curriculum drew on best practices from CTSC partner institutions (Emory University, University of Wisconsin-Madison) and local expertise from the NIH-funded U54 Investigator Development Core. Prior work identified the lack of CER-specific mentorship as a barrier to success, prompting the creation of this dedicated program. Small cohorts with community mentors: Each bi-monthly cohort comprised four mentees and one community mentor, supported by CTSC staff. This structure created a safe space for sharing project challenges and offered grounded perspectives on community-partner needs and expectations. Mentor coaching mentors received targeted coaching, enhancing their capacity to guide mentees and boosting overall mentor satisfaction. Results/Anticipated Results: Evaluation surveys captured satisfaction, confidence, and likelihood of continued participation. Key findings include * High Satisfaction: Both mentors and mentees reported strong satisfaction with program elements. * Skill Development: Mentees cited support across project design, grant development, networking, and policy work. * Future Participation: 100 % of mentors and mentees indicated they would join again or recommend the program to colleagues. * Community Impact: Participants highlighted the program’s sense of community, passion, and peer support. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This CER mentoring program addresses a critical gap: traditional career mentors often focus on clinical or academic specialties, overlooking the unique challenges of building equitable community partnerships. By centering mentorship on CER and incorporating coach-driven mentor development, the program fosters bidirectional growth.

Objectives/Goals: In 2021, Mayo Clinic Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCaTS) launched CE Studios to enhance community-informed research across a multisite institution. This study applied the Proctor’s implementation outcomes framework to evaluate the implementation efforts across diverse settings. Methods/Study Population: From June 2022 to October 2025, we held 59 CE Studios across 19 sites in Arizona, Florida, and Midwest. CE Studios were done in-person and virtually via Zoom. Researchers and community members completed a survey assessing their experience and perceived influence of communities’ feedback on the research project. Data were collected and analyzed from June 2022 to October 2025. To assess the implementation, we applied Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework, which examines eight constructs: Acceptability, Adoption, Appropriateness, Feasibility, Fidelity, Implementation Cost, Penetration, and Sustainability. Results/Anticipated Results: Thirty (51%) researchers and 286 (67%) community members completed the survey. Both groups indicated high satisfaction with CE Studio planning, format, and facilitation, emphasizing meaningful contribution of community feedback on research. All researchers noted at least one stage of their research was influenced by community input: pre-research (28%), study design (28%), implementation (22%), infrastructure (15%), analysis (1%), and dissemination (6%). Over time, CE Studios requests increased, reflecting recognition of their value in enhancing research. The framework revealed missing structured coordinators’ feedback, a key for understanding implementation and highlighted the need to revise evaluation tools and identify additional data sources aligned with the broader framework. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Applying the Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework revealed areas to strengthen CE Studio implementation such as coordinator feedback, refinement of evaluation tools, data source, and strategies to assess CE Studio sustainability and institutional impact. These insights offer a model to guide similar efforts at other institutions.

Objectives/Goals: A participatory mixed methods study was conducted to examine Arab Americans’ attitudes toward clinical dementia research and identify the cultural and contextual factors that influence their participation. Methods/Study Population: A community council partnered with the study team to conduct this study. Arab American adults (N = 51) completed a modified version of the Research Attitudes Questionnaire (RAQ-7) assessing views of clinical dementia research. Mean item scores and frequencies were analyzed. A subsample of participants (N = 11) participated in focus groups to further explore the factors that influence their attitudes toward research and barriers and facilitators to participation. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed to contextualize survey findings. Results/Anticipated Results: Participants reported highly positive attitudes toward dementia research (M=3.96–4.29/5), with >80% agreeing that clinical dementia research is safe and important. Most endorsed a collective responsibility to volunteer for dementia research (90%) and had confidence in the protection of their information (88%). Yet 98% had never participated in dementia research (2% unsure). Focus groups revealed that their lack of participation is largely explained by structural and systemic barriers, including the absence of Arabic-language studies, transportation, misalignment with community priorities, and the broader political context shaping their health experiences and trust in institutions. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This study demonstrates that despite having positive attitudes toward clinical dementia research, Arab Americans do not enroll in studies. Findings underscore the need for transformative models of research, such as community engaged approaches, that may better address barriers to participation.

Objectives/Goals: Our UAB OBGYN team is collaborating with the West Alabama (AL) Maternity Care Coalition (WAMCC) and using implementation mapping and mixed methods to co-develop and test a digital implementation strategy at the individual and community level. The goal is to mitigate mistrust and improve the accessibility of maternity care in rural areas. Methods/Study Population: UAB OBGYN and the WAMCC will partner with Ashmi Health and the West Alabama Area Health Education to co-develop and test the implementation strategy, MOM (Mothering Our Mothers) Connect (MOM-C). The MOM-C is an adaptive progressive web application that includes contextually tailored health information, local resources, and local community health worker (CHW) support. This three-phase research includes 1) co-developing and finalizing the implementation strategy using focus groups and implementation mapping; 2) pretesting and finalizing the strategy components with people of reproductive age (n = 20) and local CHWs (n = 2–3); and 3) finalizing the strategy and implementation map. Results/Anticipated Results: Data collection led to the refinement of MOM-C and the development of a CHW training course. Our team also developed additional, complementary implementation strategies that included effective dissemination methods. Plans and metrics for case tracking, resource sharing, usage analytics, and user behavior data will be developed to measure the association between the implementation strategies and both primary and secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes include utilization of perinatal healthcare and social/community resources and self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes include provider and medication adherence, complications, depressive/anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and quality of life. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Digital health interventions are an essential and cost-effective public health tool for the efficient delivery of health education and healthcare services, especially in care deserts. In low resource and low trust contexts, digital health interventions are strengthened when they are combined with CHW services and adapted for the local context.

Objectives/Goals: Using k-means clustering, we analyzed data from the All of Us Research Program to 1) identify distinct social connectedness clusters (based on social support and neighborhood social cohesion) and 2) examine their associations with objectively measured physical activity (PA) and daily steps among adults in the USA. Methods/Study Population: PA is an important modifiable factor for preventing noncommunicable diseases, yet <50% of US adults meet moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) guidelines. While social connectedness may influence PA, its relationship with objectively measured PA remains understudied. We conducted a secondary analysis of All of Us data from participants who completed the Social Determinants of Health Survey and provided 7 days of objective PA data (Fitbit). Using k-means clustering, we identified social connectedness profiles based on social support and neighborhood cohesion. We determined the optimal number of clusters using partition criteria and ran logistic regression models (adjusted for demographic, clinical, and neighborhood factors) to examine associations with meeting MVPA guidelines and achieving 10,000 steps/day. Results/Anticipated Results: Among 8,406 participants (mean age 55.6±14.7 years; 70.0% women; 80.1% non-Hispanic White), we identified three clusters: high social support/high neighborhood cohesion (HSS-HSC; 28%), high social support/low neighborhood cohesion (HSS-LSC; 47%), and low social support/low neighborhood cohesion (LSS-LSC; 24%). Compared to HSS-HSC, participants in HSS-LSC and LSS-LSC clusters had lower odds of meeting MVPA guidelines (HSS-LSC: AOR=0.87, 95% CI=0.78–0.98; LSS-LSC: AOR=0.81, 95% CI=0.70–0.93) and achieving 10,000 steps/day (HSS-LSC: AOR=0.82, 95% CI=0.72–0.92; LSS-LSC: AOR=0.84, 95% CI=0.72–0.98). Discussion/Significance of Impact: Social connectedness is associated with greater PA. Nearly 50% of our sample had low neighborhood cohesion despite high social support, highlighting gaps in community-level connectedness. Findings support the need for multilevel interventions to address determinants of PA among adults.

Objectives/Goals: The ConQuER study is randomized controlled trial testing the impact of a personal training program in patients with CKD. We are conducting an implementation evaluation of that trial to measure RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) outcomes and identify barriers to clinical research participation. Methods/Study Population: This is a convergent mixed-methods study. The qualitative component is a thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with study participants and staff. Participant eligibility requires thrice-weekly chronic hemodialysis for at least 6 months with clinical stability and adequate dialysis (single-pool Kt/V > 1.2). We will use an interview guide that solicits general perceptions about the trial and questions aligned with the RE-AIM domains. Data collection and analysis will occur iteratively using a combined inductive and deductive approach; deductive codes will pertain to RE-AIM domains. The quantitative component is a cross-sectional analysis of trial administrative documents and patient demographics. We synthesized qualitative and quantitative data in a table organized by RE-AIM domains. Results/Anticipated Results: We anticipate completing 30 interviews to achieve thematic saturation. We assume qualitative findings will suggest several factors contributing to exercise adherence, including dialysis regimen and schedule, reliable transportation access, and community support. We anticipate that familiarity with and understanding of the goals of clinical research will be factors contributing to participation. Social risk factors may also play a role, as patients with greater social risk may be unable to routinely participate in clinical research. We anticipate qualitative and quantitative findings will converge and that qualitative data will explain unanticipated quantitative results. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This study will identify how social risk, health status, and patient perspectives contribute to exercise and clinical research participation. With this knowledge, clinicians can capitalize on the enablers and work to minimize barriers to both exercise adherence and clinical research participation, increasing study population diversity.

Objectives/Goals: Summarize literature on treatment outcomes among postpartum women with OUD. Describe a model Assessment, Decision, Adaptation, Production, Topical Experts, Integration, Training, and Testing (ADAPT-ITT) guiding the adaptation of Baby & Me. Assess preliminary effectiveness and implementation outcomes of the adapted version of Baby & Me. Methods/Study Population: We used the ADAPT-ITT model to tailor Baby & Me, a brief education and skills-based parenting program, for postpartum women receiving MOUD in the Women’s Mental Health Program (WMHP) at UAMS. Originally delivered for Women, Infants, & Children offices, Baby & Me targets parenting stress and well-being to prevent child abuse/neglect. Adaptations focused on the unique parenting-related needs of postpartum women receiving MOUD. We will pilot the adapted program with 10 participants, receiving care at the WMHP using a pre- and post-test design with surveys and interviews to assess preliminary effectiveness (i.e., perceived parenting stress, postpartum depression, and substance use) and implementation outcomes (acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility). Results/Anticipated Results: We anticipate that participation in the Baby & Me program will be associated with reductions in perceived parenting stress, postpartum depression symptoms, and substance use from baseline to follow-up among postpartum parenting women with opioid use disorder. Qualitative interviews are expected to reveal that recipients find the intervention to be acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for delivery in outpatient treatment settings, yet inform further refinements prior to larger-scale testing. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Parenting programs in outpatient treatment settings can potentially improve maternal mental health, strengthen mother–infant bonds, and recovery outcomes. Yet most are home-based, lengthy, and cover a broad range of child developmental stages. Embedding brief, tailored programs into clinical care may boost acceptability and impact.

Objectives/Goals: Mayo Clinic launched the Community Health Assessment and Improvement Measures Program (CHAMP) Awards to support community–academic partnerships that address community health needs through community-engaged research. This abstract describes the development, implementation, and impact of CHAMP. Methods/Study Population: Launched in 2014, CHAMP offers two awards: Research Awards for discreet community-engaged research projects and Partnership Development to develop infrastructure for future community-engaged research. Awardees must address identified community health needs and involve community partners. The awards span two years; Year 1 focuses on partnership development and Year 2 on implementing project aims. Projects are reviewed and scored by internal investigators and community partners, and top-scoring proposals are selected by a review committee. Budgets must support community partners and teams submit progress and final reports to track the impact of the awards. Outcomes such as grants, publications, and career advancement are tracked by program staff. Results/Anticipated Results: The CHAMP Awards have completed seven funding cycles, supporting 28 community–academic projects and partnerships across Arizona, Florida, and the Midwest. To date, 23 awardees have published over 250 peer-reviewed articles related to community-engaged research. Of the 28 projects, over 60 subsequent grants have been secured from agencies such as the National Institute of Health, National Cancer Institute, and others, expanding both impact and sustainability. Project topics include school-based vaccinations, cardiovascular disease prevention, cancer advocacy, screening, and diabetes management. Awardees and partners continue to advance science, build lasting relationships, and secure additional resources. Discussion/Significance of Impact: The CHAMP Awards advance community-engaged research by developing and funding strong community–academic partnerships that address identified community health needs. The program supports early-career investigators, promotes workforce development, and has catalyzed new funding through subsequent grants.

Objectives/Goals: This study surveyed Michigan Medicine patients to explore their interest and willingness to serve as research partners #_msocom_1 (patients who collaborate with academic researchers) and to identify their preferred research engagement activities, preferences for working with researchers, and perceived barriers and facilitators to collaboration. #_msoanchor_1. Methods/Study Population: We selected a random sample of 2,000 adult Michigan Medicine patients. A modified Dillman method was used, including initial mailing with a $10 gift, postcard reminder, and additional outreach for non-responders (mail, phone, or online survey). Survey questions covered demographics and health literacy, trust in medical researchers, and interest, preferences, obstacles, and facilitators to partnering. Variables were summarized descriptively, and associations between patient-level factors and interest in more versus less intensive partnership (>1 hour/month vs 1 hour/month or less) were quantified using logistic regression (adjusted for age and sex). Results/Anticipated Results: Of the N=2000 sample, 1633 were response-eligible. Of these, N=408 (25%) responded, with N=258 (63%) endorsing being interested in partnering. Average age was 51 years; 59% identified as female; 44% White, 19% Black, 9% Asian, 6% Hispanic/Latino, 6% Middle Eastern/North African, and 12% multiracial and/or multiethnic. Factors associated with interest in more time-intensive partnership (41% of responders) were having greater trust in researchers and being interested in helping identify research topics, assist with recruitment, and help disseminate findings. Transportation issues were the most reported obstacle (57%); personal experience with the medical topic was the most reported facilitator (76%). Health literacy level was not associated with willingness to engage in high time–intensity partnership. Discussion/Significance of Impact: This study identified factors that may affect patients’ willingness to engage as research partners, highlighting that those with lower literacy may still desire collaborations. Findings will contribute to development of a training program to support effective collaboration between patients and researchers.