The SRA Symposium - College of Medicine

Papers
The list of certified research administrators provided by the RACC only included the names, affiliation,
and city of the individuals. In order to obtain complete contact information for the certified
research administrators, further research was necessary as RACC did not readily provide complete
contact information upon request. NCURA and SRA membership databases were utilized in an
attempt to find complete contact information for the 147 certified research administrators based
in the Southeast region of the NCURA. A search of these two sources revealed contact information
for 84 of the 147 certified research administrators based in the Southeast region of NCURA.
A search of university Web sites provided the necessary contact information for 34 additional
individuals. Contact information for the remaining 29 individuals was obtained through Internet
searches, telephone calls, and through contacting individuals known to the researcher who were
affiliated with the same organization as the CRA. Contact information was verified, edited, and
resulted in a final count of 134 certified research administrators based in the Southeast region of
NCURA.
The list of 1,101 research administrators based in the Southeast region of NCURA was used to
draw a random sample of 147 non-certified research administrators. Sixty-eight (68) of the individuals
included in the list of 1,101 were deleted since they were already included in the certified
research administrator sample population. The author of this paper was also deleted from the list
of 1,101, leaving a total 1,032 non-certified research administrators based in the Southeast region
of the NCURA from which a random sample of 147 was drawn. This resulted in 126 verified and
willing participants.
Since there were more non-certified research administrators based in the Southeast region of
NCURA to draw a random sample from, a second random sample of 21 was drawn in an effort
to identify more respondents. The list the second random sample of 21 was drawn from was
narrowed to 885 after the 147 from the first random sample were eliminated from the list. The
second random sample resulted in 17 additional potential respondents that could be verified. Of
the remaining 4 individuals identified in the second random sample, 2 could not be located, and 2
were unresponsive. Contact information was verified, edited, and resulted in a final count of 143
non-certified research administrators based in the Southeast region of NCURA.
A total of 277 potential respondents comprised the overall sample population for this study.
134 were identified as certified research administrators, and 143 were identified as non-certified
research administrators. Each potential respondent was contacted by telephone or e-mail and notified
that this study was in progress. Confirmation of contact information for all potential respondents
was checked for accuracy and edited as necessary.
A third random sample of 5 was drawn from the list of non-certified research administrators after
a situation arose subsequent to the initial distribution of the survey instrument. One of the potential
respondents indicated it was the policy of that particular institution to receive Institutional
Review Board approval for any study involving students or employees of that institution. Despite
already having obtained the appropriate Institutional Review Board approval, the researcher
was asked to refrain from sending additional surveys to students or employees of that particular
institution unless Institutional Review Board approval from that particular institution was obtained
for this study. Considering this circumstance the researcher elected to draw a third random
sample of 5 since all the potential respondents from this institution were non-certified research
administrators who could be replaced. One individual from this particular institution had already
freely responded to the initial survey invitation, so their response was maintained. The researcher
complied with the request from this institution by not resending the survey to any potential
respondent from that institution. Contact information for all 5 of the potential respondents from
the third random sample were verified, notified of the study, and identified themselves as willing
participants in the study after being contacted by the researcher.
224 2005 Symposium Proceedings Book