The Emerging Equity Scholars Program: A belonging intervention to address othering in research careers

The Relationship Between Well-Being and Equity

Well-being can be difficult to prioritize and achieve for people who come from systemically marginalized and minoritized communities (Wallace, 2017). This occurs for a myriad of reasons, many of which are directly linked to structural racism and other social determinants of health that interfere with access to safe and secure housing, transportation, employment, education, and health care. Indeed, adverse social determinants of health have been reported to be significantly higher for almost all groups of people of color compared with white people (Town et al., 2024). Furthermore, coping with the daily stresses of racism has been documented to seriously damage physical and mental health (Geronimus, 2023).

Scholars from groups that have been historically excluded from and are currently othered in research careers may be contending with an array of these factors, or with emotional or physical health issues that resulted from prior exposures to adverse conditions caused by racism and other systems of oppression. In addition, scholars from othered groups, and particularly those who are the first in their families to graduate from college, frequently have familial obligations and become a resource for their loved ones as their careers advance, providing financial and practical support while also managing their professional lives (Covarrubias et al., 2019). Paradoxically, the flexibility offered in many research professions can add further challenges, because family members may expect scholars to be able to interrupt their workday to assist with family matters, leading to additional misunderstandings and stress. Due to health disparities driven by racism, scholars of color are also more likely than white scholars to experience the death of loved ones (Williams, 1999) and thus may have a need for more bereavement leave than they are allocated. Whether coping with their own current structural barriers, issues that arose due to prior exposures, the ongoing needs of family members, or a combination of all of these contexts, scholars from systemically marginalized and minoritized groups typically find themselves navigating a complex set of demands that are often poorly understood or ignored by their colleagues from more privileged and dominant groups.

Scholars who possess lived expertise on the topics they research may face additional strains. On study teams, there often is an implicit divide between “us” (the researchers) and “them” (the people being researched). An early-career scholar who has direct experience because they, their family, or their community are dealing with consequences related to substance use, criminal legal system involvement, health or mental health conditions, or other frequently studied topics that disproportionately affect systemically marginalized and minoritized groups may fear being stigmatized if they disclose this information. This may lead to the researcher choosing not to share their lived expertise to avoid revealing private information in workspaces, which then could put them in the position of having to manage in isolation feeling triggered or overwhelmed by reading literature, collecting or analyzing data, or being in discussions about issues they have directly experienced. It also could lead to them deciding to leave a team or switch topic areas if they are put in a position of having their expertise revealed against their will—for instance if they are required to undergo a background check to access a dataset or enter a facility to conduct interviews. In addition to being profoundly harmful for scholars, these situations also significantly diminish the quality of research if it remains devoid of the insights and perspectives of researchers who have deep, rich, and nuanced understandings of these areas of study.

The EES leadership team understood that in a program for scholars from othered groups working in a PWI, well-being clearly is a core component of equity. People cannot feel like they belong in an environment that harms them. Actively communicating concern about and support for well-being in ways that are tailored to the needs of people from a wide array of groups is key to cultivating a sense of belonging within PWIs. Thus, we decided to thoughtfully incorporate and prioritize well-being as an integral part of EES.

Well-Being Mentorship

A key innovation of the EES program is the inclusion of well-being mentors. In the pilot cohort, well-being mentors primarily were RTI staff working in roles that supported research endeavors but who did not self-identify as “researchers.” These colleagues were invited to become well-being mentors based on their varied and significant contributions across our research institute, their tenure, and shared sociodemographic characteristics with EES Scholars. Because the goal of well-being mentorship was to establish empathic communities at work, receive support navigating workplace processes and cultures, and foster long-term emotional and physical health, it was important that the Scholars could relate to their well-being mentor on a personal level.

Successful well-being mentorship required ongoing relationship and trust building, which well-being mentors attempted to develop through their twice monthly check-ins. While the Scholars’ experiences and needs were always centered, well-being mentors would often share their own relevant personal and work experiences to demonstrate compassion and empathy for the Scholars and provide examples of practical strategies. Throughout the program, well-being mentors supported Scholars in thinking through their well-being goals, achievements, and ongoing needs; exploring new practices such as journaling; and normalizing seeking therapy.

Since well-being mentors were also from othered groups, there was a possibility they were affected by the same workplace culture issues as the Scholars. To minimize harms or experiences of vicarious trauma, well-being mentors were provided with support through monthly one-on-one meetings with the well-being director and participation in the monthly well-being mentor peer support group. These forums contributed to building community and provided structured space for support. For example, when one well-being mentor experienced the death of a loved one, time was devoted during the peer meeting to supporting her with heartfelt condolences, tips on navigating the complexities of grief and loss, and encouragement to pay special attention to her well-being during this difficult time. The well-being mentor later expressed how meaningful the support felt and how much she appreciated the opportunity to connect with the group when it was most needed.

EES Well-Being Programmatic Practices

Well-being mentorship requires an authentic look at day-to-day activities and examining them for ways to create a safe and inclusive environment in which emerging scholars can openly discuss challenges and seek guidance without fear of judgment. We began by identifying three dominant constructs of well-being and how they connect to types of rest (see Figure 6). We then incorporated these concepts into EES program activities.

Figure 6

Well-being constructs and types of rest

Sharing Resources

In EES, we recognized that people from marginalized or minoritized groups likely have more well-being needs directly related to oppressive systems than their counterparts. Therefore, we developed the EES Well-Being Resource Guide (see Figure 7) to give EES participants easily accessible information about more than 50 employer-provided resources as well as external resources that could be accessed at no or relatively low cost to assist with mental, physical, and social well-being goals. From suggestions on finding a new therapist, introducing readers to inspirational people to follow on social media, or linking them to information about health care benefits, the Well-Being Resource Guide was intended to be a repository that was not only informative but also nurtured the soul, featuring inspirational quotes and beautiful, representative images throughout the guide.

Figure 7

Image from EES Resource Guide

Sharing Power in Research Mentorship

Mentorship is recognized as a key factor for success in research professions. In recent years, it also has been increasingly scrutinized and critiqued for being rife with possibilities for exploitation, gatekeeping, and other forms of toxic work culture and harmful interpersonal dynamics (Horton, 2023). We designed EES to provide the benefits of engaging with more experienced colleagues while cultivating interactions between research mentors and Scholars that are attentive to the importance of sharing learnings and power.

As discussed in the previous section, a key innovation in EES is pairing Scholars with a well-being mentor as well as a research mentor. In our messaging around this dual mentorship model, we continually foregrounded the importance of well-being and emphasized that the well-being mentors’ insights and guidance held equal weight alongside those of the research mentor. This was a deliberate effort on our part to disrupt traditional hierarchies that prioritize academic training over other forms of knowledge. In full cohort meetings, the well-being director always welcomed participants and opened the meeting before the research director spoke, and in meetings with multiple mentors present, well-being mentors were invited to share their thoughts first, followed by research mentors. Likewise, we began meeting agendas, check-in conversations, and written communications by addressing well-being (e.g., opening the floor for sharing well-being wins, asking people if they needed support with challenges, reminding participants to take time for intentional rest), only moving onto research items once people’s humanity had been acknowledged. These practices of consistently holding space for and leading with well-being also helped to avoid wellness as being construed as secondary or an “add-on” to the focus on research.

In addition, we encouraged Scholars to meet with colleagues beyond their officially assigned mentors as a way of ensuring that no single person exerted disproportionate influence over their well-being or their research. While Scholars met weekly with either their well-being mentor or research mentor, they were welcome to connect with any of the EES mentors or advisors to discuss a specific question, get feedback on their Equity Project, or learn more about someone’s professional trajectory. The research director also met with the Scholars periodically to hear about their program experiences and their work on their Equity Project. Although no adjustments were needed in the pilot year, these check-ins were intended to provide opportunities for the Scholars to identify any challenges in working with their research mentors and obtain support in addressing an issue or changing mentors. In addition, since broadening Scholars’ networks was considered integral to fostering a sense of belonging in a research profession, the research director and mentors facilitated introductions to senior colleagues outside of EES.

Finally, the concept of holistic mentorship being provided in community was applied to the research mentors as a collective. The monthly peer meetings gave research mentors a forum in which they could solicit advice for addressing mentorship questions, ideas for strengthening the equity focus of their own research, or creative strategies for prioritizing their own well-being. These opportunities for connection yielded rich conversations about topics such as the complexities of helping Scholars stay emotionally and physically well in an increasingly high-pressure and demanding global economy and tactics for providing Scholars with a supportive infrastructure that would cultivate intellectual independence.

Equity Projects: Honoring Agency and Lived Expertise in Research

In the professional research environment, early-career scholars frequently do not have the chance to design and conduct studies on topics of their choice. Rather, they typically are assigned specific tasks under the direction of a more senior researcher, which potentially equips them with valuable experience but also can leave them with a lack of clarity about how different components tie together and feeling unsure about their own abilities to lead a project from start to finish. The intention of the EES Equity Project is to provide Scholars with the support and opportunity to exercise agency in choosing a focal area and crafting a project design, deepen their understanding of the research process by engaging them in all stages of the work, and experience a sense of accomplishment and ownership over the final product.

During the pilot year, the EES research director and research mentors endeavored to implement equity-focused practices to create a highly supportive environment in which Scholars could attain these goals. As Scholars were contemplating topic areas and project designs, we continually encouraged them to honor their own interests and drive the process. Scholars sometimes expressed the sense that they “should” undertake a certain set of activities that would be beneficial for a more senior scholar’s program of research or meet expectations that someone else had of them. We acknowledged these pressures and realities of the professional world, but emphasized to them that EES offered a uniquely protected space in which they were being encouraged to pursue their own intellectual passions.

At times, Scholars also expressed insecurities about their ability to conceive of an Equity Project idea since they customarily worked to advance the ideas of others. To address this, we engaged Scholars in brainstorming sessions and provided them with examples of how we generate ideas for our research, being transparent about our own self-doubts and blockages and the strategies we use to move beyond those. Importantly, during the idea generation process and throughout the Equity Projects, we strove to promote an atmosphere of curiosity, innovation, and exploration in which we and the Scholars placed trust in their intuitions and hunches, even when they opposed traditional research theories and approaches or the ways the research mentors conducted their own work. This approach included encouraging Scholars to explicitly incorporate knowledge developed through their lived expertise into their work in ways that felt comfortable and welcome for them.

While we reinforced this messaging in our mentorship conversations and group meetings, a primary way we elevated the value of lived expertise in research was through the EES Speaker Series. In our inaugural event, Professors Reuben Jonathan Miller and Michael Walker elucidated the concept of “proximity as methodology” and how their personal experiences richly inform and strengthen their award-winning research (Miller, 2021; Walker, 2022). During the discussion following the talk, each Scholar was invited to pose a question they had formulated in advance to the speakers. This event was attended by more than 200 people across our research institute. Many colleagues contacted us afterward to express appreciation for the platform we provided for the Scholars, noting that typically questions and comments from senior researchers are prioritized in large-audience settings. Throughout the program year, we involved the Scholars as co-organizers and facilitators of each EES Speaker Series event. By suggesting guest speakers, crafting discussion questions, and sharing their own wisdom and learnings as they moderated conversations, the Scholars gained further visibility across our institute and modeled the benefits of disrupting traditional hierarchies in favor of a culture of power sharing.

Finally, we strongly supported Scholars in designing Equity Projects that were feasible. Each Scholar initially proposed a scope of work that would have been extremely challenging to complete due to the amount of work required within the program’s timeframe. Research mentors used this opportunity to discuss how our profession’s culture promotes “performative productivity” and projecting ambition by setting unrealistic goals, which in turn leads to internalizing harmful normative expectations and sacrificing well-being in an effort to manage an overwhelming workload (Kenny, 2017).

Research mentors and Scholars worked together to adjust the scale of the Equity Projects, a process which helped the Scholars better understand the “building blocks” of research and how the necessary steps leading to a final product have value in and of themselves. For example, several Scholars originally stated that they wanted to publish a manuscript for a peer-reviewed journal on an analysis of research they would conduct in a topic area or using a methodology that was relatively new to them. While the research mentors acknowledged the high currency of peer-reviewed publications in research professions in their discussions with these Scholars, they also shared their experiences of how long the writing process often takes and the anxiety it can produce when rushed due to a demanding deadline. In addition, they highlighted the importance of and sense of fulfillment in taking one’s time to master a new skill or develop a comprehensive understanding of a novel topic, which then could provide the infrastructure for future work, including a published manuscript.

After Scholars reimagined the shape their interests and goals could take, the final EES Equity Projects for the pilot cohort included:

• Learning Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis techniques and conducting an analysis of maternal and child health disparities in Alabama, the Scholar’s home state, using data from RTI Rarity^TM.

• Undertaking an extensive literature review of the impact of municipal incorporation in Black-majority suburbs—a new topic area for the Scholar—and conducting a case study of several municipalities in Georgia.

• Developing a blog dedicated to advocating, inspiring, and showcasing how to equitably and inclusively build and sustain community partnerships in research, which involved the Scholar forming relationships with local community-based organizations and learning how to create a website.

• Conducting a thorough literature review and creating a resource guide for researchers on health equity and intersectional theory, with an emphasis on Black feminist thought leadership.

In preparation for module 5 (Shine), research mentors also worked closely with Scholars to help them develop 10-minute presentations for webinars and a one-page overview of their Equity Project to share with colleagues. The final EES Speaker Series event was held during Shine and featured each Scholar discussing their Equity Project and well-being reflections. In preparation for the “Shine Showcase,” the Scholars conducted practice runs with the well-being director and research director and then presented to the entire EES program at the module 5 kickoff meeting and to two other groups of approximately 15 researchers who provided feedback on the Scholars’ slides and talking points. This series of preliminary presentations helped Scholars hone their public-speaking skills, refine their materials, and build confidence before the final Speaker Series event, which was attended by more than 120 people, including the president of our research institute and other members of RTI’s executive leadership team as well as an interdisciplinary mix of researchers across all career stages.

The full month of Shine activities was intended to encourage Scholars to reflect on their hard work and feel pride in what they had accomplished. During this period, research mentors also talked with Scholars about how they could build on their Equity Projects to continue advancing their work in areas of interest to them, such as by submitting their presentation abstracts to conferences or developing their one-pagers into blog posts. Following their participation in EES, all the Scholars were asked by their managers or other senior colleagues to join project teams due to specific expertise they had developed during the program (e.g., GIS analysis, community engagement).

Throughout the pilot year, we strove to support the Scholars in approaching their equity-centered research from a foundation of well-being. Although deadlines for completing the Equity Projects and developing presentations aroused understandable stress, program leadership and the mentors continually encouraged Scholars to find the joy in their work and take time to celebrate their successes. We conclude this paper by reflecting on what we learned from the pilot year and our ideas for moving EES forward.

EES Lessons Learned

Perhaps the most notable learning we gained from the EES pilot is the program’s impact on mentors. Although we had been attentive to mentors’ experiences when designing EES, we considered the peer-support groups and check-ins with the co-directors as ways of supporting their mentorship—that is, we anticipated that discussions would focus primarily on discussing challenges such as experiencing vicarious trauma when helping Scholars navigate an issue or sharing resources about equity-centered research methodologies. However, from the early months of the program, we realized that EES has the potential to serve as a belonging intervention for mentors as well as Scholars. This insight did not change our implementation approach but is an unanticipated strength of the program that we will attempt to maximize moving forward by continuing to include frequent opportunities for mentors to connect with each other, be recognized and celebrated for their talents and achievements, and play a central role in the program.

Based on other learnings and feedback received from pilot participants, we plan to make the following program adaptations:

Develop enhanced materials for well-being mentorship. Although the focus on well-being in EES was warmly received, both Scholars and well-being mentors indicated that additional guidance such as suggested topics for routine check-ins and activities to facilitate relationship building would be welcome in the early stages of the program. We recognize that including well-being is a highly innovative aspect of EES and understand that more structure helping people to learn how to talk about, identify, and develop well-being would be helpful. At the same time, flexibility and individuality will continue to be central themes for the well-being component so that we can continue to implement an equitable program and be responsive to individual needs.

Provide Scholars with concrete strategies for conceptualizing Equity Projects. Although the intention in EES was to provide Scholars with a maximum amount of freedom in designing their Equity Projects, the lack of structure for deciding upon a topic and approach felt disorienting to them. From a mentorship perspective, we wanted Scholars to feel like they could rest first and then take their time with the project’s design. We did not provide them with suggestions of possible projects because we did not want them to feel like they needed to conform to our ideas. However, as early-career researchers who had limited experience developing research projects, Scholars felt uncertain about how to move forward and unsure about their abilities. Their feedback helped us understand that it would be beneficial to provide them with more structure to guide them through the process of conceptualizing and finalizing their project designs.

In the future, we will provide Scholars with written resources and engage them in small-group discussions about concrete strategies and steps for developing an Equity Project. These strategies will include feasibility considerations regarding timeline and the scale of work proposed. Future cohorts of Scholars also will be able to access the pilot cohort’s Shine presentations to see examples of previous Equity Projects.

Provide opportunities to develop financial literacy in the context of career growth. Financial literacy is a dimension of well-being. EES did not provide dedicated resources about financial literacy during the pilot, but this topic arose in module 3 during the discussion of the “Money Matters” chapter of thought leader Stacey Abrams’ (2018) Lead from the Outside, and participants expressed a desire to focus on this topic more intensively. Financial literacy includes principles that reinforce earning potential, the importance of saving and investing, and responsible and accessible borrowing. Given the systemic barriers faced by people from othered groups, financial literacy is not something everyone has had an opportunity to learn about or develop. Including financial literacy moving forward will normalize talking about finances and hopefully encourage program participants to consider this aspect of their overall well-being.

Actively support Scholars and mentors to integrate EES learnings and experiences into other work projects and leadership opportunities. We heard from pilot program participants that they made efforts to disseminate EES practices and approaches to other RTI colleagues. Although we had not specifically asked them to do this, we recognize these actions as fruitful avenues for systemic change and plan to build intention around this practice moving forward. Specifically, we will periodically solicit feedback from program participants regarding what learnings or experiences they think would be beneficial for our broader research institute to consider. We then will engage the cohort in brainstorming messaging frameworks we can amplify as a collective and strategies for doing so.

Conduct a full evaluation. While the EES pilot was extremely promising, scaling up the program will lead to new challenges and evolutions. We plan to conduct a rigorous evaluation of the next iteration of the program, which will include quantitative as well as qualitative data across a variety of metrics to help us understand the program’s capacity to enhance professional development and well-being as well as build belonging.

Our efforts to assess the feasibility and acceptability helped us focus on the need for the these changes. As we delineate in our concluding section, they also affirmed that EES contains enormous potential to operate as a belonging intervention.

Building Belonging Through Holistic Mentorship

When our team set out in January 2022 to develop the EES program, we were inspired by Black feminist thought leaders to reimagine mentorship as set of communal relationships that synergistically foreground the importance of well-being and thriving for early-career scholars launching their careers. We drew on the teachings of john a. powell (2012), but did not have the benefit of Belonging Without Othering (powell & Menendian, 2024) or the OBI’s Belonging Design Principles (Gallegos & Surasky, 2023) at the time. However, these materials became available as we concluded the pilot and began a full review of our extensive program documentation. As we deepened our study of building belonging, we were struck by the close alignment between the core components of EES, the feedback we received about the program, and the Belonging Design Principles, which are encapsulated in a reader-friendly resource guide (see Figure 8) and are conceptually expanded in Belonging Without Othering. We therefore undertook an exercise of mapping the program structure, content, and feedback across the Belonging Design Principles as a means of assessing whether EES robustly addresses the OBI’s call for belonging interventions to “root out structural inequality and exclusion of all kinds while helping us turn toward, rather than against, each other” (Gallegos & Surasky, 2023, p. 3).

Figure 8

OBI’s Belonging Design Principles

Source: Gallegos and Surasky (2023). Belonging Design Principles© were developed by the Othering & Belonging Institute at University of California, Berkeley. Authored by Ashley Gallegos and Cecilie Surasky. Design by Rachelle Galloway-Popotas. Illustrations by Burcu Köleli for OBI X Fine Acts, modified for OBI.

As noted in the introduction, the first two Belonging Design principles are complementary “big ideas” (“the root of the problem is othering” and “everyone belongs”) that align with the inspiration for developing EES. The third principle, “prioritize structural change,” highlights that “structures most often do the work of exclusion” and therefore should be a key target of transformation (Gallegos & Surasky, 2023, p. 5). EES operates in accordance with this principle in multiple ways. One, the EES program was created to function as a structure: rather than providing individualized support for scholar-mentor dyads within the dominant culture, EES aims to build a novel research ecosystem with norms, values, and practices that disrupt traditional paradigms. As such, it engages participants in the active work of systemic change and serves as a model for reimagined ways of being (Benjamin, 2022). In the words of one mentor, “I am not aware of any corporate program that actually centers around growing young professionals in their area of research. I feel the EES program can serve as a blueprint for a longstanding program.” This ripple effect was frequently apparent in feedback we received about Speaker Series events from colleagues outside of EES that indicated expanded mindsets and the desire to reexamine customary norms, such as:

• “This needs to be mandatory RTI-wide training!”

• “[An] incredibly important door opened today.”

• “I love, love, love seeing these wellbeing reflections. I want this in all project spaces here at RTI!”

• “[I’m learning that] well-being is not just about the individual... it's resisting the structural factors that disproportionately pose difficulties in the lives of underrepresented people.”

• “This was truly amazing! I really would like to explore the possibility to make this practice of genuine speech [sharing lived expertise] a practice across disciplines.”

In addition, because EES participants remain involved in their day-to-day work with colleagues outside of the program, they are well-positioned to disseminate ideas and practices into other groups. These changes may be small or incremental but introduce systemic shifts nonetheless. As one concrete example, many participants noted that they appreciated beginning meetings at 5 minutes past the hour and had started implementing this practice in meetings outside of EES. This practice was enthusiastically embraced by many of their colleagues, and over time, we have seen an increase in meetings scheduled for 55 minutes instead of a full hour, a change we cannot fully attribute to EES but that indicates movement toward prioritizing well-being at the institute level. The following comment from a mentor further encapsulates how EES participants shared the program’s approach as a model for changing customary practices:

My experience as a mentor has completely shifted my perspective, philosophy, and approach to mentoring in general but specifically underrepresented and first-generation scholars. The opportunity to have continuous discussions with other mentors and mentees around materials, content, ideas and their implementation in the pilot improved my capacity and joy around mentoring. Without question, this work is critical for fostering equity within RTI and beyond. This work also allowed me to take these experiences to my own program as it highlighted ways I can help my peers in leadership weave mentoring into their daily interactions.

The fourth Belonging Design Principle is to “recognize and address power dynamics” by being “transparent about how power is distributed and how that distribution may need to change to create belonging” (Gallegos & Surasky, 2023, p. 5). This principle closely connects to the fifth principle, “foster agency and inclusive co-creation,” which accentuates the need to prioritize ways for people to contribute, have their voices heard, and be involved in the construction of spaces and projects. The fourth principle also connects to the sixth principle, “embrace mutual responsibility,” highlighting the accountability of the collective for creating the whole. These three principles are woven into the fabric of EES, beginning with having two co-directors who share equal leadership and the emphasis on providing mentorship in community to afford all participants the opportunity to learn and grow. Indeed, Scholars and mentors frequently made comments about how much they learned from each other and from those in their peer groups:

Participating in the EES program has been such an amazing experience. As a mentor, I have had the great fortune of meeting and collaborating with RTI colleagues across different fields, supporting my mentee while also learning from them, and strengthening my own skills as a mentor. This experience has helped me professionally to understand the value of quality and in-depth mentorship at all stages of careers and reconceptualize how my lived experience and wellness impacts my research. This program is a powerful resource at RTI both to create transformational research and to develop the next generation of researchers.

Thoughtfulness around power dynamics and mutual responsibility also correspond to the intentional efforts to support Scholars in pursuing their own research interests in their Equity Projects, choosing well-being practices that advance their personal goals, and selecting the module 4 thought leader and organizing and facilitating Speaker Series events. As one Scholar reflected:

Being a part of EES meant that I had an opportunity to radically imagine what a career in equity-engaged research can look like, and also take up space as an underrepresented person in a research profession more generally. It also meant that my scholarly interests and abilities were being invested in, which is something I’m truly grateful for… My confidence as a researcher has grown tremendously! Prior to the program, most of my scientific contributions to equity work took place behind the scenes. Now I am confident in my ability to take leadership and equity in research initiatives and also effectively communicate my science to a wide range of audiences.

The seventh principle is to “celebrate and value diversity,” recognizing both that belonging “does not mean everyone is or must be the same” and that “different groups, based often on deep histories of exclusion, may need different kinds of support to create an equitable place of belonging” (Gallegos & Surasky, 2023, p. 6). Relatedly, the eighth principle underscores the need to “recognize that identities are multifaceted and dynamic” and that people should not be flattened into a singular identity or have their identities considered static or rigid. We made efforts not only to include people with intersectional identities and multiple forms of diversity as program leaders, mentors, advisors, Scholars, and guest speakers—but also to continually honor diverse histories, experiences, perspectives, disciplines, methodologies, and forms of expression for their potential to spark curiosity and learning, impart wisdom, transform understanding, and ignite joy. An attendee of a Speakers Series event expressed appreciation for a conversation about incorporating lived expertise in research by writing, “I think about this as what we ‘can’t’ or ‘shouldn’t’ talk about in research...as a queer researcher, what about myself can’t I share because it's not ‘appropriate’ in the research space.”

We also see EES’s focus on well-being as intrinsically tied to these principles. Recognizing that different people need different forms of support and that these needs are fluid and ever-changing is central to our approach of providing time, space, and encouragement for people to tend to their well-being but allowing them to decide for themselves and express to others what care they want and need. Scholars described the program’s focus on well-being as helping to increase their understanding of themselves and what their priorities are, identify new practices that felt helpful to their emotional health (e.g., keeping an audio journal or sitting in the sun for a few moments each day), and remain mindful of the importance of taking action to counteract the strains of a research career. In one Scholar’s words:

EES stands out from other mentorship programs I’ve participated in due to its strong emphasis on well-being as a research professional. Especially in terms of equity-engaged research, where burnout is unfortunately so common, my experience in EES constantly reminded me that we can only produce science as good as we take care of ourselves, and that we are people first, but committed researchers and scientists immediately after.

The final two OBI Belonging Design Principles are “prioritize and value relationships” and “harness the power of interconnection.” The primary importance of relationships and connections grounded every decision made about EES: the concept of providing mentorship in community, emphasis on Scholars meeting weekly with a mentor, bringing Scholars and mentors into monthly peer group discussions, sharing celebrations and challenges on the Teams channel, and countless other details through which we strove to express care and appreciation for each other. Scholars noted this as a key strength of the program, and mentors also lauded the program for the connections it created:

It can be lonely as a person of color in traditional research settings. We are often the “only one in the room,” or “one of a few,” which only gets worse over the course of one's career. Becoming an EES research mentor has reconnected me to the vast but sometimes invisible web of Black and Brown scholars who are passionate about research in service of racial equity and change. It has also replenished some of [the] community feel that was lost during the pandemic. Regardless of whether we are mentors or mentees, we can look at each other and say, “I see you, and you deserve to be here.”

All in all, the EES program structure and the feedback we received during the pilot strongly align with the OBI Belonging Design Principles, indicating the program’s significant potential as a belonging intervention.