Our approach was informed by the Collective Impact framework (Kania & Kramer, 2011), which highlights the importance of a common agenda, mutually reinforcing systems, and continuous feedback as elements necessary for achieving collective impact. Our work was grounded in trust, accessibility, and transparency, which shaped the tools we chose and the tone we cultivated, ensuring that each point of contact affirmed inclusion and demonstrated integrity in action.

Laying the Groundwork

With the NRMN Coordination Center moving further along in planning, our next priority was to create a communication infrastructure that reflected our core values of transparency, accessibility, and trust. We aimed to build an internal infrastructure that minimized administrative burden and allowed teams to focus their energy on research (see Chapter 2). We also prioritized tools that could accommodate the scale and diversity of our network—spanning institutions, time zones, career stages, institutional and team positionality, and areas of expertise. Our goal was to find tools that could meet people where they were and support collaboration in real-time.

The main tool we selected was Google Workspace (Calendar, Docs, Drive, Sheets, and Sites), a product that allows for simultaneous document editing, centralized resource storage, and calendar integration across teams. It gave our community an organized and accessible environment where we could obtain and share updates and co-develop content. Using this cloud-based system helped ensure that our resources were not only available but also findable, which was key to maintaining transparency and reinforcing a sense of shared ownership. However, we learned that not all institutions in the NRMN research community provided access to Google products. In these cases, we worked directly with the research teams to identify alternative tools, such as Box or other campus-approved platforms, to ensure that everyone could access the materials they needed.

To streamline communications, we introduced a standardized email system under a dedicated email address that became the centralized point of contact for all NRMN Coordination Center inquiries, updates, and announcements. Emails from this account were numbered sequentially and denoted in the subject line (e.g., “NRMN CC Email #98: November Webinar Recap”) and the first information included in the body of each email clearly identified whether action was required, by whom, and by when (see Appendix 1: Example Email from NRMN Coordination Center). We created and maintained an updated, searchable, and accessible archive of all email communications throughout the project that could be accessed by research teams via our NRMN Research Community Google Site. This approach helped research teams find our archived communications easier and helped onboard new community members.

We also created a searchable personnel directory that allowed community members to discover colleagues and research studies they were connected to, identify others with similar roles, and foster direct collaboration. We regularly updated this directory as part of our formal onboarding and offboarding processes. New NRMN research community members completed a Google Form with information that we included in our directory. When members departed, they informed us of their final day, allowing us to update their status from “current” to “former” in the directory. Early on, we realized this resource could be valuable not just for the NRMN Coordination Center team but for the entire NRMN research community. This expanded audience led us to adapt it into an external directory. What began as an internal tool to help us organize and store contact information became a valuable community resource—an embodiment of our values in action. As we continued to listen and learn, we heard that usability and accessibility mattered to the community. In response, we reworked the directory into a dynamic, filterable resource where individuals could sort by role, institution, research study, and other relevant categories (see Appendix 2: Personnel Directory).

Our expanding infrastructure was complemented by a series of monthly webinars in which we celebrated collective milestones, provided project updates, and hosted discussions on shared challenges. These webinars were not just a method of delivering information, they were a core part of our strategy for building community. We designed these spaces to help members of the NRMN research community connect with one another, learn about each other’s research, and see themselves as part of a connected network. Early webinars consisted of research teams introducing themselves and their studies, sharing recruitment plans and strategies, and discussing the successes and challenges they faced. Webinars dedicated to study updates were scheduled annually so research teams could update the NRMN research community as they progressed in their studies. We also invited the NRMN Resource Center who presented their role within the NRMN research community and the ways their resources could complement and enhance NRMN research studies. As we continued to develop webinars, we were intentional about incorporating connection points like small group discussions in breakout rooms and engaging check-ins, which helped foster community building. After hearing how valuable these connection opportunities were, we added an optional community conversation space following each webinar. These informal, half-hour sessions offered a fluid agenda and served as a touchpoint for community members to stay connected, raise issues, or simply spend time together outside the structure of formal meetings. Through these strategies, webinars became more than updates, they became opportunities for relationship building and collective care.

As we built out this infrastructure, we continued to ask ourselves and NRMN research community members: Is this helping or creating more work? Does it reflect our commitment to clarity and inclusion? Are we offering flexibility for people to engage in ways that work for them? The feedback we received highlighted a need for more engagement opportunities, so we established working groups focused on key areas like measure development and invited NRMN research community members to co-lead them (see Chapter 4). Establishing working groups also fostered distributed leadership, leveraged the community’s expertise, and supported decentralized decision-making, which mirrored best practices outlined by Minion & Rolland, who emphasize intentionally “prioritizing diversity in leadership and membership, creating multi-level opportunities for leadership and participation, providing intensive community management and facilitation” to sustain the impact of working groups (Minion & Rolland, 2024).

Finally, we developed a formal onboarding process for new members of the NRMN research community. This process included an introduction to the DPC ecosystem, an overview of the NRMN research studies and NRMN Resource Center, an invitation to join relevant working groups, and a survey to learn more about their goals and interests. We also offered optional one-on-one virtual meetings with NRMN Coordination Center staff to answer questions and provide a human touchpoint during the transition into the NRMN research community.

In addition to the working groups and community-wide engagement, the NRMN Coordination Center also engaged a steering committee (see Chapter 2). We recruited steering committee members with expertise in key areas such as the persistence of minoritized and excluded student groups in higher education as well as developing and implementing policies and programs for research training and capacity building—efforts aimed at building the future research workforce. This steering committee convened annually for focused meetings that provided updates on the progress of the NRMN research community, reflected on emerging challenges, and engaged in strategic planning for the future. These meetings played a critical advisory role in guiding the direction of the NRMN Coordination Center’s work. In addition, we invited steering committee members to participate in webinars and included them in key communications. Committee members’ insights helped shape our coordination strategies and offered valuable perspectives for growth opportunities. Including their voices in our communication infrastructure enhanced our accountability and reinforced our commitment to shared leadership and collective learning.

To hold our infrastructure resources, we developed the NRMN Research Community Google Site—a one-stop shop designed to support collaboration, learning, and connection across community members with the goal of creating a space to easily find information, resources, and visuals related to our collective work. We intentionally chose Google Sites because our institution was licensed to use it, making it a low-cost, user-friendly solution that did not require extensive development time or outside contractors. None of the information shared on our NRMN Research Community Google Site was private, and any visuals demonstrative of our collective progress were deidentified. This allowed us to keep the site public but unlisted and non-searchable on Google; the URL was only shared directly with members of the NRMN research community. We worked to keep the resources relevant, up-to-date, and easy to navigate, recognizing that reducing barriers to information is key to supporting participation. We also updated the site based on feedback from the community. See Appendix 3: NRMN Research Community Google Site Navigation for a detailed site map.

We wanted all communication—whether by email, webinar, or resource—to reflect inclusion, clarity, and a strong sense of follow-through. By doing this, we moved beyond just a communication infrastructure to a culture of connection.

From the beginning, the NRMN Coordination Center understood that building trust required more than open communication—it required active listening and intentional follow-through. We ensured intentional follow-through by building transparent feedback loops that were embedded directly into each phase of our work. We began building our feedback loop during our initial NRMN community meeting in July 2019 (grant year 1). Before the meeting, we asked attendees to complete a short pre-survey with one central question: “What do you expect or assume the role of the NRMN Coordination Center will be?” Their responses helped surface early assumptions, uncertainties, and aspirations, which could be organized into three overarching themes.

1. The need for infrastructure and coordination to support aligned data collection and sharing across projects.;
2. The desire for communication and connection that would foster regular dialogue, shared learning, and collaboration among the NRMN research community.
3. The hope for guidance and partnership in navigating recruitment challenges, finalizing outcome measures, and supporting success across NRMN research studies.

We used the results from our pre-survey to guide the meeting discussion, aligning expectations and beginning to build a shared understanding of what coordination could look like in practice.

This early feedback loop became a model for what followed. The NRMN Coordination Center established an internal evaluation process rooted in continuous improvement. We engaged NRMN research community members regularly through continuous improvement surveys, feedback links, and informal check-ins. The goals of these touchpoints were to collect data and affirm our values of transparency and mutual accountability. These efforts were especially important in a distributed network, where community members operated within diverse institutional and team contexts and served different populations. A one-size-fits-all approach to support was not feasible, and listening was our way of staying aligned.

Continuous improvement surveys were tailored to collect periodic temperature checks on collaboration tools and resources and give the NRMN research community opportunities to share what was or was not working (see Appendix 4: Template for Continuous Improvement Survey). What we heard from NRMN research community members shaped everything from the language we used to how we structured shared documents. For example, after hearing that some research teams felt the first iteration of our NRMN Research Community Google Site was hard to use for someone without an in-depth NRMN background, we revamped it to include more background information and a video orientation that welcomed visitors and demonstrated the various ways the site could be used.

Feedback from these surveys did not just lead to adjustments in our processes—it also sparked the development of shared resources, which responded directly to community-identified needs. Two examples of these shared resources are the Intro to Data Visualization Google Site and the NRMN Phase II Community Sharing Google Site. The Intro to Data Visualization Google Site was curated by the NRMN Coordination Center in response to community interest in building skills around accessible and introductory data visualization tools. This resource offered activities and learning materials designed to support participants at all levels strengthen their skills in presenting data clearly and effectively. Similarly, the NRMN Phase II Community Sharing Site was developed to harness the collective wisdom of our research community. This resource was designed to encourage the contributions of materials, strategies, and tools from individuals across the NRMN research community, making it easier for members to learn from and support one another. Both resources demonstrated how listening and responding to feedback not only shaped how we communicated but also guided what we created together.

Additionally, we committed to closing the feedback loop at every stage. We did not just collect feedback, we reported back on what we learned and how we were planning to respond to this feedback. This approach reinforced trust and demonstrated that feedback was not going into a void. NRMN research community members knew that their perspectives mattered—evident in the tangible changes their input inspired. By making feedback a collective practice, we opened the door to honest conversation, iterative design, and shared responsibility. In doing so, we laid the groundwork for a collaborative culture that was reflective and responsive.

If building trust was the foundation of the NRMN Coordination Center’s work, then communication was the sustenance that allowed it to grow. From day one, we approached communication as an active process of cultivating connection, clarity, and credibility. We understood that clear, consistent communication was not just a convenience—it was essential to ensuring that all projects could move forward efficiently and collaboratively. We aimed to establish an infrastructure where people felt seen, informed, and supported.

To support this effort, the NRMN Coordination Center adopted a communications approach that was grounded in key principles pulled from established research. In our grant proposal, we noted: “Effective models of communication share basic characteristics that resonate from the answers to the following questions: Is the communicator credible? Is the content of the communication credible, valuable, useful? What is the channel of communication? Who is the audience?” (Hovland et al., 1953). These questions served as a north star for our team as we developed communications processes and templates. They helped us consider how the tone, timing, and delivery would not only impact logistics, but trust as well.

One of our guiding principles was to ensure we engaged with the community in a manner that was consistent and handled with care. To do this, we tracked our communications across time. Each email was logged in our email archive described above, allowing us to monitor frequency and topics. This system helped us avoid redundancy and information overload. However, no process is immune to challenges. There were moments when emails were missed, meetings were misaligned, and updates did not reach the right people in time. When mistakes happened, our goal was not to place blame but to be transparent, repair quickly, and learn. By openly acknowledging these communication breakdowns and adjusting course, we reinforced our values and modeled a culture of humility and responsiveness.

Communication was our primary way to foster belonging. From the tone of our emails to the structure of our meetings, we wanted every touchpoint to feel welcoming and aligned with the larger purpose of the community. As Rolland and colleagues noted: “A well-built coordination center can ameliorate some of the overhead and offload some of the burden from researchers by managing the administrative aspects, facilitating collaborative activities, and empowering investigators to focus on the science, thus improving every stage of a study” (Rolland et al., 2017). By committing to a communications infrastructure that was value-aligned, transparent, and flexible, we helped ease the coordination burden for the NRMN research community, created space for their independent research to flourish, and helped them realize the potential of our collective impact.

The first months of the NRMN Coordination Center were more than an administrative launch, they were the beginning of a shared journey. During this early period, we laid the groundwork for what would become a dynamic and evolving research community.

This approach was not just about setting norms—it was about setting a tone. It signaled to our NRMN research community partners and the wider DPC community that the NRMN Coordination Center was here to support, adapt, and follow-through. The infrastructure and culture we built in the beginning did not just help us “get started”; they shaped the trajectory of the entire initiative by providing a platform for deeper collaboration, sustained engagement, and collective momentum. As we progressed into later phases, we continually returned to this foundation.

For those building collaborative research communities, we offer this chapter as a case study in starting with care. Invest in communication. Prioritize clarity and kindness. Build the culture you want to sustain. When trust takes root early, collaboration can thrive long term.