Telephone Interview with Dennis Beatrice Wednesday, August 16, 1995, 10 a.m.

1a. Based on your experience and familiarity with the fellows and the programs, what did we really accomplish? What were the most important contributions?

We mastered the art of cross-training. We trained our fellows in analysis and policy. This approach is more important now than ever because the fine lines between health policy analysts and health policy makers are becoming blurred.

1b. What is the Pew "legacy" in terms of:

  1. health policy?

    The Pew program enabled people who wanted to become program analysts to obtain both the analytic and policy training needed.

    Pew put policy types in an academic setting. Pew took people from state and federal positions. A new and different cadre of individuals was put through this program.

    The Pew program retooled and juiced up several cohorts of people who would ultimately end up in public policy positions.

  2. education (doctoral, postdoctoral, or midcarrer programs)?

    Pew educated a new kind of PhD, one better prepared and more relevant for today's world.

  3. your institution?

    At Brandeis, Pew succeeded in bringing a different kind of student into the university. The Pew program got Brandeis thinking about ways to accommodate different students in different tracks (practitioner training versus research training).

  4. other?

2. How and why did your specific program develop? To what extent will your program continue now that Pew funding has ceased?

With the help of the Pew program, Brandeis has initiated Health Institute Fellowships. The very best health applicants are recruited. The institute has committed itself to the training and support of these students. This is the way that Brandeis has kept and will continue to keep the Pew spirit alive.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement