Podcasts about rand center

Why do we engage with scammers? What makes one person more likely to engage than the next? Of those that engage, what makes someone more likely to lose money? These are important questions to ask – and find the answers to – both as consumers and as an industry with an interest in disrupting the cycle of financial fraud. On this episode, we hear from moderator Emma Fletcher, a senior data researcher with the FTC, and panelists Marti DeLiema, Assistant Research Professor at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Duygu Başaran Şahin, a postdoctoral research fellow at the RAND Center for the Study of Aging, and Gary Mottola, research director for the FINRA Foundation, about the latest research into these important questions and learn more about what might stop someone from engaging with a fraud to begin with.Resources mentioned in this episode:Exposed to Scams: What Separates Victims from Non-VictimsDoes One Size Fit All? An Examination of Risk Factors by Scam TypeFraud Victimization Across the Lifespan: Evidence on Repeat Victimization Using Perpetrator DataAddressing the Problem of Chronic Fraud VictimizationVulnerability of Older Adults to Government Impersonation ScamsA Review of Scam Prevention Messaging ResearchProtecting Retail Customers from Gift Card Payment ScamsFINRA Foundation Research Center Find us: X / Facebook / LinkedIn / E-mail

Project Roomkey, Governor Gavin Newsom's initiative that turned hotel and motel rooms across the state into temporary shelters for the homeless during the height of the covid pandemic, is the subject of a recent independent evaluation. The goal of this report is to figure out if Project Roomkey was successful in providing the protection and services it promised. What did it get right, what did it get wrong, and is there a way to take the lessons learned and apply them to today? We're going to start our conversation by taking a closer look at the findings of this evaluation with Nichole Fiore, principal associate with the research firm Abt Global and co-author of the report. Then for another perspective, we turn to Sarah Hunter, Director at the RAND Center on Housing and Homelessness and Senior Behavioral Scientist at the RAND Corporation. You can check out the Project Roomkey evaluation at Abt Global's website, just type in Project Roomkey in the search bar.

Andrea Inokon is the COO and Co-founder of Cadence Cash, a fintech platform dedicated to providing business financing solutions for women and minority-owned small businesses. She is a distinguished C-suite executive, advisor, lawyer, and entrepreneur with a 20-year track record of championing the rights and opportunities of women and minorities in the financial and tech sectors. Andrea is a founding member of Chief, an organization focused on advancing women leaders into the C-suite. She is also the Founder and CEO of The 1972 Project, a nonprofit dedicated to promoting gender and racial equality in the workplace. Andrea serves on the advisory board for The RAND Center to Advance Race Equity Policy. In this episode… There has always been a racial wealth gap, and accordingly, it can be difficult for women- and minority-owned small businesses to get funding. How can these small businesses acquire the financing they require? Capital is necessary for the day-to-day operations of a business. Most women- and minority-owned companies struggle to acquire the funding, resulting in their closure. Discovering this, change-maker Andrea Inokon, her husband, and sisters-in-law decided to launch a fintech platform that could offer financing solutions to the underrepresented. She shares how they are innovating to close the racial wealth gap. In this episode of Inspired Insider Podcast, Dr. Jeremy Weisz sits down with Andrea Inokon, Co-founder and COO of Cadence Cash, to discuss how women- and minority-owned companies can access funding. Andrea talks about Cadence Cash, what it does, its business model for financing and lending to small businesses, and the funding challenges faced by minorities and women in business.

This is a conversation about physician compensation, which is often oddly misaligned from the way that the whole physician or provider organization is getting paid. Now, first thing to point out: There are lots of different kinds of physicians doing all kinds of different things. As with most everything in healthcare, lumping everybody together and making general proclamations about what is best is a really cruddy idea. With that disclaimer, if you think about the main models of physician compensation, there are two; and this is oversimplified, but let's call one fee for service (FFS), which is really getting paid for generating RVUs (relative value units)—in short, getting paid for volume. The more you do (especially the more expensive things you do), the more you get paid. And then we have getting some kind of capitation payment. A capitated payment is some kind of per member per month-ish flat payment to ideally keep patients healthy, and you will make the most money if you can figure out how to have the least volume of expensive stuff. As an individual doc getting a salary to care for a patient panel of a certain size, let's just consider commensurate with that. These incentive models obviously have a big impact on any given doctor's ability to get paid to do things that they think they should be doing. For example, the current fee-for-service RVU fee schedule frequently rewards those doing the stuff a lot of specialists do much more than those doing primarily cognitive work, including those doing work for patients who aren't sitting in the exam room at the time—like a PCP arranging for a patient to go to hospice or answering patient portal questions. In my opinion, the goal here should be to pay docs and others fairly for providing high-value care. These payments also should actually be proven to actually incent that high-value care. Here's the obvious problem: Neither of these two things, either the quantifiable definition of high-value care and/or the best way to pay for it, has any kind of canon. There are no rules which are considered to be particularly authoritative and definitive here, really. So, what is the downside of not aligning physician compensation models to what good looks like, meaning to the kind of care that patients really need in that particular community? A couple of downsides for you: One is moral injury. Not the only reason, but a reason for moral injury is getting paid in misalignment with what is best for patients. That sucks. You want to help your patients as best you can, and then you can't earn a living and/or you get in trouble with the boss if you do what you think is right. This can cause real mental anguish for especially PCPs but also others who see the need to do anything that doesn't have a billing code. Here's another downside to not worrying about physician compensation, and it's for plan sponsors (employers, maybe) who are trying to get integrated care or a medical home for their employees. I was talking to Katy Talento about this. She was telling me that in ASO (administrative services only) contracts, there are often line items for value-based care and for capitated payments. So, good news? Well, let's follow the dollar here, because we wind up with a disconnect that doesn't help patients but certainly can earn a nice little kitty for those who can get away with it. Here's where that dollar goes: This VBC (value-based care) or capitated payment kitty may go to a health system that the ASO says is to be a medical home for employees or plan members. But the PCPs mainly who are treating members in those medical homes are getting paid, it often turns out, fee for service with maybe some quality kickers. So, the plan is paying a value-based care payment, but the PCPs are getting paid FFS. Is anyone shocked when the members report that they don't actually feel like they are getting integrated care, that they are getting rushed in and out because maximizing throughput becomes a thing when you're getting paid for volume? Dan O'Neill also talks about this at length in episode 359, because IPAs (independent physician associations) are doing kinda the same thing. Getting so-called value-based care contracts with MA (Medicare Advantage) plans or CMS or employer groups, I'd imagine, and then paying all the individual practices or the solo practitioners fee for service and scooping up the excess payments themselves, most docs manage to provide high-enough-quality care that the contract holder can scoop up the profit off the capitation without actually having to share the capitation to achieve this high-enough-quality care. In this healthcare podcast, I am digging into all of this physician compensation ballyhoo with Rachel Reid, MD, MS. She was an author on a study at the Center of Excellence on Health System Performance at RAND. This study specifically set out to look at how health systems and provider organizations (POs) affiliated with those health systems incentivize and compensate the physicians who work there. Short version: Yeah, it's confirmed. Most docs are paid using the classic RVU productivity measures representing a big chunk of their compensation, even PCPs. There's frequently some kickers or extra payments to achieve some kind of quality metric, but this is the icing, not the cake. The cake is still very fee for service-y. This is true regardless of how the physician organizations, the provider organizations themselves are getting paid by payers. I asked Dr. Rachel Reid a bunch of questions about this, but one of them was (this seems weird, a weird misalignment), Why is this happening? And Dr. Reid listed out five reasons beyond the macro existential question of what is value and do we even know how to change human behavior to get it. 1. The payment is not big enough from the payer for the physician organization to go through all the time and trouble and risk frankly of changing the whole comp model. 2. The value-based payment arrangements that do exist at the organizational level often have a fee-for-service chassis with an icing of quality payments or some kind of value payment on top of it. So, maybe there's actually more alignment than we might think. 3. It's hard to try to change comp models—it's a thing. And there is risk in messing it up. 4. Inertia. The ever-present inertia. 5. We know what we want to move from, but what exactly are we moving to? And this “What do we want to move to?” is going to change for PCPs and for every single different specialty and could even vary by patient population. I then also asked Dr. Reid what could be done by plan sponsors, for example, to pay docs in alignment with the goals of the contract; and she said, write physician comp expectations into the contract. Something to think about. We dig into all of this today. Shows that you should, for sure, listen to for additional insights include the one with Dan O'Neill (EP359) as aforementioned. Also the show with Brian Klepper, PhD (AEE16), where we dig into how the RUC is behind some of these FFS rates. Also episode 391 with Scott Conard, MD. My guest today is Rachel Reid, MD, MS. She is a physician policy researcher at RAND Corporation and a primary care physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital.   You can learn more about Dr. Reid, her publications, and the work she has done on the RAND Web site.     Rachel Reid, MD, MS, is a physician policy researcher at the RAND Corporation. Also a practicing primary care physician, her research focuses on measuring cost, quality, and value in healthcare. She has particular interest in the primary care delivery system, physician payment and compensation, and delivery and payment system reform. Dr. Reid has been engaged in the RAND Center of Excellence on Health System Performance, assessing health systems' compensation and incentives for physicians, leading work related to assessing low-value healthcare delivery, and measuring primary care spending. She is the principal investigator on an NIH-funded grant assessing novel Medicare billing codes for transitional care provided after hospital discharge. Prior to joining RAND, Dr. Reid worked in the Research and Rapid Cycle Evaluation Group at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Innovation Center. Her clinical work has included ambulatory primary care and hospital-based internal medicine. She is an associate physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital and an instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Reid received her AB in biochemical sciences from Harvard University and her MD and MS in clinical research from the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.   07:13 What did Dr. Reid's recent study show about how doctors are currently being paid and incentivized? 08:11 Why Dr. Reid decided to do the study in the first place. 09:49 What are the main foundations of what doctors are paid on? 10:31 Why is value-based compensation still just the “icing” on the cake? 13:08 What is the biggest value add for doctors, and does it vary between specialties? 14:32 Why wouldn't a physician organization change their comp models? 19:55 Are we at a moment of evolution? 20:20 “Tying dollars to measured quality gaps doesn't necessarily produce results.” 20:42 EP295 with Rebecca Etz, PhD. 22:04 “I don't think there's a current gold standard for how to pay doctors.” 25:37 Job one: What are we trying to incent? 31:28 From the payer or insurer perspective, what's the leverage they have to change doctor compensation?   You can learn more about Dr. Reid, her publications, and the work she has done on the RAND Web site.   Rachel Reid, MD, MS, of @RANDCorporation discusses on our #healthcarepodcast how doctors get paid. #healthcare #podcast   Recent past interviews: Click a guest's name for their latest RHV episode! Dr Amy Scanlan, Peter J. Neumann, Stacey Richter (EP400), Dawn Cornelis (Encore! EP285), Stacey Richter (EP399), Dr Jacob Asher, Paul Holmes, Anna Hyde, Dea Belazi (Encore! EP293), Brennan Bilberry

Truffle Media Update 0036 Show Notes: From the RAND podcast, David Shlapak, codirector of the RAND Center for Gaming, describes a recent series of games examining potential results of a Russian invasion of the Baltics. Subscribe to the Truffle Media Update podcast series on iTunes: https://bit.ly/tmn-update-podcast

We explore “cascades of care” — how a clinician's desire to be thorough can snowball into a harmful spiral of unnecessary care.Guests:Meredith Niess, MD, MPH, Clinical Academic Resource Director, University of North Carolina School of Medicine and Novant HealthIshani Ganguli, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's HospitalCheryl Damberg, PhD, MPH, Principal Senior Economist and Director, RAND Center of Excellence on Health System PerformanceScott Weingarten, MD, MPH, Professor of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center; Chief Innovation Officer, SCAN Health PlanRead a full transcript and dig deeper into the issues explored in today's episode on our website.Support this type of journalism today by making a donation.Sign up for our weekly newsletter to see what research health policy experts are reading right now, plus recommendations from our staff.Follow us on Twitter. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Recap:2017 Publication: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Communities in Action: Pathways to Health Equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Key Takeaways of the Communities in Action Conceptual ModelHealth equity is crucial to the well-being and vibrancy of communities.Social inequities matter more than health care in shaping health disparities.Health equity holds benefits for the entire nation, from economic vitality to national security.Communities have the power to take steps toward health equity.Community-based solution - An action, policy, program, or law driven by the community that impacts community-level factors and promotes health equity. Join the conversation as we cover the remaining 3 Social Determinants of Health.Income WealthEmploymentHousingWe also discuss a specific communty-based solution, PUSH Buffalo (People United for Sustainable Housing).PUSH Buffalo: When we show up in big numbers, people listen.Mission Mission: "At PUSH we mobilize residents to create strong neighborhoods with quality, affordable housing, expand local hiring opportunities, and advance economic justice in Buffalo. PUSH s members are the community organizers who make affordable housing a reality in Buffalo. Our members work with partners and funders to create a healthy, just and strong city that includes community control of resources, living wage jobs and access to quality education, healthcare and transportation." From RAND Center to Advance Racial Rquity Policy Wellbeing"We are at a critical point in history, where enacting real policy change is not only important, but a central part of creating an equitable society for all. I believe combining RAND's history of rigorous research with racial equity studies positions us to be leaders in public policy conversations in this arena." Rhianna Rogers, Director, RAND Center to Advance Racial Equity Policy (Source: Q A with Rhianna Rogers)

We explore “cascades of care” — how a doctor's desire to be thorough can snowball into a harmful spiral of unnecessary care.Guests:Meredith Niess, MD, MPH, Clinical Academic Resource Director, University of North Carolina School of Medicine and Novant HealthIshani Ganguli, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women's HospitalCheryl Damberg, PhD, MPH, Principal Senior Economist and Director, RAND Center of Excellence on Health System PerformanceScott Weingarten, MD, MPH, Professor of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center; Chief Innovation Officer, SCAN Health PlanRead a full transcript and dig deeper into the issues explored in today's episode on our website.Support this type of journalism today by making a donation.Sign up for our weekly newsletter to see what research health policy experts are reading right now, plus recommendations from our staff.Follow us on Twitter. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This time our guest is Dr. Theodore Karasik and we will be speaking about geostrategic power rivalries in the Middle East and Africa. In this series of interviews with Dr. Stephen Blank, our guest is Dr. Theodore Karasik. Our discussion will turn to Africa, where we will discuss geostrategic power rivalries in the Middle East and Africa, for influence and access to energy, military bases, trade and strategic positioning. Dr. Theodore KARASIK is currently a Fellow, Russia and Middle East Affairs at the Jamestown Foundation and a Senior Advisor to Gulf State Analytics. He is also an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Lexington Institute, all located in Washington, D.C. He is the co-author of “Russia in the Middle East” published in 2018. For the past 35 years, Karasik worked for a number of US agencies involved in researching and analyzing defense acquisition, the use of military power, and religio-political issues across MENA and Eurasia including the evolution of violent extremism and financing networks. Dr. Karasik lived in Dubai, UAE from 2006 until 2016 where he worked on Arabian Peninsula foreign policy and security issues surrounding cultural awareness, cybersecurity, maritime security, counter-piracy, counter-terrorism, and infrastructure and national resilience. Dr. Karasik worked for a number of UAE ministries and think-tanks covering regional and homeland security issues. Dr. Karasik was an Adjunct Lecturer at the Dubai School of Government where he taught graduate level international relations and also an Adjunct Lecturer at University Wollongong Dubai where he taught labor and migration. Karasik was a Senior Political Scientist in the International Policy and Security Group at RAND Corporation. From 2002-2003, he served as Director of Research for the RAND Center for Middle East Public Policy. He is a specialist in geopolitics and geo-economics for the MENA and Eurasia regions and frequently conducts studies and assessments of future security trajectories and military requirements in addition to cultural awareness issues surrounding traditionalism and tribalism in policymaking. Dr. Karasik received his Ph.D in History from the University of California, Los Angeles in four fields: Russia, Middle East, Caucasus and an outside field in cultural anthropology focusing on tribes and clans from Central Asia to East Africa. He wrote his dissertation on military and humanitarian operations in the northern port city of Arkhangel'sk and their impact on political institutions during the Russian civil war. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/mediterranean-sustainable/message

Dalia Dassa Kaye, RAND senior political scientist and Wilson Center Fellow; Linda Robinson, Director of the RAND Center for Middle East Public Policy; and Jeffrey Martini, RAND Senior Middle East researcher, discuss their recent RAND report, ‘Reimaging US strategy in the Middle East, including a new approach to assess US partnerships in the region; how Iran can be ‘right sized’ in US strategy; the increasing importance of Iraq as a regional partner for the United States; why the US should still win the battle for influence relative to Russia and China in the Middle East; and how US policy tools can be recast to reach out to the region’s next generation.

Terri Tanielian is a senior behavioral scientist and a nationally recognized expert on veteran mental health. Her areas of interest include military and veterans health policy; military suicide; military sexual assault; psychological effects of combat, terrorism, and disasters. She has led multiple studies to assess the needs of veterans and to examine the readiness of private healthcare providers to deliver timely, high-quality care to veterans and their families. She has also examined community-based models for expanding mental health care for returning veterans and their families. As the former director of the RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research, she spent a decade overseeing RAND's diverse military health research portfolio. She was the co–study director for a large, nongovernmental assessment of the psychological, emotional, and cognitive consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan entitled Invisible Wounds of War: Psychological and Cognitive Injuries, Their Consequences, and Services to Assist Recovery. She was also the co-director for RAND's study Hidden Heroes: America's Military Caregivers, the first representative study of military caregiving in the United States. Tanielian has published numerous peer-reviewed articles and reports. She was a member of the planning committee for the 18th, 22nd, and 26th Annual Rosalynn Carter Symposium on Mental Health Policy, which focused on mental health needs and recovery following September 11, Hurricane Katrina, and deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively. She serves on the National Academy of Medicine's Standing Committee on Health Threats and Resilience. She earned her M.A. in psychology from American University. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/changeyourpov/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/changeyourpov/support

We discuss a new RAND research center focused on racial equity policy; L.A.’s high unemployment, and why some groups are worse off than others; what might happen if China develops a successful COVID-19 vaccine; how the U.S. military services approach leadership; eating habits among people in the UK; and the national security risks of an insider threat at Twitter. For more information on this week’s episode, visit rand.org/podcast.

A Staying Connected Series webcast about art and propaganda, in partnership with the Wende Museum. Open to the public. “Fake news” and “alternative facts” have become buzzwords of our time. After the twentieth-century struggles between top-down media propaganda and bottom-up media exposures, we acquired unprecedented access to information. Nevertheless, it has become increasingly difficult to separate fact from interpretation. In our current moment, how do we remain (self-)critical in a world of politically split realities? What can art teach us about fact and fiction? Featuring: Robeson Taj Frazier, Associate Professor of Communication; and Director, Institute for Diversity and Empowerment at Annenberg (IDEA) Professor Frazier is a cultural historian who explores the arts, political and expressive cultures of the people of the African Diaspora in the United States and elsewhere. His research examines histories and current-day dynamics of race and gender, cultural traffic and contact, urban culture and life, and popular culture. Farrah Karapetian, Artist, Assistant Professor of Visual Arts, University of San Diego Farrah Karapetian is an artist based in California. Her methods incorporate sculptural and performative means of achieving imagery that refigures the medium of photography around bodily experience. Her work is in public collections that include the J. Paul Getty Museum and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Luke Matthews, Behavioral and Social Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School; Co-Director, RAND Center for Applied Network Analysis Luke Matthews' work focuses on studying cultural diffusion on social networks, that is, how people influence each other. He has applied social network analysis, simulation models, and machine learning to mixed qualitative-quantitative data. Moderator: Catherine Wagley, Contributing Editor, Momus Catherine G. Wagley writes about art and visual culture in Los Angeles. She currently works as an art critic for L.A. Weekly and contributes to a number of other publications, most recently CARLA, ARTNews, East of Borneo, and L.A. Review of Books.

COVID-19 has given our global community a stark reminder of the fragility of life. Its first and second waves shocked even the wealthiest of nations. As Europe and the US are still in the process of beating back the virus and its economic impact, its third wave, directed towards Global South nations, might prove most deadly in terms of the number of deaths as well as the economic challenges and supply chain pitfalls. The COVID-19 solution is multi-pronged and will take a global effort. It requires unprecedented cooperation across countries and disciplines. It is for that reason why Luohan Academy, invited panelists from a diverse set of backgrounds aiming to discuss how wealthier countries and groups such as the G20, the IMF, and the World Bank can support the Global South amid COVID-19's third wave.The panelists featured, senior policy researcher and Tang Chair in China Policy Studies at the RAND Corporation, Jennifer Huang Bouey. An epidemiologist by training, Bouey's research centers on global health strategies and social determinants of health. Joining Bouey from Rand was Rafiq Dossani is director of the RAND Center for Asia Pacific Policy, a senior economist at the RAND Corporation, and a professor at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. Representing Luohan Academy, was Columbia University professor and former ADB economist, Shang-Jin Wei and Luohan Academy's Executive Director, as well as Hupan School of Entrepreneurship Executive Provost, Long Chen. Hosting the online panel was CGTN's business anchor Cheng Lei.During the conversation, the panelist posed and answered questions that centered around mitigating the impact of the third wave.

Tonya Hall talks to Dr. Kathryn Bouskill, anthropologist at the RAND Corporation and associate director at the RAND Center for Global Risk and Security, about the acceleration of technology advancements and if humans are capable of keeping up with all of these changes. FOLLOW US  - Subscribe to ZDNet on YouTube: http://bit.ly/2HzQmyf - Watch more ZDNet videos: http://zd.net/2Hzw9Zy - Follow ZDNet on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ZDNet - Follow ZDNet on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ZDNet - Follow ZDNet on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ZDNet_CBSi - Follow ZDNet on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ZDNe... - Follow ZDNet on Snapchat: https://www.snapchat.com/add/zdnet_cbsi Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Financial literacy in Singapore has not been analysed in much detail, despite the fact that this is one of the world’s most rapidly aging nations. In this podcast, Professor of Finance Benedict Koh from the SMU Lee Kong Chian School of Business, discusses the key findings of his research jointly conducted with Olivia Mitchell from the University of Pennsylvania and Susann Rohwedder, Senior Economist at the RAND Corporation and Associate Director of the RAND Center for the Study of Aging. Using a unique new data-set and nationally representative survey - the Singapore Life Panel, they conducted an analysis of older Singaporeans’ financial literacy. Here, Professor Koh discusses his key findings, including: Do older Singaporeans score better on financial knowledge compared to their counterparts in the United States? What are the empirical linkages between financial literacy and retirement preparedness in Singapore? And is financial literacy positively associated with greater wealth and diversity of portfolios?

Kathryn Bouskill is a social scientist at the RAND Corporation and associate director of the RAND Center for Global Risk and Security. She is also professor of core coursework at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. She has a Ph.D. in anthropology and an M.P.H. in epidemiology from Emory University.  An anthropologist by training, Bouskill draws on qualitative and quantitative methods to study a range of sociocultural- and health-related issues. Her topical areas of focus include: the role of emerging technologies in health and wellbeing, issues in cancer prevention and survivorship, military mental health, social cohesion in a globalizing world, and global health. In this episode we talk about the unforeseen consequences of a fast paced world. We talk about the effects of a fast paced world on groups in society and on us as individuals. We point out the differences in countries that are deciding to push the pace and those that aren’t. This is a powerful conversation that is and will continue to affect everyone in society today. Research Discussed Bio Kathryn on Twitter My Email: ben@heroicminds.live

With the recent unprecedented and sophisticated hack of Australia’s major political parties and at the heart of our democracy by undoubtedly a major state actor, we speak with Elizabeth Bodine-Baron of Rand Corporation (U.S.) about the recent Russian influence campaign to disrupt the U.S. presidential election and the pressing issue of foreign interference through media manipulation on national sovereignty.   Elizabeth Bodine-Baron is an information scientist specializing in complex networks and systems at the RAND Corporation. She is the associate director of the Force Modernization and Employment Program in Project Air Force and co-directs the RAND Center for Applied Network Analysis and System Science. Her research interests include network analysis and modeling for both domestic and national security issues. Her recent work for the United States Air Force includes analysis of cybersecurity, logistics, targeting and intelligence policy. She has used network analysis of social media data to study violent extremist messaging, Russian propaganda, ISIS support and opposition networks, and information operations. Bodine-Baron received a B.S. in electrical engineering and a B.A. in liberal arts (Plan II Honors) from the University of Texas at Austin in 2006, and a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from California Institute of Technology in 2012.

We interviewed Scott W. Harold, the associate director of the RAND Center for Asia Pacific Policy and they discuss the strengths and challenges of Taiwan's development assistance, as well as Scott's newly release report “Countering China's Efforts to Isolate Taiwan Diplomatically in Latin American and the Caribbean: The Role of Development Assistance and Disaster Relief.” Producer: Marzia Borsoi-Kelly Host: Marzia Borsoi-Kelly Edit: Jack Liu Music: Joseph Ross

Summary: Terri Tanielian is a senior behavioral scientist and a nationally recognized expert on veteran mental health. Her areas of interest include military and veterans health policy; military suicide; military sexual assault; psychological effects of combat, terrorism, and disasters. She has led multiple studies to assess the needs of veterans and to examine the readiness of private healthcare providers to deliver timely, high quality care to veterans and their families. She has also examined community based models for expanding mental health care for returning veterans and their families. As the former director of the RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research, she spent a decade overseeing RAND's diverse military health research portfolio. She was the co–study director for a large, non-governmental assessment of the psychological, emotional, and cognitive consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan entitled Invisible Wounds of War: Psychological and Cognitive Injuries, Their Consequences, and Services to Assist Recovery. She was also the co-director for RAND's study Hidden Heroes: America's Military Caregivers, the first representative study of military caregiving in the United States. Tanielian has published numerous peer-reviewed articles and reports. She was a member of the planning committee for the 18th, 22nd, and 26th Annual Rosalynn Carter Symposium on Mental Health Policy, which focused on mental health needs and recovery following September 11, Hurricane Katrina, and deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively. She serves on the National Academy of Medicine's Standing Committee on Health Threats and Resilience. She earned her M.A. in psychology from American University. Read more about Terri Here In This Particular Episode You Will Learn: Terri's background and research experience Research focusing on Gulf War veterans versus Post 9/11 veterans Research on connectivity and communication with the homefront while deployed Research supporting understanding health and wellness in transitions Late onset PTSD Impact of service on military families Cultural competence in community care providers Links Mentioned in This Episode: Terri's Email Address: TerriT@rand.org Rand publications on military, veteran, and family member mental health Terri Tanielian on Twitter   Want to keep up with all of the Head Space and Timing content? Subscribe Here    You can be sure to find future episodes of Head Space and Timing, and all of the CYPOV Podcast Network Shows, by subscribing through your Podcast player of choice, like iTunes. Using an app makes subscribing and listening to podcasts (both ours and others) so much simpler. Just subscribe to Change Your POV Podcast within your app and it will automatically update every time a new episode is released. Do you want to check out Duane's latest book, Combat Vet Don't Mean Crazy? Check it out by finding it on Amazon

Summary: Terri Tanielian is a senior behavioral scientist and a nationally recognized expert on veteran mental health. Her areas of interest include military and veterans health policy; military suicide; military sexual assault; psychological effects of combat, terrorism, and disasters. She has led multiple studies to assess the needs of veterans and to examine the readiness of private healthcare providers to deliver timely, high quality care to veterans and their families. She has also examined community based models for expanding mental health care for returning veterans and their families. As the former director of the RAND Center for Military Health Policy Research, she spent a decade overseeing RAND's diverse military health research portfolio. She was the co–study director for a large, non-governmental assessment of the psychological, emotional, and cognitive consequences of deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan entitled Invisible Wounds of War: Psychological and Cognitive Injuries, Their Consequences, and Services to Assist Recovery. She was also the co-director for RAND's study Hidden Heroes: America's Military Caregivers, the first representative study of military caregiving in the United States. Tanielian has published numerous peer-reviewed articles and reports. She was a member of the planning committee for the 18th, 22nd, and 26th Annual Rosalynn Carter Symposium on Mental Health Policy, which focused on mental health needs and recovery following September 11, Hurricane Katrina, and deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively. She serves on the National Academy of Medicine's Standing Committee on Health Threats and Resilience. She earned her M.A. in psychology from American University. Read more about Terri Here In This Particular Episode You Will Learn: Terri's background and research experience Research focusing on Gulf War veterans versus Post 9/11 veterans Research on connectivity and communication with the homefront while deployed Research supporting understanding health and wellness in transitions Late onset PTSD Impact of service on military families Cultural competence in community care providers Links Mentioned in This Episode: Terri's Email Address: TerriT@rand.org Rand publications on military, veteran, and family member mental health Terri Tanielian on Twitter     Want to keep up with all of the Head Space and Timing content? Subscribe Here    You can be sure to find future episodes of Head Space and Timing, and all of the CYPOV Podcast Network Shows, by subscribing through your Podcast player of choice, like iTunes. Using an app makes subscribing and listening to podcasts (both ours and others) so much simpler. Just subscribe to Change Your POV Podcast within your app and it will automatically update every time a new episode is released. Do you want to check out Duane's latest book, Combat Vet Don't Mean Crazy? Check it out by finding it on Amazon

Donna Boehme is our guest on this week's podcast.  She is an advocate for an independent, and empowered Chief Compliance Officer.   Donna is an internationally recognized authority in the field of organizational compliance and ethics with over 20 years' experience designing and managing compliance and ethics solutions, within the US and globally. As Principal of Compliance Strategists LLC, she has advised a wide spectrum of private, public, governmental, academic and non-profit entities. She serves on the respective boards of RAND Center of Corporate Ethics and Governance, Rutgers Center for Government Compliance & Ethics. Donna is an Emeritus Member and past Board member of the Ethics and Compliance Officer Association,  past Board member of the Association of Corporate Counsel – Europe and past Advisory Board member of The Society of Corporate Compliance & Ethics. Donna has been cited and interviewed as the “Lion of Compliance” because of her tireless work to increase understanding of the role of the chief compliance officer (CCO) and to improve the governance model for CCOs to include empowerment and independence, and position CCOs for success.    

An interview with Ambassador Nina Hachigian by Alex Hachigian This episode delves into some of the most controversial issues that concern the United States and China today with the intention of developing the basis for sound foreign policy. After receiving her Bachelors of Science from Yale University, magna cum laude, and her J.D. from Stanford University, with distinction, Ambassador Nina Hachigian went on to work on the National Security Council for the Clinton Administration.  Then she joined the RAND Center for Asia Policy, ultimate serving as its director for four years. Next, she became Senior Vice President and a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress focussed on Asia Policy.  Then, in 2014, President Obama nominated Ambassador Hachigian to serve as the second U.S. Ambassador to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN. After being confirmed by the Senate, she went on to have a remarkable tenure as ambassador by strengthening American relations with Southeast Asia and being awarded the State Department's Superior Honor Award for her service.  Since the end of her time as ambassador, she has served the City of Los Angeles as Deputy Mayor for International Affairs. Ambassador Hachigian has published numerous articles and books, including as editor of the book Debating China: The U.S. – China Relationship in Ten Conversations.

In this Events @ RAND podcast, David Shlapak, codirector of the RAND Center for Gaming, describes a recent series of games examining potential results of a Russian invasion of the Baltics.

In this April 2012 Congressional Panel Briefing, Andrew Weiss, director of the RAND Center for Russia and Eurasia, moderates a discussion on the future of U.S. - Russian relationships during Putin's third term.

In this Congressional Briefing held on June 8, 2009, Ambassador David Aaron, director of the RAND Center for Middle East Public Policy, moderates a discussion on Iran, one of the United States’ most critical and high-profile foreign policy concerns.