Multi-institutional perspectives on team science evaluation in clinical and translational science programs: Practices, challenges, facilitators, and future directions

Team science is central to clinical and translational research; however, systematic evaluation of collaborative efforts remains inconsistent and underdeveloped. To better understand current team science evaluation practices within clinical and translational science programs, we conducted a structured cross-sectional survey of team science and evaluation professionals. We analyzed quantitative data using descriptive statistics and qualitative responses through thematic analysis. Among participating organizations, the majority have implemented team science evaluations, predominantly using mixed-methods approaches combining quantitative metrics and qualitative assessments. Evaluation findings were primarily used to inform programing, improve team functioning, and secure funding. Reported challenges fell into four key areas: methodology; implementation; data analysis; and organization. Facilitators included: methodological enhancements, organizational support, collaborative approaches, and infrastructure elements. Participants emphasized using interim measures (e.g., team dynamics and satisfaction) that move beyond traditional outcome measures so that evaluations better reflect how teams interact, adapt, and progress as they develop. While team science evaluation adoption is substantial among leading translational research institutions, significant methodological gaps persist. Future directions focus on developing standardized frameworks with local flexibility, creating validated instruments, utilizing interim process measures, and demonstrating return on investment (ROI) to advance both evaluation science and translational outcomes.