Table 2. Evaluation results of preceptor self-reported surveys conducted in 2010-2013.

Item	Content	Year
	Intern Quality Items #1-3: 1-5 scale, 5 is best	2010	2011	2012	2013	Mean
1	You had strong applicants to interview	4.35	4.70	4.52	4.70	4.57
2	Interviews were effective	4.12	4.70	4.56	4.59	4.49
3	Interns allow acceleration of research	4.88	4.64	4.51	4.68	4.68
4	Number of applicants interviewed (average)	2.63	3.67	3.14	2.82	3.07
5	Number of interns mentored (average)	1.63	1.81	1.81	1.46	1.68
	CaRES Program Items: 1-3 scale, 3 is best
6	Communication with CaRES program faculty	2.76	2.91	3.00	3.00	2.92
7	CaRES allows interns a flexible schedule	2.88	2.95	2.93	2.92	2.92
8	CaRES faculty / staff respond to questions	2.88	2.95	3.00	3.00	2.96
9	Stipend support was adequate	2.76	2.90	2.93	3.00	2.90
10	Expectations of preceptors and interns clear	2.82	2.91	2.85	3.00	2.90
11	Administration of CaRES program	2.82	2.81	3.00	3.00	2.91
	Preceptor Benefits Items: 1-4 scale, 4 is best
12	Help conceptualizing research methods	3.12	2.71	2.76	2.64	2.81
13	Help designing research plan	2.47	2.53	2.67	2.81	2.62
14	Help analyzing data	3.00	2.88	2.87	2.84	2.90
15	Help interpreting results	3.00	2.64	2.80	2.74	2.80
16	Help writing final paper / report	2.53	2.53	2.83	3.00	2.72
	Intern Performance Items: 1-4 scale, 4 is best
17	Hours worked vs. promised	3.58	3.56	3.77	3.64	3.64
18	Research tasks done	3.71	3.53	3.79	3.62	3.66
19	Deadlines met	3.63	3.44	3.67	3.57	3.58
20	Conceptualizing and designing research	3.46	3.33	3.05	3.24	3.27
21	Writing quality	2.54	3.28	3.32	3.48	3.16
22	Understanding methodology	3.63	3.56	3.57	3.45	3.55
23	Analyzing and interpreting data	2.79	3.23	3.26	3.28	3.14
24	% Willing to be CaRES Preceptor again	100	95	100	96	98

Note: The n completing this survey / N possible respondents is: 17/24 for 2010; 22/26 for 2011; 28/28 for 2012; and 28/29 for 2013, for an overall response rate of 95/107 (89%).