1. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A National Perspective Kristine Wong, MPH - Program Director Community-Campus Partnerships for Health Fostering Collaborative Community-Based Clinical and Translational Research Meeting National Center for Research Resources September 14, 2007

2. Overview  Introduction to CCPH  Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Project, 2002 – 2005  “Achieving the Promise of Community-Higher Education Partnerships: A Community Partner Summit,” 2006  CCPH Resources

3. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health Mission To promote health (broadly defined) through partnerships between communities and higher educational institutions

4. CCPH Major Strategies Create and expand opportunities for collaboration and information sharing Promote awareness about the benefits of community- campus partnerships Advocate for policies that facilitate and support community-campus partnerships Support service-learning and community-based participatory research in higher education

5. * Conferences *Training Institutes *Educational Calls *Consultancy Network *Annual Awards *Community Partner Mobilization *Ethical Considerations in CBPR *Community-Engaged Scholarship for Health Collaborative *Engaged Institutions Initiative CCPH Initiatives & Programs

6. Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Project, 2002 – 2005  Funding: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) - Prevention Research Center Office through a cooperative agreement with the Association of Schools of Public Health  Participant researchers: Representatives of 10 partner organizations  Products: (1) Knowledge synthesis: factors that contribute to and impede successful prevention research partnerships and (2) Evidence-based curriculum that is offered online and through training workshops

7. Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Project, 2002 – 2005 Overarching Goal: To facilitate approaches for effectively translating community interventions in public health and prevention into widespread practice at the community level.

8. Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Project, 2002 – 2005 Aims: 1) To synthesize knowledge about community-institutional partnerships for prevention research 2) To build community and institutional capacity for participatory research

9. Participant-Researchers Representatives from 10 Partner Organizations:  Community-Based Public Health Caucus of the American Public Health Association (national)  Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (national)  Community Health Scholars Program (national)  Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center – Detroit, MI  Harlem Community and Academic Partnership – New York City, NY  Harlem Health Promotion Center – New York City, NY  National Community Committee of the CDC Prevention Research Centers  Seattle Partners for Healthier Communities – Seattle, WA  Wellesley Institute - Toronto, Canada  Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center, New Haven, CT

10. Year 1 (2002-2003)  Examined and synthesized existing data on community-institutional partnerships for prevention research.  Results: Identified characteristics of successful partnerships and barriers to successful partnerships Made recommendations for building the capacity of communities, institutions and funding agencies Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989- 1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

11. Major Findings: Characteristics of Successful Partnerships – Part I  Trusting relationships  Equitable processes and procedures  Diverse membership  Tangible benefits to all partners  Balance between partnership process, activities, and outcomes  Significant community involvement in scientifically sound research Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989- 1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

12. Major Findings: Characteristics of Successful Partnerships – Part II  Supportive partner organization policies and reward structures  Leadership at multiple levels  Culturally competent and appropriately skilled staff and researchers  Collaborative dissemination  Ongoing partnership assessment, improvement, and celebration  Sustainable impact Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989-1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

13. Major Findings: Barriers to Successful Partnerships  When characteristics of successful partnerships are absent  Funding mechanisms, policies, and procedures: *Limited funding sources *Funding agency requirements, definitions, timelines, and reviews *Lack of funding and funding mechanisms that specifically support community involvement as an equal research partner Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989-1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

14. Recommendations for Emerging & Established Partnerships – Part I *Embrace diversity within the partnership *Decide who the “community” is, and who “represents” the community *Develop structures and processes that help develop trust and shared leadership among partners Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989- 1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

15. Recommendations for Emerging & Established Partnerships – Part II *Provide training and technical assistance to partners –build capacity! *Plan ahead for sustainability *Be strategic about dissemination *Invest in ongoing assessment, improvement, and celebration Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989- 1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

16. Year 2 (2003-2004)  Policy Working Group Goal: To implement policy recommendations by collaborating with funding agencies to support partnership infrastructure, assess partnerships in proposals and design peer review processes  Training Working Group Goal: To develop and test a training curriculum for partnerships on developing and sustaining CBPR partnerships Sources: Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. Journal of Urban Health, 2006 Nov;83(6):989- 1003; The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.infowww.cbprcurriculum.info

17. Year 3 and beyond (2004-present)  Completed evidence-based curriculum for Developing & Sustaining CBPR Partnerships (2005) www.cbprcurriculum.info  Pilot-tested it through a 4-day intensive training institute for partnership teams (Aug. 2005)  Team-taught the curriculum at: 2004 - 2007CCPH conference workshops 2005 - 2007 APHA Continuing Education Institutes 2006 Canadian CBR Skills-Building Workshop 2006Regional workshops in Oregon with CCPH, NW Health Foundation & community partners

18. Achieving the Promise of Community-Higher Education Partnerships: A Community Partner Summit April 24-26, 2006 Wingspread Conference Center, Racine, WI

19. Achieving the Promise of Community-Higher Education Partnerships: A Community Partner Summit Convened by CCPH, with the support of:  Community-Based Public Health Caucus of the American Public Health Association  National Community-Based Organization Network  National Community Committee of the CDC Prevention Research Center Program Funded by the WK Kellogg Foundation, the Johnson Foundation, and Atlantic Philanthropies

20. Achieving the Promise of Community-Higher Education Partnerships: A Community Partner Summit Intended Outcomes  Develop and gain clarity on the current state of community-higher education partnerships  Uncover community perspectives on the key insights and ingredients of effective, authentic community-higher education partnerships  Build the case for the importance of community-higher education partnerships  Develop a case of actionable recommendations for maximizing the potential of community-higher education partnerships  Create a framework and next steps for developing an ongoing vehicle to increase the number and effectiveness of these partnerships, and ensure that communities are involved in the dialogues and decisions about these partnerships that affect them

21. Achieving the Promise of Community-Higher Education Partnerships: A Community Partner Summit Participants: 23 experienced community partners from a diversity of communities across the U.S. Purpose: To advance authentic community-higher education partnerships by mobilizing a network of experienced community partners

22. Summit Agenda  What is the Current Reality of Community-Higher Education Partnerships? -What’s Working/Not Working, and Why? -What’s Holding Us Back?  What is our Vision for the Future of Community- Higher Education Partnerships?  What Do We Mean By Authentic Partnerships?  How Can Community-Higher Education Partnerships More Fully Realize Their Potential?  What are our “Big Ideas” and Recommendations?  Where Do we Go From Here?

23. “We are here because we are passionate about these partnerships, but they are not working.” -Ira SenGupta, Cross Cultural Health Care Program, Seattle, WA “Our experience has been that the university was there for the community, to share knowledge…we have had a long history of working together. We have built social capital through the work of our partnership.” -Lola Sablan Santos, Guam Communications Network, Long Beach, CA What’s the reality of community-higher education partnerships?

24. The Current Reality of Community- Higher Education Partnerships: Part I  There is a “community engagement buzz” in higher education and funding circles  The predominant model is not a partnership; much of this is due to the fact that that the playing field is not level.  Community-higher education partnerships benefit a variety of stakeholder groups.  The relationship between community and campus partners is largely based on individuals and funding, and is not institutionalized.  There is often an assumption by academic institutions, funding agencies, and policymakers that community groups need the academy to have legitimate conversations and that academic knowledge has a greater value than community knowledge.

25. The Current Reality of Community- Higher Education Partnerships: Part II  Building community capacity through strong community-based organizations is not a major conversation or an explicit goal of many partnerships  Despite the challenges, there is good news for communities who are new to partnerships with colleges and universities. Communities are realizing their power to change the nature of their relationships with higher educational institutions.  There are significant differences between mature partnerships and early partnerships

26. What’s Working? Part I  When community-based research partnerships are structured in a manner that uses the funding and partnership to develop skills among community members, and build infrastructure  Partnerships that are developed and implemented in a way that is transparent, equitable, sustainable, and accountable to both the community and the academic partner.  When there is an ongoing two-way engagement process through community competency and cultural competency, as well as an understanding of the reality and context of an academic environment.

27. What’s Working? Part II  When research questions are developed and structured in a way that is relevant to community.  When there is support from funding agencies that understand how equal partnerships are developed and sustained, and incorporates this understanding into their peer review and proposal evaluation process.

28. What’s Not Working?  No community engagement as proposal is developed  Inequitable distribution of power and resources  Decisions made behind closed doors  Lack of partner commitment to community’s future  No guidelines for funders and peer reviewers  No planning for sustainability, no exit strategy  Community lacks infrastructure to fully engage  Presumption that communities speak with one voice  Presumption that service-learning and CBPR are same

29. Framework for Authentic Partnerships 1) Quality Processes 2) Meaningful outcomes that are tangible and relevant to communities 3) Transformation at multiple levels: personal, community, institutional, systems of knowledge, political

30. Conclusions Part I - Community-higher education partnerships are:  Vehicles for social change  A source of benefits for all partners  Varied in level of authenticity, but predominantly not authentic  Are usually not designed to equalize power differentials  Rarely equal between campus and community  Rarely prioritize community capacity building  Largely based on individuals and not institutionalized

31. Conclusions Part II  For the most part, communities do not have the time, resources, or access to knowledge about engaging in partnerships on their own terms  However, communities are learning from each other and are asserting their desire to build capacity through peer mentoring, training programs, and partnership work (such as through community-based participatory research)

32. Recommendations  Community partners have the responsibility to share their collective wisdom and knowledge  Community involvement and capacity building is needed at the local, regional, and national levels  Both partners must familiarize themselves with the culture and daily realities of community-based organizations and academia  Both partners must work together to change the culture of higher education to elevate credibility for community experiences and expertise  Funding agencies need to reexamine funding priorities, processes, and decisions  Community partners should form a collective body to increase capacity through mentoring, networking, and advocacy

33. CPS Workgroups Mentoring Workgroup - Purpose: To develop and implement peer mentoring and leadership development activities that build the capacity of community partners to engage in authentic community-higher education partnerships, and succeed in their community-building work. Policy Workgroup - Purpose: 1) To develop and advocate for policies that support authentic community-higher education partnerships, working in collaboration with existing national groups, community partners, funders, and academic allies. 2) To develop tools and strategies for advocating to community partners, academia, and funding agencies regarding policies that support authentic community-higher education partnerships.

34. Dissemination and Replication  Local, national, regional conferences among community, academia, and community health practitioners  American Public Health Association annual meeting  Regional Community Partner Summit: Convened by the University of Illinois at Chicago, 2007  CPS Poster – can be borrowed from CCPH for your conference, event, or community partner meeting/training

35. CCPH Resources Available at CCPH Website – www.ccph.info -CBPR resources -Community Partner Summit information -CBPR and Research Ethics call series handouts, audiofiles -Community-Engaged Scholarship resources -Partnership Matters Newsletter -Membership Benefits Listservs: -CCPH E-News, CBPR – to subscribe, sign up on info sheet being passed around, or visit: https://mailman.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/cbpr (CBPR listserv only)