Product Details

Author Information

Corresponding Author
Sarena Seifer
Community-Campus Partnerships for Health
UW Box 354809
Seattle, WA 98195-4809
United States
p: 206-666-3406
f: 206-666-3406
sarena@u.washington.edu

Product Description and Application Narrative Submitted by Corresponding Author

What general topics does your product address?

Public Health

What specific topics does your product address?

Community engagement, Curriculum development, Partnership building , Prevention, Research ethics

Does your product focus on a specific population(s)?

What methodological approaches were used in the development of your product, or are discussed in your product?

Case-based learning, Community-based participatory research , Meta-analysis, Problem-based learning

What resource type(s) best describe(s) your product?

Curriculum, Faculty development materials, Online course, Training material

Application Narrative

1. Please provide a 1600 character abstract describing your product, its intended use and the audiences for which it would be appropriate.*

Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum is an evidence-based curriculum designed as a tool for use by community-institutional partnerships that are using or planning to use a CBPR approach to improving health. It can be used by partnerships that are just forming as well as existing partnerships. It is intended for use by health professions faculty and researchers, students and post-doctoral fellows, staff of community-based organizations, and staff of public health agencies at all skill levels.

The curriculum has 7 units which each contain:
*Learning objectives
*In-depth content information about the topic(s) being presented
*Examples and interactive exercises that are designed to trigger discussion and to help better understand the concepts being presented
*Citations and suggested resources, selected based on their relevance and usefulness to the unit’s learning objectives

Upon completing the curriculum users will:
*Have a deeper understanding of the basic principles of CBPR and strategies for applying them
*Understand the key steps involved in developing and sustaining CBPR partnerships
*Identify common challenges faced by CBPR partnerships and suggested strategies and resources for overcoming them
*Develop and enhance skills for all partners that will enhance their capacity for supporting and sustaining authentic CBPR partnerships

2. What are the goals of the product?

Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum presents an opportunity to explore the practice of CBPR as an innovative approach for improving health. The curriculum intends to foster critical thinking and action on issues impacting CBPR and community-institutional partnerships. The curriculum is built upon a combination of experiential and didactic approaches to teaching and learning. Through clearly presented content, examples and exercises that stimulate new ways of thinking “outside of the box,” users will:

*Develop a deeper understanding of the basic principles of CBPR and strategies for applying them
*Understand the key steps involved in developing and sustaining CBPR partnerships
*Identify common challenges faced by CBPR partnerships and suggested strategies and resources for overcoming them
*Develop and enhance skills for all partners that will enhance their capacity for supporting and sustaining authentic CBPR partnerships

3. Who are the intended audiences or expected users of the product?

The curriculum is intended as a tool for use by community-institutional partnerships that are using or planning to use a CBPR approach to improving health. It can be used by partnerships that are just forming as well as existing partnerships. It is intended for use by health professions faculty and researchers, students and post-doctoral fellows, staff of community-based organizations, and staff of public health agencies at all skill levels.

4. Please provide any special instructions for successful use of the product, if necessary. If your product has been previously published, please provide the appropriate citation below.

Citation: The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships: A Skill-Building Curriculum. 2006. www.cbprcurriculum.info

The curriculum may be used:
(1) In the early stages of developing a partnership to...
*Orient partners to CBPR
*Stimulate conversations around key questions and issues as the partnership is forming
*Establish principles, policies and procedures that lay the foundation of a successful partnership

(2) Within a partnership to...
*Work through concerns or challenges and develop locally relevant solutions
*Assess the extent to which the partnership has embraced CBPR
*Orient new partners to CBPR

(3) In classroom discussions on CBPR

(4) In training workshops with “mixed audiences” of community, academic and health department representatives

5. Please describe how your product or the project that resulted in the product builds on a relevant field, discipline or prior work. You may cite the literature and provide a bibliography in the next question if appropriate.

The material presented in the curriculum is based on the work of the Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Project that ran from October 2002 through December 2005 with funding from the Prevention Research Center Program Office at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) through a cooperative agreement with the Association of Schools of Public Health.

The project aimed to identify and synthesize what is known about community-institutional collaborations in prevention research and develop and evaluate strategies to foster community and institutional capacity for participatory research at national and local levels. The project's ultimate goal was to facilitate approaches for effectively translating community interventions in public health and prevention into widespread practice at the community level. Nine organizations participated in the project:
*Community-Based Public Health Caucus of the American Public Health Association
*Community-Campus Partnerships for Health
*Community Health Scholars Program
*Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center
*Harlem Community & Academic Partnership
*National Community Committee of the CDC Prevention Research Centers
*Seattle Partners for Healthy Communities
*Wellesley Institute
*Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center

During the first year of the project (2002-2003), the project partners collaborated to examine and synthesize existing data on successful characteristics of community partnerships for prevention research. These activities yielded a report (1) that:
*Defined “successful community-institutional collaborations in prevention research”
*Identified factors that facilitate and impede these successful relationships and outcomes
*Presented recommendations and strategies that could build the capacity of communities, institutions and funding agencies to engage in successful community-institutional partnerships for prevention research

During the second and third years of the project (2003-2005), the project partners completed a curriculum for Developing and Sustaining CBPR Partnerships that built upon the evidence base presented in the first year report (1). The curriculum is the product of multiple rounds of review by project partners, incorporating feedback from participants. Portions of the curriculum were offered in a variety of formats, including a pre-conference workshop at the 2004 Community-Campus Partnerships for Health conference and a half-day continuing education institute at the 2005 American Public Health Association conference. The full curriculum was pilot-tested through a 4-day intensive training institute for partnership teams held in August 2005.

6. Please provide a bibliography for work cited above or in other parts of this application. Provide full references, in the order sited in the text (i.e. according to number order). .

(1) Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group. Building and sustaining partnerships for prevention research: findings from a national collaborative. J Urban Health. 2006 Nov;83(6):989-1003.

Project reports, presentations and other products are available on the project website at http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/researchprojects.html#ExaminingCommunityPartnerships

7. Please describe the project or body of work from which the submitted product developed. Describe the ways that community and academic/institutional expertise contributed to the project. Pay particular attention to demonstrating the quality or rigor of the work:

• For research-related work, describe (if relevant) study aims, design, sample, measurement instruments, and analysis and interpretation. Discuss how you verified the accuracy of your data.
• For education-related work, describe (if relevant) any needs assessment conducted, learning objectives, educational strategies incorporated, and evaluation of learning.
• For other types of work, discuss how the project was developed and reasons for the methodological choices made.

The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research project began in October 2002 with funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Research Center (PRC) Program Office through a cooperative agreement between the Association of Schools of Public Health and the CDC. The three-year project aimed to identify and synthesize knowledge about community-institutional partnerships for prevention research and to develop and evaluate strategies to foster community and institutional capacity for participatory research at national and local levels. The project’s ultimate goal was to facilitate approaches for effectively translating community-based interventions in public health and prevention into widespread practice at the community level.

The project was designed as a collaborative effort involving the partner organizations listed elsewhere in this application. These partner organizations pursued a collaboration because they (1) were all involved in community-institutional partnerships for prevention research, (2) had access to research and evaluation data on these partnerships, and (3) believed that the shared learning and action that would result through a collaborative effort could significantly advance collective knowledge about partnerships and lead to substantive capacity-building responses.

Between December 2002 and March 2003, each partner organization with relevant data* prepared a report that answered these Bguiding questions^ using existing reports and publications based on their work:
1. What is meant by “successful community-institutional partnerships for prevention research?”
2. What are the factors that contribute to successful community-institutional partnerships for prevention research?
3. What are the barriers that interfere with successful community-institutional partnerships for prevention research?
4. What ideas, recommendations and strategies can build the capacity of communities, institutions and funding agencies to engage in successful community-institutional partnerships for prevention research?

The specific methods used to prepare the individual summary reports varied by partner, based upon the type of reports and publications available for analysis. The partners reviewed each other’s reports and convened in March 2003 to discuss their responses to the four guiding questions and to construct a conceptual framework for understanding partnerships. This discussion was taped and transcribed. A qualitative data analysis approach was used to reviewand synthesize each report and the meeting minutes. First, the text was color-coded to easily identify the source. Next, responses to a given guiding question were combined into one section. Each of the responses for a given question was reviewed and compared with all of the other responses across the reports and combined according to similar themes or categories. Each of these themes was given a descriptive label to capture the content of the statements that comprised them. Each of the lists of themes was reviewed, and in some instances meta-themes were created that combined conceptually similar themes, and in other instances themes remained as originally listed. Next, the themes pertaining to a given question were reviewed and compared with the themes pertaining to the other
questions and combined when similar. In order to capture the full range of ideas recommendations and strategies for building capacity for partnerships, responses to question #4 were combined into a single list and subsequently edited to eliminate duplication. A descriptive narrative, largely drawing on the text contained in the reports and the meeting minutes, was then written for each theme.

8. Please describe the process of developing the product, including the ways that community and academic/institutional expertise were integrated in the development of this product.

Each of the partner organizations in the project identified a team of community and academic colleagues to represent them in the project. After developing an initial outline for 7 units in the curriculum, these individuals divided up the task of writing each unit. Each unit was co-authored by community and academic colleagues, bring their respective experiences and areas of expertise to the process of writing and editing. Drafts of the curriculum were periodically shared with the full project team for their review and feedback. Drafts of the curriculum were also pilot-tested at conference presentations and workshops involving community and academic audience members (eg, the 2004 Community-Campus Partnerships for Health conference. a half-day continuing education institute at the 2005 American Public Health Association conference). The full curriculum was pilot-tested through a 4-day intensive training institute for community-academic partnership teams held in August 2005. The pilot-testing process ensured that feedback from both community and academic colleagues was solicited and incorporated into subsequent curriculum drafts.

9. Please discuss the significance and impact of your product. In your response, discuss ways your product has added to existing knowledge and benefited the community; ways others may have utilized your product; and any relevant evaluation data about impact, if available. If the impact of the product is not yet known, discuss its potential significance.

The curriculum has helped to fill the need for CBPR training materials. The curriculum website has over 100 hits/month and the PDF version has been downloaded over 2,400 times from the site since its launch in 2006. A user survey on the site, and feedback we have received by email indicate that over 150 academic institutions and over 300 CBPR partnerships have used the curriculum as a training tool. A number of CBPR funding agencies (eg, the Northwest Health Foundation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research), have pointed grantees and prospective grantees to the curriculum site as a recommended resource.

10. Please describe why you chose the presentation format you did.

We chose an online format so that anyone could easily view, print and use the curriculum. A paper version is also available, although we rarely get requests for it.

11. Please reflect on the strengths and limitations of your product. In what ways did community and academic/institutional collaborators provide feedback and how was such feedback used? Include relevant evaluation data about strengths and limitations if available.

We describe how we sought and used feedback in other parts of this application.

The strengths of the curriculum are its accessiblity and ease of use; its use of "real life" case studies and examples; the evidence-base upon which it is based; the multiple rounds of feedback and revision; and the testing of the complete curriculum with a group of community-academic partnerships who helped to tweak the final version. The limitations are that is it of high literacy level and available only in English; because it is focused on developing and sustaining CBPR partnerships, tt does not include substantive content on methods for conducting the actual research (although an appendix provides a list of journal articles and books that can enhance understanding in these areas); and resource limitations have prevented us from continually updating the curriculum with new content.

Intended audience

12. Please describe ways that the project resulting in the product involved collaboration that embodied principles of mutual respect, shared work and shared credit. If different, describe ways that the product itself involved collaboration that embodied principles of mutual respect, shared work and shared credit. Have all collaborators on the product been notified of and approved submission of the product to CES4Health.info? If not, why not? Please indicate whether the project resulting in the product was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) and/or community-based review mechanism, if applicable, and provide the name(s) of the IRB/mechanism.

The project that led to the development of the curriculum was designed as a collaborative multi-partner project from the start. Each partner organization contributed data from their experience with CBPR. We made the decision early-on to adopt a corporate authorship (Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group) and to recognize all contributors by name in alphabetical order in order to ensure that everyone got credit for their participation. All contributors support the submission of the curriculum to CES4Health.info because they are all committed to seeing it maximally disseminated and used. The project was deemed exempt from IRB review as it was synthesizing existing literature and administrative-type data.