|
Session Title: Evaluation of Community-based Participatory Research and Community Mobilization Strategies to Prevent Chronic Disease and Youth Violence: Advances and Lessons Learned by Two Research Center Programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
|
|
Panel Session 508 to be held in Carroll Room on Friday, November 9, 9:25 AM to 10:10 AM
|
|
Sponsored by the Research, Technology, and Development Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Alicia Norris,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
anorris@cdc.gov
|
| Abstract:
Of the six key strategies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed to guide decisions and priorities, one relates to public health research: -create and disseminate the knowledge and innovations people need to protect their health.- Both the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) and the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) at CDC support national research center programs to develop public health interventions. In both programs, collaboration between academic, community, and public health partners occurs in order to actively engage communities in research. Due to programmatic similarities, common evaluation strategies have developed for the Prevention Research Centers (PRC) Program and the National Academic Centers of Excellence on Youth Violence Prevention (ACEs) Program. This panel presents advances and lessons learned from recent evaluative work conducted to better understand both the PRCs' and ACEs' community-based participatory research and community mobilization strategies.
|
|
Using Document Review and Data Abstraction to Inform Management of a Federal Research Program: Lessons, Benefits, and Challenges Found by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Prevention Research Centers Program
|
| Demia S Wright,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
amy7@cdc.gov
|
|
The Prevention Research Centers (PRC) Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funds 33 academic health centers to conduct health promotion and disease prevention research. CDC implemented a multi-component national evaluation consisting of quantitative and qualitative methods. Evaluators completed a document review and data abstraction for all 33 PRCs to understand several components of the program: PRCs' infrastructure and staffing; university resources; PRC partner communities; governance of community committees; and PRCs' prevention research topics, designs, and methods. Documents and data sources consisted of cooperative agreement applications, progress reports, community committee guidelines, budgets, U.S. Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and more. The presentation will describe which data sources were most informative, what findings were most useful for understanding the research program, and benefits (low burden on grantees, informing future program requirements) and challenges (inconsistency within data sources, defining each grantee's 'community') of using the methodology.
|
|
|
An Evaluation of Community Based Participatory Research and Community Mobilization: Formative Research Results From the National Academic Centers of Excellence on Youth Violence Prevention
|
| Nancy Stroupe,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
nstroupe@cdc.gov
|
|
CDC funds ten Academic Centers for Excellence on Youth Violence Prevention (ACEs). These Centers are designed to foster interdisciplinary research and promote stable, long term strategies to address youth violence. ACE centers are required to demonstrate their ability to design and implement community based participatory research (CBPR) and community mobilization activities in their defined community. In 2006, a formative evaluation of the community mobilization and CBPR components of the ACEs began. Applications, progress reports, and data from an information system were used to assess the extent of these activities. Semi-structured interviews with principal investigators, community mobilization directors, and community partners were conducted to gain additional information regarding perceptions, strategies, lessons learned, and outcomes of community mobilization and CBPR activities. This presentation will discuss the design and methods used for the evaluation; barriers and lessons learned; and how the information is being used to impact program policy.
| |