The Community Engagement Course and Action Network: Strengthening Community and Academic Research Partnerships to Advance Health Equity

"One benefit of community engagement in research is gathering valid and credible evidence of diseases and designing meaningful and impactful culturally appropriate interventions based on the lived experiences of affected community members."



Community-based participatory research (CBPR) emphasises equitable community engagement in research. In the United States, the Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center ("the Center") collaborates with members of historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), minority-serving institutes, and community organisations on the Community Engaged Course and Action Network (CECAN). The network was launched in May 2020 to strengthen the capacity of minority-serving institutions to develop locally responsive community-campus CBPR partnerships. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the community-academic partnership and research administration through participatory evaluation, which is designed to address needs mutually identified by partners to assure that initiatives: (i) are audience driven; (ii) foster sustained ownership of evaluation processes; and (iii) are central to programme decision-making and sustainability.



To begin, the Center launched a mini-grant programme to support community-university research partnerships, facilitate community input into university research, and increase health research in community settings that is both responsive and relevant to the health needs of the community. Projects, partners, and focus areas are detailed in tables within the paper. For example, the Georgia State University CECAN research project involves training barbers and barber students to be mental health advocates. Considerable formative work went into establishing and strengthening a community-academic partnership well before the research began, and these efforts continue throughout the project to ensure that the community's voice, ideas, and concerns are foundational to this collective work. Through focus group discussions with this community of interest (i.e., barbers, barber students, and shop owners), as well as participant surveys and barber advisory board input, the partners were able to collect process and outcome data that will be used to enhance the training programme.



A qualitative assessment of the community-academic partnership was conducted by reviewing CECAN establishment, structure, partnership dynamics, and outcomes of partnerships based on the alignment with the CBPR principles. A review of partnership formulation documents, funding structures, and reports from meetings, webinars, technical assistance and support, and workshops provided additional contextual data for assessment of the network partnership dynamics. In addition, a focus group (N = 12) of CECAN members (both community and academic partners) was conducted face-to-face and supported by Mentimeter, a survey polling tool.



Key findings are divided into themes including:

• Strengthening community-academic partnerships, including sharing and fellowship, coalition building and collaboration, and greater connections and awareness of community needs. Suggestion: Researchers should approach partnership within communities with honest intentions and humility, recognising that building such relationships takes time and unwavering efforts over the long term.
• Establishing authentic partner engagement, which requires a clear conceptual framework that links group dynamic characteristics of equitable partnerships (e.g., shared leadership, meaningful participation, and power sharing) with the effectiveness of partnership efforts to intervene and reduce health inequities more broadly. Suggestion: Researchers should collaborate with community partners to ensure they are recognised and valued within the community as a trusted agent of change. Being present in the community helps to build trust and commitment to engagement and ultimately establish co-leadership for research.
• Ensuring network synergy and expansion, which involves addressing the structural, social, and cultural differences between the community and academics. Suggestion: Sharing knowledge, expertise, decision-making, capacity building of community partners, and other resources could help in breaking down silos and strengthening unity for the success of such partnerships.
• Securing institutional and leadership support, which requires commitment in creating an environment of co-leading, co-learning, and capacity building that is beneficial for all members of the partnership. For example, the Center's leadership fully embraced the use of CBPR model and expressed its commitment to the establishment of community-academic partnerships for the CECAN research projects by contracting with its Community Coalition Board chair, a non-academic leader, to serve as a coordinator and facilitator for community engagement. This leadership structure allows for power-sharing between community and academia by building on existing trusting relationships.
• Fostering partnership and network engagement: CECAN research partners expressed some of the successes they achieved through the network and recommendations for improving their project plans to strengthen the community-engaged approach. One of the most salient wins was "bringing national attention to the concept of community engaged research at undergraduate level".

In short: "By conducting a qualitative review of partnership structure, project implementation processes, and outcomes of the research collaboration, it was clear that consistent monitoring and technical assistance is essential for success of community-academic partnerships. There was evidence to support the claim that breakdown in communication between partners can result in undefined expectations and delay in the execution of research processes. Focus group discussions among the network's partners did reveal some positive results regarding the benefits of the network with key areas for improvements to further enhance the relationships between partners and to grow the network. Noteworthy in informing other initiatives is that CBPR capacity building and partnership development support towards community-driven intervention, is the goal of the network."

The researchers suggest that a more comprehensive assessment of the community-academic partnership is warranted. Ongoing assessment is also essential for ensuring continuous quality improvement across partnerships such as determining CBPR fidelity, assessing partnership synergy, and dynamics, and for quality improvement of research protocol.



In conclusion: "The implications and potential for advancing implementation science through this and similar networks are great towards advancing leadership in modeling how foundations in community service can advance to CBPR partnership formation and ultimately, health equity approaches, that are local defined and assessed."



Full list of authors, with institutional affiliations: Tabia Henry Akintobi, Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center; R. Barrett, Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center; L. Hoffman 2, Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center Community Coalition Board; S. Scott, Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center; K. Davis, T. Jones, Morehouse School of Medicine Prevention Research Center; N. De Veauuse Brown, Georgia State University, School of Public Health; M. Fraire, Coalition of Latino Leaders (CLILA); R. Fraire; CLILA; J. Garner, Georgia State University, School of Public Health; A. Gruner, CLILA; J. Hill, Georgia State University, School of Public Health; R. Meckel, Georgia Department of Natural Resources; C. Obi, Fort Valley State University College of Agriculture; P. Omunga, Savannah State University; Q. Parham, Savannah State University; T. Rice, Dalton State College Allied Health and Social Work; O. Samples, Fort Valley State University College of Agriculture; T. Terrill, Fort Valley State University College of Agriculture