In 2006-2009, pilot funding from the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities, provided support for the Center for Participatory Research, University of New Mexico; and the Indigenous Wellness Research Institute, University of Washington, with advice from a national Think Tank of academic and community CBPR experts, to start their inquiry of the science of CBPR and community engaged research.
1) Interdisciplinary literature reviews of collaborative and community-engaged research (Wallerstein et al., 2008); and measurement instruments and constructs (Sandoval et al., 2011; Pearson et al, 2011);
2) Internet survey of the appropriateness of potential partnering and outcome constructs to ~ 100 CBPR projects; and expert consultation with community and academic CBPR practitioners;
3) Creation of Conceptual Model with four dimensions;
4) In-depth focus groups with primarily community partners of six academic-community research partnerships working with ethnic/racial minority populations (4 local; 2 national) to assess face validity and acceptability to community members. Four cross-cutting constructs were identified: development of trust; enhanced capacities of both community and academic partnerships; mutual learning and dialogue: and need to address unequal power dynamics towards a more equitable shared power structure (Belone et al, 2016);
5) NIH-funded mixed methods study, “Research for Improved Health (RIH)” (2009-2013), with an additional partner as Principal Investigator, the National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center, to test the CBPR conceptual model and its four dimensions across a wide variability of federally-funded community engaged and CBPR research projects (funded through the Native American Research Centers for Health, National Institutes for Health, and Indian Health Service). Methods used were two internet surveys (~200 partnerships) and seven in-depth case studies (Hicks et al, 2012; Lucero et al, 2016);
6) Development of the first psychometric validation of partnering process and outcome scales (Oetzel et al, 2015);
7) Development of a set of emerging best or promising practices with analyses of the associations between select partnering practices and partnership outcomes (Duran et al, 2019; Oetzel et al, 2018; Ward et al, 2020; Rodriguez-Espinosa et al, 2020; Wallerstein, Oetzel, et al, 2019).
8) Third Stage: Engage for Equity (E2): Advancing CBPR Practice Through a Collective Reflection and Measurement Toolkit (National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)/NIH: 2015-2022: 1 R01 NR015241: PI: Nina Wallerstein): This grant included refining English measures and metrics identified in previous Research for Improved Health NIH grant and translating two internet survey instruments into Spanish; conducting internet surveys of 179 diverse NIH-funded grants and 36 smaller pilots; and conducting a randomized control trial of E2 tools and resources, delivered by workshop versus provided through web access. Analysis provided additional empirical data for pathways and theories of change and promising/best practices (such as structural governance, trust, participatory decision-making, community engagement in research actions, and collective empowerment). Survey instrument psychometrics were also revalidated. Articles on E2 tools included learnings from the workshops; dissemination of the tools beyond the workshops; and adaptation and use of the CBPR Model in national and international contexts.
