Using a Participatory Approach to Provide Assistance to Community-Based Organizations: The Seattle Partners Community Research Center

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Cheadle ◽  
Marianne Sullivan ◽  
James Krieger ◽  
Sandra Ciske ◽  
Molly Shaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Participatory Approach ◽  
Research Center ◽  
Community Research ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Discussion Section ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Community Based Organizations

Community-based organizations (CBOs), including grassroots, voluntary organizations, are an important part of any strategy for addressing social determinants of health. Because of the challenges faced by CBOs, “enabling systems” may be needed to help them survive and fulfill their missions, and researchers have a variety of skills that allow them to play a role in such systems. The potential for researchers to play a role in supporting CBOs led the Seattle Urban Research Center (known as Seattle Partners) to establish a community research center (CRC) as one of its core projects. This article describes the operation of the Seattle Partners CRC and gives examples of how it has worked collaboratively with CBOs in providing technical assistance. The Discussion section draws from the CRC experience to examine the benefits and challenges of collaboration and the trade-off between capacity building and providing direct technical assistance in promoting long-term CBO viability.

“You Can’t Evict Community Power”

2020 ◽  
pp. 223-242
Author(s):  
Alison Hope Alkon ◽  
Yahya Josh Cadji ◽  
Frances Moore
Keyword(s):  
Food Justice ◽  
The Self ◽  
Community Garden ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Farmers Market ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
Community Power ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Structural Forces

How can gentrification spur collaborations between new food justice organizations and long-standing residents? This chapter explores this question through an analysis of the partnership and eventual merging of Phat Beets Produce and the Self-Help Hunger Program in North Oakland, California. In 2014, Phat Beets saw a local realtor point to its community garden and farmers’ market in an advertisement video designed to draw new residents to their gentrifying neighborhood. This drove them to resist the upscaling of their food justice work and deepen their alliances with long-term community-based organizations. This collaboration has transformed both organizations and created a strong alliance, but it is not enough to resist the structural forces that drive gentrification.

scholarly journals Technical Assistance as a Prevention Capacity-Building Tool: A Demonstration Using the Getting To Outcomes® Framework

2009 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 810-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah B. Hunter ◽  
Matthew Chinman ◽  
Patricia Ebener ◽  
Pam Imm ◽  
Abraham Wandersman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Prevention Programming ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
High Satisfaction ◽  
Performance Accountability ◽  
The Face ◽  
Getting To Outcomes

Demands on community-based prevention programs for performance accountability and positive outcomes are ever increasing in the face of constrained resources. Relatively little is known about how technical assistance (TA) should be structured to benefit community-based organizations and to lead to better outcomes. In this study, data from multiple sources were used to describe an effective TA model designed to improve the capacity of community-based organizations to plan, implement, and evaluate prevention programming. This article is the first of its kind to provide detailed analyses of the TA delivered to community-based organizations to build substance abuse prevention capacity. The results of this study describe the range of TA services provided and the importance of two-way communication between the TA provider and recipient. TA recipients reported high satisfaction and an improved understanding of targeted TA activities. However, achieving these benefits requires significant program staff time, and not all skills were successfully transferred. Results from this study suggest how TA may be structured to be effective in supporting quality prevention programming in community settings.

scholarly journals Development and implementation of a community-based research network

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 508-514
Author(s):  
Brittany C. Minor ◽  
Jessica Dashner ◽  
Sandra M. Espín Tello ◽  
Rebecca Bollinger ◽  
Marian Keglovits ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Independent Living ◽  
Formative Evaluation ◽  
The State ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
Practice Based Research

AbstractIntroduction:People aging with long-term physical disabilities (PAwLTPD), meaning individuals with onset of disability from birth through midlife, often require long-term support services (LTSS) to remain independence. The LTSS system is fragmented into aging and disability organizations with little communication between them. In addition, there are currently no evidence-based LTSS-type programs listed on the Administration for Community Living website that have been demonstrated to be effective for PAwLTPD. Because of these gaps, we have developed a community-based research network (CBRN), drawing on the practice-based research network model (PBRN), to bring together aging and disability organizations to address the lack of evidence-based programs for PAwLTPD.Materials and Methods:Community-based organizations serving PAwLTPD across the state of Missouri were recruited to join the CBRN. A formative process evaluation of the network was conducted after a year to evaluate the effectiveness of the network.Results:Nine community-based organizations across the state of Missouri joined the CBRN. CBRN members include three centers for independent living (CILs), three area agencies on aging (AAAs), one CIL/AAA hybrid, one non-CIL disability organization, and one non-AAA aging organization. To date, we have held seven meetings, provided educational opportunities for CBRN members, and launched an inaugural research study within the CBRN. Formative evaluation data indicate that CBRN members feel that participation in the CBRN is beneficial.Conclusion:The PBRN model appears to be a feasible framework for use with community-based organizations to facilitate communication between agencies and to support research aimed at addressing the needs of PAwLTPD.

Finding the heart of a Research-Practice Partnership: Politicized trust, mutualism, and use of research

2021 ◽  
pp. 136548022110199
Author(s):  
Stephanie Lezotte ◽  
Sharada Krishnamurthy ◽  
Daniel Tulino ◽  
Shelley Zion
Keyword(s):  
Future Research ◽  
Trust Building ◽  
Collaborative Partnership ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
Problems Of Practice ◽  
Research Alliances ◽  
Use Of Research

The assumption that research is out-of-reach, irrelevant, or unusable for practitioners has been a theme echoed throughout academia. Research alliances such as Research-Practice Partnerships (RPP) attempt to alleviate this problem by having researchers, practitioners, and/or community-based organizations form a collaborative partnership that uses research to solve tangible problems of practice. Previous works have highlighted the complexities inherent with forming and maintaining these long-term partnerships including politics, trust building, time, and available resources. In this paper, we engage in reflective analysis of our own RPP around three key elements we believe are at the heart of RPPs: politicized trust, mutualism, and use of research. This paper illustrates successes and points of failure in each of these areas, which have been previously unconnected in RPP literature. We conclude with recommendations for school and university partners and future research on RPPs.

Voluntary Organizations and Crime Prevention

Criminology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Nonprofit Organizations ◽  
Crime Prevention ◽  
Social Problems ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
The State ◽  
Voluntary Organizations ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Local Conditions ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
Control And Prevention

Voluntary, non-state and nonprofit organizations are commonplace in many regions as principal deliverers of services and programs to solve an array of social problems. From homelessness and poverty to human trafficking and youth and gang violence, voluntary organizations’ contribution is part of a broader ethos of “communities” and market-based solutions to urgent public problems. Often referred to as community-based organizations in the US-context, these voluntary agencies address people’s individual needs by developing services and increasing social, human, economic, and political capital (see “Community” in Oxford Bibliographies in Social Work). They consist of nongovernmental assemblages, foundations, charity groups, practitioners, and volunteers. A principal modality of community-based initiatives is to promote collective action against identified needs that replace, supplement, or extend functions of what had been the jurisdiction or obligation of the state. While serving this role, organizations often challenge, resist, or revise state policies, programs, or practices. In crime control and prevention, voluntary organizations are instrumental to justice system practices (see “Community-Based Justice Systems” in Oxford Bibliographies in Criminology). A frequent objective of voluntary organizations is preventing crime and delinquency (see “Delinquency and Crime Prevention” in Oxford Bibliographies in Criminology). Community-based groups work alongside or directly under government agencies through multi-agency partnerships, police-community collaborations, community courts, or several other collaborative ways. A feature of voluntary groups and organizations is that they are tailored to local conditions and local capacities. In some instances, they operate separately or in opposition to the state. Activists and those advocating for criminal justice reforms frequently work through or within voluntary organizations. Regardless of the political alignment, in this shift away from a moderately robust public sector to a nonprofit, nongovernmental, community-based voluntary sector, these organizations are where much of this occurs. As the state increasingly retreats from directly working against social problems, voluntary or community-based organizations have become vital to patching up the frayed social fabric of neglected neighborhoods in late modern neoliberal times.

Supporting Community-Based Prevention and Health Promotion Initiatives: Developing Effective Technical Assistance Systems

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 620-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger E. Mitchell ◽  
Paul Florin ◽  
John F. Stevenson
Keyword(s):  
Program Implementation ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Organizations ◽  
Prevention Interventions ◽  
Assistance Systems ◽  
State And Local

As research evidence for the effectiveness of community-based prevention has mounted, so has recognition of the gap between research and community practice. As a result, state and local governments are taking a more active role in building the capacity of community-based organizations to deliver evidence-based prevention interventions. Innovations are taking place in the establishment of technical assistance or support systems to influence the prevention and health education activities of community-based organizations. Several challenges for technical assistance systems are described: (1) setting prevention priorities and allocating limited technical assistance resources, (2) balancing capacity-building versus program dissemination efforts, (3) collaborating across categorical problem areas, (4) designing technical assistance initiatives with enough “dose strength” to have an effect, (5) balancing fidelity versus adaptation in program implementation, (6) building organizational cultures that support innovation, and (7) building local evaluative capacity versus generalizable evaluation findings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document