Assessing Research Activity and Capacity of Community-Based Organizations: Development and Pilot Testing of an Instrument

The failure of top-down categorical approaches for generating solutions to many local problems has led to the adoption of alternate approaches. Many scholars believe that a confluence of local and global forces have generated complex problems, which call for new approaches to problem solving. Previously, the top-down approach relied entirely on the knowledgeable elite. Communities were seen as passive study subjects and information flow was one way only- from knowledgeable elites to the less knowledgeable community agents or community-based organization acting on behalf of communities. The objectives of this study are to provide a review of governance as a means of organizing community action to address community problems in the Black Belt Region (BBR) of the Southeastern United States, and an assessment of community problems in the BBR from the perspectives of community-based organizations (CBOs). Data was collected from CBOs via a telephone survey in eleven Southeastern states and via listening sessions conducted with CBOs in 9 Southeastern states. The study provides valuable insight regarding the challenges faced by these organizations and strategies they employ in adapting to serve their communities.

Download Full-text

Facilitators and barriers to the utilization of the ACT SMART Implementation Toolkit in community-based organizations: a qualitative study

Implementation Science Communications ◽

10.1186/s43058-021-00158-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Aksheya Sridhar ◽

Amy Drahota ◽

Kiersten Walsworth

Keyword(s):

Technology Acceptance ◽

Technology Acceptance Model ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Ease Of Use ◽

Science Literature ◽

Community Based ◽

Web Based ◽

Community Based Organizations ◽

Facilitators And Barriers ◽

Acceptance Model

Abstract Background Evidence-based practices (EBPs) have been shown to improve behavioral and mental health outcomes for children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Research suggests that the use of these practices in community-based organizations is varied; however, the utilization of implementation guides may bridge the gap between research and practice. The Autism Community Toolkit: Systems to Measure and Adopt Research-Based Treatments (ACT SMART) Implementation Toolkit is a web-based implementation toolkit developed to guide organization-based implementation teams through EBP identification, adoption, implementation, and sustainment in ASD community-based organizations. Methods This study examined the facilitators and barriers (collectively termed “determinants”) to the utilization of this toolkit, based on the perspectives of implementation teams at six ASD community-based organizations. Two independent coders utilized the adapted EPIS framework and the Technology Acceptance Model 3 to guide qualitative thematic analyses of semi-structured interviews with implementation teams. Results Salient facilitators (e.g., facilitation teams, facilitation meetings, phase-specific activities) and barriers (e.g., website issues, perceived lack of ease of use of the website, perceived lack of resources, inner context factors) were identified, highlighting key determinants to the utilization of this toolkit. Additionally, frequent determinants and determinants that differed across adapted EPIS phases of the toolkit were noted. Finally, analyses highlighted two themes: (a) Inner Context Determinants to use of the toolkit (e.g., funding) and (b) Innovation Determinants (e.g., all website-related factors), indicating an interaction between the two models utilized to guide study analyses. Conclusions Findings highlighted several factors that facilitated the utilization of this implementation guide. Additionally, findings identified key areas for improvement for future iterations of the ACT SMART Implementation Toolkit. Importantly, these results may inform the development, refinement, and utilization of implementation guides with the aim of increasing the uptake of EBPs in community-based organizations providing services to children with ASD and their families. Finally, these findings contribute to the implementation science literature by illustrating the joint use of the EPIS framework and Technology Acceptance Model 3 to evaluate the implementation of a web-based toolkit within community-based organizations.

Download Full-text

Leveraging community based organizations and fintech to improve small-scale renewable energy financing in sub-Saharan Africa

Energy Research & Social Science ◽

10.1016/j.erss.2021.101949 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 73 ◽

pp. 101949

Author(s):

Hemen Mark Butu ◽

Benyoh Emmanuel Kigha Nsafon ◽

Sang Wook Park ◽

Jeung Soo Huh

Keyword(s):

Renewable Energy ◽

Sub Saharan Africa ◽

Small Scale ◽

Community Based ◽

Community Based Organizations ◽

Sub Saharan

Download Full-text

How Worker Centers Organize Low-Wage Workers: An Exploration of Targets and Strategies

Labor Studies Journal ◽

10.1177/0160449x21989429 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 0160449X2198942

Author(s):

Jessica Garrick

Keyword(s):

Public Policy ◽

Private Sector ◽

Progressive Era ◽

Service Provision ◽

Government Agencies ◽

Community Based ◽

Worker Centers ◽

Center Staff ◽

Community Based Organizations ◽

Worker Center

In response to the growing absence of unions from the private sector, community-based organizations known as worker centers have emerged as a new front in protecting and organizing workers. Scholars generally argue that worker centers have converged on a model of combining service provision with organizing and advocacy, supported primarily by funding from foundations and government agencies. I draw on interviews conducted with worker center staff, a dataset compiled from their public materials, and secondary research to add to the existing literature and to argue that a clear categorization of worker centers can be derived by attention to their primary workplace strategies. First, worker centers can be meaningfully distinguished by whether they attempt to raise standards in specific industries versus responding to problems in individual workplaces. But they can also be distinguished based on the extent to which they view public policy or winning agreements with employers as the primary route to systemic improvements. These divergences in strategy echo Progressive-era debates about the role for the state in redressing workplace ills. Similar to that era, strategic differences among today’s worker centers are driven less by ideology and more by the distinct structural challenges facing workers in particular political and economic contexts.

Download Full-text