4 results
4475 Meeting Partners Where They Are: Tailoring Community-Engaged Research Consultation Services
- Adam Paberzs, Patricia Piechowski, Jordan Poll, Meghan Spiroff, Karen Calhoun, Ayse Buyuktur, Athena McKay, Donald Vereen, Susan Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 4 / Issue s1 / June 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 July 2020, pp. 87-88
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: One of the most significant challenges to community engagement experienced by Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) institutions is inadequate capacity of academic and community partners to engage in collaborative research. Several CTSAs within the consortium provide consultation services to help address this gap. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: For over 10 years, the Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR), a CTSA at the University of Michigan, has provided CEnR-specific consultations to partners seeking support for a variety of needs. Consultations can be requested for assistance with identifying potential partners, developing partnership infrastructure, finding CEnR funding opportunities, and incorporating CEnR approaches into research plans. When a consultation is requested, MICHR’s Community Engagement (CE) Program responds by planning a meeting with staff and faculty who have relevant skills, expertise, and connections. After the initial meeting, the CE Program provides follow-up communication and support based on the needs of the specific request, and often facilitates connections with potential partners. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The two most frequent types of consultation requests involve 1) making connections with potential researchers or community partner organizations, and 2) providing guidance on research grant applications that involve community engagement. MICHR provides approximately 50 CEnR consultations each year, which have resulted in development of new partnerships, grant submissions, and research projects that utilize CEnR principles and address community-identified health priorities. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: This presentation will describe the evolution of MICHR’s CEnR consultation process and highlight successful outcomes and lessons learned over its 12-year history. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DESCRIPTION: NA
4449 Building Capacity in the Flint Community in the Midst of the Ongoing Water Crisis
- Athena S. McKay, Adam Paberzs, Patricia Piechowski, Donald Vereen, Susan Woolford
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 4 / Issue s1 / June 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 July 2020, p. 82
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Examining the impact of the Building Capacity for Research and Action (BCRA) Award created by the Community Engagement (CE) Program at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR)--a Clinical & Translational Science Award (CTSA) site at the University of Michigan--in partnership with Community Based Organization Partners (CBOP). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The BCRA is a funding mechanism that supports new community-engaged research (CEnR) partnerships and projects that address community-identified health needs in Flint, Michigan. BCRA projects are required to be Flint-based and inclusive of both community and academic partners. A study section consisting of 10 MICHR-affiliated faculty and community partners reviewed proposals and made funding decisions. Funded teams were trained on Institutional Review Board (IRB) and reporting requirements by CE staff. MICHR provides support to BCRA-funded teams through monthly email correspondence with the CE Flint connector, budget review, mediation, regulatory assurance of IRB and the National Center for Advancing Translational Science (NCATS) requirements, coordinating six-month and final reporting, and hosting an annual stakeholder meet and greet. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: In 2017, the BCRA Award submitted its first request for proposals. It received 20 applications in 2018, and selected eight awardees, providing them with a total of $60,000 in funding. Four received $5,000 for partnership development and another four received $10,000 for their research projects. The BCRA Award received 16 applications in 2019, expanding its academic pool to include the University of Chicago, U-M Flint, Michigan State University, and Michigan State University-Flint in addition to the University of Michigan. Five recipients were selected and received a total of $45,000 in funding. One was awarded $5,000 for partnership development and another four were awarded $10,000 for their research projects. MICHR has invested over $100,000 in Flint through this mechanism, which was renewed in 2019. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Each awardee presented at the annual stakeholder meet and greet. They showcased their projects with a brief overview and spoke about their expectations, lessons learned, partnership strengths and challenges, translational issues, and proposed next steps for subsequent grants, publications.
2447 Community voices first: A multi-method approach to shaping institutional response to Flint’s water crisis
- Karen D. Calhoun, Kent Key, E. Yvonne Lewis, Jennifer Carerra, Joseph Hamm, Susan Woolford, E. Hill De Loney, Ella Greene-Moten, Arlene Sparks, Don Vereen, Patricia Piechowski-Whitney, Kaneesha Wallace, Ismael Byers, Athena McKay, DeWaun Robinson, Jess Holzer, Vanessa De Danzine, Adam Paberzs, Meghan Spiroff, Erica Marsh
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 2 / Issue S1 / June 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 November 2018, pp. 66-67
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Explore perceptions of Flint stakeholders on the water crisis regarding trust and the capacity of faith and community-based organizations providing public health services to address community needs. Analyze the community’s voice shared at (1) 17 key community communications (community/congressional meetings and events), and (2) during 9 focus group sessions, in which residents, faith-based leadership and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address them. Develop a framework that defines core theories, concepts and strategies recommended by the community to help rebuild trust and the quality of life in Flint, Michigan, and support other communities experiencing environmental stress. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Study population: faith-based leaders, seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino and African American stakeholders, and others experiencing inequities in the city of Flint. Convene 9 focus group sessions (recorded and transcribed) to learn community perceptions on trust and ways to address it. Validate accuracy of the transcriptions with community consultants to reconcile any inaccurate information. Through a community engaged research (CEnR) process, review and analyze qualitative data from the 9 focus group sessions, and quantitative data from 2 surveys documenting (1) demographic backgrounds of focus group participants, and (2) their perceptions on trust and mistrust. Prepare a codebook to qualitatively analyze the focus group data summarizing community input on trust, mistrust, changes in service delivery among community and faith-based organizations, and ways to re-build trust in the city of Flint. Transcribe the community’s voice shared during 17 key events, identified by a team of community-academic stakeholders (i.e., UM Flint water course, congressional and community events, etc.), in which residents and other stakeholders discuss issues and concerns on the Flint Water Crisis, and recommend ways to address it. Qualitatively analyze the transcriptions, using a CEnR process to prepare a codebook on key themes from the community’s voice shared at these events, and recommendations on ways to address it. Compare and contrast findings between the two codebooks developed from (1) the focus group data and (2) qualitative analysis of community voice during public meetings and events. Synthesize this information into a framework of core theories, concepts and rebuilding strategies for Flint, Michigan. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: It is important to note many undocumented immigrant populations in Flint fear deportation and other consequences, hampering their ability to obtain service and provide community voice. Through our purposive sampling approach, we will hear from community voices not often included in narratives (i.e., seniors, youth, Hispanic/Latino residents). The presentation will present findings documenting levels of trust and mistrust in the city of Flint; and a framework of recommendations, core theories and concepts on ways to reduce, rebuild and eliminate stress that will be helpful to other communities experiencing distress. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: To our knowledge, levels of trust and mistrust in Flint have not been documented thus far. We will compare and contrast common themes presented by the community at public meetings and events with themes presented in our focus group effort on trust. Faith and community-based providers were among the first responders to the Flint Water Crisis. The effort will also share perceptions on changes in public health service delivery, and observations on preparedness for these roles that occurred among community and faith-based providers. Finally, the effort will (1) support the design of a research agenda, (2) define a framework of core theories, concepts and recommendations developed by the community to help rebuild trust in Flint, Michigan; and (3) support other communities addressing environmental distress.
2543: Participatory development of a CTSA-wide Community Advisory Board: Enhancing community engagement at the Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research
- Jorge Delva, Adam Paberzs, Patricia Piechowski, Karen Calhoun, Diane Carr, Meghan Spiroff, Ayse Buyuktur, Kevin Weatherwax
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 1 / Issue S1 / September 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 May 2018, p. 54
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To describe how Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research (MICHR) has engaged communities in its leadership and governance structure. This presentation will describe these practices, how they are being evaluated, and future plans for institute-wide engagement of communities in translational research. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Engaged partners from various communities across Michigan in various ways within MICHR’s Community Engagement Program. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: MICHR has utilized participatory practices in the development of the CAB to strengthen existing relationships and build new ones with potential partners. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: MICHR-wide Community Advisory Board (CAB) will ensure community voices are heard and utilized in leadership and strategic decisions for CTSA activities.