Understanding the utility of an evaluation instrument and a feedback mechanism in community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To examine i) how longstanding (≥6 years) community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships nationwide implemented a validated questionnaire to measure success and its contributing factors and ii) how the CBPR partnerships utilized and applied a feedback mechanism, or reports of findings from the questionnaire and a facilitation guide METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: This mixed methods study builds upon a larger NIH-funded project entitled 'Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS). MAPS developed and validated the 109-item MAPS questionnaire to measure success in longstanding (≥6 years) CBPR partnerships. In 2020, 55 CBPR partnerships nationwide completed the MAPS Questionnaire and, a year later, received the MAPS Feedback Mechanism, consisting of questionnaire findings and a facilitation guide on how to present the findings. In this follow-up study, we administered multi-method surveys to each partnership contact person in 2022 to examine their experience with and utility of the MAPS Questionnaire and the MAPS Feedback mechanism. We performed descriptive analysis of quantitative responses using SAS and thematic analysis of qualitative responses. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Survey responses have been presently collected from 14 partnerships. Preliminary findings suggest that the most frequently reported benefits of completing the MAPS Questionnaire included stimulating partnership reflections and ease of completion. Many partnerships shared results of the MAPS Questionnaire by e-mail or during partnership meetings. Nearly half of the partnerships rated components of the MAPS feedback mechanism as useful. Over one-third of the partnerships reported that the COVID pandemic limited their capacity to engage with the MAPS Feedback Mechanism. Key qualitative suggestions included making the MAPS Questionnaire shorter, providing it in a different format, and offering additional facilitation to support the implementation of the MAPS Feedback Mechanism. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study examines how CBPR partnerships utilize an evaluation instrument and apply results on success. Current findings suggest potential utility of the MAPS Questionnaire and Feedback Mechanism for ongoing evaluation. Reducing the questionnaire length and providing facilitation resources may enhance implementation across diverse settings.

A conceptual framework for clinical and translational virtual community engagement research.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a trend for clinical and translational community-engaged research in adapting to an increasingly virtual landscape. This requires a framework for engagement distinct from in-person research and program activities. We reflect on four case studies of community engagement activities that inform a conceptual framework to better integrate the virtual format into community-engaged research reflecting key tenets of health equity and antiracist praxis. Methods: Four projects were selected by community-engaged research stakeholders for an in-depth review based on how much the virtual transition impacted activities such as planning, recruitment, and data collection for each project. Transitions to virtual engagement were assessed across ten areas in which community engagement has been demonstrated to make a positive impact. Results: Our analysis suggests a conceptual evaluation framework in which the ten community engagement areas cluster into four interrelated domains: (1) development, design, and delivery; (2) partnership and trust building; (3) implementation and change; and (4) ethics and equity. Conclusions: The domains in this conceptual framework describe critical elements of community engaged research and programs consistent with recommendations for health equity informed meaningful community engagement from the National Academy of Medicine. The conceptual framework and case studies can be used for evaluation and to develop guidelines for clinical and translational researchers utilizing the virtual format in community-engaged research.

A Community-Academic Approach to Preventing Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and activism against structural racism heightened awareness of racial-ethnic disparities and disproportionate burden among the underserved. The opioid crisis further compounds these phenomena, increasing vulnerability for substance use disorders (SUD). Community-based participatory research can facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration, yet literature on these approaches to prevent and reduce SUD and associated stigma remains limited. OBJECTIVE: Discrimination, stigma, and multiple crises with health care and systemic barriers increasingly marginalize the underserved, specifically around SUD. The Detroit Area Mental Health Leadership Team (DAMHLT, since 2015), aims to optimize SUD prevention, enhance resiliency and advocacy to advance knowledge on SUD research and influence community-level research and practice. LESSONS LEARNED: DAMHLT's approach on bidirectionality, community level access to real-time epidemiological data, advocacy (i.e., institutional responsiveness) and dissemination may be translational to other partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: As we move through an ever-changing pandemic, DAMHLT's lessons learned can inform partnership dynamics and public health strategies such as hesitancy on public health response.

Self-Reported Health Status Improved For Racial And Ethnic Minority Groups After Michigan Medicaid Expansion.

Addressing health inequities for racial and ethnic minority populations is challenging. After passage of the Affordable Care Act, Michigan launched its Healthy Michigan Plan, which expanded Medicaid eligibility in the state. Our evaluation of the expansion provided the opportunity to study its impact on racial and ethnic minority groups, including Arab American and Chaldean American enrollees, an understudied population. Using data from telephone surveys collected in 2016, 2017, and 2018, we conducted an analysis to study the plan's impact on access to a regular source of care and health status among racial and ethnic minority groups. More than 90 percent of respondents of all racial and ethnic groups reported having a regular source of care after plan enrollment compared with 74.4 percent before enrollment. Respondents who identified as non-Hispanic White, African American, and Hispanic reported improvements in health status after plan enrollment. Our study demonstrates the potential of health insurance access to narrow health inequities between racial and ethnic groups.

Understanding racial differences in attitudes about public health efforts during COVID-19 using an explanatory mixed methods design.

Efforts to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 rely on trust in public health organizations and practices. These practices include contact tracing, which requires people to share personal information with public health organizations. The central role of trust in these practices has gained more attention during the pandemic, resurfacing endemic questions about public trust and potential racial trust disparities, especially as they relate to participation in public health efforts. Using an explanatory mixed methods design, we conducted quantitative analysis of state-level survey data in the United States from a representative sample of Michigan residents (n = 1000) in May 2020. We used unadjusted and adjusted linear regressions to examine differences in trust in public health information and willingness to participate in public health efforts by race. From July to September 2020, we conducted qualitative interviews (n = 26) to further explain quantitative results. Using unadjusted linear regression, we observed higher willingness to participate in COVID-19 public health efforts among Black survey respondents compared to White respondents. In adjusted analysis, that difference disappeared, yielding no statistically significant difference between Black and White respondents in either trust in public health information sources or willingness to participate. Qualitative interviews were conducted to explain these findings, considering their contrast with assumptions that Black people would exhibit lower trust in public health organizations during COVID-19. Altruism, risk acknowledgement, trust in public health organizations during COVID-19, and belief in efficacy of public health efforts contributed to willingness to participate in public health efforts among interviewees. Our findings underscore the contextual nature of trust, and the importance of this context when analyzing protective health behaviors among communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Assumptions about mistrust among Black individuals and communities may be inaccurate because they overlook the specific context of the public health crisis. These findings are important because they indicate that Black respondents are exhibiting strategic trust during COVID-19 despite systemic, contemporary, and historic barriers to trust. Conceptual specificity rather than blanket generalizations is warranted, especially given the harms of stereotyping and discrimination.