Principle 8:

Principle 8:

Integrate and achieve a balance between research and action for the mutual benefit of all partners relationships and shared decision-making

CBPR reminds partnerships of the important contributions needed from the scientific community and community partners. It emphasizes integrating knowledge gained through the research partnership, in the advancement of interventions and policies that capture the concerns of all partners and the broader communities they serve. This includes the competencies required for activism, advocacy and actions to improve health and wellbeing, as well as research skills.

Competencies and/or conditions

  • Policy advocacy skills within study sites, including extending community voices in policymaking, and influencing policies and practices aimed at improving health and wellbeing.
  • Knowledge of how to frame an issue, engage different audiences and promote belief that action can lead to change.
  • Ability to identify group lobbying power.
  • Ability to provide mechanisms of accountability through measurable results.
  • Skills in engaging community members and providing appropriate coordination mechanisms for action.
  • Commitment to the integration of research results with community change efforts with the intention that all involved partners will benefit.
  • Knowledge and skills to implement the steps in the policy process.
  • Ability to mobilise communities and promote dialogue among diverse constituencies.
  • Organize activities to gain media coverage and media advocacy techniques.
  • Be able to communicate with policymakers, critical elements used to advance campaigns (e.g., building alliances with key partners).
  • Communication techniques and development of a communication strategy.
  • An understanding of the difference between programs and policies, and the steps involved in developing a policy advocacy campaign.
  • Knowledge of how a bill becomes law and who the major players are in decision making.
  • Ability to identify supporters and opponents.
  • Ability to create a joint interpretive forum for sharing research knowledge.
  • Understanding of the change process and awareness of the effects of the political dimension on what they can accomplish and how.
  • Ability to maintain credibility as an effective driver of change and as an astute political player.
  • Skills to deal with the political ramifications of sharing control and ownership of findings and products.
  • Awareness of the effects of data and actions on the system in which research is involved.
  • Capacity to assess ‘readiness’ – the degree to which a community is prepared to take action on an issue – of the collaborating partners and the newly formed partnership with all phases of the CBPR process.
    • Research is more responsive to community priorities through joint knowledge production and equitable and complementary responsibilities between academic and non-academic partners.
    • Improves responsiveness of research to real-life problems.
    • Enhances the complementarity of knowledge and skills, generating public support for research, creating critical mass for social change, and minimizing duplication of effort.
    • All research partners perceive the new knowledge gained and the potential benefit to the community as a motivation to work together.
    • Active community organizations linked to policy makers help to empower individuals to take informed action.
    • Active community involvement and dialogue among diverse constituencies leads to policy or practice change.
    • Mentor community members to take a leadership role in the partnership and advocate for the health issue in the broader community
    • Undertake value creation stories to give a structured approach to storytelling, and a disciplined way of collecting data about outcomes from actions 
    • The PRECEDE-PROCEED model provides a structure that supports the planning and implementation of health promotion or disease prevention programs. This model has worked well for many health promotion topics, and can effectively support one-time interventions or long-running programs
    • Have a specific focus on providing training to enhance the capacity of community members to engage in the policy change process
    • Deliver a series of workshops to train wider community members in policy advocacy – delivered by community researchers
    • Provide technical assistance to community researchers in their subsequent policy change efforts.
    • Design and deliver training sessions on topics relevant for policy advocacy at the organizational, local, state, and national levels, including: an in-depth overview of policy and advocacy, building the skills needed to design an advocacy campaign, power mapping (a power analysis tool to map power and shape a campaign strategy), communicating with policymakers, critical elements used to advance campaigns (e.g., building alliances with key partners), and communication techniques and development of a communication strategy.
    • Exploring ideas and concepts and how to promote transformation through increasingly informed actions 
    • Provision of additional funds and possible employment opportunities for community partners
    • Discussions of power (who has it and how to mobilize it using ‘‘power mapping’’ and the development of talking points for communicating with policymakers)
    • Build political and bureaucratic support for citizen participation
    • Situate the research partnership as a bridge between community and external resources (e.g., state health department, foundations), assist community researchers and community members to identify and develop local assets, contribute time to community investigations, build capacity for advocacy, assist in writing grants and working with funders to support community groups 
    • Clear partnership ‘goals’ defined and shared by partners from the onset, as well as the goals for the mutually defined CBPR projects.
    • Evidence that the partnership and participation in the research made a difference in the involvement with the community to stimulate change
    • New partners and networks engaged to make changes to health and wellbeing
    • Number of training sessions or mentorship delivered in relation to policy change, media involvement or communication 
    • Mapping of policy makers
    • Measures to demonstrate which participants feel they have the knowledge and power necessary to advocate for policy change, and the extent to which people have the power to change policies in their area 
    • Evidence of improved capacity of participants to carry out policy related work
    • Clearly articulated policies and strategies outlining communication, consultation and participation processes within government agencies 
    • Evidence of change to policy, process, practice or service delivery
    • Evidence of ongoing project accountability through measuring intermediate outcomes of capacity strengthening, ownership, and empowerment against goals and making explicit their link to ultimate research outcomes and public health impact
    • Value creation stories
    • Narratives collected from and with researchers and co-researchers
    • Evidence of actions related to policy change i.e letters 
    • Communication strategies
    • List of potential solutions and action plans 
    • Power mapping outputs
    • Confidence scales/measures
    • Evidence of meetings with decision makers and political advocates
    • Training slides developed and delivered to communities by community researchers
    • News articles that show outcomes and relate to research partnerships
    • Photographs with narratives that show conversations, advocacy activities
    • Evidence of additional resources e.g allocation of rooms, printing services, financial support from different organisations, communities etc.
    • Interviews or participatory methods that track or demonstrate the path to policy/practice changes

*Please note that some statements are adaptations or direct quotes from the papers listed in the reference section