BackgroundFew models of how community mobilisation works have been elaborated in the scientific literature, and evaluation of the impact of these programmes on HIV and other health outcomes is extremely limited. Avahan, the India AIDS Initiative, has been implementing community mobilisation as part of its prevention programming with groups of high-risk individuals across six states since 2005.PurposeTo articulate a programme theory and evaluation framework for evaluation of Avahan's approach to community mobilisation among female sex workers in four southern states in India.MethodsThe authors use a goal-based evaluation approach to describe the programme goals and an underlying programme theory that specifies how the programme is expected to work. Using multilevel structural equation modelling with propensity score matching, the evaluation will compare what is observed in the data with the predicted relationships specified by the model.ResultsThe Avahan model of community mobilisation posits that meaningful participation in high-risk group intervention, structural intervention and organisational development activities leads to identification, collectivisation and ownership, which in turn leads to improved programme outcomes. Strong community groups and an enabling environment reinforce social norm and behaviour change outcomes and lead to sustained impact.DiscussionSpecifying an explicit programme theory can aid in the evaluation of complex interventions, especially when the evaluation design is observational. In addition to articulating Avahan's community mobilisation approach in a model that can be tested, we recommend some specific measures and methods that could be used to improve evaluation efforts in the future.

Community mobilization often requires greater time and resource investments than typical interventions, yet few evaluations exist to justify these investments. We evaluated the added benefit of community mobilization on HIV prevention outcomes among female sex workers (FSWs) using a composite measure of volunteer participation in program committees by FSWs. After adjusting for treatment propensity, we used multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) to test our program theory. We hypothesized that stronger community mobilization would be associated with increased levels of consistent condom use and with increased levels of perceived fairness, mediated by psychosocial processes. Community mobilization had an indirect effect on consistent condom use mediated through social cohesion and an indirect effect on perceived fairness mediated by collective efficacy. Our results suggest higher levels of community mobilization help improve condom use and reduce perceived discrimination beyond the effects of the core HIV intervention program. We recommend further testing of this model.

BackgroundCommunity mobilisation is an important component of a participatory approach to health and development interventions. However, it is challenging to define, measure and assess community participation and ownership of a programme, especially at scale.MethodsAn iterative cross-sectional survey was designed for implementation across a representative sample of community-based groups, using a weighted index that captured both qualitative and quantitative data in a standardised form. These data were aggregated at the level of individual groups, as well as state-wide or across the whole programme. Community participation in the survey is a primary feature of the methodology and was integral to the process of designing the index and administering the survey.ResultsThe survey provided programme management and communities with objective tools for monitoring community mobilisation across a large-scale and complex intervention covering 32 districts in India. The implementation of the survey engaged communities in an open discussion of their goals and capabilities and helped them to challenge the power dynamics between themselves and other stakeholders.ConclusionsIt is possible to translate the theoretical premises of participatory development into a tool that both measures and fosters meaningful participation. The active participation of community members in the collection and analysis of data on their mobilisation suggests that monitoring of participation can be undertaken to inform a scaled-up programme and can be a useful intervention in its own right.

While there is a burgeoning literature on the benefits of research collaboration for development, it tends to promote the idea of the "partnership" as a bounded site in which interventions to improve collaborative practice can be made. This article draws on complexity theory and systems thinking to argue that such an assumption is problematic, divorcing collaboration from wider systems of research and practice. Instead, a systemic framework for understanding and evaluating collaboration is proposed. This framework is used to reflect on a set of principles for fair and equitable research collaboration that emerged from a programme of strategic research and capacity strengthening conducted by the Rethinking Research Collaborative (RRC) for the United Kingdom (UK)'s primary research funder: UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). The article concludes that a systemic conceptualisation of collaboration is more responsive than a "partnership" approach, both to the principles of fairness and equity and also to uncertain futures. RÉSUMÉBien qu'il existe une littérature émergente sur les bienfaits de la collaboration pour le développement de la recherche, celle-ci tend à promouvoir la notion du partenariat comme un périmètre délimité dans lequel il est possible d'intervenir pour améliorer les pratiques de collaboration. Cet article ancre son analyse dans la théorie de la complexité et la pensée systémique, et démontre par leur biais qu'une telle hypothèse est problématique, car elle dissocie la collaboration du reste des systèmes de recherche et de pratique. Nous privilégions ici une approche systémique afin de comprendre et d'analyser les collaborations. Cette approche nous permet d'étudier un ensemble de principes visant à faciliter une collaboration juste et équitable dans la recherche qui ont émergé d'un programme de recherche stratégique et de renforcement des capacités, dirigé par la Rethinking Research Collaborative (RRC) pour le principal bailleur de fonds de la recherche au Royaume Uni : UK ARTICLE HISTORY

BackgroundIn a participatory approach to health and development interventions, defining and measuring community mobilisation is important, but it is challenging to do this effectively, especially at scale.MethodsA cross-sectional, participatory monitoring tool was administered in 2008–2009 and 2009–2010 across a representative sample of 25 community-based groups (CBGs) formed under the Avahan India AIDS Initiative, to assess their progress in mobilisation, and to inform efforts to strengthen the groups and make them sustainable. The survey used a weighted index to capture both qualitative and quantitative data in numeric form. The index permitted broad, as well as highly detailed, analysis of community mobilisation, relevant at the level of individual groups, as well as state-wide and across the whole programme.ResultsThe survey demonstrated that leadership and programme management were the strongest areas among the CBGs, confirming the programme's investment in these areas. Discussion of the Round 1 results led to efforts to strengthen governance and democratic decision making in the groups, and progress was reflected in the Round 2 survey results. CBG engagement with state authorities to gain rights and entitlements and securing the long-term financial stability of groups remain a challenge.ConclusionThe survey has proven useful for informing the managers of programmes about what is happening on the ground, and it has opened spaces for discussion within community groups about the nature of leadership, decision making and their goals, which is leading to accelerated progress. The tool provided useful data to manage community mobilisation in Avahan.