A diagnostic evaluation model for complex research partnerships with community engagement: The partnership for Native American Cancer Prevention (NACP) model

Abstract

Complex community oriented health care prevention and intervention partnerships fail or only partially succeed at alarming rates. In light of the current rapid expansion of critically needed programs targeted at health disparities in minority populations, we have designed and are testing an “logic model plus” evaluation model that combines classic logic model and query based evaluation designs (CDC, NIH, Kellogg Foundation) with advances in community engaged designs derived from industry-university partnership models. These approaches support the application of a “near real time” feedback system (diagnosis and intervention) based on organizational theory, social network theory, and logic model metrics directed at partnership dynamics, combined with logic model metrics.

Key Strategies for Building Research Capacity of University Faculty Members

“…Incorporating explicit discussion of chances for advancement and leadership opportunities into our mentoring sessions with researchers has proven important in retaining talented junior faculty. Our evaluation process collects data on communication and relationship interactions of all Partnership members; this social network analysis provides insights into individuals who might reasonably be able to step into a new leadership role (Trotter et al, 2015). …”

“…A third successful proposal was funded in 2014, and NACP is consequently in its third five-year funding period. Over the past six years, an extensive evaluation effort has provided detailed information for formative and summative purposes (Trotter, Laurila, Alberts, & Huenneke, 2015), including typical outcomes such as publications, grant proposals, and student mentoring. For our purposes in this article, our outcomes were defined as follows.…”

The Imperative for Research to Promote Health Equity in Indigenous Communities

“…Underlying either approach is establishing partnerships and relationships, based in a methodological pluralism that honors equally both scientific and Native ways of knowing (Trotter, Laurila, Alberts, & Huenneke, 2015). Researchers who establish strong partnerships with tribal governments and organizations are better able to jointly develop and complete interventions that are of high priority, sustainable, and a better fit with cultural values, traditions, infrastructure, and tribal governance.…”

Evaluating Research Centers in Minority Institutions: Framework, Metrics, Best Practices, and Challenges

“…Another example is the NIH-sponsored National Cancer Institute's Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equities (PACHE) initiative that builds institutional research capacity to reduce health disparities or advance health equities. PACHE program evaluation is focused primarily on designs for complex, community-engaged research partnerships [19]; evidence to support how infrastructure programs increase research capacity among underrepresented investigators [20]; strategies for expansion of the pool of health disparity researchers [21]; evaluation of underrepresented focused health disparities research training programs serving as a pipeline to build capacity for underrepresented investigators and reduce health disparities [22]; and strategies for building research capacity among faculty [23].…”

“…A culture of evaluation, continuous dissemination of findings to the academic and lay communities, and opportunities for leveraging program and consortium-driven data for program decision making must be created to foster consistent and responsive evaluation tracking. Existing research infrastructure programs, such as NIH's IDeA Networks of Biomedical Research Excellence [33] and the CTSA [7,29,31], PACHE [19], and National Research Mentoring Network [34] initiatives, may provide guidance on best practices that should be explored.…”