Rural Oregon Community Perspectives: Introducing Community-Based Participatory Research into a Community Health Coalition

Abstract

The Community Health Improvement Partnership (CHIP) model has supported community health development in more than 100 communities nationally. In 2011, four rural Oregon CHIPs collaborated with investigators from the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network (ORPRN), a component of the Oregon Clinical and Translational Research Institute (OCTRI), to obtain training on research methods, develop and implement pilot research studies on childhood obesity, and explore matches with academic partners. This article summarizes the experiences of the Lincoln County CHIP, established in 2003, as it transitioned from CHIP to Community Health Improvement and Research Partnership (CHIRP). Our story and lessons learned may inform rural community-based health coalitions and academicians who are engaged in or considering Community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships. Utilizing existing infrastructure and relationships in community and academic settings provides an ideal starting point for rural, bidirectional research partnerships.

Engaging the Underserved: A Process Model to Mobilize Rural Community Health Coalitions as Partners in Translational Research

“…One community member commented, “This was a very valuable experience. However, the short timeline to implement the pilot project was very challenging.” Some CHIRP members are actively seeking new partnerships with academics to address childhood obesity and other community health concerns …”

“…CHIP members participate in a facilitated process to identify and address local health needs . As summarized in Table , CHIP membership represents the diversity of their communities, engaging public health, education, business, primary care, and other sectors . Each CHIP had previously identified childhood obesity as a pressing regional health concern, and they were working to address the issue by building community gardens, developing safe walking routes to school, facilitating partnerships with primary care clinics, or working with schools to change nutrition and physical activity policies.…”

Development and evaluation of a community-engaged research training program: Building capacity of Marshallese stakeholders and academic researchers to conduct health research

“…However, conducting CBPR requires building the capacity of both community stakeholders and academic researchers (Crosby et al 2013;Goytia et al 2013;Kwon et al 2012). Though several CBPR engagement and training models have been published (Allen et al 2013;Baquet et al 2013;Cole et al 2013;Crosby et al 2013;Goytia et al 2013;Healey, Reed & Huber 2013;Martin del Campo et al 2013;Rideout et al 2013;Smith, Kaufman & Dearlove 2013;Young-Lorion et al 2013), few have focused on work with Pacific Islander communities (DiStefano et al 2013;Kaholokula et al 2014;Kwan et al 2012Kwan et al , 2014Palmer 2014).…”

The evolving collaborative relationship between Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRNs) and Clinical and Translational Science Awardees (CTSAs)

“…For example, PBRNs had a long-standing history of linking academic investigators and community-based practices to identify, develop, and to conduct research and were expanding this approach to bridge with community. For example, the Community Health Improvement and Research Partnership model is one approach used by PBRNs to conduct community-engaged research and to mobilize research partnerships between academicians and diverse community stakeholders (e.g., health system, schools, business, service providers, engaged citizens) [ 44 – 47 ].…”