Using Community Surveys to Inform the Planning and Implementation of Environmental Change Strategies: Participatory Research in 12 Washington Communities

Abstract

A number of studies have demonstrated the efficacy of environmental change strategies (ECS) in effecting community-level change on attitudes and behaviors related to underage drinking (Treno and Lee in Alcohol Res Health 26:35-40, 2002; Birckmayer et al. in J Drug Educ 34(2):121-153, 2004). Primary data collection to inform the design of these strategies, however, can be resource intensive and exceed the capacity of community stakeholders. This study describes the participatory planning and implementation of community-level surveys in 12 diverse communities in the state of Washington. These surveys were conducted through collaborations among community volunteers and evaluation experts assigned to each community. The surveys were driven by communities' prevention planning needs and interests; constructed from collections of existing, field-tested items and scales; implemented by community members; analyzed by evaluation staff; and used in the design of ECS by community-level leaders and prevention practitioners. The communities varied in the content of their surveys, in their sampling approaches and in their data collection methods. Although these surveys were not conducted using traditional rigorous population survey methodology, they were done within limited resources, and the participatory nature of these activities strengthened the communities' commitment to using their results in the planning of their environmental change strategies.

Partnering with insiders: A review of peer models across community-engaged research, education and social care

“…As noted in several of the reviewed articles, peers working within peer models can benefit directly from increased knowledge and practice of research skills, enhanced self‐esteem, confidence and feelings of empowerment, improvements in knowledge/information about health, chronic disease and well‐being, leadership opportunities, greater access to resources and increased peer support networks (Allen et al., ; Colleran et al., ; Downey et al., ; Ghahramani, ; Houlihan et al., ; James, ; John et al., ; Lazarus et al., ; Madrigal et al., ; Ramsden, Martin, McMillan, Granger‐Brown, & Tole, ; Schutt & Rogers, ; Woodall et al., ). Utilising a peer model also has benefits and advantages for the peer communities including actionable project findings/results applicable to the community, improved health and social services, enhanced understanding of community needs and priorities and increased awareness of important issues at community level, social change and justice (Baynes et al., ; Boise et al., ; Brown et al., ; Calhoun, ; Chen et al., ; Cortez et al., ; Dill, ; Downey et al., ; Gabriel et al., ). Furthermore, working with peers in a peer model can improve the quality of research, education and interventions in terms of recruitment, contextually and culturally relevant questionnaires, methods and techniques, data collection and screening, interpretation of results and translation and dissemination of findings (Chang et al., ; Horowitz, Brenner, Lachapelle, Amara, & Arniella, ; Hull et al., ; Martin et al., ; McElfish et al., ; Minkler et al., ; Olsson et al., ; Sharma et al., ; Topmiller, Zhen‐Duan, Jacquez, & Vaughn, ).…”

Call for Research on Bystander Intervention to Prevent Sexual Violence: The Role of Campus Environments

“…To capture broader, settingslevel factors, additional, community-level measurement methods will need to be considered. Researchers from community psychology who have evaluated environmental change strategies have used methods such as conducting community surveys and using participatory research strategies (Gabriel et al 2013); employing natural experiments and spatial models (Freisthler et al 2013); and conducting audits and observation (Johns et al 2013;Seidman 2012). These can all be potentially translated to the assessment of environmental change strategies to address bystander intervention on college campuses.…”

Connecting patients to services: Screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment in primary health care

“…The authors again emphasize that this work would not have been possible without significant collaboration with clinic staff -a lesson that also has been emphasized in other applied process evaluation literature (Gabriel, Leichtling, Bolan, & Becker, 2012). There is a complex balance involved in utilizing data along with all other systemic mechanisms appropriately to respond to each programmatic barrier (Patton, 2008).…”