Research and Evaluation

Understanding Community-Based Processes for Research Ethics Review

Co-Sponsored by Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) & the
University of New England (UNE)

Click here to view and print the study abstract.
An abbreviated version appears below.

Background & Significance

A number of community groups and community-institutional partnerships have established their own community-based processes for research ethics review that operate independently or in parallel with institution-based IRBs (institutional review boards). With the exception of federally recognized community IRBs such as those operated by tribes and community health centers, community-based processes for research ethics review are not mandated or regulated. Beyond anecdotal reports, little is known about their prevalence, history, processes, experiences and outcomes. A systematic approach to identifying and studying these processes will increase our understanding of the ethical issues that arise in community-based research and yield promising practices and recommendations for ensuring the protection of communities involved in research.

Study Aims, Methods & Timeframe

Essentially, we are interested in learning more about how community groups and community-institutional partnerships decide what research to support, conduct or participate in - and how this may differ from what institution-based IRBs consider when they review community-based research proposals.

Aim 1: Identify and describe community-based processes for research ethics review
Method: Survey
Timeframe: January-September 2008

Aim 2: Assess the similarities and differences between the protocols used by community-based processes for research ethics review and those used by institution-based institutional review boards
Method: Protocol Analysis
Timeframe: April-December 2008

Aim 3: Describe in-depth the history, processes, ethical considerations, experiences and outcomes of community-based processes for research ethics review.
Method: Case Studies
Timeframe: January-December 2009

Study Products & Outcomes

The study will generate new knowledge about community-based research ethics review that identifies promising practices and recommendations for ensuring the protection of communities involved in research. An intended outcome of the study is the formation of an ongoing collaborative research network among community-based processes for research ethics review. We will determine multiple strategies for disseminating our findings and recommendations to primary audiences, which include communities, community-institutional partnerships, IRB members and administrators, and agencies that fund and regulate research. At a minimum, study products will include:

• Peer-reviewed journal articles that report on methods and findings
• Published case studies of community-based research ethics review processes
• Educational conference calls that feature study findings and recommendations
• An online repository of community-based research ethics review processes and protocols

Study Team

At CCPH: Principal Investigator Sarena D. Seifer, MD, Study Coordinator & Co-Investigator Kristine Wong, MPH, and Graduate Research Assistant Lisa Moy. At UNE: Principal Investigator Nancy Shore, PhD and Kirsten Cyr, Graduate Research Assistant.

Study Advisory Committee

These experts in CBPR and research ethics are serving as study advisors:

• Bonnie Duran, DrPH, MPH, Associate Professor of Public Health, University of Washington and Director, Center for Indigenous Health Research, Indigenous Wellness Research Institute, Seattle, WA
• Kelly Fryer Edwards, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Medical History and Ethics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
• Sarah Flicker, PhD, Assistant Professor, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada
• Bill Freeman, MD, MPH, Director of Tribal Community Health Programs & Human Protections Administrator, Northwest Indian College, Bellingham, WA
• Helen McGough, MA, Retired Director, Human Subjects Division, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
• Ann-Gel Palermo, MPH, Chair, Harlem Community and Academic Partnership; Member, NIH Council of Public Representatives
• Michelle Proser, MPP, Director of Policy Research, National Association of Community Health Centers, Washington DC
• Joan Sieber, PhD, Editor, The Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics and Professor Emerita, Department of Psychology, California State University, Hayward, CA
• Linda Silka, PhD, Director, Center for Family, Work and Community; Professor, Department of Regional Economic and Social Development; Special Assistant to the Provost for Community Outreach and Partnerships, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA
• Stephen Sodeke, PhD, Associate Director, Tuskegee University National Center for Bioethics in Research and Health Care and Chair, Tuskegee University Institutional Review Board, Tuskegee, AL,
• Eric Wat, MA, Data Manager, Special Services for Groups, Los Angeles, CA

Supporting Organizations

These organizations representing key study stakeholders have written letters of support for the study. We have sought their assistance in reviewing draft study materials, identifying and recruiting survey participants and disseminating study findings.

• Association of Asian Pacific Community Health Organizations
• National Association of Community Health Centers
• National Health Care for the Homeless Council
• Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM&R)
• Tuskegee University National Center for Bioethics in Research and Health Care

IRB Review

The IRBs at the University of Washington and the University of New England reviewed the study and determined that it did not meet the definition of human subjects research and thus did not require IRB review

For More Information

Email the study team at ccphirb@u.washington.edu or cbresearch@une.edu

Join CCPH's CBPR & Research Ethics Listserv

Visit CCPH's CBPR & Research Ethics Webpage

Service-Learning Programs in Health Professions Education: What Contributes to their Sustainability and what is their Long-Term Impact?

A Ten-Year Follow-up Study of the Health Professions Schools in Service to the Nation Program

Study Purpose

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) is conducting a ten-year follow-up study of the Health Professions Schools in Service to the Nation (HPSISN) program. From 1995 to 1998 HPSISN provided three-year grants to 17 health professions schools to support community-academic partnerships and service-learning in the curriculum. This study aims to learn about the sustainability and impact of the HPSISN-supported service-learning programs over the past ten years, and what factors were key influences on those outcomes. The study will produce recommendations for how to support service-learning in the health professions.

Study Investigators & Advisors

This study is being conducted by Amanda L. Vogel, a PhD Doctoral Candidate at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, with the full support of CCPH.

Study Design

In the summer of 2007 we interviewed the principal investigator who led the HPSISN-funded service- learning program at each participating school, in order to learn about the program's overall sustainability and impact. Based on those findings, we are selecting service-learning programs with unique experiences with program sustainability and impact to participate in case studies. Our aim is to learn from the perspectives of both academic and community partners. The case studies will involve site visits to each school and its main service-learning community partners, and interviews with individuals who have been involved with the service-learning program. We will also collect documents that can help us learn about the program's sustainability and impact.

Ethics Review of the Study

The interview portion of the study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The case study portion of the study is under review there now.

Study Funders

Support for the study is being provided by the Corporation for National and Community Service and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Study Findings & Products

Findings will be reported in Ms. Vogel's doctoral dissertation, academic presentations and publications. In addition, we will produce an internal case report for each service-learning program that summarizes our findings and includes recommendations.

Study findings & products will be posted here as they become available. Click on the citation below to open the corresponding document:

Vogel AL and Seifer SD. Long-term sustainability of service-learning programs: A ten year follow-up study of the Health Professions Schools in Service to the Nation program. Oral presentation, 135th Annual Meeting and Exposition of the American Public Health Association. Washington, DC, November 2007.

Vogel AL. Long-term sustainability of service-learning programs: A ten year follow-up study of the Health Professions Schools in Service to the Nation program. Poster presentation, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Research Retreat. February 2008.

For More Information

If you have any questions about the study, please contact Ms. Vogel at avogel@jhsph.edu or 410-419-4528 from 9 am to 5 pm Eastern Time.

Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for
Prevention Research

Project Description

This 4-year project began in fall 2002 with funding from the Prevention Research Center Program Office through a cooperative agreement between the Association of Schools of Public Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The project aimed to identify and synthesize what is known about community-academic collaborations in prevention research and develop and evaluate strategies to foster community and institutional capacity for participatory research at national and local levels. The project's ultimate goal was to facilitate approaches for effectively translating community interventions in public health and prevention into widespread practice at the community level. Through community-institutional partnerships for prevention research, new knowledge about the social and ecologic determinants of health will be gained, priority health issues from the community's perspective will be increasingly addressed, and the public's health will be improved.

Click here to read a project fact sheet.

Project Partners

The project involves nine partner organizations that each bring a wealth of relevant information and experience:

CDC Prevention Research Centers National Community Committee
Project Representatives: Ella Greene-Moton and Yvonne Lewis, Co-Chairs

Community-Based Public Health Caucus of the American Public Health Association
Project Representatives: Renee Bayer and Adele Amodeo

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health at the University of Washington School of Public Health and Community Medicine
Project Representatives: Sarena Seifer (Project Principal Investigator), Jen Kauper-Brown and Annika Robbins

Community Health Scholars Program
Project Representatives: Diane Calleson and Renee Bayer

Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center
Project Representatives: Barbara Israel and Robert McGranaghan

New York Urban Research Center
Project Representatives: Princess Fortin and Sandro Galea

Seattle Partners for Healthy Communities
Project Representatives: Kirsten Senturia, Alison Eisinger, and Gary Tang

Wellesley Institute
Project Representative: Sarah Flicker

Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center
Project Representatives: Kari Hartwig and Maurice Williams

Project Outcomes and Components

The measurable outcome objectives of this collaborative project were to:

1. identify and synthesize lessons learned about developing successful community-institutional collaborations in prevention research (year 1);
2. identify the key issues that emerge from what is known concerning factors that can facilitate and impede successful community-institutional relationships and outcomes (year 1);
3. develop a strategic plan to foster community and institutional capacity for participatory approaches to prevention research at national and local levels (year 1); and
4. implement and evaluate one or more strategies to foster community and institutional capacity for participatory approaches to prevention research at national and local levels (years 2-4).

Project Updates

During the first year of the project (2002-2003), the partner organizations primarily collaborated to examine and synthesize existing data they already had available on community partnerships for prevention research.

During the second year of the project (2003-2004), the project partners created two working groups which designed and implemented two specific strategies for building community and institutional capacity for participatory approaches to prevention research:

• Policy Working Group worked to implement policy recommendations by developing collaborative relationships with and working with funding agencies work to support partnership infrastructure and assess partnerships in proposals
• Training Working Group developed and tested a curriculum training module for partnerships on developing and sustaining community-based participatory research partnerships.

In the third and fourth years of the project (2004-2006), the project partners disseminated and promoted the project's Curriculum Training Module for Developing and Sustaining Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships, and continued promoting and disseminating project findings, recommendations and products.

Twelve CBPR partnership teams convened for the Community-Based Participatory Research Skill-Building Institute for Partnership Teams held August 5-8, 2005. The institute was based on the training curriculum developed by the Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group to build the capacity of communities, public health agencies and academic institutions to engage in CBPR. Held at the beautiful Sleeping Lady Resort and Conference Center at the base of the Cascade Mountains in Washington State, participants worked together in intensive interactive workshops and small group mentoring sessions to deepen their understanding of CBPR partnerships. Each team left the institute with an action plan for developing and sustaining their CBPR partnership. For more information about the institute, click here. For the agenda and presentation materials from the institute, click here. For slides and handouts from the institute, click here.

Presentations on the project have been given at the following conferences and venues. To access additional information about these presentations (including powerpoint slides and handouts), visit http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pastpresentations.html.

• Continuing Education Institute, American Public Health Association Annual
  Conferences, 2005, 2006 and 2007, "Developing and Sustaining Partnerships
  for Community-based Participatory Research."
• CDC Chronic Disease Prevention Conference, March 1, 2005. "Building Partnerships for Community-Based Participatory Research." Yvonne Lewis, Ella Greene-Moton, Sarena Seifer.
• International Science Shop Network Annual Conference, February 5, 2005. "Building and maintaining effective community-based participatory research partnerships: an interactive session based on best practices." Jen Kauper-Brown.
• American Public Health Association Annual Conference, November 9, 2004. "Developing and implementing a curriculum to assist in building and maintaining effective community-institutional partnerships for prevention research: Lessons learned from the pilot testing phase." Robert McGranaghan and Gary Tang.
• Community-Campus Partnerships for Health Annual Conference, October 6, 2004. "Essentials of Community-Based Participatory Research: Pre-Conference Workshop." Kari Hartwig, Maurice Williams, Jen Kauper-Brown. Click here for materials.
• National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Annual Meeting of Environmental Justice and CBPR Grantees, June 15, 2004. "Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research: Introduction to a CBPR Training Curriculum." Robert McGranaghan and Gary Tang.
• Institute for Community Research National Conference on Community-Based Research, June 12, 2004. "Skill Development for Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships." Kari Hartwig, Maurice Williams, Jen Kauper-Brown.
• Society of Public Health Education Mid-Year Conference, May 5, 2004. "A Skill-Building Workshop on Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships." Robert McGranaghan and Yvonne Lewis.
• University of Toronto Centre for Urban Health Initiatives Annual Planning Workshop, May 3, 2004. "Community-Academic Research Partnerships for Health: Benefits and Best Practices". Jen Kauper-Brown.
• CDC Chronic Disease Prevention Conference, February 19, 2004. "Skill Development for Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships." Renee Bayer and Yvonne Lewis.
• Federal Interagency Working Group for Community-based Participatory Research, January 22, 2004. “Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research.” Policy Working Group.
• American Public Health Association Annual Meeting, November 17, 2003. "Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research." Ella Greene-Moton.

Click here for CCPH's webpage on community-based participatory research (CBPR), including definitions, tools and resources, and CBPR course syllabi.

Project Products

The project resulted in a peer-reviewed publication of findings and an online skill-building curriculum, Developing and Sustaining CBPR Partnerships.

For Project Partners Only: Click Here

• Overall, service-learning was found to be a powerful tool for influencing student attitudes toward the role of service in their lives as future health professionals, and was fulfilling for faculty who feel strong motivations to link learning to meeting community needs.
• Administrative leadership, linkage to other campus service-learning activities, and integration into required courses were all associated with successful implementation and sustainability of service-learning that was transformational to students.
• Community agency partners valued the opportunity to shape future professionals and develop partnerships with university faculty, especially when the partner was acknowledged for their contribution to the learning outcomes of students.
• Ongoing challenges include issues of institutionalization, confusion over the distinction between service-learning and clinical training, and strategies for involving students and faculty not previously inclined toward service activities.

Community-Campus Partnerships: A National Study of Academic Health Centers and their Surrounding Communities

Project Description

This multi-site study examines the community involvement of academic health centers (AHCs) in education, research, clinical care, community service and community and economic development. The first phase of the study examines institutional factors (e.g. perception of external forces, leadership, climate, faculty roles and rewards) affecting the development of community-campus partnerships. Data collection methods include written questionnaires and document analysis. The respondents to the study include vice chancellors, CEOs of affiliated health care delivery systems, deans, faculty, and coordinators of community-based activities.

The second phase of the study examines AHC-community partnerships from the perspective of the communities that collaborate with the academic institutions. Primary data collection consists of on-site interviews with community participants from community-campus partnerships identified in the survey responses from the first phase of the study. The interviews will focus on the community's perceptions of the structure, processes and outcomes of community-academic partnerships.

The study includes both research-oriented and community-based, and public and private academic health centers. Comparisons across these institutions highlight the different factors contributing to the community involvement of these AHCs, and the different challenges these institutions face in becoming more responsive to the overall health of their surrounding communities. A national advisory committee is overseeing the project's design and implementation.

Goals

• Examine institutional factors affecting the development of AHC-community partnerships
• Examine socioeconomic and cultural factors in communities affecting the development of AHC-community partnerships
• Study the organizational structure of AHC-community relationships (e.g., authority, governance and decision-making, roles and responsibilities, resource allocation
• Identify policy issues influencing the development of AHC-community partnerships
• Share the findings with a broad audience of institutional and community leaders, and policymakers

Intended Audience

Institutional leaders and health professions school faculty, staff of community-based organizations, and state and federal policy makers

Funding

Grant support is from the Health Professions Schools in Service to the Nation (HPSISN), a service-learning demonstration program of The Pew Health Professions Commission and the National Fund for Medical Education, sponsored by The Pew Charitable Trusts, the Corporation for National Service Learn and Service America: Higher Education program, and the Health Resources and Services Administration. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, a nonprofit organization dedicated to fostering health-promoting partnerships between communities and higher education, is supporting the dissemination of the study findings and follow-up activities to the study.

Principal Investigators

• Sarena D. Seifer, MD, University of Washington School of Medicine
• Diane C. Calleson, PhD, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Study Findings and Reports

Click here to view and print a summary of a presentation on the study given at the March 1998 meeting of the Association of Academic Health Centers. You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader (available free of change from Adobe Systems) to view and print this file.

Click here to view this abstract based on the study: Forces Affecting Community Involvement of AHCs: Perspectives of Institutional and Faculty Leaders coauthored by Diane Coucoulas Calleson, Sarena D. Seifer, and Cheryl Maurana; Acad Med 2002;77 72-81.

Click here to view this paper based on the study: Calleson DC and Seifer SD (2004). Institutional collaboration and competition in community-based education. Journal of Interprofessional Care 18(1): 63-74.

Click here to view this paper based on the study: Calleson DC, Jordan C and Seifer SD. Community-Engaged Scholarship: Is Faculty Work in Communities a True Academic Enterprise? Acad Med. 2005 Apr;80(4):317-21.

Click here for an abstract and information on ordering the complete dissertation on which this study is based.

For More Information

For more information on the study, please contact Sarena Seifer. Study findings and reports will be posted on this website as they become available.

The Urban Health Initiative Evaluation Project

Conducted by Community-Campus Partnerships for Health Sponsored by the Fan Fox and Leslie R. Samuels Foundation

Background

Community service and community-based learning are prominent themes across the health professions. Leaders within academe have articulated a vision for community service and community-based learning based on partnerships between health professional schools and the communities they serve. These calls to action have largely been due to environmental factors, including changes in financing and delivery of health care; concerns about the size, distribution and quality of the health workforce; and concerns about the erosion of medical professionalism and the clinician-patient relationship. Proponents of community service in medical education advance numerous arguments for the important and unique learning opportunities offered in these settings including new knowledge and skills related to health promotion and disease prevention strategies, patient communication, and health issues of rural and underserved communities just to name a few. Further, such experiences are believed to contribute to a commitment to caring, civic responsibility, and life-long civic engagement.

The literature on community service and community-based learning in medical education contains many descriptive reports and several outcome studies about a variety of programs, ranging from those that are student-initiated and led community service to those that are fully integrated into the core medical school curriculum (service-learning). Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (CCPH) has received a grant from the Fan Fox and Leslie R. Samuels Foundation provides to conduct a process evaluation of the Urban Health Initiative (UHI), a medical student community service initiative based in New York. This evaluation provides an opportunity to contribute to the growing body of literature and knowledge on medical student community service and medical education.

Overview of the Urban Health Initiative

Since 1993, the Fan Fox and Leslie R. Samuels Foundation has provided grant funding to the New York Academy of Medicine (NYAM) to increase involvement of New York medical schools and medical students in community service. The goals of the UHI are:

• to broaden the educational experience of students by facilitating and enhancing the direct community service activities of schools and their students; and
• to increase the number of medical students and supervising physicians volunteering in community-based programs and agencies that provide health services, health education, and community services to underserved populations in New York.

The UHI provides student opportunities, primarily in their first and second years of medical school, to learn about community based health care programs in order to foster better understanding of medicine and community, and provide relevant community service in New York.

Click here to view and print an article on the UHI: "Community Service as an Integral Component of Undergraduate Medical Education: Facilitating Student Involvemen", authored by Holly Michaels Fisher, in the Summer 1995 issue of the Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader (available free of change from Adobe Systems) to view and print this file.

Overview of evaluation plan conducted by Community-Campus Partnerships for Health

Community-Campus Partnerships for Health has been awarded a grant from the Fan Fox and Leslie R. Samuels Foundation to conduct a process evaluation of the UHI with guidance from a project advisory committee. The purpose of the year-long evaluation, begun June 1, 2001, is to examine and document the current and historical implementation of the UHI by the NYAM and within the participating medical schools and community agencies. The findings from the process evaluation will contribute to the design of an outcome evaluation to be implemented in a subsequent phase of the project.

Among the questions and issues to be addressed in the evaluation are:

• What have been the steps, accomplishments, facilitating factors and challenges in implementing the UHI since its inception?
• How and why has the UHI evolved over time?
• What have been the roles and responsibilities of key program stakeholders (such as students, faculty, staff, community agency partners, advisory committee members)?
• What have been the experiences and perceived benefits to these stakeholders of their involvement in the UHI?
• What is the nature and extent of partnerships between the NYAM, participating community agencies and participating medical schools?
• What student community service and service-learning activities are underway and planned in New York medical schools? What strategies might support and enhance the involvement of New York medical schools in student community service and service-learning?
• How can the UHI be strengthened to better achieve its goals, and how might the program be sustained?

The data collection will include a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods including on-site focus groups, in-person and telephone interviews, and written surveys. A final report of findings and recommendations is due to the Foundation in spring 2002. Edited versions of the report will be submitted for publication to peer-reviewed journals and disseminated in other ways.

Project Team

The project team at Community-Campus Partnerships for Health includes executive director Sarena D. Seifer, senior consultant Kara Connors (CCPH's former associate director), graduate research assistant Tanis Mihalynuk and executive assistant Rose Coroneos. Additional individuals will assist with on-site data collection, including several members of the project advisory committee, below (Mick Huppert and Judy Lewis).

To obtain more information about the evaluation of the UHI, please email Sarena Seifer.

Project Advisory Committee members

• Deb Archer, medical student, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, RI
• Alba Cruz, Center for Community Health, Education, Research and Service, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
• Ann Banchoff, Stanford University Medical School, Palo Alto, CA
• Jason Block, Community & Public Health Action Committee Chair, American Medical Student Association and medical student at Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
• Diane Calleson, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel-Hill, NC
• Paul Freyder, Salvation Army Homeless Health Care Programs, Pittsburgh, PA
• Kari Hannibal, Schweitzer Fellowship Program, Boston, MA
• Rebecca Henry, Michigan State University School of Medicine, Lansing, MI
• Mick Huppert, Massachusetts Area Health Education Centers, and University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA
• Lewis Lefkowitz, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN
• Judy Lewis, University of Connecticut Medical School, Farmington, CT
• Tom O'Toole, Open Society Institute and Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
• Adriana Padilla, UCSF-Fresno Undergraduate Medical Education Program, Fresno, CA
• Donald Weaver, National Health Service Corps, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD 

Conducted by Community-Campus Partnerships for Health
University of Washington School of Public Health and Community Medicine

Sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research

Background

In recent years, national organizations, funding agencies and researchers have called for a renewed focus on an approach to health research that recognizes the importance of social, political and economic systems to health behaviors and outcomes. As a result, research that involves partnerships between communities and universities have become central to the national prevention research agenda. Although there is a growing literature about community-university partnerships for research, questions remain about the infrastructure required to develop and sustain these partnerships. For example, what community structures, processes and policies are required to conduct community-based participatory research? What university structures, processes and policies are required? What faculty, staff and volunteer roles, expertise and experience are required?

The NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research commissioned Community-Campus Partnerships for Health to draft a report on the infrastructure required to develop and sustain community-university partnerships for health research. Published in January 2003, the paper identifies nine critical issues that affect the infrastructure required for community-university research partnerships and, consequently, the future of the field. Attention to these issues is critical in order to provide the necessary support for both academic and community partners.

Click here for a copy of the final paper.

Click here for more resources on community-based participatory research.

Project Team

The CCPH project team included executive director and research assistant professor Sarena D. Seifer, doctoral student Nancy Shore, program coordinator Stacy L. Holmes, and executive assistant Rose Coroneos. For more information about this project, please email Sarena D. Seifer or call 206/616-4305.

A Case Study of a Successful Community-Campus Partnership: Changing the Environment Through Collaboration

Project Description

Collaborative initiatives between higher education institutions and the communities that surround them reflect a shared interest. Collaborative partnerships between the town and gown have historically been formed to enhance business ventures, share physical resources, and confront community challenges (Mattesich & Monsey, 1992, Taylor-Powell, Rossing, & Geran, 1998). This study, conducted in 2001-2002 by CCPH member Julie Bell-Elkins and supported in part by a small grant from CCPH, focused on community-campus collaborations addressing a specific challenge: underage drinking and irresponsible behavior while under the influence of alcohol (IBUI, Bell-Elkins 2002).

This qualitative research study was designed to examine the components that created a successful collaboration and to identify what factors enable the partnership to sustain itself over time. The findings from this study could be helpful to community-campus partnerships (CCPs) that are formed to meet a variety of goals beyond the issues of underage drinking and IBUI.

The goal of this case study was to learn about the structures, resources, and processes that have formed and sustained one successful CCP. Bell-Elkins broke new ground by being the first to apply the group development framework, Structuration Theory, and the Nine Principles of Good Practice for Community-Campus Partnerships developed by Community-Campus Partnerships for Health to a partnership formed to reduce underage drinking and IBUI.

Fostering formal CCPs in the form of a committee is relatively new; therefore the research in this area is limited. The articles and research projects on the topic of CCPs often focus on quantitative approaches that document reductions in specific behaviors such as fewer arrests, less noise, less damage, and fewer community complaints regarding alcohol-related behavior of college students (Alcohol Issues & Solutions, 1999, Boedhman, 1999, Gebhardt, Kaphingst, & DeJong, 2000). The partnership in this study was formed to reduce underage drinking and IBUI; however, Bell-Elkins argued that many of the findings in this study will provide practical applications for community-campus partnerships with other missions.

The significance of this study is three-fold. First, this study has contributed to the field by increasing the depth of information about CCPs by studying one successful partnership using qualitative techniques. The case study included interviews of members of the partnership and enlisted their perspectives to identify conditions and factors that support the success of their community-campus partnership. Second, by studying a successful partnership, as identified by leaders in the field of higher education alcohol prevention, information regarding successful practices can emerge and be utilized by other partnerships working to sustain current efforts. Finally, Bell-Elkins applied a set of principles of good practices utilized by the national organization for Community-Campus Partnerships for Health, which allowed comparison to the actual practices of the partnership in the study. In addition to comparing the actual practices to the set of principles, the study allowed new principles to emerge.

The conceptual frameworks for this study were chosen based on their applicability to the four guiding questions. Structuration Theory, grounded in the field of Speech Communication, provides a set of principles that pay particular attention to the process, resources, and evolution of groups (Giddens, 1984). The four guiding questions explored the formation, evolution, success, and sustainability of the partnership.

1. What structures and practices assisted in the formation of the CCP?
2. How has the partnership evolved over time?
3. How has success been measured?
4. What factors contributed to the sustainability of the partnership?

Bell-Elkins was particularly interested in identifying the institutional and social practices of the CCP, the College, and tavern owners in the study. She used a second framework, CCPH's Nine Principles of Good Practice to analyze the data gathered in the study.

Study Products and Outcomes

Click here for an abstract of the study and information on ordering the complete dissertation.

Click here for the assessment tool used to assess CCPH principles of partnership.

Click here for a set of study citations and references.

Click here for an overview of the study findings, reported at the 2002 Annual National Meeting on Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and Violence Prevention in Higher Education

For More Information

For more information about the study, please email Julie Bell-Elkins.