Williams Karen Jaynes, Cooks John Mark, May Marlynn, Peranteau Jane, Reifsnider Elizabeth, Hargraves Martha A
University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, TX, USA.
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2010 Winter;4(4):263-77. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2010.0013.
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches equitably involve community members and researchers throughout the research process. A developing literature examines problems in CBPR partnerships, but less is written about community groups using CBPR to access university resources to address community-prioritized health concerns.
We sought to examine issues in two stages of a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded CBPR partnership: (1) joint proposal preparation, and (2) grant administration.
We used a case study approach to analyze data (partner dialogs, meeting notes, interviews, and press coverage) from a longstanding community-academic partnership.
The partnership received NIH Partners in Research Program funding. During joint proposal preparation, issues included (1) learning to practice operating principles, such as "talking in ways that all people can understand," (2) streamlining proposal design to facilitate communication with community members, and (3) addressing inequities inherent in community-academic budget sharing. During the administration phase, issues included (1) community partner struggles with administrative requirements, (2) inequities in indirect cost (IDC) allocations, and (3) the impact of a natural disaster.
Separately funded CBPR grants can contribute to community partner development, but make substantive demands on small, grassroots community organizations. Funders should consider taking more responsibility in developing community resources and infrastructure to ensure that grassroots community groups have the power to be equal partners. More accurate accounting of costs and benefits of CBPR to vulnerable communities should be in place to ensure communities receive adequate return on the time they invest in partnering with universities.
基于社区的参与性研究（CBPR）方法在整个研究过程中公平地让社区成员和研究人员参与进来。越来越多的文献探讨了CBPR伙伴关系中的问题，但关于社区团体利用CBPR获取大学资源以解决社区优先关注的健康问题的论述较少。
我们试图研究由美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）资助的CBPR伙伴关系两个阶段中的问题：（1）联合提案准备，以及（2）拨款管理。
我们采用案例研究方法来分析来自一个长期社区 - 学术伙伴关系的数据（伙伴对话、会议记录、访谈和新闻报道）。
该伙伴关系获得了NIH研究伙伴计划的资金。在联合提案准备过程中，问题包括（1）学习践行操作原则，如“以所有人都能理解的方式交谈”，（2）简化提案设计以促进与社区成员的沟通，以及（3）解决社区 - 学术预算共享中固有的不平等问题。在管理阶段，问题包括（1）社区伙伴在行政要求方面的困难，（2）间接成本（IDC）分配的不平等，以及（3）自然灾害的影响。
单独资助的CBPR拨款可以促进社区伙伴的发展，但对小型基层社区组织提出了实质性要求。资助者应考虑在发展社区资源和基础设施方面承担更多责任以确保基层社区团体有能力成为平等伙伴。应更准确地核算CBPR对弱势社区的成本和收益，以确保社区在投入与大学合作的时间上获得足够回报。
