Richard Lichtenstein

Community-Based Participatory Research: A Capacity-Building Approach for Policy Advocacy Aimed at Eliminating Health Disparities

There have been increasing calls for community-academic partnerships to enhance the capacity of partners to engage in policy advocacy aimed at eliminating health disparities. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is a partnership approach that can facilitate capacity building and policy change through equitable engagement of diverse partners. Toward this end, the Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center, a long-standing CBPR partnership, has conducted a policy training project. We describe CBPR and its relevance to health disparities; the interface between CBPR, policy advocacy, and health disparities; the rationale for capacity building to foster policy advocacy; and the process and outcomes of our policy advocacy training. We discuss lessons learned and implications for CBPR and policy advocacy to eliminate health disparities.

Challenges and facilitating factors in sustaining community-based participatory research partnerships: Lessons learned from the Detroit, New York City and Seattle Urban Research Centers

In order to address the social, physical and economic determinants of urban health, researchers, public health practitioners, and community members have turned to more comprehensive and participatory approaches to research and interventions. One such approach, community-based participatory research (CBPR) in public health, has received considerable attention over the past decade, and numerous publications have described theoretical underpinnings, values, principles and practice. Issues related to the long-term sustainability of partnerships and activities have received limited attention. The purpose of this article is to examine the experiences and lessons learned from three Urban Research Centers (URCs) in Detroit, New York City, and Seattle, which were initially established in 1995 with core support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The experience of these Centers after core funding ceased in 2003 provides a case study to identify the challenges and facilitating factors for sustaining partnerships. We examine three broad dimensions of CBPR partnerships that we consider important for sustainability: (1) sustaining relationships and commitments among the partners involved; (2) sustaining the knowledge, capacity and values generated from the partnership; and (3) sustaining funding, staff, programs, policy changes and the partnership itself. We discuss the challenges faced by the URCs in sustaining these dimensions and the strategies used to overcome these challenges. Based on these experiences, we offer recommendations for: strategies that partnerships may find useful in sustaining their CBPR efforts; ways in which a Center mechanism can be useful for promoting sustainability; and considerations for funders of CBPR to increase sustainability.

The detroit community-academic urban research center: Development, implementation, and evaluation

There is increasing research evidence that stressors in the social and physical environment (e.g., poverty, inadequate housing, air pollution, and racism) are associated with poor health outcomes. Given the complex set of determinants of health status, the disproportionate burden of disease experienced within marginalized communities, and the limited effectiveness of traditional prevention research, particularly within communities of color, there have been growing calls for more comprehensive and participatory approaches to public health research and practice. The purpose of this article is to describe and analyze the process of establishing, implementing, and evaluating the Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center (URC), a community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership involving community-based organizations, a local health department, academia, and an integrated health care system. Lessons learned and recommendations for creating effective CBPR partnerships are presented.

Disentangling Measures of Individual Perceptions of Community Social Dynamics: Results of a Community Survey

This study examined how different measures of individual perceptions of community social dynamics relate to each other and how these measures relate to self-reported general health and depressive symptoms. Results of a principal components analysis conducted to investigate the interrelationships between these individual measures suggest that these measures measure separate phenomena. In addition, in results of multiple-regression analyses conducted to examine associations between the various measures of individual perceptions of community social dynamics and the dependent variables of self-reported general health and depressive symptoms, sense of community, perceived neighborhood control, and neighborhood participation were all associated with the outcome variables in separate regression models. In a regression model with these three variables added to control variables, only sense of community was significantly, albeit modestly, associated with depressive symptoms and self-reported general health.

Including health status in medicare’s adjusted average per capita cost capitation formula

Actuarial factors currently comprising Medicares HMO capitation formula, the Adjusted Average Per Capita Cost (AAPCC), are considered by many researchers to be inadequate as predictors of future period health care costs. While it is often suggested that the formula should incorporate beneficiary health status, no measure of health status suitable for this purpose has yet been identified. The authors present initial results from a study of 1,934 randomly selected Medicare beneficiaries in Michigan. Beneficiaries were surveyed to obtain data on several alternative measures of health status. Medicare claims were used to estimate beneficiary health care costs for periods before and after the survey. In regressions on future period Medicare payments, equations including the AAPCC factors plus a health status measure achieved R2 values ranging from 0.013 to 0.072, depending on the health status measure, compared with an R2 value of 0.003 for the equation with AAPCC factors alone.

A Bridge Between Communities: Video-making using principles of community-based participatory research.

Health educators can play a critical role in bringing together the partners and resources to successfully make videos using principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR). This article is a “how-to” guide for making videos using community-based participatory research principles. The authors describe video-making and CBPR, then outline six steps on how to make a video using principles of CBPR: (a) engaging stakeholders, (b) soliciting funding and informed consent, (c) creation of shared ownership, (d) building cross-cultural collaborations, (e) writing the script together, and (f) pulling it all together: editing and music selection. Still photographs and key themes from the video A Bridge Between Communities are presented as a running case study to illustrate these steps. The article concludes with implications for health promotion research and practice.

Review Article : The Job Satisfaction and Retention of Physicians in Organized Settings: a Literature Review:

when professionals become employees of organizations. Scholarly debate deals not only with the negative impact that many features of bureaucratic organization have on the job satisfaction of professionals but also with the theoretical question of whether professional job values and bureaucratic requirements are inherently in conflict. This issue has particular relevance for the study of physicians working in organizations because physicians have historically worked in traditional settings, such as solo practices or partnerships, but now are working in formal organizations with greater frequency (Donabedian, Axelrod and Wyszewianski 1980). As an increasing number of physicians eschew the solo, private practice setting and assume positions in organizations ranging from small

Selection Bias in Tefra At-risk Hmos

The issue of selection bias was investigated using data from 22 HMOs who are enrolling Medicare beneficiaries under Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) at-risk contracts. The study differs from previously published analyses of this issue in that it deals with the current Medicare risk program (TEFRA) rather than with earlier Demonstration Programs; as an indicator of selection bias, it utilizes beneficiary functional health status at enrollment; and it examines selection not only at the mean of the health status distribution, but at the two tails (very disabled, very able) as well. For each of the participating HMOs, the functional health status of recent Medicare enrollees was compared with that of a control group of randomly chosen fee-for-service beneficiaries. None of the HMOs experienced adverse selection, whether measured in terms of overall (mean) health status of enrollees or in terms of the proportion of the very disabled population that chose to join. Nine of the 22 HMOs were considered to have experienced favorable selection on the basis of the mean health status of new enrollees. In addition, ten more HMOs were found to have experienced favorable selection in one or both tails of the health status distribution. Although a specific cause for the observed enrollment patterns is not identified, speculation is made on factors that may or may not contribute. Evidence suggests that beneficiary self-selection is probably a more important explanation of these patterns than purposeful actions of HMOs to discourage enrollment by sicker beneficiaries (i.e., “skimming”).

The one-pager: a practical policy advocacy tool for translating community-based participatory research into action.

The multiple and diverse perspectives, skills, and experiences inherent in community–academic partnerships make them uniquely positioned to educate policy makers and advocate for health equity. Effective communication tools are critical to successfully engage in the policy-making process. Yet few resources emphasize the development and use of practical tools for translating community-based participatory research (CBPR) findings into action. The purpose of this article is to describe a CBPR process for developing and using a one-page summary, or “one-pager,” of research findings and their policy implications. This article draws on the experience of the Healthy Environments Partnership (HEP), a community–academic partnership in Detroit, Michigan. In addition to describing these processes, this article includes a template for a one-pager and an example of a one-pager that was written for and presented to federal policy makers.

Health insurance coverage of the unemployed.

Of 1,332 unemployed individuals in the Detroit area interviewed in late 1983, 51% did not have health insurance. Lack of insurance was directly related to length of unemployment. Of those unemployed 3 months or less, 31% had no insurance, as compared with 56% of those unemployed more than 3 years. For the most part, these were not the chronically uninsured: 78% of them were insured when they were employed. Three fourths of those without insurance were not covered by Medicaid either. These findings suggest that during the latest economic recession, the problem of health insurance loss due to losing ones job was more severe than had been assumed by most policymakers.