Investigating How a Community Advisory Panel in a Research-Practice Partnership Supports Community-engaged Research

• In Event: Research-Practice Partnership Routines and Structures That Support Inclusive and Equitable Engagement in Improvement Research

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigates the role of a community advisory panel in supporting a research-practice partnership aiming to address disparities in a large urban school district. This analysis aims to understand how the advisory panel supported inclusive and community engaged research in the first year of a three year RPP project.

During the 2023-2024 school year, the partnership recruited, planned, and convened a panel of district and school personnel, one high school student, parents, and members of community groups to help make sense of the partnership’s initial research findings and identify areas to deepen or extend the inquiry. The panel’s feedback was intended to support the RPP in deepening and extending analyses and helping the partnership make progress toward identifying specific problems of practice around which to focus improvement efforts in the 2024-2025 school year.

Conceptual framework
Community engaged research is “an approach to inclusive and equitable research that joins researchers with communities as partners throughout the full cycle of the research process” (Ubri, et al., 2024). Community engaged research values shared power and equity in decision making; transparency and open communication; accountability and respect; accessibility and demonstrated values; capacity bridging and co-learning, and avoidance of harm. (Ubri et al., 2024).

Study design
The study sought to understand how the design and implementation of an advisory panel supported progress towards the goals of the partnership. This study utilizes a case study approach (Rav ich & Carl, 2019) to document the theory of action of the advisory panel, assess the impact of advisory panel activities on the research process, and determine improvement areas. The mixed-methods study design includes both qualitative and quantitative data sources. Analysis of the panel processes include both inductive and deductive coding of transcripts, notes and artifacts from panel planning meetings and panel sessions, interviews with advisory panel members, and reflective surveys attending to participants’ sense of trust, belonging, agency, and power.
Study participants include researchers (N= 5); community advisory panel facilitator (N=1); advisory panel members (N=14), and district leaders (N=2).

Preliminary findings:
Of the Panelists who filled out the survey (N=8), the majority felt engaged during the meetings and like they had a voice. Ninety percent of the panelists felt that they had an improved understanding of the partnership research, and one hundred percent felt that they had an improved understanding of the barriers that youth face. While participation was viewed as valuable to the community panel members, there is limited evidence that the advisory panel infomed the research design and goals of the partnership. This has implications for the upcoming school year.

Significance:
Research-practice partnerships seek to make research more useful and relevant for practice-partners, and community engagement is a critical component of this work. Findings from this analysis have informed the work of the advisory panel in the second year of the study. In addition, findings can inform other research-practice partnerships or networks aiming to increase the participation and voice of those typically not included in the design of research studies.

Authors

• Sean P. Corcoran, Vanderbilt University

• Changhee Lee, Vanderbilt University