4.1 Article

THE CHALLENGES OF COLLABORATION FOR ACADEMIC AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN A RESEARCH PARTNERSHIP: POINTS TO CONSIDER

Journal

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.1.19

Keywords

community-engaged research; community-based participatory research; community-academic partnerships; community; community-based organizations; memorandum of understanding; data dissemination

Funding

  1. National Center for Research Resources (NCRR)
  2. National Institutes of Health (NIH)
  3. Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program (CTSA)
  4. Clinical Research Enterprise [UL1RR024999]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

THE PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNING OF Community-Engaged Research (CEnR) entails a collaborative partnership between academic researchers and the community. The Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) model is the partnership model most widely discussed in the CEnR literature and is the primary model we draw upon in this discussion of the collaboration between academic researchers and the community. In CPBR, the goal is for community partners to have equal authority and responsibility with the academic research team, and that the partners engage in respectful negotiation both before the research begins and throughout the research process to ensure that the concerns, interests, and needs of each party are addressed. The negotiation of a fair, successful, and enduring partnership requires transparency and understanding of the different assets, skills and expertise that each party brings to the project. Delineating the expectations of both parties and documenting the terms of agreement in a memorandum of understanding or similar document may be very useful. This document is structured to provide a points-to-consider roadmap for academic and community research partners to establish and maintain a research partnership at each stage of the research process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available