CBPR emphasises integrating knowledge gained through the research partnership into interventions and policies. To achieve this partnerships may engage in activism and advocacy as well as research.
● Policy and advocacy skills within study sites, including extending community voices in policymaking, and influencing policies and practices aimed at improving health and wellbeing.
● Knowledge of how to frame an issue, engage different audiences and promote belief that action can lead to change
● Ability to identify or develop group lobbying power to influence change in policy or policy processes
● Commitment to the integration of research results with community change efforts
● Media engagement skills and relationships with workers in the industry
● Capacity to ensure regular and effective communication with practitioners and service delivery organisations to ensure that evidence influences the uptake and design of programs
● Understanding of the difference between programs and policies, and the steps involved in developing a policy and advocacy campaign (22)
● Knowledge of how a bill becomes law and who the major players are in decision-making
● Ability to identify supporters and opponents
● Ability to create a joint interpretive forum for sharing research knowledge
● Understanding of the change process and awareness of the potential effects of politics on outcomes
● Awareness of the effects of data and actions on the system in which research is involved
● Capacity to assess ‘readiness’ – the degree to which a community is prepared to take action on an issue
● Improved responsiveness of research to real-life problems
● Enhanced complementarity of knowledge and skills, generating public support for research, creating critical mass for social change and minimising the duplication of effort
● Research partners perceive the new knowledge gained and the potential benefit to the community as a motivation to work together
● Active community organisations linked to policy makers help to empower people and institutions to take informed action
● Active community involvement and dialogue among diverse constituencies leads to policy or practice change
● Mentor community members to take a leadership role in the partnership and advocate for the health issue in the broader community
● Undertake value creation stories to give a structured approach to storytelling, and a disciplined way of collecting data about outcomes from actions
● Use planning models such as the PRECEDE-PROCEED model which provide a structure that supports the planning and implementation of health promotion or disease prevention programs
● Provide training to enhance the capacity of community members to engage in the policy change process
● Deliver a series of workshops to train wider community members in policy and advocacy – delivered by community researchers
● Provide technical assistance to community researchers in their subsequent policy change efforts
● Map pre-existing power relationships to understand facilitators and hinderances to change through power mapping (a power analysis tool to map power and shape a campaign strategy), communication with policymakers and alliances with other advocates
● Develop a communication strategy or advocacy plan
● Build political and bureaucratic support for citizen participation
● Situate the research partnership as a bridge between community and external resources (e.g., state health department, foundations), assist community researchers and community members to identify and develop local assets, write grants and work with funders to support community groups
● Clear partnership ‘goals’ defined and shared by partners from the onset, as well as the goals for the mutually defined CBPR projects
● Evidence that the partnership and participation in the research made a difference in the involvement with the community to stimulate change
● New partners and networks engaged to make changes to health and wellbeing
● Number of training sessions or mentorship delivered in relation to policy change, media involvement or communication
● Mapping of policy makers
● Documentation to demonstrate that participants feel they have the knowledge and power necessary to advocate for policy change, and the extent to which people have the power to change policies in their area
● Evidence of improved capacity of participants to carry out policy related work
● Clearly articulated policies and strategies outlining communication, consultation and participation processes within government agencies
● Evidence of change to policy, process, practice or service delivery
● Evidence of ongoing project accountability through measuring intermediate outcomes of capacity strengthening, ownership, and empowerment against goals and making explicit their link to ultimate research outcomes and public health impact
● Value creation stories
● Narratives collected from and with researchers and co-researchers
● Evidence of actions related to policy change i.e. letters
● Communication strategies with duty bearers
● List of potential solutions and action plans
● Power mapping outputs
● Confidence scales/measures
● Evidence of meetings with decision makers and advocates
● Training slides developed and delivered to communities by community researchers
● News articles that show outcomes and relate to research partnerships
● Photographs with narratives that show conversations and advocacy activities
● Evidence of additional resources e.g. allocation of rooms, printing services, financial support from different organisations, communities etc.
● Interviews or participatory methods that track or demonstrate the path to policy/practice changes
● Audio visual outputs such as blogs, vlogs and podcasts
*Please note that some statements are adaptations or direct quotes from the papers listed in the reference section