Establishing New Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships using the Community-Based Participatory Research Charrette Model: Lessons from the Cancer Health Accountability for Managing Pain and Symptoms Study

Abstract

Overall, the CHAMPS partnership benefited significantly from the charrette process. Specifically, the charrette process engendered greater transparency, accountability, and trust among CHAMPS partners by encouraging collective negotiation of project goals and implementation, roles and responsibilities, and compensation and communication structures. The process also allowed for the exploration of newly identified challenges and potential solutions with support from CEs and AEs. Furthermore, the charrette also functioned as a catalyst for capacity building among CHAMPS community, academic, and medical partners. Future studies should compare the impact of the CBPR charrette, relative to other approaches, on partnership development and process evaluation outcomes.

Utilizing CBPR Charrette in Community-Academic Research Partnerships – What Stakeholders Should Know

“…In 2010, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill adapted the Charrette for innovative use in CBPR (Samuel et al, 2018). In the research context, Charrette is defined as, "a collaborative planning process that harnesses the talents and energies of all interested parties to create and support a feasible plan that represents transformative community change.…”

“…In 2018, facilitators from UNC conducted CBPR Charrettes with participants from the Cancer Health Accountability for Managing Pain and Symptoms (CHAMPS) Study (Samuel et al, 2018). The facilitators worked with 14 participants interested in studying the effects of race on differences in treatment Utilizing CBPR Charrette in Community-Academic Research Partnerships -What Stakeholders Should Know and symptoms among breast cancer patients.…”

“…The Charrette also highlighted challenges to the group, including concerns about the academic researchers' unrealistic expectations of the community members. Despite a broad range of interests and expertise among members, the Charrette process provided an opportunity to address potential challenges and build group cohesion (Samuel et al, 2018).…”

“…Overall, Charrettes have been shown to be effective tools for building intergroup collaboration toward a specific objective, even when groups have different backgrounds and expertise (Wishkoski et al, 2019). Charrettes are most effective when participants are involved throughout the decision-making process, and are approached as true collaborators, as opposed to focus group members or consultants, making CBPR and the Charrette process highly compatible with one another (Hughes, 2017;Samuel et al, 2018). Although the outlook for Charrette as an effective CBPR tool is encouraging, only a few articles have emerged that utilize the Charrette process as a capacity-building tool for groups of community stakeholders, nor could we find articles that presented different conventional and non-conventional Charrette processes in a comparative context.…”

It’s time for a change!: The appreciative inquiry/bootcamp translation to address disparities in the Latino community with autism spectrum disorders.

“…Partnership building is not a simple or short process but is critical to the success of an AI/BCT. Indeed, multiple models exist to support partnership development (e.g., Samuel et al, 2018). Once the group is formed, they can expect to meet often for an extended amount of time.…”