Literature DB >> 23539266

Using the give-get grid to understand potential expectations of engagement in a community-academic partnership.

Jodi Southerland1, Bruce Behringer, Deborah L Slawson.   

Abstract

Research suggests that stakeholder investment is maximized when partnerships understand the assumptions held by partners of the benefits to be derived and contributions to be made to the partnership. In 2011, representatives from seven rural county high schools and five university departments participated in a planning workshop designed to identify elements of an effective community-academic partnership to address adolescent obesity disparity in Southern Appalachia. The purpose of this investigation was to examine key elements of partnership building by way of the Give-Get Grid partnership tool. Content analysis was conducted to identify emerging themes. University representatives consistently identified more proposed program contributions as well as benefits than their high school partners. University personnel responses generally pertained to their level of participation and investment in the partnership, whereas high school personnel tended to identify contributions fundamental to both partnership and program success. Additionally, content analysis uncovered programmatic facilitators and potential barriers that can be instrumental in program planning and forming program messages. Findings suggest that although partners often share common goals, perceptions of the value of investment and benefits may vary. The Give-Get Grid can be used during the program-planning phase to help identify these differences. Implications for practice are discussed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  community-based participatory research; health research; partnerships/coalitions; program planning and evaluation; qualitative evaluation

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23539266     DOI: 10.1177/1524839913477657

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Promot Pract        ISSN: 1524-8399


  9 in total

1.  College students as facilitators in reducing adolescent obesity disparity in Southern Appalachia: Team Up for Healthy Living.

Authors:  Deborah Leachman Slawson; William T Dalton; Taylor McKeehan Dula; Jodi Southerland; Liang Wang; Mary Ann Littleton; Diana Mozen; George Relyea; Karen Schetzina; Elizabeth F Lowe; James M Stoots; Tiejian Wu
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-04-30       Impact factor: 2.226

2.  Comparing the Functioning of Youth and Adult Partnerships for Health Promotion.

Authors:  Louis D Brown; Alisha H Redelfs; Thomas J Taylor; Reanna L Messer
Journal:  Am J Community Psychol       Date:  2015-09

3.  Community-Academic Partnership Participation.

Authors:  Rosemary Meza; Amy Drahota; Emily Spurgeon
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2015-05-15

4.  A Community-Academic Partnership to Reduce Health Care Disparities in Diagnostic Imaging.

Authors:  Lucy B Spalluto; Debbie Thomas; Katina R Beard; Thoris Campbell; Carolyn M Audet; Velma McBride Murry; Martha J Shrubsole; Claudia P Barajas; Yvonne A Joosten; Robert S Dittus; Consuelo H Wilkins
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 5.532

5.  Understanding the Benefit-Cost Relationship in Long-standing Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Partnerships: Findings from the Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) Study.

Authors:  Laurie Lachance; Chris M Coombe; Barbara L Brush; Shoou-Yih Daniel Lee; Megan Jensen; Brianna Taffe; Prachi Bhardwaj; Michael Muhammad; Eliza Wilson-Powers; Zachary Rowe; Cleopatra H Caldwell; Barbara A Israel
Journal:  J Appl Behav Sci       Date:  2020-11-12

6.  Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success: Theory and Methods for Measuring Success in Long-Standing Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships.

Authors:  Barbara A Israel; Laurie Lachance; Chris M Coombe; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Megan Jensen; Eliza Wilson-Powers; Graciela Mentz; Michael Muhammad; Zachary Rowe; Angela G Reyes; Barbara L Brush
Journal:  Prog Community Health Partnersh       Date:  2020

7.  Self-reported versus actual weight and height data contribute to different weight misperception classifications.

Authors:  William T Dalton; Liang Wang; Jodi L Southerland; Karen E Schetzina; Deborah L Slawson
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 0.954

Review 8.  An exploration of inter-organisational partnership assessment tools in the context of Australian Aboriginal-mainstream partnerships: a scoping review of the literature.

Authors:  Christina Tsou; Emma Haynes; Wayne D Warner; Gordon Gray; Sandra C Thompson
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 9.  Measuring Community-Engaged Research Contexts, Processes, and Outcomes: A Mapping Review.

Authors:  Tana M Luger; Alison B Hamilton; Gala True
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 4.911

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.