| Literature DB >> 35352602 |
Daryl Mangosing1, Gertrude Kumalo-Sakutukwa2, Beth Bourdeau2, Greg Rebchook2, Marguerita Lightfoot2, Janet J Myers2.
Abstract
The HIV epidemic remains a public health threat in the U.S., and the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based prevention and care programs are critical to addressing significant HIV health disparities. The provision of technical assistance (TA) to program providers and evaluators is key for uptake of these programs. The University of California San Francisco Prevention Research Center (UCSF PRC) model for TA delivery uses topics and strategies adapted to address HIV health disparities for a global audience. This model specifically matches TA requests to a TA provider who has expertise in that area upon receiving a request through various communication channels. Areas of expertise include research methods, community engagement strategies, interventions, and Implementation Sciences. Our evaluation of diverse TA services indicates that on-demand TA is effective for light-touch requests and well-suited for moderate to intensive requests. The model is a promising, broad-reaching, and responsive alternative for providing TA to a multitude of HIV workforce recipients.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; capacity-building; evaluation; health disparities; technical assistance
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35352602 PMCID: PMC8973044 DOI: 10.1177/00469580221081436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inquiry ISSN: 0046-9580 Impact factor: 2.099
Figure 1.University of California San Francisco, Prevention Research Center Model of Technical Assistance Delivery.
Types of TA Requested and Intersection with Minority Status.
| Type of request | Frequency (% of total
| Ethnic (% of type
| Gender (% of type
| Sexual (% of type
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Referral to HIV resource ( | 22 (18.2) | 4 (18.2) | 7 (31.8) | 6 (27.3) |
| Linkage to expert ( | 22 (18.2) | 7 (31.8) | 6 (27.3) | 5 (22.7) |
| Information transfer ( | 10 (8.3) | 4 (40.0) | 4 (40.0) | 5 (50.0) |
| Consultation ( | 60 (49.6) | 19 (31.6) | 21 (35) | 25 (41.7) |
| Literature/Article search ( | 14 (11.6) | 5 (35.7) | 4 (28.6) | 4 (28.6) |
| Request for data ( | 3 (2.5) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Request for research instrument ( | 18 (14.9) | 2 (11.1) | 6 (33.3) | 5 (27.8) |
| Other ( | 8 (6.6) | 3 (37.5) | 1 (12.5) | 3 (37.5) |
aRequests can meet more than one category or minority issue, so no column or row will total 100%.
| Responses to Satisfaction Survey Closed-Ended Items | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Item | Response options | M (SD) | |
| 1. How satisfied are you with the | |||
| A. Timeliness of the delivery of TA services/products? | 1 “very dissatisfied” to 5 “very satisfied” | 4.82 (.69) | |
| B. Accessibility of the staff person? | 4.77 (.74) | ||
| C. Professionalism of the staff person? | 4.86 (.65) | ||
| D. Cultural sensitivity of the staff person? | 4.72 (.79) | ||
| e. Staff person’s flexibility to adjust to your unique needs? | 4.80 (.71) | ||
| f. Staff person’s knowledge of the topic area? | 4.75 (.77) | ||
| 2. How well did the TA services resources or products you received meet your needs? | 1 “not well at all” to 4 “extremely well” | 3.73 (.57) | |
| 3. Overall, how useful were the TA services/products provided to you? | 1 “not at all useful” to 5 “very useful” | 4.56 (.76) | |
| 5. Would you use our TA services/products again if the need arises? | 0 “no” or 1 “yes” | 1.00 | |