Community Engagement Studio Toolkit 2.0

Tiffany Israel MSSW

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Helena Farrow MPS

Nashville OIC

Yvonne Joosten MPH

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Yolanda Vaughn MS

Neighborhoods Resource Center

Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research

Sponsor Award No: 3-UL1-RR025747-02S1, UL1 RR024975 and UL1-TR000445 from NCRR/NIH

For more information, go to https://victr.vanderbilt.edu/pub/community/

Email cerc@vanderbilt.edu

Community

Engagement Studio

Toolkit 2.0

  
3 
Community Engagement Studio Toolkit  
Table of Contents: 
1)  Introduction and Acknowledgements  
 
2)  Overview of a Community Engagement Studio 
 
3)  The Community Engagement Studio Team  
 
4)  The Researcher 
 
5)  The Community Experts  
 
6)   Requesting a CE Studio 
 
6)  Scheduling 
 
7)  Following up  
 
8)  Metrics 
 
9)  Promoting the CE Studio 
 
10) Appendices 
A.  Community Navigator Job Description 
B.  FAQs for Researchers 
C.  Sample Research Presentation 
D.  Tools for Recruiting Community Experts 
E.  Expert Orientation Guide (including Glossary of Terms) 
F.  Sample Forms  
G.  CE Studio Costs 
H.  Researcher Evaluation Survey 
I.  Sample CE Studio Summary and Recommendations  
J.  Sample  CE Studio Flyer 
 
 

Back to Table of Contents

1) Introduction and Acknowledgements

After participating in a Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio), researchers often remark

that they wished they had done so earlier in the development of their research. The input they

receive from patient or community stakeholders proves invaluable and in retrospect could have

saved them a lot of time and effort in planning their research, in building community

partnerships and in recruiting participants into their study. It is our hope that with the help of

the Community Engagement Studio, researchers will come to view community input as

essential to the planning, implementation and dissemination of their work.

Community members too value the opportunity not only to learn about research and how it

can benefit themselves, their families, or their community, but also to contribute to its

development and execution in a way that increases the researchers understanding of, and

sensitivity to the community. As one of our community experts remarked:

We are grateful to our community collaborators at the Neighborhoods Resource Center and

Nashville OIC who helped us develop and refine the Community Engagement Studio model;

and to the many patients and community members who have served as experts, making each

Community Engagement Studio a valuable learning experience.

“The Community Engagement Studio presents a unique

opportunity to tap into the wisdom of community members.

It empowers community members to contribute to the

process of research in ways we have not seen before. We

have only begun to see the benefits to both researchers and

the community.”

Rev. Neely Williams, Community Partners Network

Back to Table of Contents

2) Overview of a Community Engagement Studio

The Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core (CERC) is a program of the

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (VICTR), and a shared resource for

academic researchers, research trainees, research staff, students and community organizations.

CERC’s mission is to bring together academic researchers and community members to improve

community health and healthcare through community-engaged research. The Community

Engagement Studio is one of the unique services developed by CERC to further this mission.

Community input can increase the quality and relevance of research, but enhancing public

participation is one of the central challenges facing clinical research activities today (1).

Engaging community members, patients, caregivers, community health providers, advocates

and policy makers in research is complex. Many researchers are not prepared to identify,

recruit, convene and engage these stakeholders or prepare them for participation in research in

an advisory capacity or as part of a research team. The CE Studio creates a framework for

stakeholders to provide immediate feedback to the researcher on specific areas of concern

before the research project is implemented.

Recognizing the limitations of traditional approaches to population health and health disparities

research, CERC’s Community Advisory Council and community partners challenged us to

develop new models for community engagement. Building on VICTR’s Translation Studio model

(2) for strengthening research proposals, the CE Studio was developed to help researchers

interested in working directly with patients and other community stakeholders do so in a way

that is culturally sensitive and in keeping with community priorities, values and needs.

The CE Studio can be a valuable experience for researchers at any stage in their career. Faculty,

post-docs, fellows and graduate students and undergrads who are interested in receiving

feedback from their population of interest on the relevance and feasibility of their research

ideas have reported a positive impact on their projects and proposals. It provides a structured

forum to gain valuable patient or community insight and has the potential to transform the way

community and academic researchers work together. In a CE Studio, members of the

researcher’s population of interest (i.e., patients, caregivers, providers, community

organizations, etc.) serve in a consultative role. Throughout this document, we will refer to

them as community experts.

The researcher gives a brief presentation about his or her project and poses specific questions

to the community experts. The discussion that follows is guided by a neutral facilitator to elicit

authentic and constructive feedback. Advance preparation by the researcher and community

experts is essential to success. Feedback from researchers and community experts who have

participated in past CE Studios indicates that the experience increases the researcher’s

understanding of, and sensitivity to the community, and creates an awareness of community

(1) Michener L, Cook J, Ahmed SM, Yonas MA, Coyne-Beasley T, Aguilar-Gaxiola S. Aligning the Goals of Community-Engaged Research:

Why and How Academic Health Centers Can Successfully Engage With Communities to Improve Health. Acad Med. 2012;87:285-91

10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182441680.

(2) Pulley JM, Bernard GR. Proven processes: The Vanderbilt Institute for clinical and translational research. Clin Transl Sci.

2009;2:180-2.

Back to Table of Contents

priorities, values and needs. Participating in a CE Studio often prompts researchers to reflect on

the significance and impact of their work. Community experts have indicated that the

experience increases their understanding of the research endeavor, including the motivation of

the researchers and how and why research is conducted (3).

HOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS CAN IMPACT RESEARCH

 Prioritize research topics

 Increase relevance to patients and communities

 Strengthen recruitment and retention efforts

 Increase dissemination and uptake of research results

If conducted during the earliest stages of project development, a CE Studio can be an effective

tool to develop a strong partnership with community partners. For researchers who are not

familiar with community engagement, it can open the door to a more participatory approach to

their work.

Researchers from a variety of disciplines can benefit from participating in the Community

Engagement Studio process. CE Studios have addressed issues of participant compensation, the

culturally appropriateness of recruitment materials, participant retention strategies, simplifying

the consent process and identifying entry points for community-based recruitment, design,

ethical considerations and translation of research findings into practice.

“Just having the opportunity to refine the research approach before

submission is critical to not only a favorable review but successful

implementation when funded.”

Researcher

(3) Joosten YA, Israel TL, Williams NA, Boone LR, Schlundt DG, Mouton CP, Dittus RS, Bernard GR, Wilkins CH. Community Engagement Studios: A

Structured Approach to Obtaining Meaningful Input from Stakeholders to Inform Research. Acad Med. 2015;90(12):1646-50 PMCID:

PMC4654264. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000794. PMID: 26107879.

Back to Table of Contents

The CE Studio is a consultative model and a quick way for researchers to get community or

patient input on the development, implementation or dissemination of a research project. It is

not a standing advisory board, a tool for recruiting research participants, or a data collection or

research methodology such as a focus group.

The Community Engagement Studio Team

The CE Studio is implemented by a team that includes a faculty researcher, staff to coordinate

planning and logistics and a skilled, neutral facilitator. The team members must be

knowledgeable about the research process and have experience engaging and maintaining

relationships with diverse communities.

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT STUDIO AND A FOCUS GROUP?

Purpose

Inform development, implementation

or dissemination of research

Qualitative data collection

Approach

Bi-directional discussion

Uni-directional

Participants

Consultants

Identified as experts based on lived

experience

Research subjects

Screened, consented

Facilitator

Neutral – could be community member

Not affiliated with research project

Uses techniques to balance power

Uses guide for conversation: can

diverge if relevant

Research team member

Uses pre-approved script: cannot

diverge

Preparation

Coaching for research team

Orientation for community experts

IRB approval

Consenting of research subjects

Compensation

Consulting fee

Participant incentive

Use of input

Participant comments and

recommendation summarized

CE Studio Team may help researcher

interpret and apply recommendations

Participant comments transcribed

Transcription qualitatively

analyzed

Back to Table of Contents

Community Navigator

The navigator’s responsibilities include running the planning meeting with the

researcher/research team, identifying and preparing the community experts, managing

logistics, and following up on any resulting actions and recommendations. The navigator is also

responsible for making sure the appropriate documentation is completed for each CE Studio

including capturing the community expert feedback from each session and the completion of

evaluation surveys, and forms needed to process payments (e.g., external consultant form and

the IRS W9). CERC uses a Community Navigator in this role (see Appendix A for Community

Navigator Job Description).

The Community Navigator

 Is a boundary spanner – with experience working in the community, and familiar with

academic research

 Has experience working in diverse communities

 Has demonstrated a capacity to build rapport and trusting relationships with key

community leaders.

Hiring from the community puts into practice fundamental principles of community

engagement such as mutual benefit, respect and community capacity building. A respected

community member is likely to have access to networks unfamiliar to someone who works in

an academic setting. Likely Community Navigator candidates include social workers,

community organizers and community health workers.

Facilitator

The facilitator’s job is to create a neutral environment that allows for open and frank discussion

and guide the conversation between the researcher and community experts. A skilled facilitator

does not interject his or her opinions or biases into the conversation. The facilitator should

have experience working with diverse populations and possess the ability to balance the power

difference that naturally occurs when researchers and lay community members come together.

Ideally, the facilitator has received relevant training that prepares them to work with groups of

individuals representing a wide range of social-economic backgrounds and have varied learning

and communication styles.

While individuals can receive formal certification as a facilitator, it is not necessary to be an

effective one. Individuals who are most successful in CE facilitation have been trained in the

principles of community organizing and incorporate a participatory approach into their style of

facilitation. Ideally, the CE facilitator brings to the table a perspective of how a stakeholder’s

perspective has been shaped by their experience in a environment where faith, class and race

play an important part of who we are and how we see the world.

Back to Table of Contents

Key Facilitator Tasks:

 Explain discussion ground rules (e.g., be concise, don’t interrupt, stay on track, and

maintain confidentiality).

 Listen carefully to the presentation and comments, as a way to keep the discussion on

track.

 Use the predefined questions as the discussion framework.

 Watch the clock: 1 1/2 -2 hours maximum.

 Politely move things along if someone is talking too much.

 In some cases, you will recognize that more needs to be said. Use probes and follow up

questions when needed.

 Ask for examples when comments are unclear.

 Be comfortable with silence as people consider their answers.

 Guide the discussion without interjecting your own opinion and personal observations.

“Being a good facilitator is both a skill and an art. It is a skill in

that people can learn certain techniques and can improve their

ability with practice. It is an art in that some people just have

more of a knack for it than others.”

-Community Toolbox

Back to Table of Contents

Faculty

The role of the faculty member of the team is to provide guidance on identifying the population

of interest, defining the questions that will be posed to the experts, coaching the researchers

on communicating effectively with non-researchers and implementing recommendations from

the community experts. The CE Studio team faculty must have experience in patient-centered

outcomes, community-engagement, comparative effectiveness and community-based

participatory research.

3) The Researcher

Clinical and translational researchers at any level or discipline may find the CE Studio to be

beneficial. Those who are inexperienced in patient or community engagement or unfamiliar

with the CE Studio will often have questions about the process. An FAQ (Appendix B) is

available to answer many of these questions.

Preparing for the CE Studio usually requires a face-to-face meeting with the researcher or the

research team. In the meeting, the CE Studio Team (community navigator, faculty and

facilitator) will explain how the CE Studio works, and what to expect. The Team provides a

presentation template, helps the researcher clarify the questions that will be posed to the

expert panel, and discusses potential probing and follow-up questions for the facilitator to use

to engage panelists. They will define the characteristics of the stakeholders needed for the

expert panel, and suggest potential times and locations for the studio to accommodate the

needs of the stakeholders. Prior to the CE Studio, the team will review the researcher’s

presentation, making suggestions so that the language and images are appropriate for non-

researchers. The team will also coach them on communicating effectively with the expert

panel. The second meeting is also an opportunity to finalize logistics and share information

about the stakeholders who will be serving on the expert panel. The team will also share a draft

of a CE Studio facilitation guide that will outline the key questions and prompters for the

meeting.

To help narrow the focus of the CE Studio and to identify the specific group of experts for the

panel, the navigator should be sure to discuss key areas of the project/proposal.

 What if any challenges are you anticipating? (Recruitment, retention, invasiveness)

 Is there a particular demographic that you feel will be more difficult to engage? (Age,

ethnicity, class)

 What parts of the study do you anticipate to being the most arduous? (Consenting,

duration)

Back to Table of Contents

In preparing the presentation, the researcher must remember community experts need to

know:

 What the researcher is trying to find out, and why it is important.

 How the planned research might impact people who would serve as research subjects

 What kind of advice the researcher needs.

Effective Communication with Non-Researchers

The CE Studio gives researchers the opportunity to describe their work to a non-research

audience. While a researcher’s skillset generally includes communicating effectively with fellow

researchers in classrooms, grand rounds, conferences and other academic venues, many are

not prepared to communicate their ideas to non-researchers. Furthermore, they are

accustomed to assuming the role of the expert. Coaching from the CE Studio Team can help

them get the most out of this opportunity. The main opportunities to coach the researcher

include the planning meeting, preparation of their presentation and feedback on the slides they

plan to use for the meeting with stakeholders.

Here are the key concepts to convey when coaching researchers:

 The community experts, while not trained in research are the experts in the room.

 After making their presentation, the researcher’s role is primarily to listen, asking and

answering questions for clarification.

 Researchers often use a language that non-researchers may find difficult to understand

so jargon, technical terms and acronyms should be explained clearly or avoided

altogether.

The Researcher’s Presentation

Preparation: The presentation must be brief – 10 to 15 minutes at the most. It can be difficult

to explain research concepts and procedures in plain language, so it is important that the

researcher devote adequate time to prepare. It is not appropriate to use a presentation that

was previously prepared for an academic audience. Language taken from a research proposal

or academic summary will probably need to be translated, replacing scientific jargon and

acronyms with plain language. Keep text to a minimum and avoid complex tables, formulas and

Back to Table of Contents

diagrams. The researcher should share the presentation with the CE Studio Team in advance so

they can recommend changes to improve clarity as needed.

Presentation Template (See Appendix C for sample )

PowerPoint is a favored method of presentation among researchers. This format can be

effective in a CE Studio, particularly if images or diagrams are used. However, PowerPoint

slides, particularly those with a lot of text can also distract from the speaker so we recommend

its use with caution. The presentation should be fairly short (no more than 10 slides) and

should include:

1. Title of study, researcher name, researcher department/institution, date

2. Specific problem study will address (brief description of the purpose of the study

and why the study is important to patients or the community and potential

impact on/benefit to patients or the community)

3. Research question (what, specifically is the study designed to find out?)

4. Population or community that is the subject/ focus of the study. Why this

population/community?

5. Study design: who, what, when, where, how (include this slide only if the study

design is relevant to the questions you will pose to the expert panel)

6. Data collection/analysis (include this slide only if the Analytical Plan is relevant to

the questions you will pose to the experts)

7. How will findings be used? (dissemination/utilization plan, translation for

community use)

8. The template may be adapted for specific projects such as survey review, focus

group feedback and quality improvement activities.

“The facilitator briefed me in advance about listening, which I really needed.”

Researcher

Back to Table of Contents

5) The Community Experts

Community members, be they patients, caregivers, advocates or providers are the key to the

success of the CE Studio model. Ideally, they will represent diverse backgrounds and are

connected to the community in various ways. Community members bring different lived

experiences to the table and can provide insights from multiple perspectives. For example, a

patient’s caregiver may have a very different, but equally valuable perspective than a patient

with a certain disease or condition.

WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN A COMMUNITY EXPERT

 Member of the population or community of interest

 Good verbal communication skills

 Good listening skills

 Desire to learn about research

 Willingness to share his or her experiences

Recruit community experts with an eye on creating a diverse pool of individuals who share an

interest in improving the way research is conducted and leveraging research to benefit their

community. There are numerous strategies that can be used in the recruitment process but it

is important to look beyond the “usual suspects”- those individuals who are commonly called

upon to serve on Boards, Coalitions and positions where they are asked to represent and

entire community.

While community organizations may look very different from city to city and neighborhood to

neighborhood, there are many common points of contacts for recruiting stakeholders:

 Community-based organizations that serve specific populations (e.g., seniors, youth,

parents)

 Neighborhood leaders affiliated with associations or formalized community groups

 Resident Associations of Public Housing Complexes

 Parent Teacher Organizations/Associations

 Issue or disease focused community coalitions and advocacy groups

 Faith-based institutions that are active in outreach or service in neighborhood

 Health specific support groups or advocacy groups (e.g., Sisters Network, National Family

Caregivers Association, Autism Society)

 Community health centers

Identifying people to serve as community experts will initially focus on the specific needs of

the researchers that are requesting a CE Studio, with an end goal of creating a core group or

pool of experts familiar with and committed to the CE Studio process.

Back to Table of Contents

A note on working with minors: Youth can also serve as community experts, bringing their

unique experiences and perspectives to research. Written parental permission is needed for

young people under the age of 18 and anyone working directly with minors (e.g., facilitator,

community navigator) should follow their organization’s policies regarding contact with

minors, such as completing a background check or completing special training.

See Appendix D for sample recruiting materials (telephone script, email and flyer) for

recruiting experts.

Compensation

The experience and knowledge that community experts bring to the research process is a

tremendous asset and they should be appropriately compensated for their time. CERC bases its

compensation rate (currently $25/hour) on the local average value of volunteer time as

estimated by The Independent Sector https://www.independentsector.org/volunteer_time.

Community Expert Orientation

Each community expert completes an application form, which includes their health interests

and areas of experience and/or expertise, including knowledge of a particular geographic

community, population or condition. This information is needed when assigning stakeholders to

expert panels. The coordinator/Community Navigator provides community experts with a

formal orientation, either one-on-one or in small groups. Community experts receive an

Orientation Guide at this time. The orientation includes a reviewing the guide discussing the

purpose of the CE Studio and the role of the community expert and answering any questions

about the process.

The Community Expert Orientation Guide (Appendix E) includes a job description, FAQs, a

glossary of common research terms, and forms used during the meeting. Experts may also

receive in advance documentation specific to the research project under review. The Guide also

outlines the purpose of the CE Studio, the role and expectations of the expert panel and the CE

Studio process.

“…for me the (CE Studio) put more human impact on research being done. One thing

is to see something on paper and then it’s quite another when you are interacting

with someone doing the work where they can explain things in different ways. It can

be more humanizing. It made me feel closer to the research process…”

Community Expert

Back to Table of Contents

The following is a list of questions commonly asked by community experts when recruited for

a CE Studio:

Q. What makes me an expert?

A. Your expertise is based on your experience with a particular community and/or a health

issue either personally or as a care giver. The researcher that has requested your advice

values your opinions and your experience and would like to incorporate your feedback into

his/her project in the hopes that it can be more relevant.

Q. I don’t know anything about research. Why do you think I can help?

A. No prior knowledge of research is required to serve on a CE Studio expert panel. The

emphasis is on your lived experience. Participating in the CE Studio however will allow you to

learn more about research and how it ultimately could affect you or your community.

Q. Will I be paid for my time? I can’t miss any work.

A. Yes, we always compensate our experts and provide a meal. You will be paid $50 for each

CE Studio session and the Community Navigator will work to schedule the CE Studio at a time

and location that is convenient to the majority of experts participating.

Q. How often to do I have to participate? What happens after the meeting?

A. If you indicate that you would like to continue as an expert, we will contact you anytime a

CE Studio is requested that is a good match to your expertise. You can decline a CE Studio

opportunity or ask to be removed from the list at any time. After each CE Studio, you will be

contacted with an update on the research project that you advised on.

Back to Table of Contents

6) Requesting a CE Studio

A consistent, streamlined process for researchers to request a CE Studio will help expedite

planning and implementation. The request should be in the form of a brief application and

should include, at a minimum:

 Researcher/PI name

 Researcher contact info

 Name of project

 Purpose of the CE Studio

 Summary of the problem the project will address

 Target population (could be study inclusion/exclusion criteria)

Ideally, you will have an online process for researchers to request a CE Studio, using a database

platform such as REDCAP. Many academic institutions have an online portal for vetting research

support services requests.

Once the request for a CE Studio is approved, the researcher will be contacted by the

Community Navigator to schedule a planning meeting.

Back to Table of Contents

Cost

CE Studio costs include CE Studio Team time, compensation for the community experts,

facilitator fees, food, and supplies. We encourage researchers to include CE Studio costs in their

grant proposals as institutional support is never guaranteed. The average cost for a CE Studio is

around $2,500, but this can vary depending on the number of community experts who

participate (see Appendix G for cost estimates).

7) Scheduling

Scheduling a CE Studio can be surprisingly complex. The time and location are determined

based on the majority of stakeholder’s availability. Community experts new to the CE Studio

should receive one-on-one or small group orientation to make sure they understand the

purpose of the meeting and what will be expected of them.

Ideally, a panel of 8-10 community experts should be present for each CE Studio. Sometimes

life gets in the way and experts have to drop out. For this reason, we recommend recruiting 10 -

12 people to ensure adequate participation. Food appropriate to the time of the meetings

should be provided, i.e. breakfast, lunch, dinner or snacks. Choose a location is convenient and

easy to find with adequate parking. The meeting room should be equipped with a computer

and projector for the PowerPoint presentation and large to comfortably seat everyone.

Choose a location for the meeting that is convenient and accessible for the community experts.

The academic medical center, while convenient for researchers, can be daunting for community

members, so a community setting (e.g. community centers, community health centers, public

libraries, etc.) may be more conducive to participation. Likewise, find a time that is convenient

for community members who may not have flexibility during the weekdays due to work and

other conflicts. Consider scheduling in the evenings or on weekends if necessary.

What to bring:

 Forms for Sign-in sheet, Expert Roster with Contact Info, Consultant Compensation.

Forms, Expert Comment Forms, Expert and Researcher Evaluation Forms, Community

Expert Applications.

 Flip charts, markers, name tags, pens.

 Researcher’s presentation on jump drive.

 Laptop computer and projector if needed.

 Copies of researcher materials if needed such as study brochures, consent forms and

recruitment flyers.

Back to Table of Contents

STEP BY STEP: GETTING READY

 Schedule planning meeting with researcher, and CE Studio team (facilitator,

community navigator and faculty member).

 Identify community members for the expert panel that fit researcher’s request.

 Provide orientation to community experts who have not previously participated in a

CE Studio.

 Determine availability of all parties starting with the community experts. CE Studios

are often held in the evenings and/or on the weekends to accommodate work

schedules and other commitments.

 Secure a location that is convenient to the stakeholders who will be in attendance.

 Follow up with the researcher/research team to review the presentation for clear

and concise language and images that will be easy for non-researchers to

understand. Make recommendations for improvement if needed. Request the final

version prior to the CE Studio.

 Confirm time and location with community experts and if necessary, mail or email

any materials that need to be reviewed in advance

 Copy complete set of forms needed. Include any materials that will be reviewed by

Experts, brochures, posters, etc.

 Arrange for food and drink to be on location.

The Meeting

A not on note taking: Adults engage in different ways and with a variety of learning styles. To

accommodate everyone, the CE Studio uses flip charts that are displayed around the room prior

to the meeting. This method allows for all participants regarding of learning style to stay

engaged in the studio as active participants. For those that learn by listening, they can easily

focus on what is being said. For those who are more visual learners, they can always refer to

what is being written on the flip charts. This also helps to ensure the note-taker is writing down

exactly what is being said, as well as, allows experts to refer back to a point made earlier in the

studio.

Back to Table of Contents

STEP BY STEP: THE MEETING

 Facilitator and/or navigator greets all participants warmly when they arrive

 The Community Navigator passes around a sign-in sheet and assists the experts with any

questions.

 When the group is seated, the navigator or facilitator welcomes everyone and asks them

to introduce themselves.

 Community Navigator sets the context by giving a brief overview of the purpose of the

meeting and gives instructions on the forms provided to each participant (comment

sheet, evaluation, paperwork needed to process payment).

 Facilitator explains ground rules: be respectful of other’s opinions and experiences, keep

confidential any personal info that might be discussed in the meeting, stay on topic and

don’t dominate the conversation.

 Researcher makes brief presentation (no more than 15 minutes) describing his or her

research project and the specific questions for the experts’ consideration.

 Experts have opportunity to ask researcher questions for clarification

 Facilitator keeps conversation on track, makes sure everyone’s voice is heard.

 Community Navigator takes notes

 The facilitator reviews their responses and recommendations made during the discussion

and the experts have the opportunity to provide additional feedback in writing.

 Ask both researchers and stakeholders to complete an evaluation survey. See community

expert survey in Appendix E and researcher survey in Appendix H.

Back to Table of Contents

8) Following Up

For the researcher: A recommendation report including the Community Navigator’s notes and

verbatim written comments from the community experts is shared with the researcher within

one week of the CE Studio. We recommend highlighting specific recommendations as related

to the topics that were discussed during the meeting. See sample summary, Appendix I.

For the community experts: Notify them of any changes or adjustments made as a result of

their input. Items shared as follow-up may include updated outreach materials, policy and

procedural changes or significant accomplishments of the study due to advice received during

the CE Studio. If possible, give the community experts periodic updates on the project as well

as any findings published or disseminated by the research team.

“Let us know what happened as a result of the studio. Be sure to make it

clear that it was worth my time to be involved. I chose to be involved

because I was interested in the topic, so just follow-though.”

Community Expert

Back to Table of Contents

9) Metrics

Reflecting 90 CE Studios conducted by CERC between 2009 and 2017.

Community Experts (N=406)

Gender

Male (33%)

Female (65%)

Other (1%)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

African American

Caucasian

Latino

Asian/Pacific Islander

Native American

Other

Race/Ethnicity

10%

15%

20%

25%

15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+

Age

Back to Table of Contents

Researchers (N=90)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Professor

Associate Professor

Assistant Professor

Research Associate

Instructor

Post-Doc/Fellow

Other

Researcher Rank

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Other

Dissemination

Implementation

Consent

Recruitment

Community partnership

Ethics

Design

Research question

Primary Focus of CE Studio

TOP 10 DISCIPLINES OF

RESEARCHERS REQUESTING

A COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT STUDIO

Cardiology

Behavioral Health

Infectious Disease

Epidemiology

Critical Care Medicine

Pediatrics

Neurology

Radiology

Nephrology

Informatics

Back to Table of Contents

Evaluation Surveys:

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Community experts will improve the quality of the research.

Community Experts Researchers

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Increased researcher's understanding of community

Increased researchers's sensitivity to community

Provided feedback on feasibility

Provided feedack on appropriateness

Ideas on recruiting research participants

Ideas on informing the community about the project

Ideas on how to use results to benefit the community

"What did the community experts contribute?"

Community Experts Researchers

Back to Table of Contents

10) Promoting the CE Studio

The Institutional Review Board is one of the organizations within an academic institution that is

likely to have a strong interest in the potential benefits of the CE Studio model. Presentations

to IRB staff and committees will introduce them to the CE Studio as a way to integrate

community perspectives into research design and implementation. Building the awareness of

IRB staff and committee members in regards to how patient and community stakeholders can

inform and assist researchers in avoiding common pitfalls will enable them to refer projects

when appropriate to the CE Studio process.

Other strategies to raise awareness about the CE Studio and gain support and buy-in include

giving talks at department and research center meetings, grand rounds presentations, meeting

with scientific review committees, getting on the agenda of community advisory councils of

research centers or groups, and including information about the CE Studio in training sessions

on patient and community engaged research.

Use internal communications such as electronic and print newsletters, and institution-wide and

departmental publications to announce opportunities to learn about the CE Studio. You can

also work with your institution’s internal marketing and communications department to publish

a feature story about a successful CE Studio from the researcher or community expert point of

view. See sample flyer in Appendix J.

Back to Table of Contents

APPENDICES

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix A

Community Navigator Job Description

Basic Qualifications

Education Required: Masters in public/community health, human and organization development, social

work or related field.

Experience: Required months in field prior to employment: 24 months minimum

Notes:

Qualified candidates will have excellent oral, written and electronic communication skills and a record of

accomplishment in community networking and collaboration building as well as demonstrated skill

working with diverse communities of health and human service providers and consumers. Familiarity

with local community, experience with academic-community partnerships and understanding of the

principles of community engagement a plus.

Job Summary

The Community Navigator will assist with the planning and implementation of the Community

Engagement Studio; work collaboratively with academic and community partners to build research

collaborations; and assist with the development of an infrastructure to foster innovative community-

engaged research by providing education, outreach and trust-building activities.

Key Functions and Expected Performance

1. Organize and support Community Engagement Studio activities, and follow up on any actions

resulting in the activities.

2. Manage the flow of research projects through the Community Engagement Core and Community

Engagement Studio.

3. Orient and support the community experts who participate in the Community Engagement Studio.

4. Identify and build professional relationships with community organizations and community

advocates who have an interest in building academic-community research partnerships.

5. Develop and maintain mechanisms to communicate with community partners, increase interaction

between community partners and academic researchers, and track the development of academic-

community research partnerships.

6. Support community education and outreach activities.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix B

FAQs for Researchers

Q. Why would I request a Community Engagement Studio?

A. Increasingly, both funders and researchers’ are seeking cost-effective and time efficient methods that

engage groups of stakeholders and patients to enhance current research practices and improve

dissemination. The Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio) streamlines the process of gathering

feedback by creating an infrastructure that works to empower community members to provide

meaningful insight into all phases of research.

Q. What is the purpose of the Community Engagement Studio?

A. The CE Studio allows a researcher to gain feedback from his or her community of interest or patient

group about issues pertaining to design, implementation, recruitment, retention and other potential

barriers to participation.

Q. How much time will this Studio take?

A. The CE Studio requires a small investment of time. In total, a researcher spends on average less than

four hours of his or her time preparing for and participating in the CE Studio.

 15 minutes online- Submitting initial request

 30-45 minute - Planning meeting with CE Studio Team (Community Navigator, Facilitator,

CERC Faculty)

 30 minutes-1 hour- Preparing presentation

 1 ½ -2 hours - meeting

Q. How much will this cost?

A. The CE Studio is currently paid for through an institutional voucher system. All expert compensation,

facilitator cost, food, supplies and staff time is covered by the voucher. We encourage researchers to

include CE Studio costs in their grant proposals as institutional money is never guaranteed. Actual costs

run between -$2,000- $3,000 depending on staff time needed, location and number of community

experts who participate.

Q. Can I recruit the experts for my study?

A. You may not use the CE Studio to recruit for your study. You may, however, share information

regarding the study so that an expert can contact you or your research staff for more information

outside of the Studio. Some experts choose to participate in the Studio and at times recruit others from

their community.

Q. Why is there a facilitator? Can I facilitate myself?

A. The CE Studio utilizes a trained facilitator who has experience working with group processes and

understands the principles of community engagement. The use of an independent facilitator allows a

researcher to listen to feedback and ask for clarification without having the responsibility of leading the

process.

Back to Table of Contents

Q. Can I pick or recommend specific experts to participate?

A. The Community Navigator is charged with the recruitment of experts. Ideally experts should not

have a prior relationship with the researcher or the staff to ensure that feedback is open and honest.

Q. How can I help ensure that the Studio is scheduled in a timely manner?

A. Identifying the right experts and finding a date that works for everyone can be complex. Your prompt

responses to emails and voicemails regarding your availability, clarification of your questions or patient

population and any other info needed to move your Studio forward is critical to getting your Studio

scheduled.

Q. Do I need IRB approval to have a CE Studio?

A. You do not need IRB approval. The CE Studio is a process to inform the development, conduct or

dissemination of research but is not considered research itself. The stakeholders or community/patient

experts who participate in the CE Studio are not research subjects, rather, they are advisors and/or

consultants.

Q. Can the information from CE Studios be used for research purposes or publication?

A. It depends on how you intend to use the information. It is acceptable to describe the process and the

input that you received. However, because the community experts are not research participants, you

cannot provide details of who participated or analyze the input by any demographics.

For example:

We received detailed input from a representative group of stakeholders to help guide our evaluation.

A group of consumers who have used the clinic was convened by our community engaged research

core using a structured process called the Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio). The award-

winning CE Studio uses best practices for community engagement and an experienced team to

overcome barriers to engaging groups of stakeholders and facilitate meaningful input from

stakeholders. From the CE Studio, we learned that consumers thought the registration process was too

long and that the experience with the interdisciplinary team was very important in determining

whether they would return to the clinic. We used the input from the CE Studio to streamline our

registration process and provide more opportunities for consumers to engage with our

interdisciplinary team. Overall the input we received from consumers was extremely helpful in

understanding how our services are used and for improving operations.

Q. What is the difference between a CE Studio and a focus group?

A. CE Studios are not intended as research. They provide a relatively quick way to gain patient or

community input on the development or implementation of a research project. Focus groups are

conducted with the use of an explicit interview guide where all questions have been pre-identified. In a

focus group, the facilitator is more focused on the subjective experience of the group as opposed to the

individual. CE Studios are utilized to dig deeper into the individual’s knowledge and experience as it

might relate to the study. The experts participating can come from a variety of backgrounds with one

shared experience, like a particular health condition. While there are 2-3 main topics that will be

Back to Table of Contents

discussed during a Studio, the discussion is not limited to specific questions. This allows the facilitator to

focus the discussion on what is most helpful to the researcher and his/her project. This is important, as

issues that may not have been identified prior to the meeting, may turn out to be the most insightful for

the research being discussed.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix C

Sample Research Presentation

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix D

Tools for Recruiting Community Experts

Email Communication to Community Experts

Single studio

Hello everyone.

This email is to inform you about an upcoming studio to be scheduled for the end of June. This studio

will provide feedback on recruitment strategies, potential barriers to enrollment and the overall

feasibility of a study with patients receiving care in the emergency room. As a reminder, the Community

Engagement Studio usually lasts 1 ½ hours, and individuals from the community (or providers of care)

give feedback and advice to help researchers improve upon their research projects.

The studio meeting will be scheduled at a time that is convenient for the majority of participants, a meal

will be provided and you will be compensated $50 for your time.

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at <insert email address here>.

Candidates for CHEST PAIN studio

1) Patients 45-65 years old in good health (no known heart condition) who have sought

emergency department care for chest pain, were admitted to the hospital, then discharged

with a final diagnosis that the heart was not the cause of chest pain.

2) Patients 45-65 years old in good health (no known heart condition) who have sought

emergency department care within the past year and were discharged from the emergency

department without being admitted.

3) Participants 45-65 years old in good health (no known heart condition except for high blood

pressure).

We are not looking for participants with a past history of heart or vascular disease (including heart

attack, heart failure, stroke, and pulmonary embolus), nor active cancer.

If you meet one of the qualifiers above and are interested in participating, please go to this link to

indicate your availability. Please use your first and last name as the poll is private. I will be in touch by

the end of next week with confirmation of date and time.

Many thanks for considering my request. Have a great weekend!

Back to Table of Contents

Multiple Studios

Hello all.

I am emailing you because you have served as a Community Expert in the past, are a leader in the

community who can share these opportunities with the community that you serve or, you completed a

survey via ResearchMatch expressing interest in being involved.

We currently have several Community Engagement Studio opportunities that are in need of

participants. I have described each studio in detail below and included a link to a scheduling doodle that

will allow you to indicate your availability. The Studio will last approximately 1 ½ hours and all

consultants will receive $50, as well as a meal. As a reminder, a Community Engagement Studio is a 1-

time meeting that brings together patients and/or community members to discuss issues that can

improve research proposals and projects.

Thank you in advance for your consideration and assistance. You may forward this announcement to

others who might be interested, but the person must contact me by email at <insert email address

here>.or I will not have their contact info to follow-up. Please feel free to contact me should you have

any questions or need additional information.

1) Coordinated Care Clinic: This studio will review and provide feedback on the design of a

Coordinated Care Clinic Model that would work to prevent cardiovascular disease in high risk

patients. The group will also give feedback on an incentive plan that waives fees associated with

hospitalization for cardiovascular disease. *You must have a Vanderbilt Primary Care Provider,

be at-risk for Cardiovascular Disease (diabetic, high blood pressure, overweight, and/or smoker,

etc.) and be over the age of 18 to participate. Indicate availability here with your first name

and last initial.

2) Improving Healthcare Systems: This studio will discuss adverse events that occur during

hospitalization (poor communication by providers, secondary infections, etc.) The group will

identify potential events and ways to prevent them. The group will also discuss their opinions

on how adverse events may have affected them and their condition. *You must have had a

recent hospitalization (last 2-3 years) or care for a patient who was hospitalized. You must

also be 18 years or older. Indicate availability here with your first name and last initial.

3) Diabetes Intervention: This studio will discuss the design of a text-based diabetes intervention

that incorporates family members. The group will discuss recruitment and messaging. You

must be 18 years or older, have diabetes AND ideally be a patient at a local Federally Qualified

Health Center. Indicate availability here with your first name and last initial.

4) Community Experts who have had Head & Neck Cancer: This studio will assist in generating an

appropriate interview guide for a new study. Time and dates are TBD. Please email me at

<insert email address here> if you are interested in participating.

Thanks again everyone!

Back to Table of Contents

Confirmation Email

Hello everyone.

I am emailing to confirm your attendance for the Community Engagement Studio on "INSERT STUDIO

TOPIC". Each participant will receive $50 in compensation for their time which will be mailed to you

following the meeting. This will be a facilitated discussion with key questions that will be asked about

your experience, and as always gathering your opinions will be the focus of our meeting. There are no

wrong answers.

The meeting will be held on INSERT SPECIFIC DATE AND TIME. This was the time and date that worked

for the majority of participants.

Your lunch order will be your confirmation. Please send me your preference asap.

See below for choices.

INSTRUCTIONS SHOULD BE VERY DETAILED

As a reminder, the meeting will last no more than two hours. You will be coming to 2525 West End

Avenue which is located across the street from Centennial Park. It is the same building where P.F.

Chang’s and Bread and Company are located. If you are coming down West End going towards

downtown you will make a right turn onto Natchez Trace next to the Wendy’s. You will then make an

immediate left into the parking lot of the building. You will see the entrance to the parking garage

directly in front of you. I will give you a ticket to validate your parking.

You will take the crosswalk across on the third floor. Enter the doors to the building and take the

elevator to the 10th floor.

You may also be able to find parking in the front lot of the building. In that case, enter through the glass

doors next to Starbuck’s and take the escalators to the top. The elevator is around the corner to your

left.

Please email me your preference to confirm your attendance.

Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions before then. As always, thank you for your

continued support!

I look forward to seeing each of you and thanks again for your participation.

Back to Table of Contents

Sample phone script for an expert with previous CE Studio experience

Hello, Mr. /Ms. __________. This is _____________ from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

How are you today?

I’m calling to discuss with you an upcoming studio. This studio will provide feedback on <insert

description> recruitment strategies, potential barriers to enrollment and the overall feasibility of a study

with patients receiving care in the emergency room. Have you received care through the emergency

room before?

<If no> Thank you for taking the time to talk with me. While you don’t qualify for this studio, I will be in

touch about future opportunities.

<If yes> Ok. Do you think you would like to participate in this studio?

<If no> Ok. Thank you for taking the time to talk with me. I will be in touch about future opportunities.

<If yes> Great, I’m glad you would like to participate. As a reminder, the Community Engagement Studio

is a 1-time meeting that lasts about 1 ½ hours. Individuals from the community (or providers of care)

give feedback and advice to help researchers improve upon their research projects. We will provide a

meal during the meeting and you will be compensated $50 for your time.

While I have you on the phone, I will read a list of times and days that we are looking at as options for

scheduling the studio. Please tell me all of the ones that you would be available to attend. Once I have

everyone’s availability, the studio meeting will be scheduled at a time that is convenient for the majority

of participants.

Thank you for your patience. Do you have any questions regarding the studio? If you think of any

please feel free to contact me at <insert email address here> or <insert phone number>.

I will be in touch by <insert time period> with confirmation of date and time.

Many thanks for considering my request. Have a great day!

Back to Table of Contents

Sample phone script for recruiting a new expert

Hello, Mr. /Ms. __________. This is _____________ from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

How are you today?

I’m calling to discuss an opportunity to participate in a meeting where you would give feedback on a

research project. These meetings are called Community Engagement Studios. The Community

Engagement Studio is a 1-time meeting that lasts about 1 ½ hours. Individuals from the community, such

as yourself, give feedback and advice to help researchers improve upon their research projects. We

provide a meal during the meeting and you will be compensated $50 for your time.

The studio I am calling about today will provide feedback on <insert description, e.g., recruitment

strategies, potential barriers to enrollment and the overall feasibility of a study with patients receiving

care in the emergency room. Have you received care through the emergency room before?>

<If no> Thank you for taking the time to talk with me. While you don’t qualify for this studio, would you

be interested in future opportunities to participate? <If yes> Great, I’ll send you an Orientation Guide

that will give you more information about the purpose and process if the studios. If you complete the

Expert Bio form and return it to me, I’ll add you to our expert pool and contact you when another

opportunity comes up. I can send that via email or mail. What is your preference?

<If yes> Ok. Do you think you would like to participate in this studio?

<If no> Ok. Thank you for taking the time to talk with me. I will be in touch about future opportunities.

<If yes> Great, I’m glad you would like to participate. I will send to you an Orientation Guide that will

give you more information about the purpose and process if the studios. I can send that via email or

mail. What is your preference?

<Write down preference.> Ok. I will send the guide to you today.

While I have you on the phone, I will read a list of times and days that we are looking at as options for

scheduling the studio. Please tell me all of the times that you would be available to attend. Once I have

everyone’s availability, the meeting will be scheduled at a time that is convenient for the majority of

participants.

Thank you for your patience. Do you have any questions regarding the studio or the process? If you

think of any please feel free to contact me at <insert email address here> or <insert phone number>.

I will be in touch by <insert time period> with confirmation of date and time.

Many thanks for considering my request. Have a great day!

Community Expert

Orientation Guide

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix E

Expert Orientation Guide

Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research

Sponsor Award No: 3-UL1-RR025747-02S1

Sponsor Award No: UL1 RR024975 from NCRR/NIH

Your guide to the Community Engagement Studio

Process

Back to Table of Contents

Dear Community Expert,

On behalf of the Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core, we thank you

for agreeing to serve as an Expert for the Community Engagement Studio. Our purpose is to

support academic-community research partnerships that are focused on improving community

health and healthcare. We created the Community Engagement Studio to provide a forum for

researchers to hear, first hand from patients, caregivers, community care providers and

community members how to plan and conduct research that is more relevant, patient-centered

and impactful.

You have been invited to serve as an expert for a Community Engagement Studio

because of your knowledge of a particular community or interest group or health condition and

your interest in research. The Community Engagement Studio is a forum for learning for both

researchers and community members, and we encourage you to offer honest feedback and

constructive criticism, and serve as an advocate for your community.

We look forward to working with you and hope that the Community Engagement Studio

is a positive experience for you.

Back to Table of Contents

Community Expert Orientation Guide

What is the purpose of the Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio)?

The Community Engagement Studio is a guidance session for health researchers interested in

getting feedback from patients or working in a community setting. Community stakeholders

serve on expert panels to provide feedback on various aspects of a proposed or on-going

research project, including the design, intervention, communication materials, participant

recruitment strategies, sharing learning with the community, and applying research findings to

practice.

What is a Community Expert?

A Community Expert is an individual who has lived experience or possesses first-hand

knowledge of a particular community or health issue. A Community Expert has a desire to

learn about research, an ability to provide constructive criticism, and a willingness to be an

advocate for his or her community.

Why are Community Engagement Studios important?

Community Engagement Studios help assure that research meets the needs of people who live

in a particular community, or are impacted by a specific health issue. Community Experts are

one of the most important resources available to directly guide a research project that will

impact patients and the community. Through the Community Engagement Studio, the

Community Expert:

 Provides the research team with a deeper understanding of patients’ and communities’

unique circumstances.

 Increases a researcher understands of and sensitivity to the patients and communities

they are interested in studying.

 Strengthens academic-community partnerships so that over time, universities become

more and more effective in working with patients and communities.

 Helps assess the relevance, feasibility and appropriateness of the research activities.

 Enhances the success of research project by providing immediate feedback to the

researchers.

How do I prepare for a CE Studio?

 Background material on the research project or research topic will be provided to you in

advance, so that you can read about the research project before the CE Studio.

 You may want to write down any thoughts, concerns or questions in advance, so that

they can be easily and promptly addressed during the CE Studio

 Complete or update the 1-page Bio form on file to match your expertise with

researchers needs.

 There is no need for additional preparation. We are matching you to this specific CE

Studio because of your particular experience, background or knowledge. Remember,

you are already an expert!

Back to Table of Contents

What can I expect?

 The CE Studio will take place in a community setting, during hours that are convenient

to the Community Experts. It will last no more than two hours.

 Up to ten Community Experts may participate in a CE Studio.

 Usually two members of the research team may attend, including the lead researcher

and staff member.

 The CE Studio will be moderated by an experienced facilitator who is knowledgeable

about the research process. In her opening remarks, the facilitator will make

introductions and explain the ground rules for the CE Studio.

 Following the opening remarks, the researcher will give a brief overview of his/her

project and pose specific questions for you to consider. Examples of questions include:

What barriers might exist for you or people you know to participate in this study? What

measurements and study outcomes are important to you? What would be some

effective ways to share what we learn from this study in your community?

 The facilitator will lead the discussion to ensure that it stays on track, that all the experts

have an opportunity to share their thoughts and it addresses the researcher’s questions.

 At the close of the Community Engagement Studio session, you will be asked to

complete a brief comment and evaluation form that will allow you to give additional

feedback that might be helpful to the researcher. See the sample that is included in this

Orientation Guide.

What happens following the CE Studio?

 The facilitator will summarize in writing the Community Expert’s feedback for the

researcher.

 You will complete a payment form to receive $50 in compensation for your

participation.

 You will be asked to complete an evaluation for to help us monitor and improve the

process and experience of everyone involved.

 If you are interested, we will contact you with updates on the study.

As a registered Community Expert we will keep your Bio on file and contact you if your area of

expertise matches a researcher’s CE Studio request. If you have any questions or would like to

be removed from our Community Expert Resource List please contact, <insert contact person’s

name, email address and phone number>.

Back to Table of Contents

Glossary of Terms

Basic Science Research: The study of a subject to increase knowledge and understanding about

it without a specific or immediate practical application. Examples include studies of cell

signaling, genetic mutations associated with specific types of cancer and how tumors evade the

body’s immune system. The majority of medical researchers at Vanderbilt and Meharry Medical

College are engaged in basic science research.

Clinical Research: Research that determines the safety and effectiveness of medications,

devices, diagnostic products and techniques, and treatment regimens.

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER): the direct comparison of existing treatments to

determine with works best. CER has emerged as an important mechanism to improve health

outcomes, accelerate the translation and dissemination of evidence-based diagnostic and

treatment strategies and deliver more patient-centered healthcare.

Community Engaged Research (CEnR): A distinct approach to research involving the building of

trusted and authentic partnerships between researchers and the community. CEnR requires

that a relationship be built between the academic institution and the community in which it

serves based on respect, trust and mutual benefit and addresses community needs and health

issues as defined by the community itself.

Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR): Community-based participatory research is

research that is conducted as an equal partnership between traditionally trained "experts" and

members of a community. In CBPR projects, the community participates fully in all aspects of

the research process. Community is often self-defined, but general categories of community

include geographic community, community of individuals with a common problem or issue, or a

community of individuals with a common interest or goal.

CTSA or Clinical Translational Science Award: A consortium of 60 medical research institutions

working to improve the way medical research is conducted. The vision of the CTSA network is

to reduce the time it takes for scientific discoveries to become treatments, practices or policies

to improve health.

Dissemination: A planned process that involves consideration of target audiences and the

settings in which research findings are to be received and, where appropriate, communicating

and interacting with wider policy and health service audiences in ways that will facilitate using

research findings in decision-making.

IRB or Internal Review Board: A committee of physicians, statisticians, researchers, community

advocates, and others that ensures that any research done on and about humans is ethical and

that the rights of study participants and communities are protected. All human subjects’

research done in the United States must be approved by an IRB before they begin.

Back to Table of Contents

Human Subjects Protection: Laws set by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

(DHHS) to protect a person from risks in research studies that any federal agency or

department has a part in. Also called 45 CFR 46, 45 Code of Federal Regulations Part 46, and

human participant protection regulations. Research institutions require that anyone engaged in

research that involves humans must complete training in human subjects’ protection.

Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engaged Research Core (CERC): An inter- and intra-

institutional, multi-disciplinary program that integrates the principles of participatory

engagement in all aspects of its work. CERC is coordinated through the Vanderbilt Office for

Community Engagement and serves as the community engagement core for both the

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (VICTR) and the Meharry Clinical and

Translational Research Center (MeTRC).

NIH or the National Institutes for Health: The primary Federal agency for conducting and

supporting medical research. NIH is composed of 27 different institutes and centers.

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR): Patient-Centered Outcomes Research helps

people and their caregivers communicate and make informed health care decisions, allowing

their voices to be heard in assessing the value of health care options. This research aims to

answer patient-centered questions as defined by individual patients.

PCORI or Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute: A nonprofit organization recently

established by the Affordable Care Act to improve the quality and relevance of research to help

patients, caregivers, clinicians, employers, insurers and policy makers make informed health

decisions. PCORI provides grants for comparative effectiveness research.

PI or Principal Investigator: The researcher in charge of an experiment or research project and

the person responsible for the overall management and direction of the project. This PI may

also be called the lead investigator or lead scientist.

Research Core: A shared resource or facility that offers support to researchers in a particular

research area (e.g., cancer, health disparities, HIV/AIDS) or data collection/analysis

methodology (qualitative research, biostatistics, cell imaging).

Stakeholders: We define stakeholders as “individuals, organizations or communities that have a

direct interest in the process and outcomes of a research project.” Stakeholders may be

patients, caregivers, advocates, research volunteers and community leaders. The target

stakeholders for the CRB are individuals with first-hand knowledge of a particular health issue

or community and stakeholders are selected in direct response to the research topic. We refer

to CRB stakeholders as “experts” and each is compensated for participation.

Back to Table of Contents

Translational Research: This type of research transforms scientific discoveries into improved

patient care, community-based practices and policies to improve health.

VICTR or Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research: VICTR works to transform

the way ideas and research discoveries make their way to patient care and community practice.

It does this through collaboration with a wide variety of research partners, by providing training

to researchers, by funding new research, by developing new and innovative ways to involve the

community in research, and by developing new informatics and biostatistical systems.

http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/victr/pub/.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix F

Sample Forms for new applications

Community

Engagement Studio

Sample Forms

Back to Table of Contents

Community Engagement Studio Expert Bio

Contact Information

Name

Street Address

City ST ZIP Code

Home Phone

Work Phone

Cell Phone

E-Mail Address

Demographic Information

Gender: ___Male ___Female ___Other Date of Birth: ___________

Ethnicity:

___ African American

___ Asian/Pacific Islander

___ Caucasian

___ Native American

___ Hispanic/Latino

___ Other (describe):

Availability

During which hours are you available for community review board meetings?

___ Weekday mornings

___ Weekend mornings

___ Weekday afternoons

___ Weekend afternoons

___ Weekday evenings

___ Weekend evenings

Interests

What health related topics are you interested in or have personal experience with (check all that

apply)?

___ Access to health care

___ Health care quality

___ Maternal/child health

___ Cancer

___ Health disparities

___ Men’s health

___ Community health

___ Heart disease

___ Mental health

___ Diabetes

___ Health policy

___ Nutrition

___ Genetics

___ Health promotion/disease prevention

___ Obesity

___ Health behavior

___ HIV/AIDS

___ Women’s health

___ Other topics (please explain):

May we contact you about future Community Engagement Studios? ___ Yes ___No

Agreement and Signature

By signing this application, I understand that the information I provide about me will be kept confidential.

Furthermore, I agree that I will keep confidential any comments made during the Community

Engagement Studio by either the other Community Experts or the presenting researchers.

Name (printed)

Signature

Date

Back to Table of Contents

Community Engagement Studio Comment Form

Date: ____________________________

Principal Investigator: ____________________________

We appreciate your participation and value your time. In an effort to maximize the benefits for

everyone involved, we have developed a Comment Form. Please comment on the points listed below

during the course of the studio session. The facilitator will collect/review these comments at the end of

the session and then summarize the feedback for group. (Please feel free to use the back of the page if

necessary.)

Additional Comments:

General thoughts about the project (strengths):

What was good about the project?

What challenges do you think the project will have in the community (weaknesses)?

What would you like to see the researcher do differently (opportunities)?

Back to Table of Contents

Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engagement Research Program

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research

Community Engagement Studio - Community Expert Evaluation Survey

You have been asked to complete this survey because of your participation the Community

Engagement Studio. The main benefit to completing this survey is to improve the effectiveness

of the Community Engagement Studio, and the quality of the academic-community research

partnerships that result. Your individual responses may be used as part of a research study and

will be kept anonymous. There are no known risks to completing this survey, and your

participation is voluntary. Refusing to participate will not have any impact on your opportunity

to participate in the Community Engagement Studio in the future.

Please respond to the following statements and questions:

1. The scheduling/communications for this Community Engagement Studio session were

handled in a timely and efficient manner.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

2. The allotted time for the Community Engagement Studio was sufficient.

 Too much time  Enough time  Not enough time

3. The Community Engagement Studio moderator managed the allotted time in order to

address my questions and comments.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

4. The relevant experts were present at the Community Engagement Studio session.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

5. I was satisfied with the Community Engagement Studio session.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

6. The Community Engagement Studio process was worth my time.

Back to Table of Contents

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

7. The researcher’s presentation gave me enough information to provide appropriate

feedback.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

8. The feedback provided by the community experts will improve the research project.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

9. Would you participate in the Community Engagement Studio again?

 Yes  No

10. What do you feel was your contribution to the research project? Please check all that

apply.

 Increased researcher understanding of the community

 Increased researcher sensitivity to the community

 Provided feedback on the feasibility of the project

 Provided feedback on the appropriateness of the project

 Ideas on recruiting research participants

 Ideas on how to inform the community about the project

 Ideas on how to use results of project to benefit the community

Other, specify_______________________________________________

11. Please suggest at least one way the quality of the Community Engagement Studio could

be improved in the future.

II.

III.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix G

Estimated CE Studio Costs

Community

Navigator/Coordinator

Communication with

researcher/research team

including prep meeting,

follow-up 3 hours

Recruitment and

orientation of experts: 15

hours

Meeting, including setup

and takedown: 4 hours

Summary prep and follow-

up communication with

researcher : 3 hours

25 hours x $50/hour

(based on $80,000

salary plus 24%

fringe)

$1,250

Administrative

Assistant

Meeting logistics and prep:

2 hours

4 hours x $20 /hour

(based on $32,000

salary plus 24%

fringe)

Faculty

Researcher coaching

2 hours x $110/hour

(based on $181,500

salary plus 21%

fringe)

220

Facilitator

For prep meeting with

researcher and facilitating

and 2 hour studio

200

Experts

For participating in 2 hour

meeting

2 hours x $25 x 10

experts

500

Meals

$12 per meal x 14

people

168

TOTAL

$2,418

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix H

Researcher Evaluation Survey

Meharry-Vanderbilt Community Engagement Research Core

Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research

Community Engagement Studio – Researcher Survey

You have been asked to complete this survey because of your participation the Community

Engagement Studio. The main benefit to completing this survey is to improve the effectiveness

of the Community Engagement Studio and the quality of the academic-community research

partnerships that result. Your individual responses may be used as part of a research study and

will be kept anonymous. There are no known risks to completing this survey, and your

participation is voluntary. Refusing to participate will not have any impact on your opportunity

to use the Studio in the future.

Please respond to the following statements and questions:

1. The scheduling/communications for this Studio session were handled in a timely and

efficient manner.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

2. The allotted time for the Studio was sufficient.

 Too much time  Enough time  Not enough time

3. The Studio moderator managed the allotted time in order to address my questions.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

4. The relevant experts were present at the Studio session.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

5. I was satisfied with the Studio session.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

6. The Studio process was worth my time.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

7. The expert feedback was conveyed to me in an appropriate way.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

Back to Table of Contents

8. This Studio session improved the quality of my project.

 Strongly agree  Agree  Disagree  Strongly disagree

9. Would you recommend a Community Engagement Studio session to a colleague?

 Yes  No

10. Would you request a Community Engagement Studio in the future?

 Yes  No

11. Would you request input again from the individuals participating in this Studio?

 Yes  No

12. What do you feel were the Studio experts’ contribution to the research project? Please

check all that apply.

 Increased my understanding of the community

 Increased my sensitivity to the community

 Provided feedback on the feasibility of the project

 Provided feedback on the appropriateness of the project

 Ideas on recruiting research participants

 Ideas on how to inform the community about the project

 Ideas on how to use results of project to benefit the community

Other, specify_____________________________________________

13. Did your Studio result in any of the following (check all that apply):

 Grant submission

 Manuscript submission

 Delayed grant submission

 Delayed manuscript submission

 Major proposal/manuscript revisions

If you selected grant submission or manuscript submission, please specify the

funding agency and/or the name of the journal:

14. Has your perception about the role of patient or community stakeholders in research

changed as a result of the Community Engagement Studio?

 Yes

 No

If yes, please describe how your perception has changed:

Back to Table of Contents

15. What, if anything do you plan to change as a result of the feedback you received from

the Studio? (check all that apply)

 Research question

 Research design

 Level of community / patient engagement in research activities

 Recruitment/retention strategies

 Consent process

 Data collection

 Data interpretation

 Dissemination

 Change in number of questions (i.e. survey items)

 More patient-centered questions

 Less technical/medical jargon

 More culturally relevant questions

 I do not intend to change anything

 Other

Please describe other:

16. To what degree has the community expert input impacted the community or patient-

centered components of your project? This includes community or patient preferences,

needs, wants and values.

 No impact

 Minor impact

 Neutral

 Moderate impact

 Major impact

17. Please suggest three ways the quality of the Community Engagement Studio can be

improved in the future.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix I

CE Studio Summary and Recommendations

Personalized HIV Care

Recommendations

Elements important in personalized care:

1. Consistent and open communication between

provider and patients.

2. Continuity of providers is essential; doctors,

nurses and staff.

3. Incorporate holistic approach to care that

includes mental health needs.

4. Take into account the variety of cultural

variances across all patient populations.

How EHRs are used in personalized care:

1. Genetic testing should be a part of PC with a focus

on inter-provider and patient education to

maximize impact.

2. Take extra care in educating patients about their

own genetic testing results.

3. Use EHR data with patient permission and full

transparency to address concerns regarding

privacy, insurance, etc.

Recruitment and Messaging:

1. Raise awareness of opportunities to participate

by building collaborations with community

partners, i.e. community organizations, faith

community, caregivers, etc.

2. Get the word out via patients or advocates who

are active in the LGBTQ or HIV+ community.

3. Utilize multiple forms of outreach: people

networks, social media, traditional media, and

providers.

Back to Table of Contents

Community Engagement Studio Conversational Summary

What does personalized care mean to you?

 There must be good communication between all of my providers.

 Honesty from my providers and I cannot feel like I am being judged. I also value openness.

 I must be able to trust my doctor/staff with sensitive information.

 There is sometimes a lack of cohesiveness – care does not feel synced – not sure who to trust

o I receive conflicting information regarding meds or treatments.

o Doctor turnover means you have to start over to rebuild trust.

 The doctor should be very knowledgeable about my disease but also my health history.

 There should be a focus on education and delivery of information. Info should be shared in a

variety of ways so all patients can understand it.

 The providers and staff should be able to focus on certain populations providing care personalized

to their needs based on culture, generation, etc.

 Open communication with doctor is a must – I should be able to share things easily.

o Consistency with doctor changes – I must then share info with new doctor.

o Continuity of care is a top priority.

 I should be able to tell my doctor everything without fear of being judged.

 Trust is important, you expect your doctor to understand all medical issues.

 Consistency of nurses and staff is also important.

 I want to feel heard.

 Address mental health issues – incorporate into care.

o Need to be able to talk about how my diagnosis is impacting my mental health.

 I want to know more about genetic testing. It should be used in my care.

 Family history is good to know to help inform treatment. Should be included.

 I want to test everything that is available that could improve my care or treatment.

 Doctors should be honest if he/she doesn’t have the answers.

 Doctors should be able to explain in plain English what is going on.

 I don’t want people to self-diagnose. Be careful with how genetic testing info is used.

 I have concerns with privacy of information.

 Info should be concise. “Dumb down.” We need to know facts.

 Too much information can be stressful.

Initial thoughts about this project?

 This is an awesome idea.

 The project could be very informative.

 I appreciate all of the work that goes into HIV care. This would complement it.

 I love to be involved in work that uses lab/science.

 This sounds very educational and interesting.

 This focus could require lots of time to truly personalize (patient volume issues).

 I like that you are listening to us who are actually go through HIV to shape the project.

Back to Table of Contents

How valuable is this in improving care? Is it important in the HIV community?

What’s important?

 It is very valuable to feel like you have somebody caring to support you.

(doctors/nurses/staff)

 Early intervention specialist important.

 Important to not see “stereotypes.” Personalizing care could ensure that everyone is seen as

an individual.

 Peer advocates can alleviate overwhelming feeling and can connect to patients as individual

people.

 It is also important to address the big picture, not just individually. Like provider turn-over.

Reaction of Others in Community

 Some people may feel like you are in their business. Those who are afraid of their diagnosis.

 Be prepared for some push-back.

 Some people who are HIV+ have trouble with diagnosis/reality

EHR

 I prefer to see the same provide so that they can access my information, records, testing.

 If you are incarcerated, records are difficult to obtain.

 I don’t like shared EHR.

 “Risky” – a lot of stuff “they” don’t all need to know. They being patients who panic or don’t

know what to do with the info or providers who aren’t treating me for HIV or might treat me

differently.

 Particularly, genetic testing information. I don’t need all of my providers to know everything.

 I don’t have a problem sharing medical history.

 Concerned about insurance companies accessing information they could use to deny

coverage.

 Maybe you’re only seeing a provider for one specific issue that is not HIV related. Would you

want them to know your status?

Personalized Care Layers

 Engaging multiple institutions is important – mental health providers/judicial/community

orgs-communication is key.

 Include holistic approach – yoga, meditation, address stress.

 Stress is the issue all HIV patients deal with chronically. Include mental health component.

 Present info in a variety of ways (i.e. medical animation). What medicines do to your body?

 Address issues related to physical ability/activity or inactivity.

 Determine access and insurance status and level of patient involvement.

 Amount of time to see doctors can be a burden; streamline the process. See all providers on

same day, testing, etc.

 Consider a patient’s social life and its impact positive or negative (friends, family).

 Give resources for the patients or caregivers to access to supplement care and quality of life.

 Identify what needs should be met with individual patients.

o Religious/cultural. Different cultures have different medicinal resources/beliefs.

o Social supports.

o Address beliefs that might impact adherence (stop meds for summer to cleanse).

 I can’t think of a church, yoga class, etc. where HIV is even mentioned.

Back to Table of Contents

What would community-engaged personalized HIV care research look like?

 Time is a factor. But people would be interested. Be sure “the ask” is doable and reasonable.

 Develop partnerships in the community.

 Have patients give advice about how you design the projects.

 Include recruiting through patient networks; use word of mouth.

 People who are already engaged will be more likely to say yes.

 Need to raise awareness of opportunities. Most of us do not know how to participate.

 There should be agreed upon expectations.

How could we better collaborate with the community?

 Pull them all together. Invite them to be a part of this project.

 Include faith community; pastors/churches. This could help with stigma.

 Get the word out. Use a lot of different methods to reach people.

 Invite community partners to participate.

Written Remarks from Comment Form

General thoughts about the project:

 Educational.

 Excellent forum for the community to become aware of CFAR.

 Great project.

 Enjoyed giving input.

What was good about the project?

 Informative.

 Personalized health care would be incredibly valuable.

 Personalized care layers – glad to know.

 Looking into factors that help and hinder HIV care will greatly benefit the HIV community.

What challenges do you think the project will have in the community (weaknesses)?

 I think HIV people have (in general) horrible self-esteem and may feel like they have nothing

to contribute.

 Time is a factor.

 Meeting the part of the HIV community that may be reluctant to participate.

Back to Table of Contents

Strengths

 Project not really clear. Study design fine.

 Very good info.

 Motivates me to do something.

 Excellent concept.

 The project is a great overall idea, that when put

into place could help many people.

 Easy group to recruit from. Connections to

VUMC will ease the way.

What was good about project?

 Incentivizing improved health behavior.

 Personal approach to need and risk factors.

 Having the $7K coverage in the worst-case

scenario; no cost.

 The willingness to put the project together to

actually help people overcome risk factors.

 Trying to humanize medicine and treatment;

collaborations across disciplines.

What challenges do you think the project will have

in the community?

 Will fail if not sensitive to poverty, literacy, race.

 Frequency of meeting times and sources of

information being delivered.

 Finding and keeping people that are as

motivated about the program.

What would you like to see the researcher do

differently?

 Include parents/caregivers. They play an

important role and are also impacted.

 ER staff – increase their awareness. They do

not have basic knowledge of HIV.

Back to Table of Contents

Appendix J

SAMPLE CE STUDIO FLYER