People aging with long-term physical disabilities (PAwLTPD), meaning individuals with onset of disability from birth through midlife, often require long-term support services (LTSS) to remain independence. The LTSS system is fragmented into aging and disability organizations with little communication between them. In addition, there are currently no evidence-based LTSS-type programs listed on the Administration for Community Living website that have been demonstrated to be effective for PAwLTPD. Because of these gaps, we have developed a community-based research network (CBRN), drawing on the practice-based research network model (PBRN), to bring together aging and disability organizations to address the lack of evidence-based programs for PAwLTPD.

Community-based organizations serving PAwLTPD across the state of Missouri were recruited to join the CBRN. A formative process evaluation of the network was conducted after a year to evaluate the effectiveness of the network.

Nine community-based organizations across the state of Missouri joined the CBRN. CBRN members include three centers for independent living (CILs), three area agencies on aging (AAAs), one CIL/AAA hybrid, one non-CIL disability organization, and one non-AAA aging organization. To date, we have held seven meetings, provided educational opportunities for CBRN members, and launched an inaugural research study within the CBRN. Formative evaluation data indicate that CBRN members feel that participation in the CBRN is beneficial.

The PBRN model appears to be a feasible framework for use with community-based organizations to facilitate communication between agencies and to support research aimed at addressing the needs of PAwLTPD.

This study employed the Delphi method, an exploratory method used for group consensus building, to determine the benefits and challenges associated with community engagement in patient-centered outcomes research.

A series of email surveys were sent to the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI)-funded researchers (n = 103) in New England. Consensus was achieved through gathering themes and engaging participants in ranking their level of agreement over three rounds. In round one, participant responses were coded thematically and then tallied. In round two participants were asked to state their level of agreement with each of the themes using a Likert scale. Finally, in round three, the group was asked to rank the round two themes based on potential impact.

Results suggested the greatest benefit of community engagement is that it brings multiple perspectives to the table, with 92% ranking it as the first or second most important contribution. Time was ranked as the most significant barrier to engaging community. Strategies to overcome barriers to community engagement include engaging key stakeholders early in the research, being kind and respectful and spending time with stakeholders. The most significant finding was that no researchers reported having specific measures to evaluate community engagement.

Community engagement can enhance both research relevance and methodology when researchers are engaged in meaningful collaborations. Advancing the science of community engagement will require the development of evaluation metrics to examine the multiple domains of partnership.

This study explored the partnership between universities and local primary schools to deliver a classroom-based paediatric communication impairment service provided by undergraduate speech pathology students. It aimed to understand how partnerships work to facilitate programme replication.

The partners included universities sending students on rural clinical placement, local host academic units and primary schools who worked together to provide paediatric speech and language services in primary schools in three sites in Australia. Rural and remote communities experience poorer health outcomes because of chronic workforce shortages, social disadvantage and high Aboriginality, poor access to services and underfunding.

The study was in twofold: qualitative analysis of data from interviews/focus group with the partners in the university and education sectors, and quantitative social network analysis of data from an electronic survey of the partners.

Factors supporting partnerships were long-term, work and social relationships, commitment to community, trust and an appetite for risk-taking. We postulate that these characteristics are more likely to exist in rural communities.

We identify characteristics of local health departments, which enhance collaborations with community- and faith-based organizations (CFBOs) for emergency preparedness and response.

Online survey data were collected from a sample of 273 disaster preparedness coordinators working at local health departments across the United States between August and December 2011.

Using multiple linear regression models, we found that perceptions of CFBO trust were associated with more successful partnership planning (β=0.63; P=0.02) and capacity building (β=0.61; P=0.01). Employee layoffs in the past 3 years (β=0.41; P=0.001) and urban location (β=0.41; P=0.005) were positively associated with higher ratings of resource sharing between health agencies and CFBOs. Having 1-3 full-time employees increased the ratings of success in communication and outreach activities compared with health departments having less than 1 full-time employee (β=0.33; P=0.05). Positive attitudes toward CFBOs also enhanced communication and outreach (β=0.16; P=0.03).

Staff-capacity factors are important for quick dissemination of information and resources needed to address emerging threats. Building the trust of CFBOs can help address large-scale disasters by improving the success of more involved activities that integrate the CFBO into emergency plans and operations of the health department and that better align with federal-funding performance measures. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:57–66)