Measuring the Success of Community Science: The Northern California Household Exposure Study

By Brown, Phil; Brody, Julia Green et al. | Environmental Health Perspectives, March 2012 | Go to article overview

Measuring the Success of Community Science: The Northern California Household Exposure Study


Brown, Phil, Brody, Julia Green, Morello-Frosch, Rachel, Tovar, Jessica, Zota, Ami R., Rudel, Ruthann A., Environmental Health Perspectives


BACKGROUND: Environmental health research involving community participation has increased substantially since the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) environmental justice and community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships began in the mid-1990s. The goals of these partnerships are to inform and empower better decisions about exposures, foster trust, and generate scientific knowledge to reduce environmental health disparities in low-income, minority communities. Peer-reviewed publication and clinical health outcomes alone are inadequate criteria to judge the success of projects in meeting these goals; therefore, new strategies for evaluating success are needed.

OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the methods used to evaluate our project, "Linking Breast Cancer Advocacy and Environmental Justice," to help identify successful CBPR methods and to assist other teams in documenting effectiveness. Although our project precedes the development of the NIEHS Evaluation Metrics Manual, a schema to evaluate the success of projects funded through the Partnerships in Environmental Public Health (PEPH), our work reported here illustrates the record keeping and self-reflection anticipated in NIEHS's PEPH.

DISCUSSION: Evaluation strategies should assess how CBPR partnerships meet the goals of all partners. Our partnership, which included two strong community-based organizations, produced a team that helped all partners gain organizational capacity. Environmental sampling in homes and reporting the results of that effort had community education and constituency-building benefits. Scientific results contributed to a court decision that required cumulative impact assessment for an oil refineiy and to new policies for chemicals used in consumer products. All partners leveraged additional funding to extend their work.

CONCLUSIONS: An appropriate evaluation strategy can demonstrate how CBPR projects can advance science, support community empowerment, increase environmental health literacy, and generate individual and policy action to protect health.

KEY WORDS: breast cancer, community-based participatory research, environmental justice, evaluation metrics, exposure science. Environ Health Perspect 120:326--331 (2012). http://dx.doi. org/10.1289/ehp. 1103734 [Online 6 December 2011 ]

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an approach to academic-community partnerships that shares power with community partners in all aspects of the research process and benefits communities through interventions or policy change. CBPR projects increase community engagement in research to generate scientific knowledge, improve public trust and understanding of environmental health science, inform culturally and socially appropriate intervention methods, improve public health decisions and stimulate action, and contribute to environmental justice (EJ) (Minkier et al. 2008; O'Fallon and Dearry 2002). Grants supporting research that involves community participation have increased dramatically and gained in academic respectability since 1996, when the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) started funding such research (Wolfson and Parries 2010), which, in turn, led to increasing pressure to more precisely evaluate outcomes (Drew et al. 2010).

Evaluating CBPR success can be difficult, because peer-reviewed publication and clinical health outcomes alone are inadequate criteria and even tangential 10 many community partnerships. A recent contribution to CBPR evaluation extracted outcomes from grantee reports (Baron et al. 2009), but the information accessible in the reports was limited because the evaluation metrics were newr and research teams had not yet consistently implemented them. In addition, these reports focused on successful outcomes, omitting process factors, challenges, and failures.

To help stimulate other reams to think more thoroughly and expansively about the outcomes of their CBPR work, we report here on the northern California Household Exposure Study (HES), which was funded through a grant titled "Linking Breast Cancer Advocacy and Environmental Justice" under NIEHS's EJ program (Silent Spring Institute 201 lb). …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Measuring the Success of Community Science: The Northern California Household Exposure Study
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.