Skip to content

Abstract Search

Primary Submission Category: Program Evaluation

Using a Community-Engaged Approach to Evaluate the Center for Engagement in Diabetes Research

Authors:  Claire Cooper, MSPH, Lorraine Kwok, MPH, Laura Wyatt, MPH, David Lounsbury, PhD, Mona AuYoung, PhD, MS, MPH, Claire Cooper, MSPH, Aditi Luitel, MSPH, Karina D. Ramirez, MPH, Emma Rodgers, MSPH, Jennifer Zanowiak, MA, CEDER Partnership Hub, Earle Chambers, PhD, MPH, Arleen Brown, MD, PhD, Nadia Islam, PhD,

Presenting Author: Stephanie Albert, PhD*

The Center for Engagement in Diabetes Research (CEDER) advances research by fostering national collaborations across community organizations, health systems, and academic institutions. CEDER offers consultation and studio services tailored to investigators and community groups engaged in type 2 diabetes-related work. This abstract describes the community-engaged approach used to evaluate the CEDER model and early insights on facilitators and barriers to co-developing and co-leading a mixed methods process and outcome evaluation. CEDER created a range of authentic opportunities for community and academic partners to contribute to the decision-making process. We assembled an evaluation workgroup (EWG) comprised of faculty and staff from 3 academic institutions, with substantial experience in community-engaged programming and research. The EWG convenes biweekly to guide the development and implementation of CEDER’s evaluation plan. Community and academic partners can be part of the EWG by attending EWG meetings or meeting individually with EWG faculty. Key opportunities for contributing knowledge/guidance include listening sessions focused on specific evaluation components and in-person meetings featuring in-depth conversations on the evaluation. These are complemented by virtual biweekly leadership and bimonthly all partner meetings and email communication. Through discussion, the EWG identified facilitators of the community-engaged approach including the diverse composition of contributors to planning and executing the evaluation, a commitment to all partners having an equal voice in the process, and having the ability to tap into partners’ expansive networks to magnify inclusion of underrepresented communities in planning and carrying out evaluation activities. The primary challenges to community-engaged evaluation were limited time and competing priorities. We will provide recommendations for participatory methods of evaluation for future health equity initiatives.