Developing and Sustaining University-Community Partnerships in Rural Communities

1. Developing and Sustaining University-Community Partnerships in Rural Communities Julie Sarno Owens, Ph.D. Center for Intervention Research in Schools Department of Psychology Ohio University

2. Overview • Context • UC Partnerships: Why and Why Not? • Navigating the Issues • Partnership Initiation • Working Together • Ethical Challenges

3. Appalachian Region of Ohio • Child Poverty (16%), unemployment (8%), uninsured (12%) exceed state rates • High school completion (78%), per capita income ($16K), and median household income ($39) are below state averages • Isolation, lack of public transportation, limited affordable housing • Mental health professional shortage • Needs exceed resources • Region also has strengths

4. Youth Experiencing Success in School (Y.E.S.S.) Program Goals: Services : Assessment Behavioral Parenting Sessions Year-long Teacher Consultation Classroom Interventions (Daily Report Card) Individual child counseling, as needed • Improve academic and behavioral functioning • Enhance home-school collaboration • Enhance service accessibility • Provide on-going consultation to teachers • Evaluate program effectiveness, feasibility, integrity Owens et al., 2005; 2008; 2010

5. Other Collaborative Projects • Kindergarten Screening Projects (Girio & Owens, 2011) • Parent Involvement Project (Mahoney, Owens et al., 2010) • CMHC - Assessing Outcomes Project (Karpenko et al 2011; Owens et al., 2011) • Consultant on a Rural Network Development Grant • OU CBPR Learning Community (Owens et al., 2010) • Center for Adolescent Research in Schools (CARS)

6. Overview • Context • UC Partnerships: Why and Why Not? • Navigating the Issues • Partnership Initiation • Working Together • Ethical Challenges

7. UC Partnerships: Why? Rationale: • Current demand for accountabilities is high • Uptake of science into practice is slow Benefits • Provides communities with resources and infrastructure for professional development, students program implementation, evaluation, and sustainability • Offers universities the opportunity to conduct researchthat is grounded in the realities of daily school/community operations; opportunities for student learning and training • Opportunity to transforming service delivery and scientific inquiry are unmatched (Owens, Dan, Alvarez, Tener, & Oberlin, 2007)

8. UC Partnerships: Why Not? Culture of Academia Culture of Community Seeking practical solutions Swift pace of action Prioritize improving QOL Qualitative, uncontrolled analyses Rewarded for quotas and low cost Interested in adapting programs • Prioritize precision • Seeking to control variables • Slow pace of action • Rewarded for grants and publications • Language of statistics & theory • Barriers to Collaboration • Unbalanced Leadership • Mismatch in interests/focus • Time and scheduling challenges • Financial constraints

9. How do Community Members Initiate a UC Partnership? • Understand the culture of academia • Connect with the right person • Contact an individual faculty member (read program of • research) • Contact the Chair of a department • Contact a university training clinic • Contact the administrator of student services or student • affairs • Contact the clearinghouse for student service learning • projects (Owens, Dan, Alvarez, Tenner, & Oberlin, 2007)

10. How do Faculty Members Initiate a CU Partnership? • Initiator • Consultant • Collaborator • Roles may be different during different projects/phases of the partnership (Stoecker, 2003)

11. Partnership Initiation: Finding Common Ground • What are the needs and resources • of the community? • of the university? • What is the nexus between the two? • What are the values and priorities of each? • How can the resources of each be leveraged? • Clearly articulate the group’s goals, values missions so that you can stay on target

12. What type of Partnership?

13. Trust During Partnership Initiation • Community: concerned about data casting negative perceptions • University: concerned about community follow-through • Researchers must ‘get to know’ the community • Spend time in the community • Listen to the history, get to know the people and dynamics. (“show up” and “be there”) • Explicitly address past experiences with the university Wallerstein et al., 2005

14. Partnership Initiation: Processes & Challenges Challenges Possible Solutions Create a glossary of terms for each other Share info about structure, operating demands and pressures Co-lead meetings; create opportunities for co-learning and joint decision-making • Different languages/ acronyms • Lack of/misunderstandings about each other’s work • Potential for unbalanced leadership

15. We Agree To Work Together….Now What?

16. Processes • Adopt of set of principles to follow that are relevant to your group (e.g., CBPR) and procedures for monitoring them • Adopt procedures for co-leadership and equitable participation of all members • Adopt procedures for decision-making • 70% Rule of Consensus (Everyone supports the decision, but they do not have to be behind it 100%. If all members can provide 70% of their own support, overall consensus has been reached; Israel et al., 2005) • Discuss procedures for conflict • Agree to disagree on some issues (Israel et al., 2003; Wallerstein et al,. 2005)

17. Action Steps • Decide on membership size; Who else should be at the table? (other systems, parents, “do-ers” verses “deciders”; political/strategic invites) • Establish a time frame for planning and network development • Identify short and long-term goals (Wallerstein et al,. 2005)

18. Content SOCIAL CHANGE

19. The Wheels Are Rollin’…We’re Moving Right Along

20. Navigating the Specifics Research: • Discuss the roles of each partner in: • Framing research questions • Implementing the design • Collecting the data • Analyzing the data • Interpreting the data • Disseminating results • Acting on the results • Service: • What services? • Who provides them? • Supervision • Navigating turf issues • Consent forms • Ethical codes • Training: • For students? • For staff? • Case load size? • Who monitors quality?

21. Tough Decisions and Compromise • Eligible participants • What is the impact of inclusion/exclusion criteria? • What is the impact of severity? • Comparison Condition for Evaluation • Random assignment at what level? • Timing of Evaluation • Consider potential confounds to conclusions drawn • Consider staff/teacher time and competing demands

22. Participatory Method Development • Solicit input and feedback from those who will be involved in the methodology • Recruitment Strategies • Language on the consent form • Name of program/intervention conditions • Relevant compensation • Time of measurement completion • What have you left out/what would they like to add?

23. Trust During the Difficult Decisions • Show respect for others’ opinions and needs • Follow through – do what you commit to do between meetings • Compromise • Respect confidentiality – “what happens in the partnership meeting stays in the partnership meeting” • Start to include each other in events beyond the partnership • Celebrate successes (Becker et al., 2005)

24. Partnership and Program Assessment Program Outcomes Partnership Outcomes Formal or informal approach? Are we meeting our short-term goals? Are we making adequate progress toward our long-term goals? Assessment of partnership process dimensions (e.g., communication, trust, leadership) Open ended questionnaires • Data –Driven Student Outcomes • Staff feedback on feasibility and acceptability • Are we producing the intended + outcomes? • Are there unintended outcomes (+ or -)? • What modifications are necessary? Retreats and Strategic Planning Sessions Ultimate Outcome Indicator: Will you work together again? (Schulz et al., 2003)

25. Effect Sizes for Grade Point Average

26. Establish a meeting structure that facilitates co-learning Researcher gains knowledge in school-based procedures (e.g., IAT/IEP) and community history and culture Community members gain knowledge about rigor in methods, data-driven decision making, strategies for interpreting data Building Capacity in Partners Example: Community members begin to appreciate the value of data and rigorous methods (Owens et al., 2010) Example: Writing and presenting with co-partners

27. Dissemination of Outcomes • Local presentations • State conferences • National conferences • Co-write articles in practice-based outlets • Co-write articles in academic outlets • Boosts morale and pride • Enhances relevance of the data • Builds capacity in all partners • Facilitates social change

28. Thinking Ahead: Sustainability • What type of partnership do you want to be? • Stay connected to stakeholders in the larger communtiy • Financial stability • Development of new goals/projects

29. Transformational Partnership Positive Transitions in the Partnership Synergistic Integration of goals Working with shared resources Working for common goals Planning and formalized leadership Coordination of activities with each other Communication with each other Unilateral awareness Transactional Relationship Clayton & Bringle, 2010

30. Timeline of Y.E.S.S. Program Partnership Development Depicting Expansions and Transitions in Leadership Multiple District Leadership Positions Change Pupil Personnel Director Retires All Principals change buildings Pupil Personnel Director Retires Hire new School Counselors • Initiation • Partnership • development • Monthly • meetings • Year 1 • Y.E.S.S. begins • in School 1 • Waitlist in • School 2 • Year 2 • Y.E.S.S. in • Schools 1 & 2 • Waitlist in • School 3 • Year 3 • Y.E.S.S. in • Schools 1, 2, 4 • Waitlist in • School 5 • Year 4 • Y.E.S.S. in 4 • schools • No waitlist • School • Year 5 • Y.E.S.S. scales • back to 3 • schools • Rethinking Implementation • Year 6,7,&8 • Strategic • Planning • Retreat • District • receives • USDOE Grant • Y.E.S.S. in all • Schools • Examining • sustainability • model Juvenile Court Judge deceases Interim Judge appointed University Partner on maternity leave New Judge elected

31. Managing Challenging Transitions in the Partnership Leverage program champions Stay connected to key decision makers Have an orientation packet to efficiently integrate new members Rely on formerly defined group processes and procedures

32. Recruitment & Informed Consent • When researchers are embedded within the school, do families understand the ‘choice’ to participate? • Example 1: • School Counselors trained to implement the Y.E.S.S. Program • Consenting parents at one of many ‘stations’ during a Kindergarten screening

33. Teachers As Participants • Do teacher feel that they have a choice to participate? • Examples: • Principal decides “our school is participating” • Questionnaires are completed in a group setting at a teacher in-service • What is the impact if one teacher declines to participate? • Example in K Screening Project: • Parents are expecting a summary report that provides the results of parent and teacher screening measures, but the teacher has declined to participate? How do we protect that teacher from negative repercussions?

34. Clinicians As Participants • How should researchers address low integrity in a clinician’s performance? • Example: • When monitoring integrity to the protocol, one clinician’s skills are below the acceptable threshold? What if the procedures are considered harmful to the client?

35. Interpretation of Data • The “Push for Positive Results” • Community: program continuation is dependent upon positive outcomes • University: next steps in research are based upon both expected and unexpected outcomes • CBPR Recommendation: Discuss possible interpretations and consequences of them prior to starting the project (Israel et al., 2003)

36. Ownership of Data • How will each partner use the data? • In CBPR, there is a tenet of “shared ownership” • What challenges does this create? • Examples: • Community project occurs with and agency as a function of a student’s thesis/dissertation. New interns to the agency want to use the data for their field placement project. • Pilot data sample sizes are small and may reveal information about the performance of specific clinicians.

37. Summary • UC Partnerships offer a mechanism for • Accelerating the uptake of evidence-based practices that address community needs • Evaluating effectiveness, feasibility, and sustainability of evidence-based practices • Challenging, but results in rewarding, meaningful work • Each partnership is unique, but there are commonality across • Lessons learned offer guides for initiating partnerships, navigating challenging relationship and ethical issues, developing rigorous but feasible methodologies, disseminating results and ultimately achieving social change

38. Thank you owensj@ohio.edu