Multi-image photogrammetry as a practical tool for cultural heritage survey and community engagement

Health policies in many developing countries are increasingly designed and evaluated by data collected using household surveys. This trend is closely associated with three factors: the increasing complexity of health systems, the increase in pressure for better accountability and improved health system management, and the continuing existence of poorly maintained vital statistics systems. But national household- or individual-level surveys are expensive. These factors have, unsurprisingly, coincided with an increase in the use of rapid survey methods. Although rapid methods have been used frequently, few studies have tested the quality of data obtained by them, and none have compared the cost of the rapid surveys with non-rapid surveys in a developing country context. This paper presents the trade-offs in cost and quality of information obtained from a rapid assessment survey in Ecuador. The results from the rapid survey were compared with results obtained from a national survey conducted six months earlier. The objective was to see what alternative policies might be arrived at if the data from the rapid survey were used in place of the large survey. In addition, the relative costs of obtaining that information were measured. Results indicate that the majority of demographic and contraceptive use measures are similar between the two surveys. The rapid survey was three times as cost-efficient as the traditional survey, if relative bias is not taken into account. However, there appears to be selection bias in the choice of households, which distorts the probability of predicting contraceptive use by residence, and makes it appear that rural women are as likely to use contraception as their counterparts in urban Ecuador. This result has implications for the credibility of rapid surveys, and suggests that their use needs to be tailored for particular programmes and policies, and overseen with, at least, a modicum of statistical caution.

The future of biodiversity monitoring and conservation utilizing environmental DNA

Further psychometric evaluation of the My Family’s Accessibility and Community Engagement (My FACE) tool: Mothers’ ratings of perceptions of community accessibility and engagement for their child with disabilities

A comparative study of different rapid visual survey methods used for seismic assessment of existing buildings

This article examines the role of creative practice-researchers working in the SHAPE subjects (Social Sciences, Humanities, and the Arts for People and the Economy) in relation to the Knowledge Exchange Framework perspective of Public and Community Engagement. Using a creative practice-research project – the theatre production Under the Radar and its after-show discussion panels – as a case study, I argue that non-academic ‘engagement’ with research should be considered as valuable as research ‘impact’, especially in terms of Higher Education’s ‘third mission’ of wider socio-cultural and socio-political change. Analysing initial findings from audience research, this article goes on to discuss potential approaches to embedding knowledge exchange in creative practice-research projects whose outcomes include a cultural artefact. It concludes by arguing that co-creation with, and knowledge exchange between, the academy, third sector organisations, and the public through engagement activities can produce value for both the academic and non-academic participants and sit within the Knowledge Exchange Framework.

Objectives/Goals: Community engagement is critical to promoting equity for those affected by clinical and translational research. Despite its importance, investigators rarely involve community stakeholders in ancillary projects such as secondary analyses. I use a study example to demonstrate how to meaningfully partner with communities in ancillary research. Methods/Study Population: Using data collected in a previous study, the aim of this secondary analysis was to examine whether pregnant women’s reports of social adversity during the third trimester were associated with their infant’s resting cortisol level at 1, 6, and 12 months of age. Community engagement at the study design phase included consultation with an institutional Community Advisory Board (CAB) whose expertise included lived experiences relevant to the context of the study (i.e., social adversity and pregnancy). Community engagement at the analysis and dissemination stage included deeper collaboration with three community research consultants (CRCs) from the CAB; all identified as women of color and mothers with relevant lived experiences. CRCs received compensation for time and effort and an invitation for co-authorship. Results/Anticipated Results: Consultations included written review as well as a live presentation and discussion with the CAB for feedback on the study proposal prior to submission for IRB approval. The focus of discussion was around the use of inclusive terminology and ensuring respectful and equitable representation of all participants in the original study, including those who reported experiences with social adversity during pregnancy. After receiving study approval, statistical analyses were finalized and CRCs actively engaged in discussions with the PI around the interpretation of results. CRCs significantly contributed to the development of solutions-oriented implications for practice, policy, and future research. All CRCs were co-authors on the study manuscript that was published in a top-tier international journal. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Community engagement in ancillary research is feasible and essential. True equitable collaboration requires partnership during all study activities, including critical phases (e.g., developing aims, data analysis). Researchers also should prioritize the use of datasets from studies that incorporated community partnership and engagement.

Parental perceptions and experiences of community inclusion influence the community participation of families and children with a disability, although no measurement tools exist. To describe the initial development of the My Family's Accessibility and Community Engagement (MyFACE) tool. MyFACE measures parental perceptions of community accessibility and engagement of families raising a child with a disability. Items represent common community activities rated on a 5-point Likert scale. COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guided content validity, construct validity, and internal reliability testing. Australia. Seventy-seven mothers of children with a disability provided data, with 69 complete data sets. The nine-item MyFACE had excellent content and construct validity and good internal reliability (Cronbach's α = .85). Hypothesis testing correlated MyFACE with maternal factors (mental health and healthy behavior) and child factors (psychosocial issues). Three predictors together explained 27% of the variance in a significant model, F(3, 61) = 7.09, p < .001. The most important predictor was maternal depressive symptoms. Initial evaluation of the MyFACE tool suggests sound psychometric properties warranting further development. What This Article Adds: The MyFACE tool provides clinicians and researchers with a way to measure parental perceptions of community inclusion. Maternal depressive symptoms were predictive of MyFACE scores, indicating that to be effective, family participation may require clinicians to address maternal mental health and children's participation restrictions.

Effective Community Engagement Approaches for Climate Change Adaptation in the Philippines

BackgroundIt is known that there are inequalities of access to hospice care (Tobin, Rogers, Winterburn, et al. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022;12(2):142–51). Community engagement within hard-to-reach communities is of utmost...

Reporting from a conference on higher education teaching and learning for a planning journal is perhaps uncommon. However, the 3rd International HETL conference co-organised with the annual Scholarship of Teaching and Engagement meeting at Utah Valley University (UVU) addressed an issue of ever increasing importance for universities of the 21st century: learning through community engagement. Which or what communities, who is learning and what kind of engagement was left open, which allowed for multiple perspectives to be addressed.Universities have traditionally engaged with society and community for purposes of research, knowledge exchange and dissemination. In fact, Bourner (2008, 26) suggested that western universities are defined by a tripartite mission consisting of 'the higher education of students, the advancement of knowledge [through research] and service to those outside the walls of the university'. Community-based, engaged learning in the form of, for example, service-learning, internships or live projects is mainly associated with the educational and external service elements of this overarching mission. Students tend to enjoy the experiential and authentic learning experiences provided through such engagements, which allow them to apply curricula based knowledge to real world problems. Community-based engaged learning is pedagogically valuable and can also provide benefits to the communities in which it is situated.Community engagement and community-based, engaged learning occurs across all subjects and disciplines - although it is undoubtedly more prevalent in some, including planning. Indeed, planning academics frequently engage in a variety of communities for research or to provide expert support, while a significant number of course curricula include forms of community engaged learning. In the UK a typical pedagogy in this context are live projects, for which students conduct research and consultancy type work for a charity, community group or local authority, for example. Such activities are ideal to prepare students for future employment as well as to introduce the concept of collaborative planning. Yet, while community engagement in teaching and learning is practiced, there are few occasions to share experiences aside from the occasional session on co-learning, community participation activities in curricula or democratisation of planning in traditional planning conferences. Thus, this conference provided a unique opportunity for sharing practices across disciplines as well as for deeper discussions around emerging approaches and thinking in community engagement and learning not only amongst educators, but also between educators and university leaders.The conference's thought-provoking premise was that in the globalised, highly interconnected and simultaneously fragmented world in which we live in, educators will have to rethink how to prepare students to lead meaningful lives, economically, personally and socially. Invoking Hoy and Johnson's (2013) vision of an emerging future for higher education institutions which challenges students to be more engaged and self-directed in all aspects of their learning and development and institutions to become more engaged with the wider community in which they exist - delegates were invited to explore how to foster community engagement to be transformative, integrated and beneficial for all.The conference was book-ended with plenary sessions by high profile speakers who underscored the breadth of the conference theme '...meaningful learning through community engagement' with different interpretations. For example, Milton Cox (Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA) focused on communities within the university among teaching staff - or rather - the general lack of community in academic culture suggesting that this sets a poor precedent for students. Nevertheless if learning communities (also labelled as 'communities of practice') among teaching staff are formed they were found to be useful and contributing to the enhancement of teaching, learning and research as well as organisational development. …

Students are to be educated and prepared for engaging with communities. The term "community engagement" refers to activities to work collaboratively with and through groups of people to address issues affecting the social well-being of those people (Woronkowicz, 2018). Citizen participation is assumed to result in decisions that are better than could have been made with no involvement of community member (Ianniello et al. 2019). Higher education institutions promoting students' social and civic responsibilities through community engagement contribute to the socio-economic development of the country (Maistry, Thakrar, 2012, 65). At the same time, students and faculty benefit from applying their knowledge and skills to real world problems, which has been shown to have positive impacts on student academic performance, civic engagement, self-efficacy and self-esteem, and leadership capacity (Hahn et al., 2020). Therefore, the course "Participation Management: tools for citizen engagement and community empowerment" was created while implementing HEIsCITI project ("Higher Education Institutions as Innovative Triggers of Sustainable Development in European Cities in Post Covid-19 Era" (KA220-HED-96EB51E1)). The methodology is developed to prepare students for community engagement practice. The study aims at revealing students' opinion on piloted university study course "Participation Management: tools for citizen engagement and community empowerment". JEL Codes: I23, I25, Z13 Keywords: community engagement, participation management, students, university, Lithuania

BackgroundWorldwide, more than 40% of the population is at risk from dengue and recent estimates suggest that up to 390 million dengue infections are acquired every year. The Eliminate Dengue (ED) Program is investigating the use of Wolbachia-infected, transmission-compromised, mosquitoes to reduce dengue transmission. Previous introductions of genetically-modified strategies for dengue vector control have generated controversy internationally by inadequately engaging host communities. Community Engagement (CE) was a key component of the ED Program’s initial open release trials in Queensland Australia. Their approach to CE was perceived as effective by the ED team’s senior leadership, members of its CE team, and by its funders, but if and why this was the case was unclear. We conducted a qualitative case study of the ED Program’s approach to CE to identify and critically examine its components, and to explain whether and how these efforts contributed to the support received by stakeholders.Methodology/Principal FindingsIn-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 participants with a range of experiences and perspectives related to the ED Program’s CE activities. Our analytic approach combined techniques of grounded theory and qualitative description. The ED Program’s approach to CE reflected four foundational features: 1) enabling conditions; 2) leadership; 3) core commitments and guiding values; and 4) formative social science research. These foundations informed five key operational practices: 1) building the CE team; 2) integrating CE into management practices; 3) discerning the community of stakeholders; 4) establishing and maintaining a presence in the community; and 5) socializing the technology and research strategy. We also demonstrate how these practices contributed to stakeholders’ willingness to support the trials.Conclusions/SignificanceOur case study has identified, and explained the functional relationships among, the critical features of the ED Program’s approach to CE. It has also illuminated how these features were meaningful to stakeholders and contributed to garnering support within the host communities for the open-release trials. Our findings reveal how translating ethical intentions into effective action is more socially complex than is currently reflected in the CE literature. Because our case study delineates the critical features of the ED Program’s approach to CE, it can serve as a framework for other programs to follow when designing their own strategies. And because the findings outline a theory of change for CE, it can also serve as a starting point for developing an evaluation framework for CE.

Beyond medical schools' historical focus on pillar missions including clinical care, education, and research, several medical schools now include community engagement (CE) as a mission. However, most academic health systems (AHSs) lack the tools to provide metrics, evaluation, and standardization for quantifying progress and contributions of the CE mission. Several nationwide initiatives, such as that driven by the Institute of Medicine recommending advances in CE metrics at institutions receiving Clinical and Translational Science Awards, have encouraged the research and development of systematic metrics for CE, but more progress is needed. The CE components practical model provides a foundation for analyzing and evaluating different types of CE activities at AHSs through five components: research, education, community outreach and community service, policy and advocacy, and clinical care. At the Medical College of Wisconsin (MCW), an annual survey administered to faculty and staff assessed the types and number of CE activities from the prior year. Survey results were combined to create a CE report for departments across the institution and inform MCW leadership. Insights gathered from the survey have contributed to next steps in CE tracking and evaluation, including the development of a CE dashboard to track CE activities in real time. The dashboard provides resources for how individuals can advance the CE mission through their work and guide CE at the institutional level.

The Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (CRCHD) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) is dedicated to enhancing the diversity of the scientific workforce through training and education and supporting community engagement. The utilization of standardized tools to track and assist in the evaluation of outcomes from training, education, and community engagement programs is important to grants supported by the CRCHD. This case study describes the utilization of a readily available and secure web-based electronic tool, REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture), to broadly track and evaluate community engagement activities and training and education milestones in an Academic Cancer Center. Aim 1 describes the online survey tool created in REDCap to track all community engagement activities for the Cancer Center. Aim 2 describes methods and assessment tools created to track and evaluate mentoring relationships, training, educational activities, and career outcomes of trainees in an emerging cancer center seeking NCI designation. Training programs in the University of Illinois (UI) Cancer Center occur across the pipeline and target high school and undergraduate students, graduate and pre- and post-doctoral students, and early-stage investigators with a focus on populations under-represented in health disparities research. The utilization of REDCap will allow outcomes from NCI CRCHD funded programs and other training, education, and community engagement programs to uniformly track outcomes and assess efficacy to ensure alignment with NCI priorities for cancer centers in community engagement and training and education. Our case study supports the NIH's efforts to ensure longitudinal tracking of training and education programs for a minimum of 10 years and to ensure community engagement targeting the cancer center's catchment area. This case study can provide generalizable information to other cancer centers and NCI CRCHD awardees. Citation Format: Ifeanyi Beverly Chukwudozie, Karriem S. Watson, Stacey Rhodes, Ahlam Al-Kodmany, Erica Martinez, Christopher Gay, Marian L. Fitzgibbon, Paul Grippo, Robert A. Winn, Robert A. Winn. Standardizing tracking and evaluation in cancer disparities research: Utilizing REDCap to track training, education, and community engagement activities [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Tenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2017 Sep 25-28; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018;27(7 Suppl):Abstract nr A01.

Higher educational institutions (HEIs) are expected to contribute to local economies and the working life through collaboration and regional development. Increasing demands and diminishing resources call for innovative solutions. We discuss the benefits of integrating education and regional development in HEIs through spatiality. We build on community engagement, knowledge transfer, spatiality and the Triple Helix; identifying a HEI's knowledge and people flows. We apply the frame to a case study of a university of applied sciences in Finland. Results suggest that there are a number of ways in which a HEI can collaborate with local industries and strengthen its regional impact without significant structural trade-offs and while supporting pedagogy. The results have implications for higher educational institutions, particularly, concerning the agile, transportable educational space concept. The study raises an important issue related to the assumptions of what makes a university: physical presence versus knowledge flows.