Leveraging community-academic partnerships to improve healthy food access in an urban, Kansas City, Kansas, community

University of Kansas Medical Center, Department of Family Medicine, Research Division, USA.
Progress in community health partnerships: research, education, and action 09/2012; 6(3):279-88. DOI: 10.1353/cpr.2012.0046
Source: PubMed


Americans can combat overweight (OW) and obesity by eating unprocessed, fresh foods. However, all Americans do not have equal access to these recommended foods. Low-income, minority, urban neighborhoods in particular often have limited access to healthy resources, although they are vulnerable to higher levels of OW and obesity.
This project used community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles to investigate the food needs of residents and develop a business plan to improve access to healthy food options in an urban, Kansas City, Kansas, neighborhood.
Partner community organizations were mobilized to conduct a Community Food Assessment survey. The surveys were accompanied by flyers that were part of the communication engagement strategy. Statistical analysis of the surveys was conducted. We engaged low-income, minority population (40% Latino, 30% African American) urban communities at the household level.
Survey results provided in-depth information about residents' food needs and thoughts on how to improve food access. Results were reported to community members at a town hall style meeting.
Developing a strategic plan to engage a community and develop trust is crucial to sustaining a partnership particularly when working with underserved communities. This project demonstrates that, if well managed, the benefits of academic and community partnerships outweigh the challenges thus such relationships should be encouraged and supported by communities, academic institutions, local and national government, and funders.
A CBPR approach to understanding an urban community's food needs and opinions is important for comprehensive food access planning.

12 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has emerged to bridge the gap between research and primary-care practice through community engagement and social action to increase health equity. It is widely acknowledged that access to high-quality primary care services is important to the overall health of a community. Here, CBPR studies in a primary care setting are reviewed to assess the use of CBPR associated with common health problems seen in primary care such as access to care and disparities in chronic disease management across vulnerable populations. CBPR involves building relationships with local communities, determining areas of need and establishing priorities for health concerns. Studies showing improved access to care for a Hispanic population, reduced asthma symptoms and weight loss are highlighted.
    Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research 07/2013; 2(4):405-19. DOI:10.2217/cer.13.45 · 0.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: To describe the design of the developmental project Healthy Future that aims to implement a new evidence-based program for the prevention of childhood obesity and collaboration and sharing of work between specialist and community health care professionals in parts of a county in western Norway. Methods: Comprehensive participatory planning and evaluation (CPPE) process as an action-oriented research approach was chosen, using mixed data sources, mixed methods, and triangulation. Discussion: A bottom-up approach might decrease the barriers when new evidence-based childhood prevention interventions are going to be implemented. It is crucial not only to build partnership and shared understanding, motivation, and vision, but also to consider the frames of the organizations, such as competencies, and time to carry out the interventions at the right level of health care service and adapt to the overweight children and their families needs. Conclusion: The developmental process of new health care programs is complex and multileveled and requires a framework to guide the process. By CPPE approach evidence-based health care practice can be delivered based on research, user knowledge, and provider knowledge in the field of childhood overweight and obesity in a certain context.
    Journal of obesity 07/2013; 2013:437206. DOI:10.1155/2013/437206
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As resources for health promotion become more constricted, it is increasingly important to collaborate across sectors, including the private sector. Although many excellent models for cross-sector collaboration have shown promise in the health field, collective impact (CI), an emerging model for creating larger scale change, has yet to receive much study. Complementing earlier collaboration approaches, CI has five core tenets: a shared agenda, shared measurement systems, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and a central infrastructure. In this article, we describe the CI model and its key dimensions and constructs. We briefly compare CI to community coalition action theory and discuss our use of the latter to provide needed detail as we apply CI in a critical case study analysis of the Tenderloin Healthy Corner Store Coalition in San Francisco, California. Using Yin's multimethod approach, we illustrate how CI strategies, augmented by the community coalition action theory, are being used, and with what successes or challenges, to help affect community- and policy-level change to reduce tobacco and alcohol advertising and sales, while improving healthy, affordable, and sustainable food access. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of CI as a framework for health promotion, as well as the benefits, challenges, and initial outcomes of the healthy retail project and its opportunities for scale-up. Implications for health promotion practice and research also are discussed. © 2015 Society for Public Health Education.
    Health Education & Behavior 03/2015; 42(5). DOI:10.1177/1090198115577372 · 2.23 Impact Factor
Show more