Community participation in health services

This study critically analyzes and synthesizes community participation (CP) theory across disciplines, defining and beginning to map out the elements of CP according to a preliminary framework of structure, process, intermediate outcomes, and ultimate outcomes. The first study component sought to determine the impact of Sight N' Soul, a CP project utilizing neighborhood health workers (NHWs), on appointment missing in an indigent urban African-American population. It found that persons entering the vision care system through contact with an NEW were about a third less likely to miss an appointment than those persons entering the system through some other avenue. While theory in this area remains too poorly developed to hypothesize causal relationships between structure, process, and outcomes, a summary of the elements of Sight N' Soul's structure and process both developed the preliminary framework and serves as a first step to mapping these relationships. The second component of the study uncovered the elements of structure and process that may contribute to a sustained egalitarian partnership between community people and professionals, a CP program called Project HEAL. Elements of Project HEAL's structure and process included a shared belief in the program; spirituality; contribution, ownership, and reciprocation; a feeling of family; making it together; honesty, trust, and openness about conflict; the inevitability of uncertainty and change; and the guiding interactional principles of respect; love, care, and compassion; and personal responsibility. The third component analyzed the existing literature, identifying and addressing gaps and inconsistencies and highlighting areas needing more highly developed ethical analysis. Focal issues include the political, economic, and historical context of CP; the power of naming; the issue of purpose; the nature of community; the power to muster and allocate resources; and the need to move to a systems view of health and well-being, expanding our understanding of the universe of potential outcomes of CP, including iatrogenic outcomes. Intermediate outcomes might include change in community, program, and individual capacity, as well as improved health care delivery. Ultimate outcomes include increased positive interdependencies and opportunities for contribution; improved mental, physical, and spiritual health; increased social justice; and decreased exploitation. ^

A focused ethnographic study of community social capital

Social capital, a relatively new public health concept, represents the intangible resources embedded in social relationships that facilitate collective action. Current interest in the concept stems from empirical studies linking social capital with health outcomes. However, in order for social capital to function as a meaningful research variable, conceptual development aimed at refining the domains, attributes, and boundaries of the concept are needed. An existing framework of social capital (Uphoff, 2000), developed from studies in India, was selected for congruence with the inductive analysis of pilot data from a community that was unsuccessful at mobilizing collective action. This framework provided the underpinnings for a formal ethnographic research study designed to examine the components of social capital in a community that had successfully mobilized collective action. The specific aim of the ethnographic study was to examine the fittingness of Uphoff's framework in the contrasting American community. A contrasting context was purposefully selected to distinguish essential attributes of social capital from those that were specific to one community. Ethnographic data collection methods included participant observation, formal interviews, and public documents. Data was originally analyzed according to codes developed from Uphoff's theoretical framework. The results from this analysis were only partially satisfactory, indicating that the theoretical framework required refinement. The refinement of the coding system resulted in the emergence of an explanatory theory of social capital that was tested with the data collected from formal fieldwork. Although Uphoff's framework was useful, the refinement of the framework revealed, (1) trust as the dominant attribute of social capital, (2) efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action as the outcome indicator, (3) cognitive and structural domains more appropriately defined as the cultural norms of the community and group, and (4) a definition of social capital as the combination of the cognitive norms of the community and the structural norms of the group that are either constructive or destructive to the development of trust and the efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action. This explanatory framework holds increased pragmatic utility for public health practice and research. ^