Appendix C

Protocol for Site Visits and Telephone Interviews, June 1996

Innovative research. We would like to discuss the extent to which the center has conducted innovative research, by which we mean research on new issues, new or inadequately reached populations, new approaches to reaching communities/populations, and new research methods.

  1. Are there specific center research or demonstration projects that demonstrate an innovative approach? In what way are these projects innovative?

  2. How do the center's structure and working relationships contribute to innovation? (PROBE: interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity)

  3. What role has CDC played in encouraging innovative research? What activities could CDC undertake to promote innovative research? (PROBE: periodic meetings of all centers, encouraging collaboration)

Criteria for selecting and judging projects. We would like to discuss the criteria you use to select research projects. In addition, we would like to discuss the ways in which CDC communicates its program criteria to the centers.

  1. Please describe the center's approach to selecting its projects. We are especially interested in hearing about the criteria and process you use.

    (PROBE: Does the selection process take into consideration the potential contributions of projects to scientific understanding and to public health



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Appendix C Protocol for Site Visits and Telephone Interviews, June 1996 Innovative research. We would like to discuss the extent to which the center has conducted innovative research, by which we mean research on new issues, new or inadequately reached populations, new approaches to reaching communities/populations, and new research methods. Are there specific center research or demonstration projects that demonstrate an innovative approach? In what way are these projects innovative? How do the center's structure and working relationships contribute to innovation? (PROBE: interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity) What role has CDC played in encouraging innovative research? What activities could CDC undertake to promote innovative research? (PROBE: periodic meetings of all centers, encouraging collaboration) Criteria for selecting and judging projects. We would like to discuss the criteria you use to select research projects. In addition, we would like to discuss the ways in which CDC communicates its program criteria to the centers. Please describe the center's approach to selecting its projects. We are especially interested in hearing about the criteria and process you use. (PROBE: Does the selection process take into consideration the potential contributions of projects to scientific understanding and to public health

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention practice? Does the process require community input? Does this process help achieve a balance between research activities and community activities? Does this process help achieve a diversity of populations with which the center works?) Has CDC clearly communicated criteria for selecting and judging projects? Please comment on the ways in which CDC communicates its program criteria to the centers. In your experience, does the SIP program alter your priorities for project selection? Do SIPs reflect your mission and priorities? Dissemination activities.We would like to know more about the center's approach to dissemination and its activities in this area. We would also like to discuss CDC's role in sharing knowledge across the centers and beyond. In general, what is your approach to dissemination of research results and advances in prevention? Does the center have an overall plan? To whom do you disseminate information? Who/what are your targets? How much time, effort, and resources are dedicated to dissemination? Who is responsible for dissemination? Has CDC communicated explicit guidelines or expectations for dissemination to the center? What efforts have been made to share knowledge between the centers and beyond? (PROBE: Is there a forum, what opportunities exist to bring together the centers through annual meetings, long-distance learning, collaboration? What works best?) Are there mechanisms to link or integrate the research findings of different centers? Is knowledge being shared between the centers? Would (is) this be beneficial? Should CDC play a role in encouraging such activities? If so, how? (PROBE: Options to consider may be funding a “think tank” or integrative

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention center. CDC could develop principles that encourage sharing knowledge across centers and beyond, or could mandate collaboration, integration, sharing.) Do the centers play a role in CDC's dissemination activities? If so, how? Does this benefit the centers? Does it help meet the centers' missions? Prevention practice. We would like to know the degree to which your research findings have been incorporated into prevention practice. Can you provide examples where practice has been changed as a result of the center's work? Are there areas where change is likely as a result of your work? What is a reasonable time frame for getting demonstration sites established? What is involved in this work? What barriers exist to developing and maintaining demonstration sites, both within institutions and between institutions/community? How do you address these barriers? What role have health departments and community organizations played in developing demonstration projects? What role has or could CDC play in facilitating the incorporation of research findings into prevention practice? (PROBE: Is CDC missing an opportunity to link science and practice?) Balance in funding sources. We would like to discuss core funding and SIP funding.

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention For mature centers: How has your use of core funding changed as the center has developed and matured? (PROBE: What do you use core funding for now?) What lessons have you leamed regarding the use of core funding for developing and mature centers? How have the types of activities changed as a center matures? How can the change in activities be reflected in funding sources? (PROBE: What are your funding priorities now that you are mature?) For developing centers: As a relatively new center, what do you view as the most important types of activities you need to undertake to be successful? Do you use core funding for such activities? (PROBE: How much of the core funding is used for nonresearch purposes such as fostering community partnerships, dissemination?) For all centers: How much congruence is there between SIP research priority areas and the mission and interests of your center? In not, what does that mean for the center? Do you apply for SIPs outside of your area of interest? From the perspective of a center director, what are the opportunities and limitations of SIPs? How could the SIP process be improved to better foster the centers work and mission? (PROBE: More interactive process) Notion of a Center. We would like to discuss your notion of a “research center,” in terms of function, structure and utility.

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Function—In your experience as a center director, what do you see as the primary functions of a “research center”? Utility—What is the utility of a center? What is the value added? In particular, what has the center contributed that would not have been accomplished without a center? What impact has this made (process and outcome)? Structure—How does the structure of a center influence its effectiveness? (PROBE: Is there a typology of centers: (a) magnet for drawing in coinvestigators; (b) dispersal/dissemination entity; (c) entity for leveraging other sources of funding?) CDC management of the program.We would like to discuss ways in which CDC can better manage the program to optimize the research conducted by centers and the impact of the centers on prevention practice. In your opinion, is the relationship between universities and communities changing? If so, in what ways? Will this be important for CDC's planning for the center program during the next decade? What could CDC do to better promote innovative research? What could CDC do to better promote dissemination efforts? What could CDC do to better facilitate the incorporation of research findings into prevention practice? What could CDC do to provide funding in a way that would optimize the potential of new and mature centers to have an impact on health promotion and disease prevention? Are there any other suggestions you have for ways in which CDC can strengthen the centers program? In particular, could CDC take actions to help new centers succeed and become mature centers and to assist mature centers in continuing to make contributions?

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Columbia University\Harlem Hospital, June 24, 1996. Participants included Barbara Barlow, Mary Bassett, Colin Bull, Jerry Hoke, Harold Freeman, Donald Gemson, Jean Ford, Mindy Fullilove, Robert Fullilove, Diane MacLean, Judith Butler McFie, Mary Northridge, Rev. Theodore Parker, Muriel Pettioni, Allan Rosenfield MD, Joann Toran, Goldie Watkins, Joyce Moon Howard, Steve Robinson, Harmon Moats, and Carol Roberts University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, June 25, 1996. Participants included Alan Cross, Carolyn Crump, Harry Herrick, Michel Ibrahim, Miriam Settle, Michael Simmons, Ethel Jackson, and Caroline Spivey. University of New Mexico, June 27, 1996. Participants included Peggy Allen, Karen Arviso, Janette Carter, Leslie Cunningham-Sabo, Sally Davis, Stewart Duban, Sue Foster-Cox, Bill Freeman, Felicia Garcia, Clark Hansbarger, Deborah Helitzer-Allen, Carla Herman, Vivian Heyward, Leona Magdalena, Renate Mahler, Charlotte Morgan, Shirley Murphy, Lenora Olson, Lydia Pendley, Don Reece, Nancy Risenhoover, and Lawrence Shorty. Prevention Research Center Directors and Co-Directors who Participated in telephone interviews. Cheryl Alexander, Robert Anderson, Mary Basset, William Baldyga, Ross Brownson, Alan Cross, Sally Davis, Brian Flay, Donald Gemson, Darwin Labarthe, Elisa Lee, Susan Levy, Carol Macera, Kenneth McLeroy, Joel Moskowitz, Gilbert Omenn, Guy Parcel, James Raczynski, Nancy Risenhoover, Allan Rosenfield, Miriam Settle, Kenneth Simon, Ira Tager, O. Dale Williams, and Kathleen Wright

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention PROTOCOL FOR SITE VISIT to CDC June 1996 Notion of a Center. We would like to discuss your notion of a “research center,” in terms of function, structure and utility. Function—In your experience, what do you see as the primary functions of a “research center”? Utility—What can be the utility of a center? What can be the value added? In particular, what can the centers program contributed that could not be accomplished without it? What impact has this made (process and outcome)? Structure—How can the structure of a center influence its effectiveness? (PROBE: Is there a typology of centers: (a) magnet for drawing in coinvestigators; (b) dispersal/dissemination entity; and (c) entity for leveraging other sources of funding?) Innovative research. We would like to discuss the extent to which the center has conducted innovative research by which we mean research on new issues, new or inadequately reached populations, new approaches to reaching communities/populations, and new research methods. Are there specific research or demonstration projects that demonstrate an innovative approach? In what way are these projects innovative? What role has CDC played in encouraging innovative research? What activities could CDC undertake to promote innovative research? (PROBE: periodic meetings of all centers, encouraging collaboration) Criteria for selecting and judging projects. We would like to discuss the criteria you use to select and judge centers. In addition, we would like to discuss the ways in which CDC communicates its program criteria to the centers. Please describe CDC's approach to selecting centers. We are especially interested in hearing about the criteria and process you use. (PROBE: Does the selection process take into consideration the potential contributions of centers to scientific understanding and to public health

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention practice? Does the process require community input? Does this process help achieve a balance between research activities and community activities? Does this process help achieve a diversity of populations with which the center works?) Has CDC clearly communicated criteria for selecting and judging projects? Please comment on the ways in which CDC communicates its program criteria to the centers. Dissemination activities. We would like to know more about CDC's role in sharing knowledge across the centers and beyond. In general, what is your approach to dissemination of research results and advances in prevention? What role do the center play in your overall dissemination plan? To whom do you disseminate information? Who/what are your targets? Has CDC communicated guidelines or expectations for dissemination to the center? What efforts have been made to share knowledge between the centers and beyond? (PROBE: Is there a forum, what opportunities exist to bring together the centers through annual meetings, long distance learning, collaboration? What works best?) Are there mechanisms to link or integrate the research findings of different centers? Is knowledge being shared between the centers? Would (is) this be beneficial? Should CDC play a role in encouraging such activities? If so, how? (PROBE: Options to consider may be funding a “think tank” or integrative center. CDC could develop principles that encourage sharing knowledge across centers and beyond, or could mandate collaboration, integration, sharing.) Public health practice. We would like to know the degree to which research findings from the centers have been incorporated into public health practice. Can you provide examples where public health practice has been changed as a result of the center's work? Are there areas where change is likely as a result of your work?

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention What role has or could CDC play in facilitating the incorporation of research findings into prevention practice? (PROBE: Is CDC missing an opportunity to link science and practice?) Balance in funding sources. We would like to discuss core funding and SIP funding For new center, what do you view as the most important types of activities that should be undertaken? How does the use of core funding change as the center develops and matures? (PROBE: What do you use core funding for now?) What lessons have you learned regarding the use of core funding for developing and mature centers? How much congruence is there between SIP research priority areas and the missions and interests of the centers? What are the opportunities and limitations of SIPs relative to other funding mechanisms? How could the SIP process be improved to better foster the centers work and mission? (PROBE: Could there be more lead time?—Perhaps a list of “tentative” project areas could be distributed early for discussion. Could there be more “network” SIPs, which seem to work well for centers in that they allow the topic to be framed with input from centers? Could the reviews be improved?—Centers have stated that the reviews are very general and do not provide useful feedback. At times, the quality of the review is lacking —erroneous comments supplied. Some centers think specific SIPs are “wired,” leading to wasted efforts in proposal development.)

OCR for page 77
Linking Research and Public Health Practice: A Review of CDC's Program of Centers for Research and Demonstration of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention SIP Funding How did you become involved in funding a SIP? Please describe the topic, development of the RFA, the type of proposals you received, and the selection process. (PROBE: Was the project “wired” for a specific center? Did centers play a role in crafting the RFA?) Which center was awarded the SIP? What was your experience with the project? Have you been involved in other SIP projects? Would you consider working with the centers program again? From the perspective, what are the opportunities and limitations of SIPs relative to other funding mechanisms? How could the SIP process be improved to better serve your purpose and to foster the centers work and mission? (PROBE: Could there be more lead time?—Perhaps a list of “tentative” project areas could be distributed early for discussion. Could there be more “network” SIPs, which seem to work well for centers in that they allow the topic to be framed with input from centers? Could the reviews be improved?—Centers have stated that the reviews are very general and do not provide useful feedback. At times, the quality of the review is lacking—erroneous comments supplied. Some centers think specific SIPs are “wired” and this information is not communicated to all centers, leading to wasted efforts in proposal development.) CDC Atlanta, July 2, 1996 Participants included the following staff from CDC: James Barrow, Don Benken, Barbara Bewerse, Sarah Kuester, Dan Miller, David McQueen, Kate McQueen, Michael Pratt, Patricia Riley, and Jean Smith.