Strengthening Services through Data & Collaborative Knowledge Sharing
By Brandon Martinez, Research Associate
In East Harlem, researchers and program staff are working together to use iterative knowledge-sharing processes to support staff and program implementation.
Participatory research gives community stakeholders a voice in evaluating the programs designed to support them. It creates partnerships between them and evaluation staff to understand program implementation processes, identify challenges, and propose recommendations.
One such approach, community-based participatory research (CBPR), incorporates the perspectives of research staff, program staff, participants, and funders in research design and execution. Through collaboration and knowledge-sharing with project stakeholders, researchers can more effectively center community perspectives and provide tailored strategies for sustaining and strengthening programming based on evaluation outcomes.
Drawing from this approach, the evaluation team at the Center for Complex Trauma at Icahn School of Medicine (CCT) is partnering with the Exodus Center for Trauma Innovation (CTI) in East Harlem to provide a community-centered evaluation of programming. Using a knowledge-sharing process with program staff, the evaluation team collaboratively interpreted program data and analyses to co-construct recommendations and implementation plans that strengthen staff supports and service delivery. In a recent evaluation memo, funded by the Criminal Justice Investment Initiative, staff detailed this approach to the method and the outcome of their discussions with program staff.
For more information about CCT’s ongoing evaluation of the CTI, visit the CTI Evaluation page and review the latest memo on the use of CBPR in CTI’s program evaluation.
Using Staff Experiences to Better Understand Research
Throughout their evaluation, CCT researchers have embodied CBPR and worked with the CTI to design their research approach, identify relevant markers of participant progress in the program, and create culturally relevant recruitment methods for focus groups. After conducting initial analysis of staff and participant interviews and program data, the CCT evaluation team led knowledge-sharing meetings.
Program staff collaboratively interpreted the evaluation team’s findings during these meetings; this meant sharing their experiences with program participants and their understanding of the challenges participants faced, as well as challenges within the larger community, that were relevant to the program data and analysis. These meetings formed the basis of the evaluation team’s interpretation of findings and development of implementation recommendations.
From this process, evaluators learned that the well-documented effects of providing trauma-informed healing were impacting the well-being of program staff. Through knowledge sharing discussions, CTI staff shared that despite these challenges, they are connected to each other through understanding, vulnerability, and trust that forms the basis of a strong work culture. After presenting these findings to the program staff, CCT co-developed recommendations to better promote staff wellness and reduce burnout:
Enhance trauma-informed support for staff.
Improve awareness and integration of existing wellness strategies.
Boost staff trauma-informed skill competency and sense of connectedness.
Assessing Feasibility to Support Next Steps
After developing the recommendations, CCT held further discussions with CTI staff to identify the necessary next steps to implement them. CCT used this discussion to determine what changes the CTI wanted to make, what supports they needed, and what barriers they anticipated. Through this collaborative discussion, CCT and the CTI formulated a hybrid work model that would shift away from in-person-only programming and instead allow some staff to work remotely to support staff wellness and improve access to services to participants who may not be able to attend in-person.
Implementation of the model would require additional staff training and standardization of internal systems. Although learning how to work in virtual settings would be a new challenge, staff felt that they could rely on the trust they had already developed with participants. This shift yields a mutually beneficial outcome, giving CTI staff and leadership a more sustainable working structure and the ability to continue improving the program and supporting participants.
ABOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVESTMENT INITIATIVE
Under former Manhattan District Attorney Cy R. Vance, Jr., the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office created the Criminal Justice Investment Initiative (CJII) in order to use $250 million seized in international financial crime prosecutions to invest in transformative projects that will improve public safety, prevent crime, and promote a fair and efficient justice system. CJII is a first-of-its-kind effort to support innovative community projects that fill critical gaps and needs in New York City’s criminal legal system infrastructure.
CJII focuses on three investment areas—crime prevention, diversion and reentry, and supports for survivors of crime. The CUNY Institute for State & Local Governance manages and provides technical assistance to CJII contractors, and conducts oversight and performance measurement throughout the lifetime of the initiative.
Image by Studio Romantic on Adobe Stock.