ArticleThe International journal of health planning and management2023
Actualising power sharing in community-led initiatives: Insights from community-based organisation leaders in Chicago, USA.
Article in The International journal of health planning and management, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is an increasing call for a governmental organisations such as local health departments and federal health and human service agencies to partner with community based organisations (CBOs) for health promotion. There is a large body of literature suggesting that CBOs need capacity building or empowerment to do this work, but less literature about the necessary culture shift at governmental organisations who fund public health work. This study aimed to examine the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of CBO leadership who do not want to partner with state funders, and understand which structures and practices demonstrate power-sharing in a community-led approach. We conducted six interviews with community-based organisation leaders and conducted a thematic analysis and a secondary, inductive discourse analysis of the transcripts to analyse why organisations chose not to apply for a government funded initiative and how they talked about power-sharing for community-led public health. Themes about the decision for CBOs to apply to the public health funding initiative: how it related to the CBO's scope of work, meeting the needs of the community, having the technical capacity, and cross-cutting themes of putting the community first and having a long-term positive impact. Organisations rejected the opportunity for this funding due to poor fit, even if they could fulfil the scope of work. A community-led approach was described as one that includes the government giving up control, creating spaces for meaningful participation and power-sharing, and systems demonstrating trust in CBOs. These findings reiterate that in order for public health to be community-led, there needs to be system-wide transformation and intentional investment that supports an infrastructure for community-led public health. State funders can learn from practices in trust-based philanthropy, such as flexible funding and reporting requirements. The results of this study can support the wider participation of CBOs in collaboration with state actors, maximising the transformative potential of collaboration, ultimately transforming power structures and advancing health equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.