ArticleResearch square2026
Increasing community capacity to address local environmental health concerns using a community grant program in Atlanta, Georgia.
Article in Research square, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Communities play a central role in responding to environmental exposures that negatively impact them, and growing their capacity to respond to these environmental threats is one approach to protect and improve community health. The Emory University HERCULES Exposome Research Center and its Stakeholder Advisory Board developed a community grant program with the goal of increasing the capacity of communities in Atlanta, Georgia to address their local environmental health concerns. This paper presents the community capacity outcomes of that program, demonstrating how a small grant program has the potential to enhance communities' capacity to address environmental health concerns. Methods: To evaluate the community capacity outcomes of the Community Grant Program we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with organizational representatives after they completed the program. The interview guide assessed dimensions of community capacity: leadership, knowledge and skills, networks and partnerships, resources, sense of community, and community power. Two team members independently transcribed and coded the, resolving discrepancies through discussion. We used NVivo qualitative analysis software to manage and analyze the data, and conducted secondary analysis of code reports to identify the themes reported here. Results: We interviewed a representative from each of the 12 grantee organizations. Grantees showed increased capacity with regards to leadership, sense of community, community power, knowledge, skills, and expanded networks and partnerships. For example, the program increased opportunities to take on leadership roles, to build community trust, to increase community awareness of environmental health issues, and for community members to act. Conclusions: Community grant programs may be a novel way to support and enhance community capacity. Using community capacity frameworks to guide community grant programming can produce short-term outcomes while building sustained capacity for long-term goals. This program not only provided financial support but also served as a catalyst for fostering leadership, knowledge, and skills, enhancing a sense of community, empowering individuals and communities to act, and expanding networks and partnerships. Overall, the success of this small Community Grant Program underscores the importance of investing in grassroots initiatives and collaborative efforts to enhance community capacity to address complex social and environmental challenges.
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.