Validation of the Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) Questionnaire.

Conceptualizing and testing factors that contribute to the success of community-academic partnerships are critical to understanding their contributions to the health and well-being of communities. Most measures to date focus on factors that contribute to the development of new partnerships, and only a few have been adequately tested and validated. Methods. The Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) study followed a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach and a multiphase process that included the construction and pilot testing of a questionnaire, and a national survey to validate the psychometric properties of the questionnaire in long-standing CBPR partnerships (existing ≥ six years). All members within partnerships were recruited to complete the survey (55 partnerships with 563 partners). We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Cronbach's alpha statistics, and a pairwise correlations approach to assess discriminant and convergent validity, and assessed internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Results. All MAPS Questionnaire dimensions demonstrated strong validity and reliability and demonstrated agreement over time. Conclusion. The MAPS Questionnaire includes seven dimensions and 81 items related to the MAPS conceptual model and provides a scientific, in-depth measurement tool that allows long-standing CBPR partnerships to evaluate their work toward achieving health equity.

Use of the socio-ecological model to explore trusted sources of COVID-19 information in Black and Latinx communities in Michigan.

BACKGROUND: Identifying trusted sources of health information and exploring what makes these sources trustworthy is an important aspect of public health. This exploration requires embracing the cultural differences in minoritized communities, which are often treated as homogeneous. This qualitative study identifies and analyze the sources of trusted COVID-19 information among Black and Latinx communities in Michigan and assesses the rationale underlying this trust. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 24 Black and 16 Latinx participants (n = 40) in four Michigan counties significantly impacted by COVID-19. The socio-ecological model was applied as an analytical framework for understanding the entities considered trusted sources of information. Within each level of the model, the dimensions of trustworthiness most salient for participants were identified. RESULTS: We found that sources of information came from all levels of the model, including interpersonal (COVID-19 survivors, church representatives, friends, relatives), organizational (employers, healthcare providers, traditional news reports), social media (hybrid source), community (members and groups), and public policy (county health department, federal and state government). Furthermore, participants determined whether they could trust information about COVID-19 by cross-referencing multiple resources. We identified competence, confidence, communication, and system trust as the dimensions of trustworthiness most often reported by participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our research suggests public health communications should engage in cross-referencing practices, providing information from sources at all levels of interaction, cultural competency, and awareness of historical/structural inequities. These efforts would be further strengthened by attending to needs for both factual information as well as care and personal connection.

Erratum: Building the foundation for equitable and inclusive research: Seed grant programs to facilitate development of diverse CBPR community-academic research partnerships - CORRIGENDUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/cts.2022.495.].

Building the foundation for equitable and inclusive research: Seed grant programs to facilitate development of diverse CBPR community-academic research partnerships.

Introduction: The effectiveness of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships to address health inequities is well documented. CBPR integrates knowledge and perspectives of diverse communities throughout the research process, following principles that emphasize trust, power sharing, co-learning, and mutual benefits. However, institutions and funders seldom provide the time and resources needed for the critical stage of equitable partnership formation and development. Methods: Since 2011, the Detroit Urban Research Center, collaborating with other entities, has promoted the development of new community-academic research partnerships through two grant programs that combine seed funding with capacity building support from community and academic instructors/mentors experienced in CBPR. Process and outcomes were evaluated using mixed methods. Results: From 2011 to 2021, 50 partnerships received grants ranging from $2,500 to $30,000, totaling $605,000. Outcomes included equitable partnership infrastructure and processes, innovative pilot research, translation of findings to interventions and policy change, dissemination to multiple audiences, new proposals and projects, and sustained community-academic research partnerships. All partnerships continued beyond the program; over half secured additional funding. Conclusions: Keys to success included participation as community-academic teams, dedicated time for partnership/relationship development, workshops to develop equity-based skills, relationships, and projects, expert community-academic instructor guidance, and connection to additional resources. Findings demonstrate that small amounts of seed funding for newly forming community-academic partnerships, paired with capacity building support, can provide essential time and resources needed to develop diverse, inclusive, equity-focused CBPR partnerships. Building such support into funding initiatives and through academic institutions can enhance impact and sustainability of translational research toward advancing health equity.

A Community-Academic Approach to Preventing Substance Use Disorders.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and activism against structural racism heightened awareness of racial-ethnic disparities and disproportionate burden among the underserved. The opioid crisis further compounds these phenomena, increasing vulnerability for substance use disorders (SUD). Community-based participatory research can facilitate multidisciplinary collaboration, yet literature on these approaches to prevent and reduce SUD and associated stigma remains limited. OBJECTIVE: Discrimination, stigma, and multiple crises with health care and systemic barriers increasingly marginalize the underserved, specifically around SUD. The Detroit Area Mental Health Leadership Team (DAMHLT, since 2015), aims to optimize SUD prevention, enhance resiliency and advocacy to advance knowledge on SUD research and influence community-level research and practice. LESSONS LEARNED: DAMHLT's approach on bidirectionality, community level access to real-time epidemiological data, advocacy (i.e., institutional responsiveness) and dissemination may be translational to other partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: As we move through an ever-changing pandemic, DAMHLT's lessons learned can inform partnership dynamics and public health strategies such as hesitancy on public health response.

Understanding the Benefit-Cost Relationship in Long-standing Community-based Participatory Research (CBPR) Partnerships: Findings from the Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) Study.

As part of the Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS) study, we investigated the relationship between benefits and costs of participation in long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships using social exchange theory as a theoretical framework. Three major findings were identified: (1) the concept of benefits and costs operating as a ratio, where individual benefits must outweigh costs for participation, applies to early stages of CBPR partnership formation; (2) as CBPR partnerships develop, the benefits and costs of participation include each other's needs and the needs of the group as a whole; and (3) there is a shift in the relationship of benefits and costs over time in long-standing CBPR partnerships, in which partners no longer think in terms of costs but rather investments that contribute to mutual benefits.

Indoor apparent temperature, cognition, and daytime sleepiness among low-income adults in a temperate climate.

The burden of temperature-associated mortality and hospital visits is significant, but temperature's effects on non-emergency health outcomes is less clear. This burden is potentially greater in low-income households unable to afford efficient heating and cooling. We examined short-term associations between indoor temperatures and cognitive function and daytime sleepiness in low-income residents of Detroit, Michigan. Apparent temperature (AT, based on temperature and humidity) was recorded hourly in 34 participant homes between July 2019-March 2020. Between July-October 2019, 18 participants were administered word list immediate (WLL) and delayed (WLD) recall tests (10-point scales) and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (24-point scale) 2-4 times. We applied longitudinal models with nonlinear distributed lags of temperature up to 7 days prior to testing. Indoor temperatures ranged 8-34°C overall and 15-34°C on survey days. We observed a 0.4 (95% CI: 0.0, 0.7) point increase in WLL and 0.4 (95% CI: 0.0, 0.9) point increase in WLD scores per 2°C increase in AT. Results suggested decreasing sleepiness scores with decreasing nighttime AT below 22°C. Low-income Detroit residents experience uncomfortably high and low indoor temperatures. Indoor temperature may influence cognitive function and sleepiness, although we did not observe deleterious effects of higher temperatures.

A conceptual framework for clinical and translational virtual community engagement research.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a trend for clinical and translational community-engaged research in adapting to an increasingly virtual landscape. This requires a framework for engagement distinct from in-person research and program activities. We reflect on four case studies of community engagement activities that inform a conceptual framework to better integrate the virtual format into community-engaged research reflecting key tenets of health equity and antiracist praxis. Methods: Four projects were selected by community-engaged research stakeholders for an in-depth review based on how much the virtual transition impacted activities such as planning, recruitment, and data collection for each project. Transitions to virtual engagement were assessed across ten areas in which community engagement has been demonstrated to make a positive impact. Results: Our analysis suggests a conceptual evaluation framework in which the ten community engagement areas cluster into four interrelated domains: (1) development, design, and delivery; (2) partnership and trust building; (3) implementation and change; and (4) ethics and equity. Conclusions: The domains in this conceptual framework describe critical elements of community engaged research and programs consistent with recommendations for health equity informed meaningful community engagement from the National Academy of Medicine. The conceptual framework and case studies can be used for evaluation and to develop guidelines for clinical and translational researchers utilizing the virtual format in community-engaged research.

Self-Reported Health Status Improved For Racial And Ethnic Minority Groups After Michigan Medicaid Expansion.

Addressing health inequities for racial and ethnic minority populations is challenging. After passage of the Affordable Care Act, Michigan launched its Healthy Michigan Plan, which expanded Medicaid eligibility in the state. Our evaluation of the expansion provided the opportunity to study its impact on racial and ethnic minority groups, including Arab American and Chaldean American enrollees, an understudied population. Using data from telephone surveys collected in 2016, 2017, and 2018, we conducted an analysis to study the plan's impact on access to a regular source of care and health status among racial and ethnic minority groups. More than 90 percent of respondents of all racial and ethnic groups reported having a regular source of care after plan enrollment compared with 74.4 percent before enrollment. Respondents who identified as non-Hispanic White, African American, and Hispanic reported improvements in health status after plan enrollment. Our study demonstrates the potential of health insurance access to narrow health inequities between racial and ethnic groups.

Understanding racial differences in attitudes about public health efforts during COVID-19 using an explanatory mixed methods design.

Efforts to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 rely on trust in public health organizations and practices. These practices include contact tracing, which requires people to share personal information with public health organizations. The central role of trust in these practices has gained more attention during the pandemic, resurfacing endemic questions about public trust and potential racial trust disparities, especially as they relate to participation in public health efforts. Using an explanatory mixed methods design, we conducted quantitative analysis of state-level survey data in the United States from a representative sample of Michigan residents (n = 1000) in May 2020. We used unadjusted and adjusted linear regressions to examine differences in trust in public health information and willingness to participate in public health efforts by race. From July to September 2020, we conducted qualitative interviews (n = 26) to further explain quantitative results. Using unadjusted linear regression, we observed higher willingness to participate in COVID-19 public health efforts among Black survey respondents compared to White respondents. In adjusted analysis, that difference disappeared, yielding no statistically significant difference between Black and White respondents in either trust in public health information sources or willingness to participate. Qualitative interviews were conducted to explain these findings, considering their contrast with assumptions that Black people would exhibit lower trust in public health organizations during COVID-19. Altruism, risk acknowledgement, trust in public health organizations during COVID-19, and belief in efficacy of public health efforts contributed to willingness to participate in public health efforts among interviewees. Our findings underscore the contextual nature of trust, and the importance of this context when analyzing protective health behaviors among communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Assumptions about mistrust among Black individuals and communities may be inaccurate because they overlook the specific context of the public health crisis. These findings are important because they indicate that Black respondents are exhibiting strategic trust during COVID-19 despite systemic, contemporary, and historic barriers to trust. Conceptual specificity rather than blanket generalizations is warranted, especially given the harms of stereotyping and discrimination.

A Participatory, Mixed Methods Approach to Define and Measure Partnership Synergy in Long-standing Equity-focused CBPR Partnerships.

Understanding what contributes to success of community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships is essential to ensuring their effectiveness in addressing health disparities and health inequities. Synergy, the concept of accomplishing more together than separately, is central to partnership effectiveness. However, synergy specific to long-standing, equity-focused CBPR partnerships has not been closely examined. To address this, we defined and developed measures of partnership synergy as one dimension of a participatory mixed methods study, Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS), to develop a validated instrument to measure success in long-standing CBPR partnerships. Framed by a conceptual model and scoping literature review, we conducted in-depth interviews with a national panel of academic and community experts in CBPR and equity to develop partnership synergy measures. Items were refined through an iterative process, including a three-stage Delphi process, comparison with existing measures, cognitive interviews, and pilot testing. Seven questionnaire items were developed to measure synergy arising from equitable partnerships bringing together diverse partners across power differences to promote equity. Defining and measuring synergy in the context of long-standing partnership success is central to understanding the role of synergy in collaborative approaches to research and action and can strengthen CBPR partnerships to promote healthy communities and advance health equity.

Examination of Changes in Health Status Among Michigan Medicaid Expansion Enrollees From 2016 to 2017.

Importance: Evidence about the health benefits of Medicaid expansion has been mixed and has largely come from comparing expansion and nonexpansion states. Objective: To examine the self-reported health of enrollees in Michigan's Medicaid expansion, the Healthy Michigan Plan (HMP), over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: A telephone survey from January 1 to October 31, 2016 (response rate, 53.7%), and a follow-up survey from March 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018 (response rate, 83.4%), were conducted in Michigan, which expanded Medicaid in 2014 through a Section 1115 waiver permitting state-specific modifications. Four thousand ninety HMP beneficiaries aged 19 to 64 years with at least 12 months of HMP coverage and at least 9 months in a Medicaid health plan were eligible to participate. Data were analyzed from April 1 to November 30, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Surveys measured demographic characteristics and health status. Analyses included weights for sampling probability and nonresponse. Comparisons between 2016 and 2017 included those who responded to both surveys (n = 3097). Results: Of the 3097 respondents to the 2017 follow-up survey, 2388 (77.1%) were still enrolled in HMP (current enrollees) and 709 (22.9%) were no longer enrolled when surveyed (former enrollees). Among all follow-up respondents, a weighted 37.5% (95% CI, 35.3%-39.9%) were aged 19 to 34 years, 34.0% (95% CI, 31.8%-36.2%) were aged 35 to 50 years, and 28.5% (95% CI, 26.7%-30.3%) were aged 51 to 64 years; 53.0% (95% CI, 50.8%-55.3%) were female. Respondents who reported fair or poor health decreased from 30.7% (95% CI, 28.7%-32.8%) in 2016 to 27.0% (95% CI, 25.1%-29.0%) in 2017 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.81]; P < .001), with the largest decreases observed in respondents who were non-Hispanic black (from 31.5% [95% CI, 27.1%-35.9%] in 2016 to 26.0% [95% CI, 21.9%-30.1%] in 2017; P = .009), from the Detroit metropolitan area (from 30.7% [95% CI, 27.0%-34.4%] in 2016 to 24.9% [95% CI, 21.6%-28.3%] in 2017; P = .001), and with an income of 0% to 35% of the federal poverty level (from 37.6% [95% CI, 34.2%-40.9%] in 2016 to 32.3% [95% CI, 29.1%-35.5%] in 2017; P < .001). From 2016 to 2017, the mean number of days of poor physical health in the past month decreased significantly from 6.9 (95% CI, 6.5-7.4) to 5.7 (95% CI, 5.3-6.0) (coefficient, -6.10; P < .001), including among current (from 7.0 [95% CI, 6.5-7.5] to 5.6 [95% CI, 5.1-6.0]; P < .001) and former (from 6.8 [95% CI, 5.9-7.7] to 5.8 [95% CI, 5.0-6.7]; P = .02) enrollees, those with 2 or more chronic conditions (from 9.9 [95% CI, 9.3-10.6] to 8.5 [95% CI, 7.8-9.1]; P < .001), across all age groups (19-34 years, from 4.3 [95% CI, 3.7-4.9] to 3.0 [95% CI, 2.5-3.5]; P < .001; 35-50 years, from 8.2 [95% CI, 7.3-9.0] to 6.9 [95% CI, 6.1-7.7]; P = .002; 51-64 years, from 9.0 [95% CI, 8.2-9.8] to 7.6 [95% CI, 6.9-8.3]; P = .001), and among non-Hispanic white (from 7.5 [95% CI, 7.0-8.1] to 6.1 [95% CI, 5.6-6.6]; P < .001) and black (from 5.9 [95% CI, 5.1-6.8] to 4.4 [95% CI, 3.6-5.1]; P < .001) respondents. No changes in days of poor mental health or usual activities missed owing to poor physical or mental health were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that HMP enrollees in Michigan have experienced improvements in self-reported health over time, including minority groups with a history of health disparities and enrollees with chronic health conditions.

Does Group Deliberation Mobilize? The Effect of Public Deliberation on Willingness to Participate in Politics.

Proponents of public deliberation suggest that engaging in deliberation increases deliberators' subsequent participation in other forms of politics. We evaluate this "deliberative participation hypothesis" using data drawn from a deliberative field experiment in which members of medically underserved communities in Michigan deliberated in small groups about the design of that state's Medicaid program. Participants were randomly assigned to deliberate about the program in a group or to think about the decision individually, and then completed a post-survey that included measures of willingness to engage in a variety of political acts. We measured willingness to engage in common forms of political participation, as well as willingness to participate in particularistic resistance to adverse decisions by insurance bureaucracies. Contrary to the claims of much of the existing literature, we find no impact of deliberation on willingness to engage in political participation. These results suggest that the ability of public deliberation to increase broader political engagement may be limited or may only occur in particularly intensive, directly empowered forms of public deliberation.

Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success: Theory and Methods for Measuring Success in Long-Standing Community-Based Participatory Research Partnerships.

BACKGROUND: Numerous conceptual frameworks have been developed to understand how community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnerships function, and multiple measurement approaches have been designed to evaluate them. However, most measures are not validated, and have focused on new partnerships. To define and assess the meaning of success in long-standing CBPR partnerships, we are conducting a CBPR study, Measurement Approaches to Partnership Success (MAPS). In this article we describe the theoretical underpinnings and methodological approaches used. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to 1) develop a questionnaire to evaluate success in long-standing CBPR partnerships, 2) test the psychometric qualities of the questionnaire, 3) assess the relationships between key variables and refine the questionnaire and theoretical model, and 4) develop mechanisms and a feedback tool to apply partnership evaluation findings. METHODS: Methodological approaches have included: engaged a community-academic national Expert Panel; conducted key informant interviews with Expert Panel; conducted a scoping literature review; conducted a Delphi process with the Expert Panel; and revised the measurement instrument. Additional methods include: conduct cognitive interviews and pilot testing; revise and test final version of the questionnaire with long-standing CBPR partnerships; examine the reliability and validity; analyze the relationship among variables in the framework; revise the framework; and develop a feedback mechanism for sharing partnership evaluation results. CONCLUSIONS: Through the application of a theoretical model and multiple methodological approaches, the MAPS study will result in a validated measurement instrument and will develop procedures for effectively feeding back evaluation findings in order to strengthen authentic partnerships to achieve health equity.

How Would Low-Income Communities Prioritize Medicaid Spending?

CONTEXT: Medicaid plays a critical role in low-income, minority, and medically underserved communities, particularly in states that have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Yet, the voices of underresourced communities are often unheard in decisions about how to allocate Medicaid's scarce resources, and traditional methods of public engagement are poorly suited to gathering such input. We argue that deliberative public engagement can be a useful tool for involving communities in setting Medicaid priorities. METHOD: We engaged 209 residents of low-income, medically underserved Michigan communities in discussions about Medicaid spending priorities using an exercise in informed deliberation: CHAT (CHoosing All Together). Participants learned about Medicaid, deliberated in small groups, and set priorities both individually and collectively. FINDINGS: Participants prioritized broad eligibility consistent with the ACA expansion, accepted some cost sharing, and prioritized spending in areas-including mental health-that are historically underfunded. Participants allocated less funding beyond benefit coverage, such as spending on healthy communities. Participants perceived the deliberative process as fair and informative, and they supported using it in the policy-making process. CONCLUSION: The choices of participants from low-income, medically underserved communities reflect a unique set of priorities and suggest that engaging low-income communities more deeply in Medicaid policy making might result in different prioritization decisions.

Applying Experiential Action Learning Pedagogy to an Intensive Course to Enhance Capacity to Conduct Community-Based Participatory Research.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is widely recognized as an effective approach to understand and address health inequities. Opportunities for public health practitioners and researchers to engage jointly with community partners in intensive colearning processes can build capacity for CBPR. Using active learning approaches that engage diverse partners can enhance partnership development, competence, and equity. Examination of such pedagogical approaches can strengthen understanding of their contributions to the effectiveness of CBPR capacity-building programs. This article describes a weeklong intensive course carried out by the Detroit Urban Research Center as the foundation for a yearlong training program to build the capacity of community-academic partnership teams to engage in CBPR in their own communities. The in-person CBPR course was developed and implemented by expert academic and community instructors and used an experiential action learning model that integrated CBPR principles and processes. We describe the course content and application of our collaborative, experiential action learning model to course design; present results from participant evaluation of course effectiveness, CBPR competence, and equitable partnership development; and examine the contributions of the pedagogical approach to outcomes central to successful CBPR. The participatory, formative course evaluation used multiple methods that included closed- and open-ended questionnaires to assess instructional effectiveness, participant competence on 12 core components of CBPR, and course impact on partner relationships. Evaluation findings suggest that an experiential action learning approach with attention to colearning, collaboration among diverse instructors and participants, and an environment that fosters and models equitable and trusting relationships can be effective in building CBPR capacity.

Enhancing Capacity of Community-Academic Partnerships to Achieve Health Equity: Results From the CBPR Partnership Academy.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is an equitable partnership approach that links academic researchers, community organizations, and public health practitioners to work together to understand and address health inequities. Although numerous educational materials on CBPR exist, few training programs develop the skills and knowledge needed to establish effective, equitable partnerships. Furthermore, there are few professional development opportunities for academic researchers, practitioners, and community members to obtain these competencies in an experiential co-learning process. In response, the Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center developed the CBPR Partnership Academy, an innovative, yearlong capacity-building program facilitated by experienced community and academic partners, involving an intensive short course, partnership development, grant proposal preparation and funding, mentoring, online learning forums, and networking. Three diverse cohorts (36 teams) from 18 states and 2 tribal nations have participated. We describe the rationale and components of the training program and present results from the first two cohorts. Evaluation results suggest enhanced competence and efficacy in conducting CBPR. Outcomes include partnerships established, grant proposals submitted and funded, workshops and research conducted, and findings disseminated. A community-academic partner-based, integrated, applied program can be effective for professional development and establishing innovative linkages between academics and practitioners aimed at achieving health equity.

Success in Long-Standing Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) Partnerships: A Scoping Literature Review.

Background. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is increasingly used by community and academic partners to examine health inequities and promote health equity in communities. Despite increasing numbers of CBPR partnerships, there is a lack of consensus in the field regarding what defines partnership success and how to measure factors contributing to success in long-standing CBPR partnerships. Aims. To identify indicators and measures of success in long-standing CBPR partnerships as part of a larger study whose aim is to develop and validate an instrument measuring success across CBPR partnerships. Methods. The Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guided searches of three databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus) for articles published between 2007 and 2017 and evaluating success in CBPR partnerships existing longer than 4 years. Results. Twenty-six articles met search criteria. We identified 3 key domains and 7 subdomains with 28 underlying indicators of success. Six partnerships developed or used instruments to measure their success; only one included reliability or validity data. Discussion. CBPR partnerships reported numerous intersecting partner, partnership, and outcome indicators important for success. These results, along with data from key informant interviews with community and academic partners and advisement from a national panel of CBPR experts, will inform development of items for an instrument measuring CBPR partnership success. Conclusion. The development of a validated instrument measuring indicators of success will allow long-standing CBPR partnerships to evaluate their work toward achieving health equity and provide a tool for newly forming CBPR partnerships aiming to achieve long-term success.

Primary Care, Health Promotion, and Disease Prevention with Michigan Medicaid Expansion.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion in Michigan, known as the Healthy Michigan Plan (HMP), emphasizes primary care and preventive services. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the impact of enrollment in HMP on access to and receipt of care, particularly primary care and preventive services. DESIGN: Telephone survey conducted during January-November 2016 with stratified random sampling by income and geographic region (response rate = 53.7%). Logistic regression analyses accounted for sampling and nonresponse adjustment. PARTICIPANTS: 4090 HMP enrollees aged 19-64 with ≥ 12 months of HMP coverage MAIN MEASURES: Surveys assessed demographic factors, health, access to and use of health care before and after HMP enrollment, health behaviors, receipt of counseling for health risks, and knowledge of preventive services' copayments. Utilization of preventive services was assessed using Medicaid claims. KEY RESULTS: In the 12 months prior to HMP enrollment, 33.0% of enrollees reported not getting health care they needed. Three quarters (73.8%) of enrollees reported having a regular source of care (RSOC) before enrollment; 65.1% of those reported a doctor's office/clinic, while 16.2% reported the emergency room. After HMP enrollment, 92.2% of enrollees reported having a RSOC; 91.7% had a doctor's office/clinic and 1.7% the emergency room. One fifth (20.6%) of enrollees reported that, before HMP enrollment, it had been over 5 years since their last primary care visit. Enrollees who reported a visit with their primary care provider after HMP enrollment (79.3%) were significantly more likely than those who did not report a visit to receive counseling about health behaviors, improved access to cancer screening, new diagnoses of chronic conditions, and nearly all preventive services. Enrollee knowledge that some services have no copayments was also associated with greater utilization of most preventive services. CONCLUSIONS: After enrolling in Michigan's Medicaid expansion program, beneficiaries reported less forgone care and improved access to primary care and preventive services.

Shifting from "Community-Placed" to "Community-Based" Research to Advance Health Equity: A Case Study of the Heatwaves, Housing, and Health: Increasing Climate Resiliency in Detroit (HHH) Partnership.

Extreme summertime heat is a significant public health threat that disproportionately impacts vulnerable urban populations. Research on health impacts of climate change (including increasing intensity, duration, and frequency of hot weather) is sometimes designed and implemented without the involvement of the communities being studied, i.e., "community-placed" not "community-based." We describe how the Heatwaves, Housing, and Health: Increasing Climate Resiliency in Detroit (HHH) partnership engaged relevant communities by integrating a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach into an existing, academic-designed research project through a steering committee of community and academic partners. Using a case study approach, we analyze program documentation, partnership evaluation questionnaires, and HHH steering committee meeting notes. We describe the CBPR process by which we successfully collected research data in Detroit during summer 2016, engaged in collaborative analysis of data, and shared results with Detroit residents. Evaluations of the partnership over 2 years show community involvement in research; enhanced capacities; success in securing new grant funding; and ways that CBPR strengthened the validity, relevance, and translation of research. Engaging communities as equal partners using CBPR, even after a study is underway, can strengthen research to understand and address the impacts of extreme heat on health and equity in urban communities.