Community engagement as a foundation for improving neighborhood health.

OBJECTIVE: Health inequities and disparities are associated with non-White race/ethnicity, immigrant status, income, and geographic location. Community engagement is essential to identify health and social needs and to plan health care and social services programs. To begin a larger community-based participatory study, the purpose of this study was to explore community residents' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to achieving and maintaining health. DESIGN, SAMPLE, AND MEASUREMENTS: This qualitative descriptive study used focus group interviews. We recruited a convenience sample (n = 50) from community meetings and gathering for five audio-recorded focus groups that used a semi-structured interview guide. Transcripts were coded to identify common topics in each group and major themes across groups. RESULTS: Participants were predominantly women (58%), Hispanic/Latinx, and Spanish-speaking (57%), who rented their homes (69%). Two main themes emerged: (a) social determinants as barriers to health and (b) need for trust to participate in health programs. CONCLUSIONS: Although health care providers are frequently concerned about providing access to care, community members identified a variety of social determinants that affected their health. Listening and responding to community members' priorities are the foundation to improving health in neighborhoods directly affected by inequities.

Expansion of the Community Engagement Studio Method: Deepening Community Participation in Health Care Innovation.

BACKGROUND: The Community Engagement Studio (CE Studio) method has emerged as a valuable model for community participation in health innovation research, and we advance the model by expanding the timing and number of CE Studio sessions, as well as facilitation. OBJECTIVES: The authors expanded the CE Studio method first to include five sessions corresponding to five phases of innovation: a) health experiences, b) community readiness,c) design features, d) adoption, and e) sustainability. Community experts were engaged throughout the duration of the research. Second, the authors positioned the CE Studio Team to be deeply embedded within the research team and the community of interest through community health workers. METHODS: The expanded CE Studio method was incorporated into a federally funded research project focused on a health technology platform. The CE Studio Team held five sessions with each of four community expert panels (total of 20 sessions) based on race/ethnicity and language: African American, Asian American, English-speaking Latinx, and Spanishspeaking Latinx. CONCLUSIONS: CE Studio sessions revealed community experts' shared and unique evolving and deepening perspectives that show promise for expanding the model.