Research & Equity

Research and evaluation play a big role in how the CHC thinks about and addresses health inequities from the types of data we use, the research questions we ask, to how we measure and evaluate programs and survey data. 

We can make sure that in the health communication equity cycle as developed by Communicate Health, we are building equity into the research and evaluation components in addition to planning, programming and design. 

Additionally, Dr. Ashani Johnson-Turbes developed the following model for embedding inclusivity and equity into the research and evaluation process.

(You can watch Dr. Johnson-Turbes' McGovern lecture on equity and evaluation on the CHC's YouTube channel.)

Questions to ask before beginning any evaluation/research activities

Are evaluation efforts and reporting reinforcing asset and equity core beliefs of the team?

We want to ensure that we are not engaging in "deficit framing" from the very beginning of the process, but instead looking wholistically at "problems" and thinking about assets the intended audience brings to the table in addition to the challenges they face. Instead of just reporting the negative aspects ascribed to the intended audience, we also examine the aspirations and assets of the community. This will involve a little more time, be it in focus groups or surveys or motivational interviews, but it will provide a richer, deeper, and more complete understanding of your intended audience. 

When designing surveys, interview guides, and focus group protocols are we using appropriate terminology/being inclusive?

The CHC research team maintains and updates a number of resources for survey design and evaluation, which can be found in the Research Resources folder in Box.

Are we anticipating evaluation audiences and their use of our reported results?

While the CHC strives to not engage in "deficit framing," once our results and data are released to funders and/or the public at large, we can no longer control how people report the data.  Thus, it is important that we think of the different lights in which people might see and use the data.

Are we making reporting accessible to intended audiences and decision-makers?

Once we have collected data from the intended audience or conducted interviews and focus groups, do we have a plan for sharing this data back to community members in a meaningful, timely manner (if applicable)? If not, try to build that into the research cycle. Equity science in health communication is about co-creating knowledge with intended audiences and developing solutions together. Research should not just be a "take" activity, wherein researchers take information and knowledge from the community without providing anything in return. 

Are we being transparent with the data we collect and report?

When reporting data, we often want to be efficient; however, sometimes this can leave consumers of the data with questions, left hanging, and/or alienated. It can also potentially place unintended value statements on what we chose to share and don't share. 

• For example, perhaps we want to report on the effectiveness of a condom campaign among men. Perhaps there were only significant differences seen between men who identify as straight and men who identify as bisexual, but not men who identify as gay. If we only report on men who identify as straight and men who identify as bisexual, does our reporting have an unintended consequence of stigmatizing and/or erasing gay men's experiences by not including them in the reported data? While there may not have been a significant difference, it is still important to be transparent and report all breakouts.