CBO employees tell a researcher what makes or breaks health research collaborations

Objectives: To examine the components and intensities of “most” and “least” successful collaborations between HIV researchers and Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). Methods: Twenty CBO employees participated in two in-depth interviews (open-ended and survey questions) about their collaborations in HIV research. Following standard procedure, independently, three coders coded qualitative data for components of most and least successful collaborations. Respondents gauged intensity of collaboration (0= most intense; 3=least intense) based on their involvement in implementing research 1) objectives, 2) design, 3) measures, 4) procedures, 5) data analysis, and 6) dissemination. To compare intensity of collaboration, paired sample t-tests were used. To control for Type I error due to multiple comparisons, Bonferoni's method was used, p level < .008. Results: Twelve participants were female, six male; nine white, three black, four Latino, two Asian. Age range: 27-65. In most successful collaborations CBOs: 1) shared roles and responsibilities with researchers; 2) developed research skills; 3) influenced research agendas; 4) developed professional relationships with researchers. In least successful collaborations: 1) researchers wanted full control; 2) CBO had to fight for equality; 3) researchers had pre-established measures; 4) there was little communication. Collaboration intensity was significantly higher in the most successful collaborations in planning objectives (p=.001), design (p=.001), measures (p=.000), data analysis (p=.001), and dissemination (p=.002), but not procedures (p=.033). Implications: The findings suggest a paradigm of successful collaboration that HIV researchers and CBOs can adopt to enhance CBO involvement in research. Policy makers may draw on this paradigm to support health research that reflects CBOs' priorities.