Democratizing Knowledge: The Role of Community-Engaged Approaches to Uncover Variation in Service Needs and Support Access of Crime Victims from Underserved and Minoritized Populations

Background: A community-engaged approach means collaborating with those who have lived experiences, personal and community investment in the research, and/or proximity to the individuals and communities affected by the issues we are exploring. To be community-engaged as researchers is to understand that knowledge is produced by all individuals and communities within our society, and to integrate this knowledge into every phase of the research process. Although all studies benefit from community-engaged approaches, researchers must engage community members in needs and resource assessments intended to represent the experiences of diverse populations and inform funding and resource priorities. This paper describes the processes and strategies for engaging community members, ways in which community members were involved in the study, and how engagement could have been improved.

Several states have conducted victims of crime needs assessments. Although these assessments represent rigorous and comprehensive studies, there is limited information about how needs and services vary regionally and how service accessibility varies across a state’s diverse populations. Consequently, it is important to use study methods that can examine differences in underserved or marginalized populations and develop these methods in partnership with those who have personal and community investment in the populations and services.

Methods: Fifteen community advisory board members were recruited from across the state of North Carolina. CAB members were recruited on a rolling basis and identified based on their area of focus or membership within one or more of the priority populations that were the focus of the study (e.g., refugees, people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ individuals, members of BIPOC communities, and more). CAB members met regularly with the research team, with the frequency of meetings determined by the phase of the study. As needed, the research team conducted one-on-one check-ins with CAB members in between meetings and also completed a systematic assessment of CAB members’ perspectives on their role and purpose, as well as their opinions and suggestions for improvement.

Results: The research team and CAB members co-created a rigorous and comprehensive needs assessment that involved different types of data collection over a phased study period, including: (1) a web presence assessment of culturally specific organizations and crime victim service providers; (2) interviews with service providers and advocates; (3) an organizational survey of crime victim service providers, culturally specific organizations, and law enforcement; and (4) a survey of victims of crime and co-victims of homicide. In addition, CAB members and the research team collaborated on data interpretation and strategies for communicating and disseminating study results.

Conclusions: Community advisory boards and other methods for community engagement define the questions and the outreach methods that are most important to the community. Although community-engaged approaches are critically important, there are a number of challenges that must be addressed in order to ensure meaningful engagement and democratize knowledge, including strategies for managing study timelines and prospective budgets within the context of evolving and responsive research methods, and addressing the limited funding for activities that can promote engagement (e.g., funding for incentives and participation).