REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Participatory Research Partnership
Seeks Organizations for Planning Grants
to Identify Indicators of Health Disparities
The purpose of this Request for Proposals is to identify community-based organizations
interested in planning a community-driven, participatory process for identifying
indicators related to health disparities in communities.
A. Background and Purpose of the Participatory Research Partnership (PRP)
The PRP is currently a subcommittee of the Steering Committee for the Eliminating
Health Disparities Initiative. The PRP reports to the Steering Committee, providing
updates of Partnership activities and recommendations.
The efforts of the PRP are aimed at identifying intermediate outcomes that can be used
to monitor the progress Minnesota has made toward eliminating health disparities.
These intermediate outcomes that impact the health of individuals and communities
may include health behaviors, characteristics of health systems, environmental factors,
community assets, historical, and cultural factors.
The PRP will use a participatory research process to identify intermediate outcomes,
identify possible sources of data, develop measurement tools, design a method for data
collection, and disseminate results to the broader community. The PRP will work with
communities to facilitate the process necessary for communities most affected by health
disparities to be full participants and leaders in the identification of indicators and
methods for collecting data to monitor Minnesota’s progress toward eliminating health
disparities.
The PRP is engaged in four phases of work and one ongoing operating activity as
follows:
 Phase I: Create and develop the Participatory Research Partnership (initiation
through May 2003, funded);
 Phase II(a): Work with communities to identify existing indicators of
intermediate outcomes and develop a planning process for refining and
expanding this list of indicators (September 2002 through October 2003,
funded);
 Phase II(b): Work with communities to refine and expand upon existing
indicators of intermediate outcomes (future phase, unfunded);
 Phase III: Work with communities to identify data collection methods and
processes (future phase, unfunded); and
 Phase IV: Work with communities and MDH to collect and disseminate data
(future phase, unfunded).
 Ongoing Operating Activity: Planning and identification of funding sources.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 1
B. Purpose of the Planning Grants
We need your assistance to identify existing intermediate outcomes related to health
disparities. We also want to provide an opportunity for community members and
community-based organizations to develop a plan to identify additional indicators to
assess health disparities and monitor Minnesota’s progress toward eliminating health
disparities in their communities.
Please note that this RFP specifically focuses on Phase II(a) of the PRP’s work. We
refer to it as the “planning process” throughout this document.
In response to this RFP, we are asking applicants to propose how they would develop a
plan to engage communities in the identification of indicators. In addition, the applicant
should discuss how they would identify relevant information/indicators that have already
been collected in their community (e.g. past focus groups or surveys).
C. Criteria for Applicants
The successful applicant should be a community member, community organization, or
partnership of organizations that serve or represent communities/populations of color in
the state. The PRP is especially interested in individuals and organizations whose
proposals are broad in their reach across different aspects of their community (e.g.,
rural and urban communities both involved in the process or several immigrant groups
from similar geographic locations addressed). The PRP will also be looking for grantees
with experience with populations of color, community assessment and health issues.
D. Available Funding
The PRP has a total of $30,000 for the planning process and expects to award up to 5
grants.
E. Application Requirements
Proposals should be no longer than 10 pages, double-spaced, 12 point font. Proposals
will be evaluated on clarity and the qualifications of the applicant rather than the length
of the proposal. A budget with justification should be provided and does not count
toward the 10-page limit. Budgets should include costs for personnel, travel, and
community engagement activities. Detail should be provided as to the number of hours
expected to be devoted to this project by each individual and their corresponding billing
rate.
The proposal should answer the following questions:
1) History and Description (3 pages or less)
 What are your goals or what is the mission and goal of your organization?
How would you describe yourself or your organization to someone unfamiliar
with your work?
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 2


What are your or your organization’s qualifications for doing this type of work?
What experiences do you have engaging communities and collaborating with
other organizations in your activities?
2) Definition of Community (1 page or less)
 How do you define the community you or your organization are interested in
planning for? This could be one community or multiple communities.
 How will you ensure the community is broadly represented?
3) Workplan (6 pages or less)
 How will you use a participatory process to plan the indicator identification
process (this includes identifying existing indicators and planning a process to
refine and expand upon existing indicators)? How will you engage members
of the community in this process?
 What steps will you undertake during the planning process? What will you do
with the funds awarded?
 How will you identify research (qualitative and quantitative) already done in
your community about potential indicators relevant to understanding health
disparities?
 What other organizations will you consider collaborating with during planning?
 What current community or organization activities have taken place or are
currently taking place that might inform this indicator project?
Proposals should be sent to:
Participatory Research Partnership
Planning Grant Selection Committee
The Urban Coalition
2610 University Avenue West, Suite 201
St. Paul, MN 55114
Electronic submissions are allowed and recommended: heather@urbancoalition.org.
Proposals are due by 5:00 p.m. on June 30th, 2003.
F. Timeline
Proposals are due June 30th, 2003 by 5:00 p.m.
Grants will be awarded by July 15th, 2003.
Planning process must be completed by October 15th, 2003.
We expect that organizations awarded planning grants will attend monthly meetings to
share their experiences, ask questions, and discuss progress with members of the PRP
and other grantees.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 3
G. Project Deliverables
The planning process supported by these grants should result in a final report that
includes the following items:

Indicator Identification Workplan
 Detailed workplan to be used for the indicator identification process
including the planned engagement methods and activities your
organization will use with community members to identify indicators;
 Detailed timeline for the indicator identification process;
 Detailed budget for the indicator identification process (estimating the
number of weeks or months as opposed to specifying dates);
 Definition of communities served by this process, including specification of
whether communities are urban/rural, defined by country of origin,
geographic and so on; and
 If relevant, a list of organizations to be involved in the indicator
identification process, including letters of support from these
organizations.

Indicator Inventory
 Comprehensive review/inventory of current indicators gathered by
organizations serving or connected with your community.

Implementation Recommendations
 Ideas for the implementation process to follow the planning process when
funding is secured.
A separate deliverable must be provided containing a final financial report for the
planning process, and detailing all expenditures incurred during the planning process
compared to the budget approved for this grant.
H. Next Steps
Building upon the reports provided by grantees, the PRP in cooperation with grantees,
will seek funding for future implementation phases. Funding may be secured in entirety
or in portions across grantees. At this time we cannot promise money for
implementation of plans or that the organizations involved in the planning will
necessarily be those implementing the indicator identification process. The PRP will
offer, following the planning period, an opportunity for all planning organizations to come
together and work on a comprehensive indicator identification plan reaching all
communities.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 4
APPENDIX: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND INFORMATION
What do we mean by participatory?
Community-based participatory research is a "collaborative approach to research that
equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique
strengths that each brings. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the
community, has the aim of combining knowledge with action and achieving social
change to improve health outcomes and eliminate health disparities."
WK Kellogg Foundation Community Health Scholars Program
See http://www.futurehealth.ucsf.edu/ccph/commbas.html for more information.
What is a community?
A common definition of community, according to participatory public health research, is
“a group of people with diverse characteristics who are linked by social ties, share
common perspectives, and engage in joint action in geographical locations or settings.”
(From: “What Is Community? An Evidence-Based Definition for Participatory Public
Health”)
Core elements of community are:
 Locus—a sense of place;
 Sharing—common interests and perspectives;
 Joint action—a source of cohesion and identity;
 Social ties—the foundation for community (interpersonal relationships forming
the foundation for community); and
 Diversity—social complexity within communities.
See http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/transitions/transitions1403_2.htm#2
for more information.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 5
What is an indicator?
Put simply, an outcome is a desirable result and an indicator is a way to measure the
desirable result. The indicators we are interested in are those things you want to
cultivate or change (and measure) in society or in communities, those factors affecting
the desirable outcome. Indicators are those factors that make it easier or harder for
individuals to take the healthy path versus the unhealthy path (and may be contributions
to risky behavior).
Criteria for indicators include:




The indicator should reflect community values.
o The community must feel that it owns the process defining the indicators.
o The voice of the community must be heard in this project.
o The choice of the indicators must reflect what seems important to the
community.
The indicator should be valid and measurable.
o The indicator can be measured through established or innovative methods
in order to serve of some community and/or research use.
Communities must trust the indicator.
Community members must understand the indicator.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 6
Potential Questions to Guide Indicator Identification










What does a healthy community and a healthy society look like?
What makes a healthy community and a healthy society?
 What can individuals do to become and stay healthy? What do individuals do to
make themselves less healthy? What fosters or prevents healthy attitudes and
behaviors?
 What can the system (government, healthcare, other) do to help communities
stay healthy? How do systems keep communities from being healthy? Often
systems are not aware of how they enable or inhibit communities from being
healthy. Why should systems help keep communities healthy? How can
communities teach systems and how can systems learn from communities?
What predicts changes in the systems’ attitude and behaviors?
 What can society do to help communities stay healthy? How does society keep
communities from being healthy? Often the society does not know how it enables
or inhibits communities from being healthy. Why should society help keep
communities healthy? How can communities teach society and how can society
learn from communities? What predicts changes in society’s attitude and
behaviors?
 What can communities offer to help individuals stay healthy? How do
communities make it hard for individuals to be healthy? What predicts changes in
communities’ attitudes and behaviors?
In what ways is your community healthy? In what ways is your community not
healthy?
 How do you keep babies healthy in your community?
 How do you keep young people healthy?
 How do you keep adults healthy?
What needs to be done to make your community healthier?
What are particular strengths of your community? How do we allow communities and
families to build on their assets?
What are some gaps or needs in your community?
How do your community’s culture, identity and history influence your community’s
health?
What are the factors that influence health disparities?
Are the indicators selected actionable?
Which indicators do communities care about?
An example of indicators related to a specific health outcome, infant mortality, is
attached.
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 7
Example of Indicators of Intermediate Outcomes for Infant Mortality
The Minnesota Department of Health developed an example of possible indicators
related to infant mortality. These indicators are included below and are intended to
serve as a demonstration of how community-identified indicators could be used to
evaluate efforts toward eliminating health disparities.
A. Systems Factors
 Cultural competency of providers
 Access to health care including clinic hours
 Health care workforce issues
 Location of clinics and hospitals
 Insurance (rate of coverage among community members)
B. Risk and Protective Factors
 Smoking during pregnancy (% of women who smoke during pregnancy)
 Drinking during pregnancy (% of women who drink during pregnancy)
 Use of drugs during pregnancy (% of women who use drugs during
pregnancy)
 Exercise (% of women who exercise during pregnancy)
 Nutrition (% of women who practice good nutrition habits during pregnancy)
 Prenatal care (Gindex or Kottelchuck)
C. Community Assets
 Social support and cohesion (% of residents who report adequate social
support)
 Access to clinics and facilities in near vicinity (% of residents who report
accessible facilities in their neighborhood)
 Extended families (% of residents who report)
 Cultural strengths (% of residents who report)
D. Social and Environmental Factors
 Poverty (federal poverty rates, free and reduced lunches)
 Racism (report of discrimination based on race)
 Employment (employment rates and self-report)
 Housing (% of income used for housing)
 Education (education attainment and % of students meeting graduation
 Requirements)
 Transportation
 Crime/violence
Participatory Research Partnership Planning Grant RFP
page 8