Evidence In-Sight:
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize
communities
Date:
January 2011
www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca ● www.excellencepourenfantsados.ca
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
The following Evidence In-Sight report involved a non-systematic search and summary of the research and grey
literature. These findings are intended to inform the requesting organization, in a timely fashion, rather than
providing an exhaustive search or systematic review. This report reflects the literature and evidence available at the
time of writing. As new evidence emerges, knowledge on evidence-informed practices can evolve. It may be useful
to re-examine and update the evidence over time and/or as new findings emerge.
Evidence In-Sight primarily presents research findings, along with consultations with experts where feasible and
constructive. Since scientific research represents only one type of evidence, we encourage you to combine these
findings with the expertise of practitioners and the experiences of children, youth and families to develop the best
evidence-informed practices for your setting.
While this report may describe best practices or models of evidence-informed programs, Evidence In-Sight does not
include direct recommendations or endorsement of a particular practice or program.
This report was researched and written to address the questions:
What are evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities?
Are there examples?
We prepared the report given the contextual information provided in our first communications (see Overview of
inquiry). We are available at any time to discuss potential next steps.
We appreciate your responding to a brief satisfaction survey that the Centre will e-mail to you within two weeks. We
would also like to schedule a brief phone call to assess your satisfaction with the information provided in the report.
Please let us know when you would be available to schedule a 15-minute phone conversation.
Thank you for contacting Evidence In-Sight. Please do not hesitate to follow up or contact us at
[email protected] or by phone at 613-737-2297.
Page | 2
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
1. Overview of inquiry
A children’s mental health centre with many programs for youth and children aged 0 to 17 is examining their current
initiative regarding bullying prevention effort within the community. Bullying is a significant problem in Canada, and has
been identified as a concern in their community. Many prevention strategies have been developed to address this
problem but although these strategies are effective, they are limited since they focus on preventing bullying in specific
contexts. Bullying can occur in a wide variety of contexts, and in order to more effectively prevent it, a community-wide
response needs to be adopted. Many of these efforts at prevention have also focused on youth themselves. Since
bullying is a systemic rather than individual-level problem, prevention efforts can only be successful if initiatives target
youth, parents, teachers and other adults throughout the community. Collaboration will occur amongst the lead agency,
two partner agencies and affected stakeholders (e.g. youth, parents, teachers) in order to obtain an overall picture of
the different ways that bullying affects the community. The aim of the project is to develop a comprehensive, evidencebased community action plan to better prevent bullying in the community and in doing so, reduce the associated
negative mental health outcomes.
2. Answer search strategy
Conduct a search of available literature using various terms related to community mobilization, best-practice, strategies,
and frameworks.
3. Findings
3.1 Community Mobilization Overview
There is a wealth of material on projects with mobilization elements in community development and health, especially
for international health and development initiatives funded by large donors. There is also a great deal of “noise” on the
internet surrounding community mobilization, including suggested mobilization cycles and strategies, and the term
‘community mobilization’ in general is used extensively in public health.
There are many definitions and conceptualizations of community mobilization, but the one provided by HowardGrabman and Snatro (2003) is broad yet appropriate to most mental health and community prevention efforts:
“Community mobilization is a capacity-building process through which community individuals, groups, or organizations
plan, carry out, and evaluate activities on a participatory and sustained basis to improve their health and other needs,
either on their own initiative or stimulated by others.”
Or, to make it more simple, community mobilization is “a community’s process of preparing and organizing to take
action, specifically toward its own development” (Southwest Prevention Center). For the purposes of this synopsis and
as it might be used to help inform bullying prevention initiatives, both definitions are useful but the Howard-Grabman
definition better captures the idea that community mobilization can include both top-down and grassroots elements. It
also leads to many of the “guidelines” or “key learnings” that may substitute for best-practices in terms of community
mobilization efforts.
3.2 Key concepts identified in the literature
Looking at health issues pertaining to children and youth in North America, community mobilization efforts have mostly
focused on decreasing the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. There is also a base of research on violence
reduction among youth that includes community mobilization. However, a search for “evidence-based community
Page | 3
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
mobilization” returns very little in the research literature. Looking specifically for reviews of health topics, the Cochrane
Library of Reviews, TRIP Database, SAMHSA NREPP database, and Promising Practices Network returned no reviews. The
reason that there is no “best-practice” guide to community mobilization is quite simple: when the unit of analysis is a
community, it is very difficult to implement a research study that can draw definitive conclusions. Furthermore, a review
would need to draw from multiple studies of sufficient quality in order to define best-practices. Roussos and Fawcett
(2000) note that “weak outcomes, contradictory results, or null effects were found in the more methodologically
rigorous studies” (p.380). With these limitations in mind, there is some literature available and we identified some
useful materials including models and frameworks, and some suggested strategies drawn from key learnings in various
settings.
ACT for Youth, a Centre of Excellence in New York, works in the field of cross-sector community partnerships and notes
that there are three popular community mobilization models that focus on youth. They all intend to develop broad,
community wide coalitions to improve youth outcomes, to increase public awareness around healthy youth and positive
youth development, and to increase community capacity to implement effective strategies (Dotterweich, 2006). Each of
these models has similarities but they do differ in their theoretical underpinnings. The Search Institute is grounded in
research on adolescent development and looks at developmental assets as the targets for programming, with a social
marketing approach to mobilization. Communities That Care (CTC) is grounded in prevention research, and
simultaneously intends to promote positive development and prevent negative behaviors. Violence is one of five
problem behaviors linked to risk factors, while protective factors are promoted. CTC guides community partnerships
step by step through the entire planning and implementation process. The last model, America’s Promise – The Alliance
For Youth, is grounded in positive youth development and resiliency research but is built more around knowledge
exchange and encouraging linkages then in giving a guiding framework.
Communities That Care (CTC) has been successfully used in Canada and a recent paper by Flynn (2008) at the University
of Ottawa summarizes some of these programs. Flynn notes that CTC is implemented in five phases, one of which is
community mobilization. At the mobilization stage, community leaders are encouraged to identify community members
who can join a Community Prevention Board, the coalition that plans and conducts prevention activities. Members
typically represent a broad cross-section of the community, including youth, parents, social services, elected officials,
law enforcement, schools, public health, faith organizations, and business. They also strive to create a shared vision for
the local community and sit on smaller working groups with specific focus areas, such as Youth Involvement, Risk
Assessment, and Public Relations.
Although not directly related to community mobilization, the Roussos and Fawcett (2000) article explores research on
factors affecting rates of community and systems change. Community mobilization could be included as a strategy to
affect community and systems change, and some of the key lessons learned from those studies might be applicable to
mobilization efforts. They identify seven factors that potentially enhance behavioral and population-level health
outcomes:
1. Having a clear mission and vision
2. Action planning for community and systems change
3. Developing and supporting leadership
4. Documentation and ongoing feedback on progress
Page | 4
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
5. Technical assistance and support
6. Securing financial resources for the work
7. Making outcomes matter
The January 2011 issue of the American Journal of Community Psychology focuses on reducing youth violence through
community mobilization. We were unable to access the journal through CHEO but several abstracts are promising and
warrant further reading. Miao and colleagues, for instance, discuss five elements essential for community engagement
in evidence-based youth violence prevention. These include:
1. Aligning evidence-based practices with a community’s shared vision and values
2. Establishing an inclusive environment for planning, implementing, and evaluating the program
3. Nurturing collaboration
4. Building adequate leadership and community capacity to develop and sustain programs
5. Building a learning community for evaluation and self-reflection
Similarities in recommendations become apparent across publications. Austen (2003) wrote that key components in
community mobilization include:
Creating a shared vision
Having a common understanding of the problem
Leadership
Establishing collaborative partnerships
Having increased community participation and sustainability
Similarly, Bourdages and colleagues (2003) found several key factors to achieving inter-sectoral community mobilization:
Involvement of concerned and influential community members
Commitment to share goals
Formation of appropriate multi-organizational systems
Formal structures to facilitate decision making, with clear leadership
Clear definition of objectives, tasks, roles, and responsibilities
Official support and legitimization from government, participating agencies, and organizations
Community mobilization is, in its essence, an approach rather than a practice or program. It is a strategy embedded in a
larger initiative, but currently there doesn’t appear to be any single “evidence-based” approach. It can be thought of as a
concept in itself, similar to program evaluation or implementation planning, with recommended models or frameworks
and common components. See some of the resources in the next section for useful links to existing tools, models, and
frameworks.
4. Next steps and other resources
The January 2011 issue of The Journal of Community Psychology is a special edition about community mobilization
and reducing youth violence. We are currently unable to access this edition through the CHEO library.
Page | 5
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
“Community Mobilization: Strategies To Support Young Children and Their Families” by Amy Dombro et al,
published in 1996, is a useful book about using community mobilization as a strategy to support children and youth
at the community level.
The Southwest Prevention Center has a framework for community mobilization that roughly adheres to commonly
accepted implementation stages. Their six stages are Entry/Initiating, Readiness, Assessment, Planning,
Implementation, and Sustaining. Each stage has a guide to Action Steps, Methods/Strategies, Outcomes, and
Support Needed. Find the framework at: http://swpc.ou.edu/doucments/publications/framework.pdf
The Community Tool Box has resources for 12 Best Processes for community change and improvement, one of
which is community mobilization. While they focus more on creating “community mobilizers” rather than
mobilization in general, some of the tools and documents are informative. For example, the section “Developing
Multisectoral Collaboration” seems relevant to community mobilization.
Howard-Grabman and Snatro, at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, produced a field guide to community
mobilization in 2003. It is an extensive resource with some useful visual guides to help conceptualize planning
community mobilization. The field guide follows a Community Action Cycle pathway, with chapters devoted to each
stage of the cycle and tools to help plan through the stages. It is admittedly not prescriptive and instead
summarizes and lays out general steps, tools, and approaches that effective community mobilization programs the
Johns Hopkins international health program has been involved with found useful.
Youth engagement fits into the broader concept of “community mobilization” and there is a good base of evidence
relating to youth engagement.
Knowing what works and receiving training on an evidence-informed practice or program is not sufficient to actually
achieve the outcomes that previous evaluations indicate are possible. A program that has been shown to improve
mental health outcomes for children and youth but that is poorly implemented will not achieve successful outcomes
(Fixsen et al, 2005). In order for a program to be evidence-informed, it needs to be applied with fidelity to the design
and it needs to be implemented using supportive “drivers” related to staff competency, organizational leadership and
organizational capacity. These drivers include assessing and monitoring the outcomes of your practice using evaluation
or performance measurement frameworks, which are particularly important when there is insufficient evidence in the
literature to guide clinical decisions. Choosing a practice is an initial step toward implementation, but the
implementation drivers are essential to ensure that the program reaches appropriate clients, that outcomes are
successful and that clinical staff members are successful in their work.
The Ontario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Health has a number of resources and services available to
support agencies with implementation, evaluation, knowledge mobilization, youth engagement and family engagement.
For more information, visit:
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/what-we-do or check out the Centre’s resource hub at
http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/resource-hub.
For general mental health information, including links to resources for families:
http://www.ementalhealth.ca
Page | 6
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
Page | 7
Evidence-based strategies to mobilize communities
References
Austen, P. (2003). Community Capacity Building and Mobilization in Youth Mental Health Promotion: The Story of the
Community of West Carleton. Health Canada, Mental Health Promotion Unit. ISBN 0-662-35783-3. Available at:
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/mh-sm/mhp-psm/pub/community-communautaires/pdf/comm-cap-build-mobilyouth.pdf
Bourdages, J., Sauvageau, L., Lepage, C. (2003). Factors in Creating Sustainable Intersectoral Community Mobilization for
Prevention of Heart and Lung Disease. Health Promotion International, 18(2), 135-144.
Dotterweich, J. (September 2006). Positive Youth Development Resource Manual. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, ACT for
Youth. Available at: http://www.actforyouth.net/?ydManual
Flynn, R. (2008). Communities That Care: A Comprehensive System for Youth Prevention and Promotion, and Canadian
Applications to Date. Available at: http://www.sciencessociales.uottawa.ca/ipc/pdf/8_IPCR2%20-%20Flynn.pdf
Howard-Grabmanm, L., Snetro, G. 2003. How to Mobilize Communities for Health and Social Change. Johns Hopkins
Bloomberg School of Public Health. Available at:
http://www.jhuccp.org/content/how-mobilize-communities-health-and-social-change-2003
Miao, T.A., Umemoto, K., Gonda, D., Hishinuma, E.S. (January 4, 2011). Essential Elements for Community Engagement
in Evidence-Based Youth Violenve Prevention. American Journal of Community Psychology. Abstract available at:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/k3751543mu864387/
Roussos, S.T., Fawcett, S.B. (2000). A Review of Collaborative Partnerships As a Strategy for For Improving Community
Health. Annual Review of Public Health. 21: 369-402.
Southwest Prevention Center. A Framework For Community Mobilization. Available at:
http://swpc.ou.edu/doucments/publications/framework.pdf
The Community Toolbox. Available at: http://ctb.ku.edu/en/default.aspx
Page | 8