Programmatic capacity and HIV structural change interventions: influences on coalitions' success and efficiency in accomplishing intermediate outcomes

Creating Youth-Supportive Communities: Outcomes from the Connect-to-Protect® (C2P) Structural Change Approach to Youth HIV Prevention

Reducing HIV incidence among adolescents represents an urgent global priority. Structural change approaches to HIV prevention may reduce youth risk by addressing the economic, social, cultural, and political factors that elevate it. We assessed whether achievement of structural changes made by eight Connect-to-Protect (C2P) coalitions were associated with improvements in youth's views of their community over the first 4 years of coalitions' mobilization. We recruited annual cross-sectional samples of targeted youth from each C2P community. We sampled youth in neighborhood venues. We interviewed a total of 2461 youth over 4 years. Males (66 %) and youth of color comprised the majority (52 % Hispanic/Latinos; 41 % African Americans) of those interviewed. By year 4, youth reported greater satisfaction with their community as a youth-supportive setting. They reported their needs were better met by available community resources compared with year 1. However, these findings were moderated by risk population such that those from communities where C2P focused on young men who have sex with men (YMSM) reported no changes over time whereas those from communities focused on other at-risk youth reported significant improvements over time in satisfaction and resource needs being met. Internalized HIV stigma increased over time among those from communities serving other at-risk youth and was unchanged among those from YMSM communities. The very different results we observe over time between communities focused on YMSM versus other at-risk youth may suggest it is unreasonable to assume identical chains of structural causality across youth populations who have such different historical relationships to HIV and who encounter very different kinds of entrenched discrimination within their communities.

The Benefits of Youth Engagement in HIV-Preventive Structural Change Interventions

Youth are infrequently included in planning the health promotion projects designed to benefit them as many of the factors infringing upon youth's health and well-being also limit their engagement in community-based public health promotion projects. This article explores youth engagement in 13 coalitions implementing structural changes meant to reduce HIV transmission among adolescents. There was wide variation of youth membership and involvement across coalitions. Using analytic induction, the authors show that youth engagement was associated with the successful completion of structural change efforts. The authors also describe how youth engagement indirectly facilitated coalitions' success. The authors suggest that youth engagement in planning and conducting structural interventions is itself a valuable structural change.

Accomplishing structural change: identifying intermediate indicators of success

Coalitions are routinely employed across the United States as a method of mobilizing communities to improve local conditions that impact on citizens' well-being. Success in achieving specific objectives for environmental or structural community change may not quickly translate into improved population outcomes in the community, posing a dilemma for coalitions that pursue changes that focus on altering community conditions. Considerable effort by communities to plan for and pursue structural change objectives, without evidence of logical and appropriate intermediate markers of success could lead to wasted effort. Yet, the current literature provides little guidance on how coalitions might select intermediate indicators of achievement to judge their progress and the utility of their effort. The current paper explores the strengths and weaknesses of various indicators of intermediate success in creating structural changes among a sample of 13 coalitions organized to prevent exposure to HIV among high-risk adolescents in their local communities.

Accomplishing structural change: identifying intermediate indicators of success

Coalitions are routinely employed across the United States as a method of mobilizing communities to improve local conditions that impact on citizens' well-being. Success in achieving specific objectives for environmental or structural community change may not quickly translate into improved population outcomes in the community, posing a dilemma for coalitions that pursue changes that focus on altering community conditions. Considerable effort by communities to plan for and pursue structural change objectives, without evidence of logical and appropriate intermediate markers of success could lead to wasted effort. Yet, the current literature provides little guidance on how coalitions might select intermediate indicators of achievement to judge their progress and the utility of their effort. The current paper explores the strengths and weaknesses of various indicators of intermediate success in creating structural changes among a sample of 13 coalitions organized to prevent exposure to HIV among high-risk adolescents in their local communities.

Conflict transformation, stigma, and HIV-preventive structural change

Over the prior decade, structural change efforts have become an important component of community-based HIV prevention initiatives. However, these efforts may not succeed when structural change initiatives encounter political resistance or invoke conflicting values, which may be likely when changes are intended to benefit a stigmatized population. The current study sought to examine the impact of target population stigma on the ability of 13 community coalitions to achieve structural change objectives. Results indicated that coalitions working on behalf of highly stigmatized populations had to abandon objectives more often than did coalitions working for less stigmatized populations because of external opposition to coalition objectives and resultant internal conflict over goals. Those coalitions that were most successful in meeting external challenges used opposition and conflict as transformative occasions by targeting conflicts directly and attempting to neutralize oppositional groups or turn them into strategic allies; less successful coalitions working on behalf of stigmatized groups struggled to determine an appropriate response to opposition. The role of conflict transformation as a success strategy for working on behalf of stigmatized groups is discussed.