# Reframing advisory as leadership to promote equity in trauma-informed community-engaged research: A case study of Yolo County, CA

## TL;DR

This paper shows how renaming a community advisory board to a leadership board can promote equity in trauma-informed research by empowering underrepresented groups.

## Contribution

The study introduces a novel approach to community engagement by reframing advisory roles as leadership to enhance equity in translational research.

## Key findings

- Renaming the CAB to CLB increased community power and cultural responsiveness.
- The CLB provided feedback on over a dozen materials and identified gaps in translation accuracy and screening time.
- Eight key areas of influence were identified, including trauma-informed screening and communication strategies.

## Abstract

Community engagement that emphasizes shared leadership is essential in clinical and translational science, and language, naming, and framing have the potential to shape power dynamics. This study explored how renaming and restructuring a Community Advisory Board (CAB) into a Community Leadership Board (CLB) could strengthen a trauma-informed network of care (TINoC) by elevating community power, cultural responsiveness, and equitable participation.

Guided by the Trauma and Resilience Informed Research Principles and Practice(TRIRPP) framework, we established a paid CLB in Yolo County, California, composed of six individuals who identified as members of groups underrepresented in science. We reviewed timesheets and TINoC products and conducted an inductive thematic analysis of meeting minutes to determine the CLB’s main areas of influence.

The CLB met 25 times over two years, provided iterative feedback on more than a dozen educational materials, clinical workflows, trauma-informed trainings, and communication strategies, and co-presented at community meetings. Eight recurring areas of influence were identified: trauma-informed ACE screening, accessibility, workflow feasibility, community- and patient-centered feedback, health communication, participant compensation, engagement, and post-screening navigation. CLB members highlighted gaps not identified by the academic and community members of the TINoC, including translation accuracy, time allowed for ACE screening, and ensuring voluntary patient participation.

Renaming the CLB as a “leadership” body signaled a shift in accountability, deepened engagement, and underscored how naming practices can drive more equitable translational research. Virtual-only meetings potentially limited the representativeness of the CLB; however, results suggest naming is a critical component of trauma-informed community-engaged research(CEnR).