Engagement of grantors and stakeholders in a research project can be vital to its success. In adapting the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) to include cultural idioms of distress for Syrian refugees, grant funding would need to be secured in order to successfully carry through the development, testing, and initial study. Furthermore, partnerships with stakeholders are also important, as it is through their organizations and networks which participants may be gathered, may be a part of the research team itself, or may be members of the populations who will benefit from the research, such as mental health workers, other psychological researchers, the Syrian refugee community, policy makers, among others.
Grant funders are more than just sources of money to complete a project. Ideally, they would also be partners, advocates, and endorsers, with an equal interest in seeing the project come to completion (Broussard, 2019). Typically, organizations, foundations, and government programs which award grants do so, at least in part, because they identify a need which aligns with their values and mission which usually helps society in some fashion (Grant Funding Expert, n.d.). For research which makes a substantial contribution to a field of study, this can also increase the reputation and notoriety of the organization providing the funding. In writing a grant proposal, one should pay close attention to the details of how the funds are meant to be used, and also the objectives and values of the grantors. The grant proposal application needs to clearly demonstrate the value of the research to society and to the grantor organization. Furthermore, funding agencies do not want their funds to be wasted, so defining a clear budget and purpose for funds awarded is necessary (Resnik & Elliott, 2013). While a funder who is actively engaged with the funds recipient throughout the research process shows a strong engagement partnership, it can also signal problems for researchers, whose research may then represent a conflict of interest or bias, even if unintentional, to produce results which please the grantor (Resnik & Elliott, 2013). A tip for engagement of grantors in increasing odds of being approved for funding is to make contact with them and learn about their goals, using a variety of modalities such as social media, emailing, calling, or having an in-person or virtual meeting to gain an insight into their perspectives (Wright, 2019). Grantmakers themselves should also seek to be involved with both their grantees and community stakeholders which can improve the success rates of the programs and research that they are funding (Enright & Bourns, 2010). For engagement with both grantors and stakeholders, meeting expectations is key – monthly reviews of the project progress and evaluation on which goals have been met and which are needing additional work or re-strategizing can help keep the project on track and maintain accountability.
Researchers also need to engage with stakeholders. This includes “those involved in program operations,…those served or affected by the program,…[and] those who are intended users of the evaluation findings” (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012, par. 3), such as other researchers, community members, local leaders, organizations with interest in the research, thought leaders and experts, and others who may benefit from or be impacted by the research being conducted (Geo Funders, 2014). According to Boost Midwest (2020), stakeholders can be identified as being key stakeholders or secondary stakeholders, and it is recommended to create a stakeholder register and assessment. They state that the major benefits of engaging stakeholders are that they “can help provide an accurate sense of the needs and challenges facing the grantee. The more diverse your team’s list of stakeholders can be, then the easier the buy-in for the project and it’s goals will become and the more successful the implementation will be long term” (Boost Midwest, 2020, par. 12). Engaging with diverse stakeholders early in the research process and throughout its timeline, can increase the usefulness, relevancy, and credibility of the study (Preskill & Jones, 2009).
There are a variety of strategies for engaging stakeholders throughout the research process, and beyond. Sharing updates and information on the project is essential, and a variety of methods can be used to do so. It will be important to consider each group or individual stakeholder and their ability to access such communications (for example, availability of internet service). The use of targeted experiences can be done through digital engagement, and includes sharing webinars, having Slack channels, podcasts, or informal meetups or chats (Young Entrepreneur Council, 2019). Meeting in person with stakeholders, even if infrequently (such as once a year) is also recommended, although talking on the phone may suffice if travel is not possible. Periodic updates can be sent out to stakeholders, through internet services like email newsletters, private emails, text or WhatsApp, or even through postal mail. Asking questions of stakeholders may bring in higher engagement, and also further collaborative efforts and allow stakeholders to share their expertise which may benefit the project.
In conducting research to develop an adaptation of the ITQ for Syrian refugees, it is expected that a number of stakeholders would need to be involved, in addition to one or more grantors. The development, pilot testing with feedback, and pilot testing for validity and reliability checks would best be done in a location close to potential participants and related stakeholders – Jordan was chosen as an appropriate country with high numbers of Syrian refugees while being a safe location to conduct research. Some permissions would likely need to be granted by governmental or organizational groups overseeing research with human subjects. Forming relationships with these groups could be mutually beneficial. Furthermore, stakeholders would ideally also be leaders within the Syrian refugee community, as well as with local mental health or psychology organizations which could provide input on the development of the assessment and would also benefit from being able to see or use the results in providing more comprehensive support or care for Syrian refugees. A cultural expert would also be needed to help broker local needs, as well as provide insight on cultural specificities in both working with and communicating with regional partners and participants, and also practical needs of conducting research such as assistance in renting an office space. Many secondary stakeholders could also exist from international organizations who hold interest in the research, however, too many could overwhelm the project’s immediate scale. A balance of input and output should be sought, and stakeholders could be assessed for their skills type and level of contribution that will improve but not hinder the research process (Preskill & Jones, 2009).
References
Boost Midwest. (September 24, 2020). Grant management: Building stakeholder engagement. https://www.boostmidwest.com/post/grant-management-stakeholder-engagement
Broussard, D. (February 13, 2019). Engage grant funders to be advocates and endorsers. Dickerson Bakker. https://dickersonbakker.com/engage-funders-to-be-advocates-and-endorsers/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Program evaluation for public health programs: A self-study guide. CDC: Program performance and evaluation office. https://www.cdc.gov/eval/guide/step1/index.htm
Enright, K.P. & Bourns, C. (2010). The case for stakeholder engagement. Stanford social innovation review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_case_for_stakeholder_engagement
Grant Funding Expert. (n.d.). Why does the government give grant money. https://www.grantfundingexpert.org/why-does-the-government-give-grant-money/
Preskill, H. & Jones, N. (2009). A practical guide for engaging stakeholders in developing evaluation questions. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K. C. (2013). Taking financial relationships into account when assessing research. Accountability in research, 20(3), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.788383
Wright, J. (September 27, 2019). Grant seeking 101: A step-by-step guide to finding and winning grants. sgENGAGE. https://npengage.com/nonprofit-fundraising/grant-seeking-101/
Young Entrepreneur Council, Expert Panel. (September 19, 2019). Five effective methods for keeping stakeholders engaged. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2019/09/19/five-effective-methods-for-keeping-stakeholders-engaged/?sh=3cff4a6635b2