The use of community connecters to increase black community involvement in research: a case example

Abstract

This paper presents a case example of an innovative approach to increase the involvement of underrepresented groups in research using community connectors. We focus on the development and implementation of a strategy to engage young Black individuals in Greater Manchester in mental health research. The paper outlines the role and methodology of community connectors, reflects on key challenges and learning, and provides recommendations to inform future Public, Community Involvement and Engagement (PCIE) work. We conclude with a discussion of outcomes and impact, including practical considerations for sustainable and inclusive engagement practices.

Plain language summary

This paper shares a project that worked with a “community connector” to improve involvement in research from underrepresented groups—especially young Black people in Greater Manchester. A community connector is a trusted person from within the community who helps build relationships between researchers and local people.

The connector worked closely with families, faith leaders, and young people to build trust and raise awareness about mental health and research. This included visiting churches and community spaces, speaking to parents and elders, and listening to concerns about how research had been done in the past.

The community connector helped organise two workshops—one for young men and one for young women—to provide a safe and welcoming space for discussion. These spaces felt safe because they were shaped by the community’s values, held in trusted venues, and supported by someone participants already knew. At the workshops, young people learned about a research project that aimed to develop a new talking therapy for people at risk of psychosis experiencing suicidal thoughts.

Out of 30 people invited, 27 attended. Many took part in open discussions about mental health and said they would be interested in taking part in research in the future. Some even shared personal or family experiences of mental health challenges, showing the level of trust created. By the end of the session, nearly all participants agreed to appear in photos and videos to promote future projects, something many had initially declined.

This summary does not assume research is important to everyone. Instead, it shows how creating respectful spaces and listening to people’s concerns can help make research more relevant and inclusive. The paper also reflects on what worked, what was challenging, and how future projects can build on this learning.

Background

Public, Community Involvement and Engagement (PCIE) is considered a central tenant in decisions about which research should be done, how it should be done, and the results disseminated [1]PCIE is increasing [2] and is a prerequisite for applied health research funding from most funding bodies [3] A major UK funder, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), views PCIE as important, expected, and possible in all types of health and social care research [4]. Consequently, PCIE methods and outputs have been scrutinised to ensure that involvement is meaningful, the process is replicable, that outputs are disseminated [5] and the experience of research involvement is positive [6].

Research has faced criticism that it lacks diversity at every level and does not speak to large sections of the population, which are typically marginalised in healthcare and cited as a factor in the perpetuation of poorer health outcomes in various ethnic populations [7]. The lack of diversity in the development of research ideas, design, dissemination and participation in research is consistently reported as a limitation in the generalisability of research findings [8, 9].

As such, this paper seeks to report key components of successful community engagement with the Black community to recruit a group of young Black people to increase future involvement of less represented groups in research.

Aims and objectives

This project aimed to increase research engagement among young Black individuals by addressing specific structural and relational barriers. The key objectives were:

• To reduce barriers that often prevent underrepresented groups from participating in research, such as mistrust, stigma, and a lack of culturally relevant engagement.

• To engage key community stakeholders—including faith leaders, elders, and parents—to support wider outreach and legitimacy of the project.

• To build trust between researchers and community members through sustained and culturally sensitive engagement.

• To identify and overcome perceived risks or harms associated with taking part in research workshops.

• To acknowledge and begin to address the harm caused by structural, institutional, and societal racism in research and healthcare.

• To explore, rather than assume, why research might matter to participants—ensuring their perspectives shaped the relevance of the work.

• To consult with participants on the design and acceptability of a proposed research project, including the development of a co-produced talking therapy.

Context

The Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester (ARC-GM) is one of fifteen ARCs across the country that support applied health and care research that respond to and meet the needs of local populations and local health care systems. Their work, funded by NIHR, seeks to improve the health and care of patients and the public.

Owing to deep rooted and persistent regional health disparities, preventing illness and reducing health inequalities are ARC-GM priorities. People in northern England have significantly poorer health outcomes than people in southern England do, with life expectancies two years lower than the national average [10]. Additionally, northern England experiences higher rates of infant and maternal mortality, disability and economic inactivity due to poor health or disability. The North South divide is widening, meaning that now more than ever we need to act to address these significant health inequalities [11].

The population of Greater Manchester is diverse, with 24% coming from minority ethnic groups. A significant portion (4.7%) of this population is from the Black community [10]. ARC-GM is committed to enhancing PCIE to align with its research goals. They have established strong relationships with African and Muslim communities, leading to the creation of the Young Person’s Advisory Group (YPAG) in 2022. The YPAG has supported research on mistrust in Muslim communities ABouT Research, community responses to the COVID-19 vaccination program [12, 13] and Hidden–Live, an immersive experience addressing mental health challenges faced by young people [14].

However, increasing representation from the Black community remains a priority. This is essential to ensure the Black community has a voice in research, with the goals of producing findings that speak to their specific needs and improving health outcomes for Black individuals.

Black people experience poorer outcomes across various health conditions, including higher rates of infant and maternal mortality, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and serious mental health disorders such as schizophrenia [15–17]. Those diagnosed with psychosis or schizophrenia are more likely to be hospitalised, detained under the Mental Health Act, placed in seclusion, and subjected to higher rates of compulsory treatment [18]. Additionally, Black individuals are disproportionately diagnosed with psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia [19].

Given these systemic health disparities, it is crucial to engage the Black community in research. Doing so can help address these inequalities and promote better health outcomes by ensuring that research findings are relevant to their experiences and needs.

Methodology

This project used a community connector model to support the meaningful involvement of young Black people in research. The community connector—a trusted and active member of the local African diaspora—was engaged to facilitate culturally appropriate outreach, relationship-building, and participant recruitment.

The target population was young people of African descent aged 16–24 living in the Greater Manchester area. The community connector engaged leaders from diverse African communities (including Congolese, Ugandan, Ghanaian, and Nigerian groups), parents, and faith leaders to promote the project and encourage youth participation.

Two gender-specific workshops were planned—one for young women and one for young men—to support psychological safety and allow participants to express themselves freely. These workshops were designed to introduce participants to an early-stage research proposal: the co-development of a culturally sensitive talking therapy for people at risk of psychosis experiencing suicidal thoughts.

The methodology aimed to:

• Build trust and establish open dialogue with participants.

• Explore young people’s perspectives on mental health and research participation.

• Gather feedback on the relevance, acceptability, and potential design of the proposed therapy intervention.

Workshops were held in familiar, community-based venues, and were shaped by the values of the participants and their communities. The presence of a known and trusted facilitator (the community connector) contributed significantly to the creation of a safe and respectful space. Workshops included informal discussions, group work, creative reflection, and opportunities for anonymous feedback.

Participation was supported by practical considerations including refreshments, travel reimbursement, and financial recognition for attendees’ time. Participants were informed about available mental health support, and consent was obtained for involvement and the use of any materials created.

This approach reflected the principles of co-production by centring participants’ voices, creating a space for reflection, and respecting different levels of interest or engagement in research.

Community connector report

This reflective account describes the process of engaging young Black people in Greater Manchester as part of a public, community involvement and engagement (PCIE) initiative. It outlines how the role of a community connector was developed and implemented to support trust-building, inclusive outreach, and community-led feedback. The report also highlights the strategies used, challenges encountered, and lessons learned—offering practical insights for future PCIE work with underrepresented groups.

Developing the role of the community connector

My journey in community engagement began in 2021 when I joined the Caribbean and African Health Network (CAHN) as a Community Engagement and Research Officer. This role allowed me to mobilise communities and build leadership networks, including coordinating the Salford Black Leaders Network. These early experiences taught me the importance of listening to community voices and building trust through presence, consistency, and respect.

Through this work, I was introduced to the Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) in Greater Manchester. Together, we engaged young people to co-create the Young People’s Advisory Group (YPAG), and I facilitated focus groups with researchers seeking to understand community priorities. These experiences deepened my understanding of how to bridge the gap between research and lived experience.

From these foundations, I stepped into the role of a community connector—someone who serves as a cultural and relational bridge between researchers and marginalised communities. In this project, the role extended beyond simple recruitment: it involved building long-term relationships, translating research concepts into everyday relevance, and ensuring the community felt safe, seen, and heard. I later joined the Health Innovation Manchester (HInM) Public Community Involvement and Engagement (PCIE) panel, where I continue to advocate for diverse representation and equitable engagement practices in research.

Over time, my engagement with diverse communities has deepened my skills in mobilising people for both research and social projects. These ongoing relationships have also led to a strong foundation of trust. This trust is now evident in how parents and community leaders actively support my efforts—some even encouraging their children to take part in the research activities I facilitate. Their confidence reflects the time, care, and cultural sensitivity invested in building these partnerships.

Understanding absence and underrepresentation in research participation

In traditional research, the term “missing data” often refers to incomplete survey responses or non-returned forms. In this project, however, we use the concept more broadly to describe a different kind of absence: individuals—particularly from ethnic minority groups—who are initially approached or express interest in research but do not go on to participate fully.

This kind of disengagement may be due to many practical or structural factors: difficulties with scheduling, lack of transport, concerns about safety or stigma, or past negative experiences with services or researchers. While this form of “missingness” is harder to quantify than traditional data gaps, it is no less important. It reveals where systems may still be inaccessible or where trust has not yet been fully established.

Through my work with ARC-GM and Health Innovation Manchester, I’ve seen firsthand how certain communities are repeatedly absent from research conversations—not because they are uninterested, but because the methods and environments are not always inclusive. In my role as a community connector, I have had many conversations with young people about why research matters, and how being involved can make research findings more meaningful to their lives. This has strengthened my personal commitment to creating more equitable and participatory research spaces.

Building trust within communities

Over time, my interactions and engagements with various communities have not only enhanced my skills in mobilising people for research and social projects but also helped build and strengthen the trust these communities place in me. This trust has reached a point where parents and community leaders now feel confident entrusting me with their children, encouraging them to participate in the research activities I organise.

Role of the community connector

The role of a Community Connector is multifaceted and involves the following:

• Building Relationships: Establishing trust and strong relationships with community members and leaders to facilitate open communication and collaboration.

• Outreach and Engagement: Actively reaching out to different community groups, understanding their specific needs, and encouraging their participation in programs and initiatives.

• Resource Sharing: Providing information and resources that can empower communities, service providers, researchers and policymakers, enabling them to access services, information and opportunities.

• Education and Advocacy: Educating and representing the interests and needs of both the community and the service providers, researchers, and policymakers.

• Event Coordination: Organising workshops, meetings, and other events that bring together community members, service providers, researchers and policymakers to discuss issues, share experiences, and learn from one another.

PCIE workshops

Process of engagement

The engagement process followed a structured, multi-step approach informed by principles of culturally responsive research and community mobilisation. The aim was to recruit young people of African descent (aged 16–24) from across Greater Manchester to participate in workshops designed to shape a proposed mental health research project.

Recruitment strategy

Flyer design and distribution

Culturally tailored flyers were developed in both digital and print formats (Fig. 1 shows an example of a flyer). These materials were designed to be visually appealing, easy to understand, and relevant to the communities involved. Flyers included clear information about the purpose, location, and format of the workshops. Distribution occurred in strategic community spaces, including African grocery stores, barber shops, hair salons, community centres, and educational settings frequently attended by the target demographic.

Fig. 1.

Example of a flyer

Stakeholder meetings with community leaders

Leaders from key African diaspora communities—including Congolese, Ugandan, Kenyan, Ghanaian, Nigerian, Eritrean, and Ethiopian groups—were consulted early in the process. Meetings focused on discussing the purpose and benefits of the workshops for young people and how local leaders and parents could support the mobilisation effort. These leaders contributed valuable cultural and logistical insights and helped identify specific barriers and facilitators for engagement within their respective communities.

Faith-Based outreach

Recognising the central role of faith institutions in many ethnic minority communities, the team engaged with churches and mosques across the region. Attendance at religious services and prayer meetings provided opportunities to speak directly with congregations, distribute flyers, and build trust through face-to-face engagement. Religious leaders played a key role in amplifying the invitation and encouraging youth participation.

Sampling

A snowball sampling method was employed to extend reach. Initial contacts (“seeds”)—primarily community and faith leaders—were asked to identify young people and families who might be interested in attending [20]. These participants, in turn, referred others. This method proved particularly effective due to its reliance on trusted personal networks. For example, one participant from the Congolese community went on to recruit five peers through her own networks. The process continued until the target number of participants was achieved.

Incentives and participation

Participants received an honorarium of £75 for a three-hour workshop, plus reimbursement for travel expenses. This was aligned with the NIHR’s guidance on payment for PCIE. The incentive served to acknowledge participants’ time and contributions and also helped to reduce financial barriers to attendance.

In total, 30 young people agreed to participate, with 27 ultimately attending the sessions. The positive response to this engagement strategy highlights the effectiveness of a culturally grounded, relationship-driven approach that blends community organising with accepted research recruitment methods.

Community mobilisation: reflections and learning

Cultural immersion and Trust-Building

As part of the engagement process, I encountered a range of rich and varied experiences while working with different African communities across Greater Manchester. These experiences were not only culturally insightful but also deeply instructive in shaping how I approached community mobilisation.

For example, my engagement with the Congolese community revealed a highly multilingual environment where French, Lingala, Swahili, and English were all commonly spoken. Attending local events immersed me in the community’s music and traditional foods, offering an authentic sense of connection and cultural respect. Similarly, when working with the Ugandan community, I was welcomed into full church services where Luganda and English were spoken interchangeably. These gatherings were powerful spaces for both spiritual connection and community outreach, and they provided opportunities to build trust with participants and their families through informal, relational approaches.

Positionality and learning

Despite sharing cultural roots, I quickly realised that assumptions based on shared African heritage could lead to oversimplification. The diversity within and between communities required me to adapt continuously. I came to understand that cultural competence is not a static state but a dynamic, reflexive process. I had to actively learn—and unlearn—assumptions about how music, food, religious practice, and values were expressed across communities.

Building trust was a gradual process. Over time, repeated engagement enabled me to develop relationships where parents and community leaders felt confident in encouraging their children to participate in research activities. This trust was not given lightly; it had to be earned through presence, consistency, and respectful communication. As a result, the young people who took part were not simply participants—they were valued contributors whose voices shaped the direction of the research.

These experiences underscored the importance of engaging with cultural nuance and demonstrated that meaningful PCIE work depends on authentic, long-term relationship-building.

Challenges encountered

Navigating cultural complexity

Although I share African heritage with the communities I worked with, this did not guarantee automatic understanding or acceptance. Each group had its own traditions, values, and social dynamics, requiring me to challenge assumptions and learn from each new interaction. Cultural competence in this context meant more than shared identity—it demanded humility, flexibility, and an openness to continuous learning. I had to actively listen, observe, and respond to subtle differences in communication styles, generational attitudes, and community expectations.

Overcoming logistical barriers

Engagement was often time- and resource-intensive. Communities were geographically dispersed across Greater Manchester, and travelling between sites required significant coordination and time. Furthermore, many leaders and stakeholders requested compensation for their participation, which had not been fully accounted for in the initial project budget. These practical challenges underscored the importance of early financial planning and recognising the value of contributors’ time and expertise.

Engaging young people

Initially, many young people were reluctant to engage with formal workshops, particularly given the stigma surrounding mental health and a general mistrust of research processes. Building trust required informal conversations, repeated contact, and visible commitment. By demystifying the aims of the project and creating welcoming, culturally safe environments, we gradually built interest and enthusiasm.

Coordinating with community leaders

While community leaders were supportive, their busy schedules and existing responsibilities meant that arranging meetings and maintaining momentum required persistence. Early engagement and flexibility in communication methods—such as WhatsApp and in-person visits—were essential to sustaining involvement over time.

Outcomes and benefits

Community cohesion and connection

The workshops brought together young people from different African backgrounds, many of whom had never previously engaged in shared dialogue about mental health. These sessions created new social links and strengthened a sense of shared identity and mutual support among participants.

Empowerment and voice

For many attendees, the workshops represented a first opportunity to share thoughts and feelings about mental health in a safe, non-judgemental space. Some shared personal experiences, while others supported peers in doing so. The environment fostered confidence and ownership, which translated into enthusiastic participation and follow-up interest in future research.

Strengthened relationships with community leaders

Working collaboratively with parents, elders, and religious leaders strengthened community ties and enhanced awareness of research as a meaningful space for youth involvement. Leaders expressed increased openness to supporting future projects and voiced appreciation for how youth voices had been prioritised.

Cost-Effective and strategic engagement

Using the snowball technique and relying on existing networks proved both efficient and culturally appropriate. This approach allowed us to reach our participant goals without high promotional costs, while reinforcing a sense of community-led momentum.

Workshop outcomes and reflections

A total of 30 young people agreed to participate in the project, with 27 attending the workshops—14 young women and 13 young men. While the sessions were initially separated by gender to support psychological safety, participants later expressed a preference for mixed-gender groups in future sessions, highlighting their interest in broader dialogue.

Participants demonstrated high levels of engagement, including thoughtful reflections on mental health, stigma, and barriers to accessing support. Several attendees disclosed personal or peer-related experiences with mental health issues, despite having limited prior exposure to clinical terms such as “psychosis.” This openness reflected the trust built through the community connector model and the creation of safe, inclusive spaces.

Importantly, by the end of the sessions, nearly all participants consented to be included in promotional materials—an increase from earlier reluctance. This shift suggested growing trust in the process and in the researchers involved. Mental health support resources were provided following the workshops, and participants were invited to share ongoing feedback through informal channels and follow-up discussions.

Participant insights have already influenced elements of the proposed research project. For example, the language used in outreach materials was adapted to better align with community values and concerns. The project also informed new community-led initiatives supported by the PCIE forum and inspired some participants to explore future roles in research involvement.

Discussion

This paper highlights the critical role that community connectors can play in increasing the involvement of underrepresented groups—particularly the Black community—in health research. By drawing on cultural knowledge, trust-building strategies, and embedded community networks, the community connector model proved effective in mobilising young people to engage with mental health research.

The workshops not only supported attendance but also created a psychologically safe space for open discussion about mental health—an outcome that aligns with findings from the youth co-production literature, where safety is linked to deeper engagement and empowerment [21].

These findings support the view that community connectors can bridge the gap between marginalised communities and research institutions. By tailoring outreach to meet the specific needs and preferences of each group, this approach increased participation and fostered stronger, more trusting relationships between researchers and community members. This trust was foundational to the openness shown by participants—many of whom disclosed personal experiences and expressed interest in future involvement.

The issue of compensation also emerged as a key consideration. Community and faith leaders consistently highlighted the need for participants’ time and contributions to be recognised. Providing fair payment, in line with NIHR recommendations, helped address historic power imbalances and signalled respect for community expertise. As Boaz et al. [22] argue, appropriate recognition is essential to forming equitable partnerships and sustaining involvement.

This trust-building process reflects principles from community-based participatory research (CBPR), which emphasise the development of authentic, reciprocal relationships [23]. In this project, emotional and psychological safety—carefully facilitated by the community connector—was crucial to young people’s willingness to engage and reflect.

Moreover, this work reinforces the importance of cultural competence, early engagement with community leaders, and pragmatic, cost-effective strategies such as snowball sampling. While personal attributes of the community connector were undoubtedly significant, the structured processes applied here can inform future PCIE initiatives aiming for inclusivity and sustainability.

This aligns with Greenhalgh et al. [24] who emphasise the importance of supportive infrastructure to enable ongoing and meaningful involvement—especially among communities facing systemic exclusion.

Finally, addressing structural racism and ensuring diverse representation in research is both a moral obligation and a public health imperative. Future efforts must focus not only on increasing representation but also on transforming the systems and assumptions that have historically excluded marginalised voices from shaping knowledge and policy [25].

Limitations

While the community connector model demonstrated considerable strengths, several limitations should be acknowledged.

First, the project relied heavily on established community and faith leaders for outreach. While this approach facilitated access and trust, it also introduced the potential for gatekeeping, whereby some individuals may have influenced who felt welcomed or eligible to participate. This could have limited the diversity of perspectives represented within the workshops.

Second, although the project aimed to reach a broad cross-section of young people, its scope was shaped by the limits of existing networks. Those less connected to formal community structures—such as faith-based or cultural organisations—may have remained excluded. As a result, the voices of more marginalised or disconnected individuals within the Black community may not have been fully captured.

Cultural expectations and hierarchical authority structures also played a role in shaping participation. In some cases, young people may have felt reluctant to speak openly due to deference to elders or community leaders, or concerns about how their views might be perceived within their social context. This may have influenced the extent to which participants felt free to share dissenting or sensitive perspectives.

Finally, while the approach was successful in promoting participation and trust, it is important to recognise that no single strategy can overcome the deep-rooted structural and historical barriers to research involvement. Issues such as systemic racism, historical mistrust of institutions, and socio-economic inequality continue to shape who feels able—and welcome—to participate. Future initiatives must therefore adopt flexible, inclusive approaches that go beyond reliance on established networks, and that continue to centre equity, safety, and shared power in the research process.

Recommendations for future PCIE work

Prioritise Cultural Competency as an Ongoing Practice.

Training for researchers and community connectors should go beyond basic awareness and foster deep reflection, cross-cultural dialogue, and humility. Cultural competency should be approached as a continuous journey, not a fixed outcome.

Engage stakeholders early and consistently

Begin conversations with community leaders and organisations at the earliest stages of project design. Investing time in building these relationships from the start supports smoother coordination and sustained trust.

Plan realistically and budget adequately

Ensure project budgets include resources for participant and stakeholder compensation, travel, refreshments, and outreach materials. Transparent and respectful compensation fosters equity and acknowledges contributions.

Use blended engagement tools

Combine traditional in-person engagement with culturally appropriate digital platforms to reach broader and younger audiences. Messaging apps and social media can enhance accessibility and keep momentum between sessions.

Build feedback loops into the process

Regularly seek feedback through informal debriefs, anonymous surveys, and co-reflection sessions. Incorporating this feedback into decision-making demonstrates accountability and supports continuous improvement.

These recommendations draw directly from the lessons learned in this project and are intended to guide others aiming to design inclusive, co-produced, and community-rooted PCIE initiatives.

Conclusions

This project demonstrates that community connectors can serve as powerful catalysts for inclusive and culturally responsive engagement in health research. Their ability to build trust, navigate cultural nuance, and maintain meaningful communication with underrepresented groups significantly enhanced participation among young Black individuals—a population historically excluded from mental health research.

The model described in this paper shows that effective engagement goes beyond outreach or translation. It requires shared learning, active listening, and a commitment to centring the lived experiences of communities from the outset. Cultural humility, adaptability, and sustained presence were critical to the success of this initiative.

While the case study offers valuable insights, it also reveals ongoing challenges—such as funding constraints, risks of gatekeeping, and the potential for tokenistic involvement when feedback structures are absent or poorly supported. Nevertheless, the relationships developed and the learning generated have already influenced future research design, strengthened community partnerships, and inspired greater youth involvement.

Formally embedding community connectors within research teams—backed by clear institutional structures, adequate resources, and appropriate recognition—holds significant potential to strengthen the impact of public involvement and co-production. When done well, this approach transforms engagement from a procedural requirement into a sustained movement for equity, relevance, and trust in research.

Abbreviations

ARC

GM–Applied Research Collaboration–Greater Manchester

CAHN

Caribbean and African Health Network

HIM

Health Innovation Manchester

PCIE

Public, Community Involvement and Engagement

NIHR

National Institute for Health Research

YPAG

Young Person’s Advisory Group

Author contributions

J. E. wrote the main manuscript text. J.A. M. wrote the community connector report.J. E. edited the manuscipt. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Funding

JE holds a part-time Pre-doctoral Fellowship funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester (NIHR ARC-GM) (grant award number NIHR200174). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval not required. Written consent to participate in the project was obtained.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Declaration of interest

This project was part funded using Pennine Care Increasing Capacity and Capability funding from NIHR.

Authors information

Joanne Ellis, Pennine Care NHS Trust, John Alex Muyita, Health Innovation Manchester.