Action Area Five: Bolster the infrastructure needed to support an equitable and durable health equity research ecosystem

To bolster or reform the HSKS infrastructure, Funders can start creating the conditions (i.e. funding, networks, infrastructure, etc.) to support an alternative health equity research enterprise; Academia can work with accrediting bodies to formalize curriculum requirements related to health justice research practices at scale; Journals can translate innovations into concretized author guidelines and push for adoption through national and international committees (e.g., ICMJE) and at the publisher level; and Non-profits can reduce dependence on external institutions' (e.g., governmental and academic) research and data infrastructure by investing in internal or coalition-shared data sovereignty capacity (e.g., dedicated data/research staff, shared governance functions, data management systems and technical assistance partnerships).

• Fund/provide backbone support for coordinated networks, coalition building
• Support or launch the infrastructure for a new journal run as a public good with no fees and no profit expectations
• Redesign funder applications to be more accessible, inclusive of communities, as opposed to rigid, nonrelational transactional processes
• Start creating the conditions (i.e. funding, networks, infrastructure, etc.) to support an alternative health equity research enterprise
• Provide technical support and training opportunities for needs across the field

• Situate senior leaders to serve as long-term champions of health equity principles and practices, with resources and dedicated staff to ensure it’s sustained and institutionalized, rather than a one-time effort
• Work with accrediting bodies to formalize curriculum requirements related to health justice research practices at scale

• Acknowledge and offset the burden of peer reviewing and serving on editorial boards by compensating these roles
• Translate innovations into concretized author guidelines and push for adoption through national and international committees (e.g., ICMJE) and at the publisher level

• Establish community data stewardship and governance practices (e.g., data governance policies, community review processes, data-sharing agreements, and decision-making protocols) to strengthen community ownership of data and ensure information is collected, used, interpreted, and shared in ways that reflect community priorities
  • Create community-owned data dashboards and shared measurement systems that allow residents, non-profits, funders, researchers, and policymakers to monitor progress toward community-defined outcomes in real time (monitoring and accountability infrastructure, to the extent possible, should be accessible and owned by the community)
• Reduce dependence on external institutions' (e.g., governmental and academic) research and data infrastructure by investing in internal or coalition-shared data sovereignty capacity (e.g., dedicated data/research staff, shared governance functions, data management systems and technical assistance partnerships)
• Establish standardized agreements, frameworks, or processes for data ownership, access, use, and dissemination when partnering with researchers, funders, and other institutions (e.g., standing data-sharing agreements or templates, memorandums of understanding or agreement, funding pass-through agreements, free, prior, and informed consent processes, and community approval processes) to promote transparency, accountability, and equitable use of community knowledge