Search

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, Two-Spirit, and other sexual and gender minority (LGBTQ+) individuals encounter numerous obstacles to equity across health and healthcare, education, housing, employment, and other domains. Such barriers are even greater for LGBTQ+ individuals who are also Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC), as well as those who are disabled, and those who are working-class, poor, and otherwise economically disadvantaged, among other intersecting forms of oppression. Given this, an evaluation cannot be equitable for LGBTQ+ people without meaningfully including our experiences and voices. Unfortunately, all evidence indicates that evaluation has systematically failed to recognize the presence and value of LGBTQ+ populations. Thus, we propose critical action steps and the articulation of a new paradigm of LGBTQ+ Evaluation. Our recommendations are grounded in transformative, equitable, culturally responsive, and decolonial frameworks, as well as our own experiences as LGBTQ+ evaluators and accomplices. We conclude by inviting others to participate in the articulation and enactment of this new paradigm.

Evaluation with Latinx LGBTQ+ communities calls for a culturally responsive and equity‐based approach that appreciates the rich diversity of experiences within the grouping "Latinx LGBTQ+." Recent advancements in Latino Critical Race Theory (LatCrit) in Evaluation and LGBTQ+ Evaluation, as well as rich historical genealogies of feminisms of color within Queer Theory offer valuable insights for evaluators working with Latinx LGBTQ+ communities. This article encourages embracing a "queered" approach to LatCrit, which meaningfully delves into the complexities of these experiences and attunes itself to the experiences and nuances of trauma. A Queered LatCrit emphasizes the importance of creating a safe and empowering context that acknowledges historical trauma and oppression, while simultaneously refusing deficit‐based frames and engaging the strengths and assets of in‐betweenness. Touching on historical, cultural, and methodological considerations, we argue for evaluations that recognize the unique challenges faced by Latinx LGBTQ+ communities while calling for evaluation practices rooted in culturally responsive, empowerment, and transformative traditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ranching communities in 10 Western states self‐organized to create conservation organizations affiliated with state livestock associations and supporting conservation efforts compatible with agricultural production. These "rangeland trusts" collectively conserve over 2.7 million acres through conservation easements. We identify these efforts as a type of community‐based conservation based on the collective nature of the efforts and the balance between community needs and conservation. They differ from traditional CBC efforts with ties to industry groups and a focus on private lands that provide public goods. A coalition of rangeland trusts formed in 2006, leading to a form of multilevel governance that establishes operating principles and actively advocates for ranch land conservation. We suggest that existing industry structures can assist to scale out conservation, bridging organizations can facilitate novel interactions and policy change, and tensions on the meaning and implementation of conservation must be navigated at each scale of interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To compare the incidence, case-hospitalization rates, and vaccination rates of COVID-19 between people experiencing sheltered homelessness (PESH) and the broader community in Chicago, Illinois, and describe the impact of a whole community approach to disease mitigation during the public health emergency. Methods. Incidence of COVID-19 among PESH was compared with community-wide incidence using case-based surveillance data from March 1, 2020, to May 11, 2023. Seven-day rolling means of COVID-19 incidence were assessed for the overall study period and for each of 6 distinct waves of COVID-19 transmission. Results. A total of 774 009 cases of COVID-19 were detected: 2579 among PESH and 771 430 in the broader community. Incidence and hospitalization rates per 100 000 in PESH were more than 5 times higher (99.84 vs 13.94 and 16.88 vs 2.14) than the community at large in wave 1 (March 1, 2020-October 3, 2020). This difference decreased through wave 3 (March 7, 2021-June 26, 2021), with PESH having a lower incidence rate per 100 000 than the wider community (8.02 vs 13.03). Incidence and hospitalization of PESH rose again to rates higher than the broader community in waves 4 through 6 but never returned to wave 1 levels. Throughout the study period, COVID-19 incidence among PESH was 2.88 times higher than that of the community (70.90 vs 24.65), and hospitalization was 4.56 times higher among PESH (7.51 vs 1.65). Conclusions. Our findings suggest that whole-community approaches can minimize disparities in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission between vulnerable populations and the broader community, and reinforce the benefits of a shared approach that include multiple partners when addressing public health emergencies in special populations. ( Am J Public Health . 2024;114(S7):S590-S598. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307801).