There are times when I have to move more expeditiously because I'm under a deadline. And so it's really critical for me to have those ongoing dialogue and engagement with key community members. It's not okay for me to get a proposal and say, "Oh, my goodness," start scratching my head and say, "Who are these community members?"

So what I guess my response is that bringing community to the table is really connected to the young scholars' or the pathways scholars' connection to this community throughout his or her life. If I've developed the linkages at an early point, if I've created opportunities to develop my research agenda that engages community members from the early point when I have no money, when I do have money it's much easier. I know who to bring to the table.

That to me has been critical. I'm not really in a position where I have to struggle to identify community. It's in my emails. It's in my Rolodex. People call me up. So I know who those folks are from my research, and they know who I am. And I think that's really important.

In terms of compensation for community, I am really adamant that the data we collect could not be collected without the effort of our research participants bringing us the data, and we're going to make a career off of their data that they're giving us, and the community members that assist us in gaining access to those populations. So they should be paid at a rate that is commensurate with the workload that they're delivering.

So we hire them again in this particular project, as consultants, not as peer educators, not as tokenized group members, but at the prevailing rate for a talented consultant on a certain number of days per year for the project.