During my time in Masaka, Uganda, I observed several ICHAD projects focused on economic wellness, dyadic (child-guardian tandem) research, and family-based intervention. These experiences were both educational and socially rewarding as I engaged with three different project teams. From these observations, I identified three key lessons.
Efficiency strategies implemented by the research teams stood out during my time in Masaka. The teams streamlined the research process, minimizing participant frustration and optimizing fieldwork time. Each team member had designated roles, and senior researchers possessed cross-training in various areas. This specialization improved data quality and participants’ understanding of study procedures. Cross-trained personnel also provided coverage, mentored junior research assistants (RAs), and executed tasks effectively. Additionally, the teams utilized scouts, team members on motorcycles or in smaller vehicles, to initiate participant registration and engage with community stakeholders. This proactive approach jump-started the main study processes upon the arrival of other team members. Furthermore, the use of small team motorcycle riders proved highly efficient in accessing remote sites inaccessible by larger vehicles. These fuel-efficient motorcycles transported one or two individuals to sites with few research participants.
Layered supervision was another significant aspect observed. The research teams had intentional and structured supervision procedures that enhanced efficiency, maintained quality, and ensured smooth study progression. I witnessed a case where a participant in the SUUBI+ Adherence project struggled to understand the RA’s questions during an interview. The RA sought guidance from the site supervisor, who involved the Principal Investigator (PI). Despite the time difference with the USA, the PI promptly joined the call and advised patience. This highlighted the importance of supervision at each level of the study process, showcasing efficient decision-making and collaboration.
Continued coaching and capacity building for research teams proved vital. Daily meetings before field visits provided an opportunity for the teams and the PI to discuss active projects, share data reports, address challenges, and learn from experiences. The PI, resembling a coach, guided the entire group, including study personnel and trainees, through challenges, providing valuable lessons comparable to a graduate school methods course.
In conclusion, my time in Masaka yielded valuable insights into research projects. The efficiency strategies employed by the teams, the significance of layered supervision, and the emphasis on coaching and capacity building emerged as key lessons. These practices contribute to project success and the advancement of research in Masaka and beyond. Witnessing these strategies firsthand was a privilege, and I believe they have broader applicability in diverse research contexts.