Table 1

Comparison between health awareness and CLEA approaches

	Health education approaches	CLEA approaches
Unit of analysis	Individuals	Communities
Core activities	Educating households Sharing information and key messages	Listening to communities Inspiring self-realisation and self-motivated action
Communications approach	One-way information sharing Health educators as experts	Facilitating dialogue Community members as experts
Emphasis	Top-down Sharing biomedical facts, correcting erroneous beliefs	Bottom-up Appreciative of other ways of understanding illness Allow multiple framings for disease at the same time
Facilitation style	Teaching and preaching House-to-house	Listening and learning Community-wide
Methods and tools	Information, education and communication materials Lists of ‘Do’s’ and ‘Don’ts’	Participatory rural appraisal tools for communities Data collection that feeds back into approach
Typical assumptions	Traditional beliefs are the problem to be solved Communities must be convinced to use health services	Community responses can lower or enhance health Services must adapt to meet community needs
Key motivations for change	Awareness of biomedical facts Rational understanding of transmission routes Self-preservation	Urgency to protect each other, build on solidarity Build hope with early treatment Build trust in health authorities
Desired outcomes	Individuals seek external health services and follow the rules.	Communities feel empowered to protect themselves using local resources. Two-way dialogue results in better use of health services that respond to community needs.

Source: SMAC (2014), Community-led Ebola Action.20
CLEA, Community Led Ebola Action; SMAC, Social Mobilization Action Consortium.