Effectiveness and Challenges of Regional Public Health Partnerships in Nebraska

Intersectoral Partnerships Between Local Governments and Health Organisations in High-Income Contexts: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Local governments are the closest level of government to the communities they serve. Traditionally providing roads, rates and garbage services, they are also responsible for policy and regulation, particularly land use planning and community facilities and services that have direct and indirect impacts on (equitable) health and well-being. Partnerships between health agencies and local government are therefore an attractive proposition to progress actions that positively impact community health and well-being. Yet, the factors underpinning these partnerships across different contexts are underdeveloped, as mechanisms to improve population health and well-being.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted to gain insight into the concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps that shape partnerships between health and local governments. The search strategy followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines and was informed by a critical realist approach that identifies necessary, contingent and contextual factors in the literature. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Central databases were searched for studies published between January 2005 and July 2021.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3472 studies, after deleting duplicates and initial title and abstract screening, 188 papers underwent full text review. Twenty-nine papers were included in the review. Key themes shaping partnerships included funding and resources; partnership qualities; governance and policy; and evaluation and measures of success. The functional, organisational and individual aspects of these themes are explored and presented in a framework.

CONCLUSION

Given that local government are the closest level of government to community, this paper provides a sophisticated roadmap that can underpin partnerships between local government and health agencies aiming to influence population health outcomes. By identifying key themes across contexts, we provide a framework that may assist in designing and evaluating evidence-informed health and local government partnerships.

Facilitators of Multisector Collaboration for Delivering Cancer Control Interventions in Rural Communities: A Descriptive Qualitative Study

Purpose and Objectives

Multisector collaboration is a widely promoted strategy to increase equitable availability, access, and use of healthy foods, safe places for physical activity, social supports, and preventive health care services. Yet fewer studies and resources exist for collaboration among governmental and nongovernmental agencies to address public problems in rural areas, despite an excess burden of risk factors for cancer morbidity and mortality. We aimed to learn about cancer prevention activities and collaboration facilitators among rural informal interagency networks.

Evaluation Methods

In 2020, researchers conducted semistructured interviews with staff from rural public health and social services agencies, community health centers, and extension offices. Agency staff were from 5 service areas across 27 rural counties in Missouri and Illinois with high poverty rates and excess cancer risks and mortality. We conducted a thematic analysis to code interview transcripts and identify key themes.

Results

Exchanging information, cohosting annual or one-time events, and promoting other agencies’ services and programs were the most commonly described collaborative activities among the 32 participants interviewed. Participants indicated a desire to improve collaborations by writing more grants together to codevelop ongoing prevention programs and further share resources. Participants expressed needs to increase community outreach, improve referral systems, and expand screenings. We identified 5 facilitator themes: commitment to address community needs, mutual willingness to collaborate, long-standing relationships, smaller community structures, and necessity of leveraging limited resources. Challenges included lack of funding and time, long travel distances, competing priorities, difficulty replacing staff in remote communities, and jurisdictional boundaries. Although the COVID-19 pandemic further limited staff availability for collaboration, participants noted benefits of remote collaborative meetings.

Implications for Public Health

Rural areas need consistent funding and other resources to support health-improving multisector initiatives. Existing strengths found in the rural underresourced areas can facilitate multisector collaborations for cancer prevention, including long-standing relationships, small community structures, and the need to leverage limited resources.

Building Community Partnerships: Using Social Network Analysis to Strengthen Service Networks Supporting a South Carolina Program for Pregnant and Parenting Teens

In 2013, South Carolina implemented a multi-year program providing support services for pregnant and parenting teens. Local lead sites were responsible for coordinating service delivery in partnership with other multidisciplinary community-based organizations. We used social network theory and analyses (SNA) to examine changes in partnerships over time. Using two-stage purposeful sampling, we identified three lead sites and their self-reported community partners. We administered two web-based surveys grounded in social network theory that included questions about partnership relationships and organizational characteristics. We calculated selected whole-network measures (size, cohesion, equity, diversity). Following the Year 1 surveys, we reviewed our findings with the lead sites and suggested opportunities to strengthen their respective partnerships. Following the Year 3 surveys, we observed changes across the networks. Survey response rates were 91.5% (43/47) in Year 1 and 68.2% (45/66) in Year 3. By Year 3, the average network size increased from 15.6 to 20.3 organizations. By Year 3, one lead site doubled its measure of network cohesion (connectedness); another lead site doubled in size (capacity). A third lead site, highly dense in Year 1, increased in size but decreased in cohesion by Year 3. Innovative use of SNA findings can help community partnerships identify gaps in capacity or services and organizations needed to fulfill program aims. SNA findings can also improve partnership function by identifying opportunities to improve connectedness or reduce redundancies in program work. The ability of lead sites to strategically reconfigure partnerships can be important to program success and sustainability.

Evaluating Effective Leadership and Governance in a Midwestern Agricultural Safety and Health Coalition

Agricultural Centers are a coalition of organizations and individual members with a common purpose: to improve the health and safety of the agricultural community. Successful leadership and governance are essential in accomplishing these goals. This article examined the effectiveness of a midwestern Agricultural Health and Safety Center (Ag Center) leadership and governance structure. The Internal Coalition Outcomes Hierarchy (ICOH) framework and the Internal Coalition Effectiveness (ICE©) instrument were used, with field visit interviews conducted to gain further insight. Combined comparative findings from both research methods showed that scores in each of the categories increased. Adjustments led to stronger collaborative leadership, vital to successful population health improvement programs. This study showcases coalition qualities in a broader environment, capturing a clearer depiction of leadership and member interaction. Field visit interviews confirmed that this midwestern Ag Center continued to have strong levels of effectiveness in each of the conceptual constructs of a coalition.

Contributions of Health Care Coalitions to Preparedness and Resilience: Perspectives From Hospital Preparedness Program and Health Care Preparedness Coalitions

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article was to describe how the Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) and other health care coalitions conceptualize and measure progress or success and to identify strategies to improve coalition success and address known barriers to success.

METHODS

We conducted a structured literature review and interviews with key leaders from 22 HPPs and other coalitions. Interview transcripts were analyzed by using constant comparative analysis.

RESULTS

Five dimensions of coalition success were identified: strong member participation, diversity of members, positive changes in members' capacity to respond to or recover from disaster, sharing of resources among members, and being perceived as a trendsetter. Common barriers to success were also identified (eg, a lack of funding and staff). To address these barriers, coalitions suggested a range of mitigation strategies (eg, establishing formal memoranda of agreement). Both dimensions of and barriers to coalition success varied by coalition type.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the term health care coalition is a one-size-fits-all term. In reality, this umbrella term describes a variety of different configurations, member bodies, and capabilities. The analysis offered a typology to categorize health care coalitions by primary function during a disaster response. Developing a common typology that could be used to specify capabilities or functions of coalitions may be helpful to advancing their development.

Children's Agricultural Safety Network: Evaluating Organizational Effectiveness and Impacts

Coalitions that are effectively organized and led are more likely to achieve their intended program outcomes and impacts, as well as achieve sustainability. External evaluation of the coalition's governance and leadership can help identify strengths and areas for improvement. This article describes the evaluation of the Children's Agricultural Safety Network (CASN)-a national coalition, or network of 45 organizational members. The conceptual framework, Internal Coalition Outcomes Hierarchy, guided the evaluation. We used a mixed-methods approach to answer study's primary objectives from the perspective of CASN members and leaders for (a) organizational effectiveness, (b) network impact, and (c) member benefits. We collected quantitative data using a survey and the Internal Coalition Effectiveness (ICE) instrument. Focused interviews were conducted by phone to gather rich data on examples. Combined findings showed that both members and leaders rated the CASN effective in all construct areas that define successful coalitions. Members feel as invested in CASN success as do leaders. The major impact of CASN has been as a national leader and clearinghouse for childhood safety issues, and the most frequently cited example of impact was the national tractor safety campaign. Members identified the benefits of CASN membership as networking, resource sharing, and opportunities to enhance their knowledge, skills, and practices in the area. Members also valued the national attention that CASN was able to bring to the important issues in childhood agricultural safety. Suggestions for improvement were to focus on more research to improve best practices and strengthen dissemination and implementation science.

Implications of network structure on public health collaboratives

Interorganizational collaboration is an essential function of public health agencies. These partnerships form social networks that involve diverse types of partners and varying levels of interaction. Such collaborations are widely accepted and encouraged, yet very little comparative research exists on how public health partnerships develop and evolve, specifically in terms of how subsequent network structures are linked to outcomes. A systems science approach, that is, one that considers the interdependencies and nested features of networks, provides the appropriate methods to examine the complex nature of these networks. Applying Mays and Scutchfields's categorization of "structural signatures" (breadth, density, and centralization), this research examines how network structure influences the outcomes of public health collaboratives. Secondary data from the Program to Analyze, Record, and Track Networks to Enhance Relationships (www.partnertool.net) data set are analyzed. This data set consists of dyadic (N = 12,355), organizational (N = 2,486), and whole network (N = 99) data from public health collaborations around the United States. Network data are used to calculate structural signatures and weighted least squares regression is used to examine how network structures can predict selected intermediary outcomes (resource contributions, overall value and trust rankings, and outcomes) in public health collaboratives. Our findings suggest that network structure may have an influence on collaborative-related outcomes. The structural signature that had the most significant relationship to outcomes was density, with higher density indicating more positive outcomes. Also significant was the finding that more breadth creates new challenges such as difficulty in reaching consensus and creating ties with other members. However, assumptions that these structural components lead to improved outcomes for public health collaboratives may be slightly premature. Implications of these findings for research and practice are discussed.