No abstract

No abstract

Coalitions currently are a popular tool for promoting community-based solutions to health problems, such as alcohol, tobacco, and other drug (ATOD) abuse. Private foundations, granting agencies, and other public health organizations assume that participation of community members in health promotion coalitions will increase the likelihood of program success. This article examines whether key characteristics of coalitions are related to effectiveness as measured by member satisfaction, commitment to the coalition, and the quality of planning efforts. Member survey data from the first year evaluation of an ATOD coalition were analyzed using factor analysis, chi-square, and multiple regression techniques at both the individual and group levels. The results suggest that community leadership, shared decision making, linkages with other organizations, and a positive organizational climate were key determinants of member satisfaction and participation. These same factors were not related to the quality of coalition plans. However, the significance of coalitions for community empowerment and health promotion is discussed.

Evaluation plays a key role in developing and sustaining community partnerships and coalitions. We recommend focusing on three levels of coalition evaluation that measure (a) processes that sustain and renew coalition infrastructure and function; (b) programs intended to meet target activities, or those that work directly toward the partnership's goals; and (c) changes in health status or the community. A tendency to focus on quick wins and short-term effects of programs may explain why some coalitions are not able to achieve systems and/or health outcomes change. Although measuring community-level or system changes (e.g., improving environmental quality or changing insurance coverage policies) is much more difficult than evaluating program outcomes, it is essential. This article presents challenges that coalition practitioners and evaluators face and concludes with practical resources for evaluation.

■ Abstract This review provides a synthesis of published public health and social science literature to determine how process evaluation has been used to examine community participation and its intermediary role in health and social change outcomes. Community participation is defined, and its relationship to other communitydevelopment principles and evaluation and research methods is described. Then, case studies and research initiatives help answer questions such as who participates and why? What are the benefits and challenges of community participation? What qualitative and quantitative methods are used in process evaluations to measure community participation? What measures are used to help define the influence of community participation in community-based interventions? A better understanding of these issues is needed to ensure that community participation is valued and used effectively to plan and implement health-promotion initiatives and evaluate their processes and outcomes.

This article describes how formation of the Allies Against Asthma coalitions was influenced by community context, history, leadership, membership, structure, processes, and other factors. Based on member surveys, key informant interviews, and self-assessment tools, results indicate that three coalitions developed from existing coalitions, and four formed in response to funding. The coalitions took an average of 12 months to form and completed 98% of formation tasks. Funding, technical support, and networking among grantees promoted formation. Although cultures, geographies, lead agencies, and years of experience differed, coalitions developed similar structures and processes. Two of three new coalitions took the longest to form, highlighting the need for flexibility and technical assistance when funding new coalitions.

Asthma is a highly prevalent and frequently misunderstood chronic disease with significant morbidity. Integrating client services at the patient-centered level and using coalitions to build coordinated, linked systems to affect care may improve outcomes. All seven Allies Against Asthma coalitions identified inefficient, inconsistent, and/or fragmented care as issues for their communities. In response, the coalitions employed a collaborative process to identify and address problems related to system fragmentation and to improve coordination of care. Each coalition developed a variety of interventions related to its specific needs and assets, stakeholders, stage of coalition formation, and the dynamic structure of its community. Despite common barriers in forming alliances with busy providers and their staff, organizing administrative structures among interinstitutional cultures, enhancing patient and/or family involvement, interacting with multiple insurers, and contending with health system inertia, the coalitions demonstrated the ability to produce coordinated improvements to existing systems of care.

Coalition staff, leaders, and members need training to promote coalition building and maintenance as well as ongoing technical assistance. The Coalition Technical Assistance and Training Framework uses a 6-step process to diagnose coalition strengths and challenges and provide a prescription for action. Re-evaluation after a specified time period helps determine whether a coalition adopted recommended changes in coalition participants, structures, and/or processes and progressed through stages of development. This empowerment approach helps coalition staff and members help themselves to be more effective and efficient. The framework was piloted with the Virginia Healthy Start Initiative from November 1997 to June 2001. Seven perinatal councils that focused on preventing low-weight births and infant mortality adopted 75% of the recommended actions within 1 year. Results from a pre and post-assessment tool after 3 years showed significant progress in the coalitions' ability to develop effective participants, processes, and structures