Collaborating for Mental Health Services in Wales: A Process Evaluation

Abstract

The need for inter‐agency collaboration between managers of mental health services has long been recognized, as has the difficulty of achieving and maintaining such relationships. Hudson et al. (1999) have developed a model for collaboration in the public sector and the current research has tested the model against attempts to achieve and maintain inter‐agency collaboration between mental health managers in Wales. We find Hudson's model a useful analytical framework but our evidence suggests that it needs to be amended by giving greater emphasis to the importance of ‘uninterrupted . . . opportunities for interaction’ between key managers. Forthcoming changes to NHS structures in Wales (for example, the abolition of Health Authorities and the conversion of Local Health Groups into Local Health Boards) will not necessarily facilitate collaboration if the Local Health Boards are given the role of planning and commissioning mental health services without having the necessary ‘critical mass’ of knowledge, expertise and dedicated staff capacity for planning and commissioning mental health services.

Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis of a Scale Measuring Interagency Collaboration of Children’s Mental Health Agencies

“…For example, recent reforms in children's mental health service delivery, such as the systems of care approach, have emphasized interagency collaboration as an important element in providing comprehensive services to children with serious emotional disturbance (Stroul & Friedman, 1986). Interagency collaboration may provide a way to cope with increasing complexity; meet expanding expectations, needs, and demands of human services; maximize human resources; share facilities and program resources; and improve utilization of funds and personnel (Jones, Thomas, & Rudd, 2004; Lippitt & Van Til, 1981). …”

When Does Cooperation Improve Public Policy Implementation?

“…Relationships between authorities impinge on policy implementation (O'Toole, 2003) and it is often emphasized that public policy can be carried out better if cooperation increases among agencies. Some scholars claim that interorganizational cooperation is inherently good (e.g., Hudson, Hardy, Henwood, & Wistow, 1999; Jones, Thomas, & Rudd, 2004), although empirical evidence suggests that cooperation only sometimes enhances performance (Jennings & Ewalt, 1998). The purpose of this article is to enrich our understanding of policy implementation by examining when a cooperative strategy actually makes implementation output better.…”

A Multilevel Framework for Effective Interagency Collaboration in Mental Health

“…Common barriers to collaboration are discussed elsewhere (see for example Carnwell and Carson ), we focus on the barriers that are particularly relevant in the mental health sector. Jones et al () identified barriers to collaboration in mental health care such as ongoing resource limitations in the sector leading to high case loads, restrictions on information sharing due to concerns over confidentiality and high rates of staff turnover. High case loads are a problem in many areas of social care.…”