Evaluating Partnerships for Community Health Improvement: Tracking the Footprints

Abstract

Private-public partnerships are increasingly seen as an important mechanism for improving community health. Despite their popularity, traditional evaluations of these efforts have produced negative or mixed results. This is often attributed to weak interventions or an insufficient period of time to observe an impact. This study examines two additional possibilities--the need for a well-articulated shared vision and the governance and management capabilities of the partnership itself. We conducted a midstream process evaluation of twenty-five community partnerships associated with the Community Care Network (CCN) Demonstration Program. We examined how the roles of a common shared vision, strong governance, and effective management influence a partnership's ability to achieve its objectives. The findings, based on both qualitative and quantitative analyses, underscore the importance of membership organizations' perceived benefits and costs of participation and management capabilities to the partnership's progress toward a vision. Based on the qualitative data, six key governance and management characteristics are identified that separate the top performing partnerships from the lowest performing ones. We explore the implications of this research for future evaluations of public-private community health partnerships.

Collective action for knowledge mobilisation: a realist evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care

“…Additionally, where grant makers require reporting of evidence of intermediate outcomes, this has the potential to promote success in the longer term. 51,52,65 These findings are linked to what Shortell et al 52 describe as 'recognising life cycles', suggesting that, where members are familiar with the stages of development of the collaborating partnerships, they are more able to address issues and seek solutions.…”

“…50 Olson et al 50 found that the success of the collaboration is promoted where personal and emotional connections to the subject area are made by those involved and thereby provide the motivation to make changes and take action. Collaborations involving initiatives which are linked in such a way that they appear to be related to each other are more successful, according to Shortell et al, 52 who suggest that this relates to the synergy between initiatives, allowing partnerships to achieve their intended objectives.…”

“…33 Organisational collaboration is described as reaching outcomes or goals. 34 The literature reviewed in the background search describes outcomes or impacts of collaboration as, for example, the dissemination and implementation of guidelines; 50 improving aspects of services and affecting health outcomes or public health; [51][52][53] promoting successful change; and closing the gap between potential and actual performance. 51,54,55 Other authors refer to increasing the number of agencies working together and promoting users' better engagement with intervention programmes; 56 having an impact on macro-level outcomes related to enhancing innovation; and expediting the translation of science for patient-focused benefits.…”

“…The review suggests that how collaborations structure themselves and the nature of the policies and procedures that they have in place are important factors to support the collaboration without placing unnecessary pressure on resources. 50 Shortell et al 52 found that most successful partnerships operate within organisations which provide stability and legitimacy across time, but maintain a low profile, allowing the partnership to flourish.…”

“…50 Sharing power through collaboration suggests that partners (community and researchers) become more knowledgeable and empowered, according to Lesser and Oscos-Sanchez. 63 Shortell et al 52 found that the ways in which successful partnerships are able to 'nip problems in the bud' are related to how conflict is forestalled through the development of trusting relationships.…”