Exploring the Process, Models, and Outcomes of Hospital-Public Health Partnerships

Health care reform has resulted in changes throughout the health system, including the Affordable Care Act (ACA) requirement that hospitals conduct community health needs assessments, taking into greater consideration the public health of their respective communities. This has led to growing strategies to develop partnerships between hospitals and public health (PH) as a way to meet these needs1. Meantime, there is a need for data on Hospital-PH partnerships, due to the growing emphasis that these types of partnerships get implemented in practice. In this paper we analyze a secondary data set to explore how hospitals and public health have engaged in partnerships prior to the ACA. We asked “How amenable have hospitals and public health agencies been to forming partnerships?” We found that while Hospitals traditionally have fewer partners, contribute fewer resources, and report fewer outcomes, they tend to report high perceptions of value and more frequent, complex partnerships. The impact of these results are important to efforts to build an evidenced-based foundation by which hospital and public health personnel can develop skills to manage these complex relationships

New Perspectives on the “Silo Effect” – Initial Comparisons of Network Structures across Public Health Collaboratives

Objectives: We explored to what extent "silos" (preferential partnering) persist in interorganizational boundaries despite advances in working across boundaries. We focused on organizational homophily and resulting silo effects within networks that might both facilitate and impede success in public health collaboratives (PHCs). Methods: We analyzed data from 162 PHCs with a series of exponential random graph models to determine the influence of uniform and differential homophily among organizations and to identify the propensity for partnerships with similar organizations. Results: The results demonstrated a low presence (8%) of uniform homophily among networks, whereas a greater number (30%) of PHCs contained varying levels of differential homophily by 1 or more types of organization. We noted that the higher frequency among law enforcement, nonprofits, and public health organizations demonstrated a partner preference with similar organizations. Conclusions: Although we identified only a modest occurrence of partner preference in PHCs, overall success in efforts to work across boundaries might be problematic when public health members (often leaders of PHCs) exhibit the tendency to form silos

Patterns in PARTNERing across Public Health Collaboratives

Inter-organizational networks represent one of the most promising practice-based approaches in public health as a way to attain resources, share knowledge, and, in turn, improve population health outcomes. However, the interdependencies and effectiveness related to the structure, management, and costs of these networks represents a critical item to be addressed. The objective of this research is to identify and determine the extent to which potential partnering patterns influence the structure of collaborative networks. This study examines data collected by PARTNER, specifically public health networks (n = 162), to better understand the structured relationships and interactions among public health organizations and their partners, in relation to collaborative activities. Combined with descriptive analysis, we focus on the composition of public health collaboratives in a series of Exponential Random Graph (ERG) models to examine the partnerships between different organization types to identify the attribute-based effects promoting the formation of network ties within and across collaboratives. We found high variation within and between these collaboratives including composition, diversity, and interactions. The findings of this research suggest common and frequent types of partnerships, as well as opportunities to develop new collaborations. The result of this analysis offer additional evidence to inform and strengthen public health practice partnerships

Perspectives of LGBTQ Older Adults on Aging in Place: A Qualitative Investigation

This qualitative study conducted by a community-research partnership used multiple types of data collection to examine variables relevant for LGBTQ older adults who wished to age in place in their urban Denver neighborhood. Focus groups, interviews, and a town hall meeting were used to identify barriers and supports to aging in place. Participants (N = 73) identified primarily as lesbian or gay, aged 50–69, and lived with a partner. Ageism, heterosexism, and cisgenderism emerged as cross-cutting themes that negatively impact access to health care, housing, social support, home assistance, and legal services. Resilience from weathering a lifetime of discrimination was identified as a strength to handle aging challenges. Recommendations for establishing an aging in place model included establishing welcoming communities and resource centers and increasing cultural competence of service providers. This study provides a unique contribution to understanding the psychosocial, medical, and legal barriers for successfully aging in place