Evaluating the Effectiveness of Community Health Partnerships: A Stakeholder Accountability Approach

Abstract

Community health partnerships (CHPs) are promoted as effective cooperative interorganizational relationships to improve community health status while conserving resources. However, relatively little is known about the effectiveness of these partnerships in achieving their goals. Using concepts from a network effectiveness framework (Provan and Milward, 2001) and a network accountability framework (Gamm, 1998), the authors propose that successful CHPs are those that are effective in multiple levels (community, network, organization/particpants) and/or accountability dimensions (political, commercial, clinical/patient, and community). The combined frameworks serve to identify a number of community health stakeholders and associated interests that vary according to accountability dimensions to which CHPs respond. Using survey data from over 400 participants in 25 Community Care Networks, the authors assess the usefulness of the conceptual framework in evaluating CHP effectiveness.

The results suggest that CHP participants recognize three different levels of analysis in their evaluation of network effectiveness: community, network, and organization/participant. Furthermore, the results show that respondents distinguish between two different organization/participant benefits: enabling and client services. While respondents rated the intangible resources or enabling benefits (e.g., legitimacy and learning) of partnership participation most highly, client services resulting from CHP participation (e.g., client services and referrals) received the lowest ratings. Community benefit (e.g., improving community health status) and network effectiveness (e.g., ability to provide efficient, high quality health and human services) received ratings that fall between the enabling and client services. Given the relatively good scores (above 60%) received by CHPs on all four effectiveness dimensions considered here, it appears that the majority of respondents find at least some evidence of network effectiveness across all three levels of network effectiveness and all four dimensions of accountability.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Afifi

A.A.

and Elashoff

E.M.

(1966). “Missing Observations in Multi-variate Statistics, Part 1: Review of the Literature.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 61:595–604.

Alter

and Hage

(199). Organizations Working Together. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Brick

J.M.

and Kahon

(1996). “Handling Missing Data in Survey Research.” Statistical Methods in Medical Research 5:215–238.

David

and Zakus

(1998). “Resource Dependency and Community Participation in Primary Health Care.” Social Science & Medicine 46(4–5):475–494.

Foster-Fishman

P.G.

. (2001). “Facilitating Interorganizational Collaboration: The Contribution of Interorganizational Alliances.” American Journal of Community Psychology 29(6):875–905.

Freeman

R.E.

(1994). Ethical Theory and Business. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gamm

(1996). “Dimensions of Accountability for Not-for-Profit Hospitals and Health Systems.” Health Care Management Review 21(2):74–86.

Gramm

(1998). “Advancing Community Health Through Community Health Partnerships.” Journal of Healthcare Management 43(1):51–67.

Gamm

and Benson

K.J.

(1998). “The Influence of Governmental Policy on Community Health Partnerships and Community Care Networks: An Analysis of Three Cases.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 23(5):771–794.

10.

Kindig

D.A.

(1998). “Purchasing Population Health: Aligning Financial Incentives to Improve Health Outcomes.” Health Services Research 33:223–242.

11.

Levine

and White

(1961). “Exchange as a Conceptual Framework for the Study of Interorganizational Relationships.” Administrative Science Quarterly 5(4):583–601.

12.

Litwak

and Hylton

(1962). “Interorganizational Analysis: A Hypothesis on Coordinating Agencies.” Administrative Science Quarterly 3:395–420.

13.

Mitchell

S.M.

and Shortell

S.M.

(2000). “The Governance and Management of Effective Community Health Partnerships: A Typology for Research Policy and Practice.” Milbank Quarterly 78(2):231–290.

14.

Olden

P.C.

and Clement

D.G.

(1998). “Well-Being Revisited: Improving the Health of a Population.” Journal of Healthcare Management 43(1):36–48.

15.

Orlikoff

(1995). “Mission-Based Governance.” Frontiers of Health Services Management 11(3):47–55.

16.

O'Sullivan

and Geringer

(1993). “Harnessing the Power of Your Value Chain.” Long Range Planning 26(2):59–68.

17.

Proven

and Milward

(1995). “A Preliminary Theory of Inter-organizational Network Effectiveness: A Comparative Study of Four Community Mental Health Systems.” Administrative Science Quarterly 40(1):1–33.

18.

Proven

and Milward

(2001). “Do Networks Really Work? A Framework for Evaluating Public-Sector Organizational Networks.” Public Administration Review 61(4):414–423.

19.

Rowley

T.J.

(1997). “Moving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influence.” Academy of Management Review 22(4):887–910.

20.

Stevens

(1996). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, 3rd ed. Nahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbaum Associates.

21.

Weech-Maldonado

and Merrill

S.B.

(2000). “Building Partnerships with the Community: Lessons from the Camden Health Improvement Learning Collaborative.” Journal of Healthcare Management 45(3): 189–204.

22.

Weiner

and Alexander

(1998). “The Challenge of Governing Public-Private Community Health Partnerships.” Health Care Management Review 23(2):39–55.

23.

Weiner

, Alexander

, and Zuckerman

(2000). “Strategies for Effective Management Participation in Community Health Partnerships.” Health Care Management Review 25(3):48–66.

24.

Zuckerman

, Kaluzny

, and Ricketts

III (1995). “Alliance in Health Care: What We Know, What We Think We Know, and What We Should Know.” Health Care Management Review 20(1):54–64.