The purpose of this study was to identify factors that contribute to the effectiveness of community health promotion coalitions. Member survey data from 10 coalitions formed as part of North Carolina Project ASSIST were analyzed at the coalition level to identify factors related to member participation, member satisfaction, quality of the action plan, resource mobilization, and implementation. The results suggest that coalitions with good communication and skilled members had higher levels of member participation. Coalitions with skilled staff, skilled leadership, good communication, and more of a task focus had higher levels of member satisfaction. Coalitions with more staff time devoted to them and more complex structures had greater resource mobilization, and coalitions with more staff time, good communication, greater cohesion, and more complex structures had higher levels of implementation. Neither member participation nor member satisfaction correlated with the other measures of coalition effectiveness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Shopland D: Smoking control in the 1990's: A National Cancer Institute model for change. American Journal of Public Health83(9):1208-1210, 1993.
2.
2. National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society. The ASSIST Orientation-Meeting Summary. Bethesda, MD, National Cancer Institute, 1991.
3.
3. National Cancer Institute: Strategies to Control Tobacco Use in the United States: A Blueprint for Public Health Action in the 1990's (NIH Pub. No. 92-3316). National Cancer Institute, 1991.
4.
4. Butterfoss F, Goodman R, Wandersman A: Community coalitions for prevention and health promotion. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):315-330, 1993.
5.
5. Kreuter M: PATCH: It's origin, basic concepts, and links to contemporary public health policy. Journal of Health Education23(3):135-139, 1992.
6.
6. Wickizer T, Von Korff M, Cheadle A, Maeser J, Wagner E, Pearson D, Beery W, Psaty B: Activating communities for health promotion: A process evaluation method. American Journal of Public Health83(4):561-567, 1993.
7.
7. Tarlov A, Kehrer B, Hall D, Samuels S, Brown S, Felix M, Ross A: Foundation work: The health promotion program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. American Journal of Health Promotion2:74-80, 1987.
8.
8. Rogers T, Howard-Pitney B, Feighery E, Altman D, Endres J, Roeseler A: Characteristics and participant perceptions of tobacco control coalitions in California. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):345-357, 1993.
9.
9. Kumpfer K, Turner C, Hopkins R, Librett J: Leadership and team effectiveness in community coalitions for the prevention of alcohol and other drug abuse. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):359-374, 1993.
10.
10. Herman K, Wolfson M, Forster, J: The evolution, operation, and future of Minnesota SAFE-PLAN: A coalition for family planning. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):331-344, 1993.
11.
11. Francisco V, Paine A, Fawcett S: A methodology for monitoring and evaluating community health coalitions. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):403-416, 1993.
12.
12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: CDC's IMPACT Program bolsters states' role in tobacco control. Chronic Disease Notes and Reports8(1):1-5, 1995.
13.
13. Butterfoss F, Goodman R, Wandersman A: Community coalitions for prevention and health promotion: Factors predicting satisfaction, participation and planning. Health Education Quarterly23(l):65-79, 1996.
14.
14. Black T.: Coalition building-some suggestions. Child Welfare62(3):263-268, 1983.
15.
15. Gray B: Collaborating: Finding Common Ground for Multiparty Problems. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1989.
16.
16. Alter C, Hage J: Organizations Working Together: Coordination in Interorganizational Networks. Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1993.
17.
17. Mizrahi T, Rosenthal B: Managing dynamic tensions in social change coalitions, in Mizrahi T, Morrison J (eds.): Community Organization and Social Administration. New York, Haworth, 1992.
18.
18. Mittelmark M, Luepker R, Jacobs D, Bracht N, Carlaw R, Crow R, Finnegan J, Grimm R, Jeffery R, Kline F, Mullis R, Murray D, Pechacek T, Perry C, Pirie P. Blackburn H: Community wide prevention of cardiovascular disease: Education strategies of the Minnesota Heart Health Program. Preventive Medicine15(1):1-17, 1986.
19.
19. Luepker R, Murray D, Jacobs D, Mittelmark M, Bracht N, Carlaw R, Crow R, Elmer P, Finnegan J, Folsom A, Grimm R, Hanna P, Jeffrey R, Lando J, McGovern P, Mullis R, Perry C, Pechacek T, Pine P, Sprafka J, Weisbrod R, Blackburn H: Community education for cardio vascular disease: Risk factor changes in the Minnesota Heart Health Program. American Journal of Public Health84(9):1383-1393, 1994.
20.
20. Farquhar J, Fortmann S, Flora J, Taylor C, Haskell W, Williams P, Maccoby N, Wood P: Effects of communitywide education on cardiovascular disease risk factors: The Five-City Project. JAMA264(3):359-365, 1990.
21.
21. Carleton R, Lasater T, Assaf A, Feldman H, McKinlay S, and The Pawtucket Heart Health Writing Group: The Pawtucket heart health program: Community changes in cardiovascular risk factors and projected disease risk. American Journal of Public Health85(6):777-785, 1995.
22.
22. Prestby J, Wandersman A: An empirical exploration of a framework of organizational viability: Maintaining block organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science21(3):287-305, 1985.
23.
23. Gottlieb N, Brink S, Gingiss P: Correlates of coalition effectiveness: The Smoke Free Class of 2000 Program. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):375-384, 1993.
24.
24. Florin P. Mitchell R, Stevenson J: Identifying technical needs in community coalitions: A developmental approach. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice8(3):417-432, 1993.
25.
25. Malek S, Enright T: North Carolina Project ASSIST: A Call to action. North Carolina Medical Journal56(1):56-58, 1995.
26.
26. Moos R, Insel G, Humphrey B: Preliminary Manual for Family Environment Scale, Work Environment Scale, and Group Environment Scale. Palo Alto, CA, Consulting Psychologists Press, 1974.
27.
27. Butterfoss F, Goodman R, Wandersman A, Valois R, Chinman M: The Plan Quality Index: An empowerment evaluation tool for measuring and improving quality of plans, in Fetterman D, Kaftarian S, Wandersman A(eds.): Empowerment Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1996.
28.
28. Steckler A, Dawson L, Herndon S: Analysis of health education sections of health systems plans. Health Education Quarterly7(3):186-201, 1980.
29.
29. SAS Institute: SAS Procedures Guide, Release 6.03 Edition. Cary, NC, SAS Institute, 1991.
30.
30. Rothman J: Approaches to community intervention, in Rothman J, Erlich J, Tropman J (eds.): Strategies of Community Intervention (5th ed.). Itasca, IL, F. E. Peacock, 1995.
31.
31. Buchanan D: Building academic-community linkages for health promotion: A case study in Massachusetts. American Journal of Health Promotion10(4):262-269, 1996.
32.
32. McLeory K, Kegler M, Steckler A, Burdine J, Wisotzky M: Editorial. Community coalitions for health promotion: Summary and further reflections. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice9(1):1-11, 1994.
33.
33. Giamartino G, Wandersman A: Organizational climate correlates of viable urban block organizations. American Journal of Community Psychology11 (5):529-541, 1983.
