Facilitators and Challenges to Organizational Capacity Building in Heart Health Promotion

2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Joffres ◽  
Stephanie Heath ◽  
Jane Farquharson ◽  
Kari Barkhouse ◽  
Celeste Latter ◽  
...  
2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. MacLean ◽  
Jane Farquharson ◽  
Stephanie Heath ◽  
Kari Barkhouse ◽  
Celeste Latter ◽  
...  

Purpose. To present the outcomes of a capacity-building initiative for heart health promotion. Design. Follow-up study combining quantitative and qualitative methods. Setting. The Western Health Region of Nova Scotia, Canada. Subjects. Twenty organizations, including provincial and municipal agencies and community groups engaged in health, education, and recreation activities. Intervention. Two strategies were used for this study: partnership development and organizational development. Partnership development included the creation of multilevel partnerships in diverse sectors. Organizational development included the provision of technical support, action research, community activation, and organizational consultation. Measures. Quantitative data included number and type of partnerships, learning opportunities, community activation initiatives, and organizational changes. Qualitative data included information on the effectiveness of partnerships, organizational consultation, and organizational changes. Results. Results included the development of 204 intersectoral partnerships, creation of a health promotion clearinghouse, 47 workshops attended by approximately 1400 participants, diverse research products, implementation of 18 community heart health promotion initiatives, and increased organizational capacity for heart health promotion via varied organizational changes, including policy changes, fund reallocations, and enhanced knowledge and practices. Conclusions. Partnership and organizational development were effective mechanisms for building capacity in heart health promotion. This intervention may have implications for large-scale, community-based, chronic-disease prevention projects.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Hulvej Rod

Purpose – In organizational health promotion research, health promotion capacity is a central concept that is used to describe the abilities of individuals, organizations, and communities to promote health. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the literature on health promotion capacity building and, further, to suggest an alternative theoretical perspective which draws on recent developments in organizational theory. Design/methodology/approach – The paper begins by a critical discussion of the capacity building literature, which is juxtaposed with the relational perspective of contemporary organizational theory. The theoretical argument is developed in reference to the case of Danish municipal health promotion agencies, drawing on secondary sources as well as ethnographic fieldwork among public health officers. Findings – The capacity building literature tends to reify the concept of capacity. In contrast, this paper argues that health promotion capacity is constantly defined and redefined through processes of organizing. The case study suggests that, faced with limited resources and limited knowledge, health promotion officials attain a sense of capacity through an ongoing reworking of organizational forms. Research limitations/implications – Organizational health promotion research should look for the organizational forms that are conducive to health promotion practices under shifting social circumstances. Originality/value – This paper makes explicit an inherent theoretical tension in the capacity building literature and suggests a novel theoretical framework for understanding organizational capacity.


2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Driedger ◽  
Kerry Robinson ◽  
John Eyles ◽  
Susan Elliott ◽  
Adele Iannantuono

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa G. Colarossi ◽  
Randa Dean ◽  
Kavitha Balakumar ◽  
Alexandra Stevens

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Elliott ◽  
Jennifer O'Loughlin ◽  
Kerry Robinson ◽  
John Eyles ◽  
Dexter Harvey ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Gabriella M. McLoughlin ◽  
Priscila Candal ◽  
Spyridoula Vazou ◽  
Joey A. Lee ◽  
David A. Dzewaltowski ◽  
...  

Abstract Background School wellness programming is important for promoting healthy lifestyles and academic achievement in youth; however, research is needed on methods that can help schools implement and sustain such programs on their own. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors within and outside the school environment that influenced school capacity for implementation and potential sustainability of wellness programming. Methods As part of the School Wellness Integration Targeting Child Health (SWITCH®) intervention, elementary school wellness teams (N = 30) were guided through a capacity-building process focused on promoting the adoption of healthy lifestyle behaviors in students. Data on implementation were collected through three standardized surveys and interviews (pre-mid-post) and a post-implementation interview. Indicators of organizational capacity were assessed using the School Wellness Readiness Assessment (SWRA). Paired t-tests were run to assess changes in implementation (classroom, physical education, and lunchroom settings), capacity, and stakeholder engagement over time. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were run to examine how implementation of best practices (low, moderate, high) explained differences in capacity gains. Qualitative data were analyzed through inductive and deductive analysis, following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results Paired t-tests showed non-significant increases in school and setting-specific capacity and implementation of SWITCH best practices over time, in addition to a consistent level of engagement from key stakeholders. ANOVA results revealed non-significant associations between implementation group and gains in school capacity (F [2, 24] = 1.63; p = .21), class capacity (F [2, 24]=0.20 p = .82), lunchroom capacity (F [2, 24]=0.29; p = .78), and physical education (F [2, 24]=1.45; p = .25). Qualitative data demonstrated that factors within the outer setting (i.e., engaging community partners) facilitated programming. Inner-setting factors (i.e., relationships with administration and staff) influenced implementation. Implementation process themes (e.g., planning, adaptation of resources to meet school capacity/needs, and engaging students as leaders) were cited as key facilitators. Schools discussed factors affecting sustainability, such as school culture and knowledge of school wellness policy. Conclusions The results from this implementation study document the importance of allowing schools to adapt programming to meet their local needs, and highlight the strengths of measuring multiple implementation outcomes. Increased support is needed for schools regarding the formation and improvement of wellness policies as a means to enhance sustainability over time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document