Abstract
Background: Successful collaboration between multiple agencies or sectors can be difficult to achieve and sustain but can address health problems not solved by one agency/sector alone. As complex health issues have multiple social determinants, collaboration necessitates working across sectoral, organisational, professional, and personal boundaries. Collaboration of sectors in health is a move towards integrated care within the health system and social care, to support people with complex needs.
An Action Plan was developed by the Waterloo Human Services Collaborative Group (WHSCG) with representatives of the community, government and non-government organisations and aimed to address identified areas of concern for Waterloo social housing residents. UNSW was asked to review the Plan to consider how well the partnership is working as well as barriers and enablers to the plan’s implementation. This research was part of that review.
Methods: Two components: (1) Waterloo Partnership Analysis Checklist (WPAC) was administered to all members of the WHSCG. The WPAC was based on the Partnerships Analysis Tool developed by the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. The WPAC provided an overall partnership score; (2) in-depth interviews and a focus group conducted with members of the WHSCG to understand what has progressed, changed, and made a difference since the Plan was introduced. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) (May et al 2015) was used to assess the process of implementing the Plan (specifically looking at the concepts of coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring) to ensure the effective implementation of interventions.
Results: Overall findings from the Waterloo Partnership Analysis Checklist indicated ‘a partnership based on genuine collaboration has been established’. However, government staff have a higher total mean score than non-government (NGO) staff and community.
Findings based on interviews and the focus group with 10 participants indicated that:
- there was coherence in that it made sense to participate both as a group and individually in the WHSCG, and the purpose was clear and distinct;
- there was collective participation in the WHSCG with it being perceived to be an effective forum to address joint issues, collaborations were already being formed between organisations, issues were being reframed, and change was occurring in customer service experience standards to affect change across the state;
- collective action of the WHSCG involves ensuring that the correct decision-makers are involved, the right resources exist, there is the ability to escalate issues, and all participants have a voice;
- Reflexive monitoring could include a review of the WHSCG guidelines around the involvement of some organisations and community, adequately resourcing the Plan, and that processes are modified to ensure the needs of the community and active participation of all groups are met.
Discussion/Conclusion: We found that progress and benefits were already occurring in addressing issues and collaborations being formed between organisations which reinforce the value of participating. These results, including issues regarding the capacity of the WHSCG to meet goals with the right delegation, active participation of participants and adequate resources, will further inform the collaboration of the WHSCG and implementation of the Plan.