Network analysis and GIS enable the presentation of meaningful data about organizational relationships and community characteristics, respectively. Together, these tools can provide a concrete representation of the ecological context in which coalitions operate, and may help coalitions identify opportunities for growth and enhanced effectiveness. This study uses network analysis and GIS mapping as part of an evaluation of the One Strong 'Ohana (OSO) campaign. The OSO campaign was launched in 2012 via a partnership between the Hawai'i Children's Trust Fund (HCTF) and the Joyful Heart Foundation. The OSO campaign uses a collaborative approach aimed at increasing public awareness of child maltreatment and protective factors that can prevent maltreatment, as well as enhancing the effectiveness of the HCTF Coalition. This study focuses on three elements of the OSO campaign evaluation: (1) Network analysis exploring the relationships between 24 active Coalition member organizations, (2) GIS mapping of responses to a randomized statewide phone survey (n = 1,450) assessing awareness of factors contributing to child maltreatment, and (3) Combined GIS maps and network data, illustrating opportunities for geographically-targeted coalition building and public awareness activities.

The Hawai'i Demonstration to Maintain Independence and Employment was a randomized controlled trial examining the effect of a participant-driven, multicomponent intervention on 190 employed adults with diabetes, 36% of whom were Asian and 35% of whom were Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. A no treatment concurrent control group was used, and the treatment group was provided an intervention that paired each participant with a life coach and a pharmacist counselor with whom they worked to achieve collaboratively chosen goals. Treatment fidelity data suggest that the intervention was largely implemented as planned. Life coaches and pharmacists performed key program functions with high to moderate adherence. The quality of their adherence to the intervention model ranged from basic to above basic and below basic to above basic for life coaches and pharmacists, respectively. Results of repeated-measures analysis of covariance analyses indicate that the intervention had a significant positive effect on participants' diabetes self-efficacy, quality of life, and body mass index but not on hemoglobin A1c levels. Further analyses examining just the treatment group indicate a dosage effect, with body mass index and quality of life outcomes optimized among participants who engaged in a greater number of sessions with life coaches and pharmacists. Implications of the study findings for practice are discussed.

No abstract