Evaluation Findings from the Institute for Public Health and Faith Collaborations

Kegler, Michelle C.; Kiser, Mimi; Hall, Sarah Marie

doi:10.1177/003335490712200611

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Two prior PHLI evaluations and 1 evaluation of a regional leadership program reported organizational and system changes. 9,10,14 This evaluation's accompanying article 5 showed how PHLI strengthened leaders' understanding, skills, selfawareness, and "sense of belonging" to an informal "community of practice" 15 from which they drew vision, ideas, validation, confidence, and a sense of obligation to contribute to the field.…”

Section: • Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of the National Public Health Leadership Institute–1991-2006

Umble

Baker²,

Diehl³

et al. 2011

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's multiyear sponsorship of a national program fostered national networks among "thought leaders" who helped to lead the development and diffusion of numerous innovations. Public health leadership development program sponsors should foster collaborative leadership by engaging leaders in systems thinking, team leadership, dialogue, conflict resolution, and negotiation, recommend using networks for sustained personal and system development, and link leaders to networks and associations. Networks provide the collective creativity and broad support needed to enact system and infrastructure changes.

show abstract

Section: • Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of the National Public Health Leadership Institute–1991-2006

Umble

Baker²,

Diehl³

et al. 2011

Journal of Public Health Management and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the included studies, 17 were from the UK, 15,56,[61][62][63][64]68,70,[75][76][77]79,80,82,83,90,91 13 were from the USA, 55,[58][59][60]65,66,71,73,[84][85][86]88,89 four were from Canada, 69,72,78,81 one was from Australia, 74 one was from Ireland 67 and one was from Israel. 57 Also included were two comparative case studies (one from the UK and the USA and one from the UK and South Africa).…”

Section: A Review Of the Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. 57,74,86,88,90 Half of the studies were published since 2007, [55][56][57][58][59][61][62][63]67,68,[70][71][72][74][75][76]81,87,88 and the majority (n = 33, 86.8%) of research was published since 2000, 15,[55][56][57][58][59][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81]…”

Section: A Review Of the Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…More of the studies of horizontal integration examined the crossing of sectoral boundaries -13 57,59,60,66,67,69,71,73,82,85,87,88,90 compared with only three 62,65,76 in the vertical integration articles -reflecting how non-health-care sectors experience horizontal relationships with clinical services. Efforts in the horizontal integration of primary care services are commonly implemented to improve access for patients seeking particular medical services.…”

Section: A Review Of the Empirical Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…88 Boundary leaders were trained in methods of community system change at an educational institute and pre/post assessments of knowledge and skills were gathered from each participant. Despite reporting success on leadership measures of renewed sense of faith and team accomplishments in planning programmes, no impact on health disparities could be reported.…”

Section: Social and Political Contextual Influences On Sharing Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Facilitating knowledge exchange between health-care sectors, organisations and professions: a longitudinal mixed-methods study of boundary-spanning processes and their impact on health-care quality

Nasir

Robert

Fischer

et al. 2013

Health Services and Delivery Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Facilitating knowledge exchange between health-care sectors, organisations and professions: a longitudinal mixed-methods study of boundary-spanning processes and their impact on health-care quality. Health Serv Deliv Res 2013;1(7). Health Services and Delivery ResearchISSN 2050-4349 (Print) ISSN 2050-4357 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HS&DR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Services and Delivery Research journalReports are published in Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HS&DR programme or programmes which preceded the HS&DR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. HS&DR programmeThe Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was established to fund a broad range of research. It combines the strengths and contributions of two previous NIHR research programmes: the Health Services Research (HSR) programme and the Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme, which were merged in January 2012.The HS&DR programme aims to produce rigorous and relevant evidence on the quality, access and organisation of health services including costs and outcomes, as well as research on implementation. The programme will enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS and is keen to support ambitious evaluative research to improve health services.For more information about the HS&DR programme please visit the website: www.netscc.ac.uk/hsdr/ This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HS&DR programme or one of its proceeding programmes as project number 09/2001/25. The contractual start date was in May 2010. The final report began editorial review in August 2012 and was accepted for publication in January 2013. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the vie...

show abstract

Engaging the Faith Community for Public Health Advocacy: An Agenda for the Surgeon General

Levin

2013

J Relig Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes an agenda for the Surgeon General of the United States that is consonant with the traditional public health approach of "upstream" and "midstream" intervention addressing social and institutional determinants of health. Accordingly, this features a prominent role for expanded partnerships between the faith-based and public health sectors. Such an agenda would revise the current status quo for the Surgeon General, whose celebrated bully pulpit is currently focused more on encouraging "downstream" compliance with federal guidelines related to lifestyle behavior modification. A new faith-based agenda, by contrast, could more effectively advocate for core features of the traditional public health ethic, including primary prevention, the multiple determinants of population health, communitarianism and social justice, and a global perspective, supported by the historic prophetic role of the faith traditions.

show abstract

Evaluation Findings from the Institute for Public Health and Faith Collaborations

Abstract: Results suggest the Institute played a role in helping to align faith and health assets in many of the participating teams.

Cited by 11 publications

References 27 publications

An Evaluation of the National Public Health Leadership Institute–1991-2006

An Evaluation of the National Public Health Leadership Institute–1991-2006

Facilitating knowledge exchange between health-care sectors, organisations and professions: a longitudinal mixed-methods study of boundary-spanning processes and their impact on health-care quality

Engaging the Faith Community for Public Health Advocacy: An Agenda for the Surgeon General

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About