RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA, 90407, USA.
Center for Health Services and Society, UCLA Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, Los Angeles, USA.
Community Ment Health J. 2021 Apr;57(3):457-469. doi: 10.1007/s10597-020-00632-5. Epub 2020 May 19.
This paper explores the effects of a group-randomized controlled trial, Community Partners in Care (CPIC), on the development of interagency networks for collaborative depression care improvement between a community engagement and planning (CEP) intervention and a resources for services (RS) intervention that provided the same content solely via technical assistance to individual programs. Both interventions consisted of a diverse set of service agencies, including health, mental health, substance abuse treatment, social services, and community-trusted organizations such as churches and parks and recreation centers. Participants in the community councils for the CEP intervention reflected a range of agency leaders, staff, and other stakeholders. Network analysis of partnerships among agencies in the CEP versus RS condition, and qualitative analysis of perspectives on interagency network changes from multiple sources, suggested that agencies in the CEP intervention exhibited greater growth in partnership capacity among themselves than did RS agencies. CEP participants also viewed the coalition development intervention both as promoting collaboration in depression services and as a meaningful community capacity building activity. These descriptive results help to identify plausible mechanisms of action for the CPIC interventions and can be used to guide development of future community engagement interventions and evaluations in under-resourced communities.
本论文探讨了一项群组随机对照试验(Community Partners in Care,CPIC)的效果,该试验涉及社区参与和规划(CEP)干预以及资源服务(RS)干预之间的机构间网络发展,这两个干预措施都提供了相同的内容,只是通过技术援助提供给各个项目。这两个干预措施都由包括卫生、心理健康、药物滥用治疗、社会服务以及社区信任组织(如教堂、公园和娱乐中心)在内的多样化服务机构组成。CEP 干预社区委员会的参与者反映了一系列机构领导者、工作人员和其他利益相关者。CEP 与 RS 条件下机构之间的伙伴关系网络分析,以及来自多个来源的关于机构间网络变化的定性分析表明,CEP 干预中的机构之间的合作能力增长幅度大于 RS 机构。CEP 参与者还认为联盟发展干预措施既促进了抑郁症服务的合作,也是一项有意义的社区能力建设活动。这些描述性结果有助于确定 CPIC 干预措施的可能作用机制,并可用于指导资源匮乏社区未来社区参与干预措施和评估的发展。