Interagency relationships among rural early intervention collaboratives.
Interagency relationships among rural early intervention collaboratives.
复制标题
农村早期干预合作机构之间的机构间关系。
DOI：
10.1046/j.1525-1446.2001.00340.x
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Elliott,M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Polivka,BJ;Dresbach,SH;Heimlich,JE;Elliott,M
机构间协作用于协调服务和计划、汇集资源或实现目标。本研究利用机构间协作模型来评估俄亥俄州三个农村县早期干预 (EI) 协作机构间的关系。该模型包括五个构造：环境因素（更广泛的社区环境）、情境因素（组织因素）、任务特征（项目范围和复杂性）、机构间流程（机构流程之间）和结果（最终产品）。来自 42 个机构的受访者完成了 18 项机构间协作评估工具 (ICAT) 和人口统计问题。 ICAT 使用 5 点李克特量表来评估模型的五个领域。受访者包括公共卫生护士、学校、社会服务机构和医院的代表。国家政策被认为鼓励地方机构间合作；受访者了解其他机构的人员和目标，但各机构不共享资金来源或提供类似服务。需要不同的专家来实现目标。各机构之间交换了一些信息。人们认为机构间活动没有得到很好的协调，结果也只是中等程度的积极。路径分析表明，机构间流程直接受到环境和情境因素的影响，但不受任务特征的影响（R2 = 0.42）。情境因素和机构间流程预测结果（R2= 0.60）。对其他机构的人员、目标和服务的认识是积极的机构间进程和感知结果的关键。
Interagency collaboration is used to coordinate services and programs, pool resources, or achieve goals. This study utilizes the Interagency Collaboration Model to assess interagency relationships of Early Intervention (EI) collaboratives in three rural Ohio counties. The model includes five constructs: environmental factors (broader community environment), situational factors (organizational factors), task characteristics (project's scope and complexity), interagency processes (between agency processes), and outcomes (end products). Respondents from 42 agencies completed the 18‐item Interagency Collaboration Assessment Tool (ICAT) and demographic questions. The ICAT uses a 5‐point Likert‐type scale to assess the five domains of the model. Respondents included public health nurses, representatives from schools, social service agencies, and hospitals. State policies were perceived as encouraging local interagency collaboration; respondents knew staff and goals of other agencies, but agencies did not share funding sources or provide similar services. Diverse specialists were needed to accomplish goals. Some information was exchanged between agencies. Interagency activities were not perceived to be well coordinated and outcomes were only moderately positive. Path analysis revealed that interagency processes were directly affected by environmental and situational factors, but not task characteristics (R2= 0.42). Situational factors, and interagency processes predicted outcomes (R2= 0.60). Awareness of personnel, goals and services of other agencies were key to positive interagency process and perceived outcomes.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
B. Polivka
通讯作者：
B. Polivka
青少年性健康教育和促进方面的机构间合作案例研究
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
S. Bloxham
通讯作者：
S. Bloxham
合作改善婴儿免疫接种：亚利桑那州婴儿免疫合作伙伴关系 (TAPII)。
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
D. Hirano
通讯作者：
D. Hirano
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
FLORIN, P;MITCHELL, R;STEVENSON, J
通讯作者：
STEVENSON, J
社区赋权：初级卫生保健的关键基础
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
E. Eng;M. Salmon;F. Mullan
通讯作者：
F. Mullan