Sarah M Chilenski1, Daniel F Perkins2, Jonathan Olson3, Lesa Hoffman4, Mark E Feinberg5, Mark Greenberg5, Janet Welsh5, D Max Crowley6, Richard Spoth7. 1. Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, United States; The Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness, The Pennsylvania State University, United States. Electronic address: sem268@psu.edu. 2. The Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness, and the Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education, The Pennsylvania State University, United States. 3. The Clearinghouse for Military Family Readiness, The Pennsylvania State University, United States. 4. Schiefelbusch Institute for Life Span Studies, University of Kansas, United States. 5. Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, United States. 6. Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, United States; Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, United States. 7. Partnerships in Prevention Science Institute, Iowa State University, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Historically, effectiveness of community collaborative prevention efforts has been mixed. Consequently, research has been undertaken to better understand the factors that support their effectiveness; theory and some related empirical research suggests that the provision of technical assistance is one important supporting factor. The current study examines one aspect of technical assistance that may be important in supporting coalition effectiveness, the collaborative relationship between the technical assistance provider and site lead implementer. METHODS: Four and one-half years of data were collected from technical assistance providers and prevention team members from the 14 community prevention teams involved in the PROSPER project. RESULTS: Spearman correlation analyses with longitudinal data show that the levels of the collaborative relationship during one phase of collaborative team functioning associated with characteristics of internal team functioning in future phases. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that community collaborative prevention work should consider the collaborative nature of the technical assistance provider - prevention community team relationship when designing and conducting technical assistance activities, and it may be important to continually assess these dynamics to support high quality implementation.
BACKGROUND: Historically, effectiveness of community collaborative prevention efforts has been mixed. Consequently, research has been undertaken to better understand the factors that support their effectiveness; theory and some related empirical research suggests that the provision of technical assistance is one important supporting factor. The current study examines one aspect of technical assistance that may be important in supporting coalition effectiveness, the collaborative relationship between the technical assistance provider and site lead implementer. METHODS: Four and one-half years of data were collected from technical assistance providers and prevention team members from the 14 community prevention teams involved in the PROSPER project. RESULTS: Spearman correlation analyses with longitudinal data show that the levels of the collaborative relationship during one phase of collaborative team functioning associated with characteristics of internal team functioning in future phases. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that community collaborative prevention work should consider the collaborative nature of the technical assistance provider - prevention community team relationship when designing and conducting technical assistance activities, and it may be important to continually assess these dynamics to support high quality implementation.
Authors: J David Hawkins; Richard F Catalano; Michael W Arthur; Elizabeth Egan; Eric C Brown; Robert D Abbott; David M Murray Journal: Prev Sci Date: 2008-05-31
Authors: Daniel F Perkins; Mark E Feinberg; Mark T Greenberg; Lesley E Johnson; Sarah Meyer Chilenski; Claudia C Mincemoyer; Richard L Spoth Journal: Eval Program Plann Date: 2010-11-10
Authors: Richard Spoth; Cleve Redmond; Scott Clair; Chungyeol Shin; Mark Greenberg; Mark Feinberg Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Linda Dusenbury; William B Hansen; Julia Jackson-Newsom; Donna Pittman; Cicely Wilson; Kathleen Simley; Christopher Ringwalt; Melinda Pankratz; Steven Giles Journal: Am J Health Educ Date: 2010
Authors: Carmen Orte; Lidia Sánchez-Prieto; Juan José Montaño; Belén Pascual Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-05 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Supriya Mohile; Marie Anne Bakitas; Lisa Zubkoff; Kathleen Doyle Lyons; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Gregory Hagley; Maria Pisu; Andres Azuero; Marie Flannery; Richard Taylor; Elizabeth Carpenter-Song Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Louis D Brown; Sarah M Chilenski; Rebecca Wells; Eric C Jones; Janet A Welsh; Jochebed G Gayles; Maria E Fernandez; Damon E Jones; Kimberly A Mallett; Mark E Feinberg Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Jonathan R Olson; Jennifer Schurer Coldiron; Ryan M Parigoris; Michelle D Zabel; Marlene Matarese; Eric J Bruns Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2020-07 Impact factor: 1.505