Dataset Information

Effectiveness of a grant program's efforts to promote synergy within its funded initiatives: perceptions of participants of the Southern Rural Access Program.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Foundations and public agencies commonly fund focused initiatives for individual grantees. These discrete, stand-alone initiatives can risk failure by being carried out in isolation. Fostering synergy among grantees' initiatives is one strategy proposed for promoting the success and impact of grant programs. We evaluate an explicit strategy to build synergy within the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Southern Rural Access Program (SRAP), which awarded grants to collaboratives within eight southeastern U.S. states to strengthen basic health care services in targeted rural counties.

Methods

We interviewed 39 key participants of the SRAP, including the program director within each state and the principal subcontractors heading the program's funded initiatives that supported heath professionals' recruitment, retention and training, made loans to health care providers, and built networks among providers. Interews were recorded and transcribed. Two investigators independently coded the transcripts and a third investigator distilled the main points.

Results

Participants generally perceived that the SRAP yielded more synergies than other grant programs in which they had participated and that these synergies added to the program's impact. The synergies most often noted were achieved through relationship building among grantees and with outside agencies, sharing information and know-how, sharing resources, combining efforts to yield greater capacity, joining voices to advocate for common goals, and spotting gaps in services offered and then filling these gaps. The SRAP's strategies that participants felt fostered synergy included targeting funding to culturally and geographically similar states, supporting complementary types of initiatives, promoting opportunities to network through semi-annual meetings and regular conference calls, and the advocacy efforts of the program's leadership. Participants noted that synergies were sometimes hindered by turf issues and politics and the conflicting perspectives and cultures of participating organizations and racial groups. Inadequate funding through the SRAP, restricting program involvement to only a few needy counties, and instances of over- and under-involvement by the program's leadership were sometimes felt to inhibit synergies and/or their sustainability.

Conclusion

Participants of the SRAP generally perceived that the SRAP's deliberate strategies yielded synergies that added to the program's impact.

SUBMITTER: Pathman DE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2621197 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of a grant program's efforts to promote synergy within its funded initiatives: perceptions of participants of the Southern Rural Access Program.

Pathman Donald E DE Chuang Emmeline E Weiner Bryan J BJ

BMC health services research 20081218

<h4>Background</h4>Foundations and public agencies commonly fund focused initiatives for individual grantees. These discrete, stand-alone initiatives can risk failure by being carried out in isolation. Fostering synergy among grantees' initiatives is one strategy proposed for promoting the success and impact of grant programs. We evaluate an explicit strategy to build synergy within the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Southern Rural Access Program (SRAP), which awarded grants to collaboratives ...[more]

PMID: 19094212

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:In a background of renewed calls for malaria eradication, several endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa are contemplating malaria elimination nationally or sub-nationally. In Mozambique, a strategy to eliminate malaria in the south is underway in the context of low endemicity levels and cross-border initiatives to eliminate malaria in South Africa and Eswatini. In this context, a demonstration project aiming to interrupt malaria transmission through mass antimalarial drug administrations and intensified vector control programmes accompanied by community engagement and standard case management was implemented in the Magude District. To ensure the necessary uptake of these interventions, formative qualitative research explored the perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, and practices related to malaria, its prevention and control. The current article describes the results of this study. METHODS:Seventeen focus group discussions were conducted between September and October of 2015 with the community leaders (6), adult men (5), women of reproductive age (5), and traditional healers (1) in Magude prior to the implementation of the project interventions. Respondents discussed perceptions around malaria symptoms, causes, preventions, and treatments. RESULTS:Knowledge of malaria was linked to awareness of its clinical presentation, and on-going vector control programmes. Perceptions of malaria aetiology were fragmented but related mainly to mosquito-mediated transmission. Reported preventive measures mostly involved mosquito control although participants were aware of the protective limitations of vector control tools. Awareness of asymptomatic carriers and the risk of outdoor malaria transmission were varied. Fever and malaria-like symptoms triggered immediate care-seeking community at health facilities. The identified barriers to malaria treatment included fear/mistrust in Western medicine, distance to health facilities, and lack of transportation. CONCLUSIONS:Several constraints and opportunities will potentially influence malaria elimination in Magude. Malaria awareness, trust in health institutions, and the demand for chemoprophylaxis could facilitate new interventions, such as mass drug administration. A lack of awareness of asymptomatic carriers, inadequate understanding of residual transmission, and barriers to care seeking could jeopardize uptake. Hence, elimination campaigns require strong community engagement and grassroots mobilization.

Project description:Background:Simulation-based education (SBE) is increasingly endorsed as an educational strategy. It allows health-care professionals to practice clinical skills within a safe learning environment, and requires devices for simulation or simulated patients, trained teachers, and an appropriate environment. The objective of this study was to evaluate perceptions of participants on SBE and an SBE workshop. Methods:A 1-day SBE workshop was conducted on September 4, 2018, in collaboration with Laerdal Global Health Nepal and the National Centre for Health Professions Education (NCHPE), Institute of Medicine, Kathmandu, Nepal. Semistructured pretest and posttest questionnaires were used to evaluate the perceptions of participants regarding SBE and the effectiveness of the workshop. Data were analyzed using SPSS 21. Results:The mean difference in participant perceptions of SBE before and after participation in the workshop was significant (P<0.05) on seven statements: enhances communication skills (pretest 4.53±0.72, posttest 4.84±0.75; P=0.03), helps in seeing and managing even rarest of cases (pretest 3.59±1.00, posttest 4.21±0.92; P=0.02), overcomes the problem of uncooperative patients (pretest 3.12±0.93, posttest 3.95±1.22; P=0.004), increases confidence of students in dealing with real patients (pretest 4.29±0.77, posttest 4.79±0.42; P=0.041), enables preparation of rating scales for skills and attitude evaluation (pretest 3.76±0.83, posttest 4.11±0.76; P=0.049), provides immediate feedback during simulation (pretest 4.06±0.9, posttest 4.58±0.51; P=0.016), and keeps materials/equipment ready before simulation (pretest 4.29±0.68, posttest 4.79±0.53; P=0.007). Mean scores for participant feedback on the workshop using a Likert scale of 1-5 (5= strongly agree, 1= strongly disagree) were notable: objective of workshop fulfilled (4.16±0.688), session very interesting (4.37±0.597), session useful for future job (4.47±0.513), scenario relevant to subject (4.21±0.787), what I learnt will be useful in practice (4.05±0.78), resource persons/facilitators were helpful and effective (4.37±0.597), professional (4.42±0.507), and answered all questions (4.32±0.478), and course content was presented clearly (4.26±0.452). Almost all participants found the workshop useful and well presented, and suggested conducting such workshops frequently. Conclusion:The SBE workshop produced substantial differences in perceptions of participants. Participants found the workshop effective in improving knowledge and understanding of SBE.

Project description:IntroductionA review of European Union (EU)-funded initiatives linked to 'Real World Evidence' (RWE) was performed to determine whether their outputs could be used for the generation of real-world data able to support the European Medicines Agency (EMA)'s regulatory decision-making on medicines.MethodThe initiatives were identified from publicly available websites. Their topics were categorised into five areas: 'Data source', 'Methodology', 'Governance model', 'Analytical model' and 'Infrastructure'. To assess their immediate relevance for medicines evaluation, their therapeutic areas were compared with the products recommended for EU approval in 2016 and those included in the EMA pharmaceutical business pipeline.ResultsOf 171 originally identified EU-funded initiatives, 65 were selected based on their primary and secondary objectives (35 'Data source' initiatives, 15 'Methodology', 10 'Governance model', 17 'Analytical model' and 25 'Infrastructure'). These 65 initiatives received over 734 million Euros of public funding. At the time of evaluation, the published outputs of the 40 completed initiatives did not always match their original objectives. Overall, public information was limited, data access was not explicit and their sustainability was unclear. The topics matched 8 of 14 therapeutic areas of the products recommended for approval in 2016 and 8 of 15 therapeutic areas in the 2017-2019 pharmaceutical business pipeline. Haematology, gastroenterology or cardiovascular systems were poorly represented.ConclusionsThis landscape of EU-funded initiatives linked to RWE which started before 31 December 2016 highlighted that the immediate utilisation of their outputs to support regulatory decision-making is limited, often due to insufficient available information and to discrepancies between outputs and objectives. Furthermore, the restricted sustainability of the initiatives impacts on their downstream utility. Multiple projects focussing on the same therapeutic areas increase the likelihood of duplication of both efforts and resources. These issues contribute to gaps in generating RWE for medicines and diminish returns on the public funds invested.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of a grant program's efforts to promote synergy within its funded initiatives: perceptions of participants of the Southern Rural Access Program.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effectiveness of a grant program's efforts to promote synergy within its funded initiatives: perceptions of participants of the Southern Rural Access Program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets