Preventing Chronic Disease | Institution-to-Institution Mentoring to Build Capacity in 24 Local US Health Departments: Best Practices and Lessons Learned - CDC
Secondhand Smoke Facts
Eliminating smoking in indoor spaces is the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke exposure. Inside this e-card, learn the importance of making your home and vehicle smoke-free.
Institution-to-Institution Mentoring to Build Capacity in 24 Local US Health Departments: Best Practices and Lessons Learned
Maggie Veatch, MPH; Gail P. Goldstein, MPH; Rachel Sacks, MPH; Megan Lent, MPH; Gretchen Van Wye, PhD, MA
Suggested citation for this article: Veatch M, Goldstein GP, Sacks R, Lent M, Van Wye G. Institution-to-Institution Mentoring to Build Capacity in 24 Local US Health Departments: Best Practices and Lessons Learned. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;11:140017. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140017
.
.PEER REVIEWED
Abstract
Introduction
Institutional mentoring may be a useful capacity-building model to support local health departments facing public health challenges. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene conducted a qualitative evaluation of an institutional mentoring program designed to increase capacity of health departments seeking to address chronic disease prevention. The mentoring program included 2 program models, a one-to-one model and a collaborative model, developed and implemented for 24 Communities Putting Prevention to Work grantee communities nationwide.
Institutional mentoring may be a useful capacity-building model to support local health departments facing public health challenges. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene conducted a qualitative evaluation of an institutional mentoring program designed to increase capacity of health departments seeking to address chronic disease prevention. The mentoring program included 2 program models, a one-to-one model and a collaborative model, developed and implemented for 24 Communities Putting Prevention to Work grantee communities nationwide.
Methods
We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews to assess grantees’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the mentoring program in supporting their work. Two interviews were conducted with key informants from each participating community. Three evaluators coded and analyzed data using ATLAS.ti software and using grounded theory to identify emerging themes.
We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews to assess grantees’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the mentoring program in supporting their work. Two interviews were conducted with key informants from each participating community. Three evaluators coded and analyzed data using ATLAS.ti software and using grounded theory to identify emerging themes.
Results
We completed 90 interviews with 44 mentees. We identified 7 key program strengths: learning from the New York City health department’s experience, adapting resources to local needs, incorporating new approaches and sharing strategies, developing the mentor–mentee relationship, creating momentum for action, establishing regular communication, and encouraging peer interaction.
We completed 90 interviews with 44 mentees. We identified 7 key program strengths: learning from the New York City health department’s experience, adapting resources to local needs, incorporating new approaches and sharing strategies, developing the mentor–mentee relationship, creating momentum for action, establishing regular communication, and encouraging peer interaction.
Conclusion
Participants overwhelmingly indicated that the mentoring program’s key strengths improved their capacity to address chronic disease prevention in their communities. We recommend dissemination of the results achieved, emphasizing the need to adapt the institutional mentoring model to local needs to achieve successful outcomes. We also recommend future research to consider whether a hybrid programmatic model that includes regular one-on-one communication and in-person conferences could be used as a standard framework for institutional mentoring.
Participants overwhelmingly indicated that the mentoring program’s key strengths improved their capacity to address chronic disease prevention in their communities. We recommend dissemination of the results achieved, emphasizing the need to adapt the institutional mentoring model to local needs to achieve successful outcomes. We also recommend future research to consider whether a hybrid programmatic model that includes regular one-on-one communication and in-person conferences could be used as a standard framework for institutional mentoring.
Figure. New York City Communities Putting Prevention to Work mentoring grant evaluation logic model, displaying the DOHMH planning process and results related to the 2 program model types used in the institutional mentoring program, the collaborative model, and the one-to-one model, 2010–2012. Abbreviation: NYC DOHMH, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; TA, technical assistance; C, collaborative model; O, one-to-one model. [A text description of this figure is also available.]
Acknowledgments
This project was supported in part by the New York City DOHMH and by cooperative agreement no. 3U58DP002419-01S1 from CDC CPPW. Users of this document should be aware that every funding source has different requirements governing the appropriate use of those funds. Under US law, no federal funds are permitted to be used for lobbying or to influence, directly or indirectly, specific pieces of pending or proposed legislation at the federal, state, or local levels. Organizations should consult appropriate legal counsel to ensure compliance with all rules, regulations, and restriction of any funding sources. The authors acknowledge the invaluable contributions of Jenny Fernandez to this project. At the time of the study, Maggie Veatch, Gail P. Goldstein, and Gretchen Van Wye were with the Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention and Tobacco Control, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
Author Information
Corresponding Author: Maggie Veatch, MPH, Director, Nutrition and Physical Activity, Brooklyn District Public Health Office, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 485 Throop Ave, Brooklyn NY 11221. Telephone: 718-637-5211. E-mail: mveatch@health.nyc.gov.
Author Affiliations: Gail P. Goldstein, Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Use Prevention, Care and Treatment, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, New York; Rachel Sacks, Megan Lent, Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention and Tobacco Control, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Queens, New York; Gretchen Van Wye, Bureau of Vital Statistics, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, New York, New York.
.png)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario