Structural and relational factors for successful cross-sector collaboration in home visiting: a multiple case study.

BACKGROUND: Aligning delivery and financing systems across sectors to create broader systems of care can improve the health and well-being of families experiencing adversities. We aimed to identify structural and relational factors for best practices to achieve successful cross-sector collaboration among home visiting programs in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a multiple case study approach to identify best practices for successful cross-sector collaboration between home visitors and other community service providers. We selected five diverse exemplary cases with cross-sector collaboration with variation in implementing agency type and geographic location. Cases were selected using a positive deviance approach based on strong coordination and integration with different community service provider types identified from previous survey data. We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with home visiting staff, community providers, and clients with a total of 76 interviews conducted from 2021 to 2022. We wrote memos to synthesize themes within each case through data triangulation using interview data, documents, and site visit observations. We compared themes across the five cases to create a cross-case synthesis of best practices for successful cross-sector collaboration. RESULTS: Across the five cases, relational factors including leadership from all levels, champions across sectors, and shared goals between community providers were key factors for successful collaboration. Interpersonal relationships, coupled with the desire and capacity to engage, facilitated effective coordination to address families' needs. At the structural level, shared data systems, written agreements, and co-location enabled care coordination activities. Community Advisory Boards provided a venue for developing partnerships, relationship-building, resource-sharing, and increasing awareness of home visiting. CONCLUSIONS: We identified key elements of successful cross-sector collaboration across five case studies where home visitors coordinate care frequently and/or are structurally integrated with a range of providers. These learnings will inform future interventions to improve home visiting collaboration with other community providers to create a system of care to enhance family well-being.

Legislative Health Notes: Preliminary Learnings From Piloting a New Policy Analysis Tool.

CONTEXT: In 2018, the Health Impact Project (the Project) developed and tested a new health in all policies (HiAP) tool called "legislative health notes" to provide state and local legislators with peer-reviewed evidence, public health data, and local data that illustrate potential positive and negative health and equity effects of proposed bills. OBJECTIVES: The Project sought to refine the health note methodology while piloting the tool in the Colorado and Indiana General Assemblies, and with the Council of the District of Columbia, and worked with affiliates to introduce them in North Carolina, Ohio, and California. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: External partners solicited feedback on health notes via semistructured interviews and surveys from legislators, legislative staff, and expert reviewers who were familiar with health notes in each of these jurisdictions. RESULTS: Respondents shared that health notes were nonpartisan, were easy for nonexperts to understand, and would be more effective if delivered earlier in the legislative process. CONCLUSION: In response to informant feedback, practitioners can explore adding high-level summaries, increasing focus on health equity implications and the potential to work with legislators during the policy formulation phase. Data from this pilot suggest that legislative health notes are a promising nonpartisan and standardized tool to better understand the health and equity implications of proposed legislation.

US Hospital Service Availability and New 340B Program Participation.

Importance: The US 340B Drug Pricing Program enables eligible hospitals to receive substantial discounts on outpatient drugs to improve hospitals' financial sustainability and maintain access to care for patients who have low income and/or are uninsured. However, it is unclear whether hospitals use program savings to subsidize access as intended. Objective: To evaluate whether the 340B program is associated with improvements in access to hospital-based services and to test whether the association varies by hospital ownership. Design, Setting, and Participants: Difference-in-differences and cohort analysis from 2010 to 2019. Never and newly participating 340B general, acute, nonfederal hospitals in the US using data from the American Hospital Association's Annual Survey of Hospitals merged with hospital and market characteristics. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2023, to January 31, 2024. Exposures: New enrollment in 340B between 2012 and 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total number of unprofitable service lines, ie, substance use, psychiatric (inpatient and outpatient), burn clinic, and obstetrics services; and profitable services, ie, cardiac surgery and orthopedic, oncologic, neurologic, and neonatal intensive services. Results: The study sample comprised a total of 2152 hospitals, 1074 newly participating and 1078 not participating in the 340B program. Participating hospitals were more likely than nonparticipating hospitals to be critical access and teaching hospitals, have higher Medicaid shares, and be located in rural areas and in Medicaid expansion states. At public hospitals, participation in the 340B program was associated with a significant increase in total unprofitable services (0.21; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.38; P = .02) and marginal increases in substance use (5.4 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, -0.8 pp to 11.6 pp; P = .09) and inpatient psychiatric (6.5 pp; 95% CI, -0.7 pp to 13.7 pp; P = .09) services. Among nonprofit hospitals, there was no significant association between 340B and service offerings (profitable and unprofitable) except for an increase in oncologic services (2.5 pp; 95% CI, 0.0 pp to 5.0 pp; P = .05). Conclusions and Relevance: The finding of the cohort study indicate that participation in the 340B program was associated with an increase in unprofitable services among newly participating public hospitals. Nonprofit hospitals were largely unaffected. These findings suggest that public hospitals responded to 340B savings by improving patient access, whereas nonprofits did not. This heterogeneous response should be considered when evaluating the eligibility criteria for the 340B program and how it affects social welfare.