Aligning healthcare, public health and social services: A scoping review of the role of purpose, governance, finance and data.

Organisations spanning social services, public health and healthcare have increasingly experimented with collaboration as a tool for improving population health and reducing health disparities. While there has been progress, the results have fallen short of expectations. Reflecting on these shortcomings, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) recently proposed a new framework for cross-sector alignment intended to move the field towards improved outcomes. A central idea in this framework is that collaboratives will be more effective and sustainable if they develop collaborative systems in four core areas: shared purpose, governance, finance and shared data. The goal of this paper is to provide a foundation for research on the four core areas of the cross-sector alignment framework. Accordingly, this study is based on two guiding questions: (1) how are collaboratives currently implementing systems in the four core areas identified in the framework, and (2) what strategies does the literature offer for creating sustainable systems in these four areas? Given the emergent nature of research on health-oriented cross-sector collaboration and the broad research questions, we conducted a systematic scoping review including 179 relevant research papers and reports published internationally from the years 2010-2020. We identified the main contributions and coded each based on its relevance to the cross-sector alignment framework. We found that most papers focused on programme evaluations rather than theory testing, and while many strategies were offered, they tended to reflect a focus on short-term collaboration. The results also demonstrate that starting points and resource levels vary widely across individuals and organisations involved in collaborations. Accordingly, identifying and comparing distinct pathways by which different parties might pursue cross-sector alignment is an imperative for future work. More broadly, the literature is ripe with observations that could be assessed systematically to produce a firm foundation for research and practice.

Community voice in cross-sector alignment: concepts and strategies from a scoping review of the health collaboration literature.

BACKGROUND: Health care access is an important driver of population health, and factors beyond health care also drive health outcomes. Recognizing the importance of the social determinants of health (SDOH), different actors in the health care, public health, and social service sectors are increasingly collaborating to improve health outcomes in communities. To support such collaboration, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation developed a cross-sector alignment theory of change. According to the cross-sector alignment theory of change, community voice is critical for helping collaboratives address community health needs. Yet research on health collaboratives offers mixed guidance on how community voice should be understood and which community voice strategies are most effective. METHODS: This study addresses a gap in the literature with a systematic scoping review of research on health-oriented cross-sector collaboration and community voice. By scanning key academic journals, searching three academic databases, and obtaining documents from across our professional networks, we identified 36 documents that address community voice in health collaboratives. RESULTS: The review reveals several conceptions of community voice and a range of community voice strategies. We find that community voice strategies fall on a spectrum between two broad types of approaches: active and passive. These vary not only in the level of power shared between communities and collaborators, but also in the level of involvement required from the community, and this in turn has important implications for community collaboration strategies. We also find that while most strategies are discussed in the context of short-term collaboration, many also lend themselves to adoption in the context of sustainable collaboration and, ultimately, cross-sector alignment. CONCLUSION: This review provides a characterization and conceptualization of community voice in health-oriented collaborations that provides a new theoretical basis for future research. Passive and active community voice strategies can be studied in more detail for their expected impact on health outcomes and disparities. Increased attention to active community voice and the resources it requires can help practitioners achieve improved health outcomes and researchers understand the pathways to health improvement through collaboration.