Table 4 What works: significant associations between coalition characteristics and outcomes
Domain | Coalition characteristic | Associated outcomes – direct pathways (significance) | Associated outcomes – indirect pathways (intermediary) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Community context | Community resources | Socio-economic position (income, income support, food relief, educational attainment, employment) | Positive: Systems change (shared decision making, p<0.05) [47] | |
Community vibrancy (building, youth, housing growth) | Positive: Systems change (coalition finance, p<0.05; shared decision making, p<0.05) [47] | |||
Social capital | Positive: Improved health / health equity (p=0.06) [32], partnership synergy (development of goals and strategies, problem solving, responsive to community needs, teamwork, p=0.05) [32], community transformation (p<0.05) [32], institutional change (p<0.05) [39], social capital (p<0.05) [42] | Mediation: Social capital (mediated by success) [42] | ||
Capacity | Partnership capacity | Positive: Individual member capacity building (p=0.05) [32], community transformation and health equity (p<0.05) [32], social capital (member empowerment, relationships, knowledge, credibility, p<0.001) [44], perceived impact and synergy (p<0.001) [44] | Pathway: Perceived effectiveness (via social capital) [44] | |
Community psychological, political and financial empowerment | Positive: Number of health promotion changes (p<0.05) [31] Negative: Health promoting environments (p<0.05) [31] | |||
Community readiness to change / capacity | Positive: Community change (p=0.066) [46], attitudes and knowledge of prevention (p<0.05) [33], intermediate outcome improvement (risk and protective factors, p≤0.05) [45], institutional change (p<0.05) [39] | Mediation: Perceived effectiveness of coalition’s work (mediated by coalition functioning) [33] Pathway: Health outcome and behaviour change (via intermediate outcomes) [45] | ||
Coalition resources | Resource levels | Adequacy of staffing | Positive: Member satisfaction (p<0.001) [34] | Mediation: Community capacity (new skills, social capital and sense of community, mediated by member satisfaction) [34] |
Resource levels | Positive: Community participation and management (p<0.001) [30], knowledge and awareness (p<0.01) [47], opportunity and impact (p<0.01) [47], social capital (p<0.01) [47] | Barrier: Barrier to success [33] | ||
Training and technical assistance | Positive: Coalition outcomes (p value not supplied) [49], ability to establish a vision and mission (p<0.05) [52], arrange community mobilisers (p<0.05) [52], community readiness to change (p=0.003) [46] | |||
Resource management | Community power over resources | Positive: Intermediate community outcomes (p<0.01) [35], distal community outcomes (p<0.01) [35] partnership synergy (development of goals and strategies, problem solving, responsive to community needs, teamwork, p=0.01) [32] | Pathway: Intermediate outcomes (via community involvement in research, positive) [35], intermediate outcomes (via community involvement in research, positive) [35] | |
Joint resource management between partners | Positive: Member agency capacity building (p=0.05) [32], community transformation and health equity (p<0.05) [32] | |||
Effective management of financial, in-kind and time resources | Positive: Partnership synergy (development of goals and strategies, problem solving, responsive to community needs, teamwork, p=0.001) [32], community transformation and health equity change (p=0.001) [32] | |||
Shared resource generation and use | Positive: Program array (p<0.05) [47], collaborative service delivery (p<0.05) [47] | |||
Coalition structure | Coordination | Chair tenure | Positive: Collaborative service delivery (p<0.05) [47] | |
Age | Coalition age/maturity | Positive: Engagement in systems change (p value not specified) [47], network centralisation (p value not supplied) [37], reciprocity (p value not supplied) [37], number intersectoral connections (p value not supplied) [37], betweenness (p value not supplied) [37] | ||
Structure | Formal organisation/structure/agreement | Positive: Health outcome (reduced alcohol use, p=0.039, binge reduced drinking, p=0.031) [12], program array (p<0.05) [47], perceived effectiveness (p<0.05) [43], social capital (p<0.05) [39], equal power between coalition and community (p<0.01) [32], community transformation and health equity (p<0.05) [32] | Pathway: Institutional change (via social capital) [39] | |
Size | Coalition size | Positive: Rate of implementation (p value not supplied) [51] | ||
Member characteristics | Expertise | Health promotion experience of coordinator | Positive: Community participation and intersectoral diversity (p<0.05) [30] | |
Experience collaborating | Negative: Trust (p<0.05) [42] | |||
Diversity | Sectoral diversity (members) | Positive: Number of health promotion actions implemented (p<0.05) [31], working on multiple strategies (p<0.01) [31], social capital (p<0.05) [39] Negative: Member participation (p≤0.001) [34], number health education plans (p<0.05) [31] | Mediation: Community capacity (new skills, mediated by member participation) [34] Pathway: Institutional change (via social capital) [39] | |
Empowerment | Psychological and political empowerment | Positive: Perceived effectiveness (p<0.01) [36] | ||
Member engagement and satisfaction | Meetings | Meeting attendance | Positive: Social capital (p<0.001) [47], opportunity and impact (p<0.05) [47] | |
Proportion of members who spoke in meetings | Positive: Perceived coalition impact (p<0.10) [48] | |||
Activity | Participation in coalition activities | Positive: Perceived coalition impact (p<0.10) [48], barrier to success (p value not supplied) [33], community capacity (p≤0.05) [45] | Pathway: Intermediate and health/behavioural outcomes (via community capacity) [45] | |
Activity level (meeting frequency and engaging in shared activity) | Positive: Collaborative service delivery (p<0.05) [47], finance (p<0.05) [47] | |||
Duration | Duration of membership | Positive: Knowledge and awareness (p<0.01) [47], social capital (p<0.05) [47], opportunity and impact (p<0.001) [47], and resource acquisition (p<0.01) [47] | ||
Coalition configuration (extent, duration and focus of member involvement) | Positive: Coalition effectiveness (p<0.05) [31] Negative: Number of health plans (p<0.05) [31] | |||
Satisfaction | Satisfaction with coalition | Positive: Empowerment outcome (leadership competence, p<0.05) [43], empowerment outcome (policy control, p<0.05) [43] | ||
Group facilitation | Decision making | Shared decision making | Positive: Community capacity (new skills, p≤0.01) [34], sense of community (p≤0.01) [34], member agency capacity building (p<0.05) [32], sustained partnership (p<0.05) [32], community transformation and health equity change (p=0.001) [32], empowerment outcome (leadership competence, p<0.01) [43] | Pathway: Community outcome (school attachment, via program safety) [43], sense of community (via member satisfaction) [34], community capacity (new skills, via member satisfaction and participation) [34] |
Functioning | Internal functioning (resourcing, activity, personal benefits, clear plan, sense of direction) | Positive: Perceived effectiveness (p<0.01) [33], attitudes and knowledge of prevention (p<0.05) [33] | ||
Relationships (leadership, resource management, trust, participatory decision making) | Positive: Intermediate (p<0.01) and distal (p<0.01) coalition outcomes [35] | |||
Task focus | Positive: Community capacity (new skills, p≤0.01) [34] | |||
Organisation and resources | Positive: Community participation (p<0.01) [30], community management (p<0.001) [30] | |||
Coalition capacity (development and use of plans, expanded membership) | Positive: Comprehensiveness of strategies (p<0.01) [38] | Mediation: Community change (mediated by comprehensive strategies) [38] | ||
Collaboration quality (culture of reflection, interdependence, flexibility, new professional activities) | Positive: Member empowerment (p<0.05) [29], sense of community responsibility over the health issue (p<0.05) [29], sense of the community contributing to health promotion, p<0.05) [29], trust (p<0.05) [29], commitment to the work (<0.05) [29], perceived efficacy (p<0.05) [29] | Pathway: Perceived efficacy (via member empowerment, sense of community responsibility, and sense of the community contributing to health promotion) [29] | ||
Values | Shared values | Positive: Intermediate (p<0.01) and distal (p<0.01) coalition outcomes [35], member agency capacity building (p<0.05) [32], community transformation and health equity (p<0.05) [32] partnership synergy (development of goals and strategies, problem solving, responsive to community needs, teamwork, p=0.05) [32] | Pathway: Intermediate and distal community outcomes (via relationship and leadership quality, and synergy) [35] | |
Leadership | Leadership quality | Positive: Member satisfaction (p≤0.001) [34], community capacity (new skills, p≤0.001) [34], perceived effectiveness (p<0.01) [36], knowledge and awareness (p<0.001) [47], social capital (p<0.001 [47], p<0.01 [39]) opportunity and impact (p<0.001) [47], resource acquisition (p<0.001) [47], partnership synergy (development of goals and strategies, problem solving, responsive to community needs, teamwork, p=0.001) [32], community transformation and health equity change (p=0.05) [32], | Pathway: Perceived effectiveness (via opportunity for leadership roles, psychological empowerment of members, social support between members, and a group based belief system) [36], institutional change (via social capital) [39], community capacity (new skills, via member participation) [34] | |
Empowerment | Member empowerment | Positive: Institutional change (p<0.01) [39] | ||
Members encouraged into leadership roles | Positive: Coalition effectiveness (p<0.01) [36] | |||
Communication | Communication quality | Positive: Perceived success (p<0.05) [42] | ||
Group dynamics | Conflict | Group cohesion | Positive: Social capital (p≤0.001) [34], sense of community (p≤0.001) [34], perceived coalition effectiveness (p<0.01) [36] | Mediation: sense of community (via member satisfaction) [34] |
Conflict | Negative: level of implementation (p value not supplied) [33], | Barrier: Barrier to implementation [47] | ||
Support | Supportive relationships | Positive: Perceived effectiveness (p<0.01) [36], program safety (p<0.001) [43] | Pathway: Health outcome (school attachment, via program safety) [43] | |
Dialogue and listening (positive attitude, participation and learning from each other) | Positive: Equal power between coalition and community (p=0.05) [32] | |||
Trust | Perceived safety, inclusion | Positive: Community connection (p<0.01) [43], social capital (p<0.05) [39] | Pathway: institutional change (via social capital) [39] | |
Trust | Positive: Perceived success (<0.05) [42], sustained partnership (p<0.05) [32], equal power between coalition and community (p<0.05) [32] | |||
Relationship and network structure | Number | Number of intersectoral partnerships | Positive: Community activity (p≤0.01) [37], policy engagement (p≤0.05) [37], community support (p<0.05) [28], sustainability planning (p<0.05) [28] | |
Increase in number of social connections | Positive: Community readiness (p=0.056) [46], number of community changes (p=0.031) [46] | |||
Structure | Network density (social network analysis) | Positive: Planning in early stages of coalition (p<0.05) [49], Negative: Coalition functioning and progress in later stages of coalition (p<0.05) [49] | ||
Loosely bound network (part-time and moderate turnover of positions) | Positive: Working on multiple strategies (p<0.05) [31], coalition effectiveness (p<0.01) [31] Negative: Number of health plans implemented (p<0.05) [31] | |||
Reciprocity of partnerships | Positive: Community activity (p≤0.01) [37], grant submission (p≤0.01) [37], perceived success (p<0.05) [42] | |||
Community partnership | Community partnerships | Resident involvement | Positive: Community neighbourhood satisfaction (p<0.01) [41], perceived neighbourhood improvement (p<0.01) [41], feel a part of the community (p<0.05) [41], trust the coalition (p<0.05) [41], feel they can influence local decisions (p value not specified) [41], individual member capacity building (p=0.03) [32], community transformation and health equity change (p=0.01) [32], equal power between coalition and community (p<0.001) [32], intermediate (p<0.01) and distal (p<0.01) coalition outcomes [35] Negative: Worklessness improvements (p value not specified) [41], | |
Political support | Positive: Equitable policy change (p<0.01) [30] | |||
Professional partnerships | Links with external entities | Positive: Health outcome improvement (p=0.011) [12] | ||
Engagement with health professionals and subject matter experts | Positive: Coalition effectiveness (p<0.05) [31], number of health promotion actions implemented (p<0.05) [31], healthy physical and social environments (p<0.01) [31] Negative: empowerment (p<0.05) [31] | |||
Participation in community of practice | Positive: Equitable policy implementation (p<0.05) [30], degree community participation (p<0.01) [30], number intersectoral partnerships (p<0.05) [30] | |||
Planning and implementation | Implementation | Number of actions implemented | Positive: Healthy physical and social environment (p<0.05) [31], perceived effectiveness (p<0.05) [31] | |
Level of policy implementation | Positive: Increased community capacity (p≤0.05) [45] | Pathway: Intermediate and health/behavioural outcomes (via community capacity) [45] | ||
Collaborative service delivery | Positive: Service diversity (p value not specified) [47] | |||
Intervention fidelity | Positive: Perceived coalition impact (p<0.05) [48] | |||
Partnership synergy (strategic planning, problem solving, teamwork, responsiveness) | Positive: Intermediate (p<0.01) and distal (p<0.01) intermediate (p<0.01) and distal (p<0.01) outcomes [35], social capital (p<0.05) [42] | |||
Governance of the work | Positive: Perceived coalition impact (p<0.001) [48] | |||
Planning | Have a strategic plan | Positive: Rate of implementation (p value not supplied) [51] | ||
Diverse/comprehensive strategies | Positive: Collaborative service delivery (p<0.05) [47], community change (p<0.01) [38] | |||
Number of health plans | Positive: Health promotion actions implemented (p<0.01) [31], perceived effectiveness (p<0.01) [31] | |||
Number of data sources used to inform strategies | Negative: Health outcome (alcohol use, p=0.029) [12] | |||