Engaging Community Networks to Improve Depression Services: A Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Community Engagement and Planning Intervention.

This paper explores the effects of a group-randomized controlled trial, Community Partners in Care (CPIC), on the development of interagency networks for collaborative depression care improvement between a community engagement and planning (CEP) intervention and a resources for services (RS) intervention that provided the same content solely via technical assistance to individual programs. Both interventions consisted of a diverse set of service agencies, including health, mental health, substance abuse treatment, social services, and community-trusted organizations such as churches and parks and recreation centers. Participants in the community councils for the CEP intervention reflected a range of agency leaders, staff, and other stakeholders. Network analysis of partnerships among agencies in the CEP versus RS condition, and qualitative analysis of perspectives on interagency network changes from multiple sources, suggested that agencies in the CEP intervention exhibited greater growth in partnership capacity among themselves than did RS agencies. CEP participants also viewed the coalition development intervention both as promoting collaboration in depression services and as a meaningful community capacity building activity. These descriptive results help to identify plausible mechanisms of action for the CPIC interventions and can be used to guide development of future community engagement interventions and evaluations in under-resourced communities.

Community Partnering for Behavioral Health Equity: Public Agency and Community Leaders' Views of its Promise and Challenge.

Objective: To understand potential for multi-sector partnerships among community-based organizations and publicly funded health systems to implement health improvement strategies that advance health equity. Design: Key stakeholder interviewing during HNI planning and early implementation to elicit perceptions of multi-sector partnerships and innovations required for partnerships to achieve system transformation and health equity. Setting: In 2014, the Los Angeles County (LAC) Board of Supervisors approved the Health Neighborhood Initiative (HNI) that aims to: 1) improve coordination of health services for behavioral health clients across safety-net providers within neighborhoods; and 2) address social determinants of health through community-driven, public agency sponsored partnerships with community-based organizations. Participants: Twenty-five semi-structured interviews with 49 leaders from LAC health systems, community-based organizations; and payers. Results: Leaders perceived partnerships within and beyond health systems as transformative in their potential to: improve access, value, and efficiency; align priorities of safety-net systems and communities; and harness the power of communities to impact health. Leaders identified trust as critical to success in partnerships but named lack of time for relationship-building, limitations in service capacity, and questions about sustainability as barriers to trust-building. Leaders described the need for procedural innovations within health systems that would support equitable partnerships including innovations that would increase transparency and normalize information exchange, share agenda-setting and decision-making power with partners, and institutionalize partnering through training and accountability. Conclusions: Leaders described improving procedural justice in public agencies' relationships with communities as key to effective partnering for health equity.

A Window of Opportunity: Visions and Strategies for Behavioral Health Policy Innovation.

Objective: The New York City's Thrive (ThriveNYC) and the Los Angeles County Health Neighborhood Initiative (HNI) are two local policies focused on addressing the social determinants of behavioral health as a preventive strategy for improving health service delivery. On January 29, 2016, leaders from both initiatives came together with a range of federal agencies in health care, public health, and policy research at the RAND Corporation in Arlington, Virginia. The goal of this advisory meeting was to share lessons learned, consider research and evaluation strategies, and create a dialogue between stakeholders and federal funders - all with the purpose to build momentum for policy innovation in behavioral health equity. Methods: This article analyzes ethnographic notes taken during the meeting and in-depth interviews of 14 meeting participants through Kingdon's multiple streams theory of policy change. Results: Results demonstrated that stakeholders shared a vision for behavioral health policy innovation focused on community engagement and social determinants of health. In addition, Kingdon's model highlighted that the problem, policy and politics streams needed to form a window of opportunity for policy change were coupled, enabling the possibility for behavioral health policy innovation. Conclusions: The advisory meeting suggested that local policy makers, academics, and community members, together with federal agents, are working to implement behavioral health policy innovation.