Breaking Down Silos in the Workplace: A Framework to Foster Collaboration.

INTRODUCTION: Employees are often placed within an organization based on their respective roles or duties, which can lead to vertical and horizontal organizational silos. Organizational silos may restrict information, resources, and stymie progress and innovation. This analysis presents a framework to mitigate silos and overcome communication barriers within an organization by increasing collaboration. METHODS: The project team examined results from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) 2020 Employee Viewpoint Survey Results and conducted 19 key informant discussions with NCCDPHP employees. Participants were asked to provide feedback on (1) understanding silos in the workplace and (2) best practices for reducing silos and fostering collaboration. A thematic analysis was conducted to understand organizational silos, the motivation to reduce silos, and identify best practices and strategies. RESULTS: Respondents felt that siloing exists at the division and branch levels; however, 95% of respondents were motivated to reduce silos. Fifty-eight percent of respondents identified that institutional factors such as the organizational structure (n = 8) and red tape/bureaucracy (n = 3) contribute to siloing. Additional behaviors and actions that perpetuate silos were identified, and efforts to reduce silos were categorized to propose a model: Framework to Foster Collaboration for improving organizational collaborative efforts. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Key themes included inclusion, shared goals and vision, bi-directional communication, and relationship building and developing trust as critical elements for improving collaboration and creating synergy across teams in efforts to reduce silos in the workplace.

Money Matters: A Three-Step Process for Using Budget Data in Program Evaluation to Assess the Design and Management of a Novel Public Health Program.

We applied a three-step process, abstracting and analyzing program budgets to examine how Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) awardees are structuring their programs and to assess the fidelity of program design to the CRCCP public health model. We reviewed 23 state, one tribal organization, and six university awardee budgets. We assessed resource allocations, staffing structures, and contracted partners and their activities. Awardees allocated 83% of all funds to contracts and personnel. Program managers were the most budgeted personnel type across three measures: number of people, full-time equivalency, and personnel costs. Awardees not only contracted with health care systems and clinics (39% of all contracts) but also contracted other partner types. Contractors were mainly funded to implement evidence-based interventions (25%) and conduct evaluation (24%). Program design varied among awardees in the number of staff (0-22), number of full-time equivalencies (0-5.4), and the number of contracts (1-11) budgeted. State awardees budgeted more resources to contracts, compared with university awardees (57% vs. 31%), while universities budgeted more for total personnel costs (41% vs. 30%). We learned that awardees designed their programs with fidelity to the CRCCP model. Although implementation approaches varied, overall results suggest implementation requires a combination of internal capacities and contracted partners. Budgets provide opportunities to use already existing program data to evaluate program design, partnerships, and planned activities.

Availability and content of clinical guidance for tobacco use and dependence treatment - United States, 2000-2019.

Evidence-based treatments for tobacco use and dependence can increase cessation success but remain underutilized. Health professional societies and voluntary health organizations (advising organizations) are uniquely positioned to influence the delivery of cessation treatments by providing clinical guidance for healthcare providers. This study aimed to review the guidance produced by these organizations for content and consistency with current evidence. Documents discussing healthcare providers' role in treatment of tobacco use and dependence produced by US-based advising organizations between 2000 and 2019 were identified in both peer-reviewed and grey (i.e., informally or non-commercially published) literature. Extraction of variables, defined in terms of healthcare provider role and endorsement of specific treatment(s), was completed by two independent reviewers. Review of 38 identified documents sponsored by 57 unique advising organizations revealed deficits in the direction of comprehensive care and incorporation of the most recent evidence for treatment of tobacco use and dependence. Documents endorsed: screening (74%), pharmacotherapy (68%), counseling (89%), or follow-up (37%). Few documents endorsed more recent evidence-based treatments including combination nicotine replacement therapy (18%), and text- (11%) and web-based (11%) interventions. Advising organizations have opportunities to address identified gaps and enhance clinical guidance to contribute toward expanding the provision of comprehensive tobacco cessation support.