Networking and Collaboration Frequently Asked Questions
Question: What are some incentives for
rural organizations to collaborate
and build networks?
Answer: There are many incentives for collaboration and networking. One reason for collaboration is to improve the effectiveness of service delivery. Effectiveness is improved because of the combined effects of programs across substantive issues including, for example, when housing, economic development, and transportation are considered in a community-based rather than a specific issues-based approach. Collaboration and networking should be centered on improving the access and availability of health and human services while improving the quality of life for rural residents. At the heart of networking efforts is building a more effective system for ensuring the health and well-being of rural people. Whether the collaborative or network is focused on fiscal, societal, or clinical issues, at it’s core will be holistic health for individuals and communities. Incentives for linking members may include achieving economies of scale and resource sharing such as sharing specialized employees thus decreasing personnel cost, or establishing school health programs that lead to less absenteeism and improved health among youth. Incentives can be both tangible as well as intangible in nature and scope. An added incentive is that many federal programs favor efforts that are based upon collaboration which makes grant seeking opportunities greater for organizations and communities in partnership with one another.
In summary – It’s all about leveraging resources to create economies of scale and improved health and wellbeing using a cross-sector approach.
Question: What
are the barriers to collaboration in rural areas?
Answer: Barriers to collaboration may be as
diverse as the communities being served and range from:
- racial disparities
- poverty
- lack of communication
- turf issues
- federal grant programs that discourage collaboration
- history of conflict and mistrust
- isolation
- poor access due to road conditions and/or severe weather conditions
- absence of public transportation
- small population base
- limited pool of professional talent including leadership capabilities.
Typically, market share in rural areas is small and at times even fragile
with tighter bottom lines and little room for revenue generation. When
networks or collaboratives set about to create “win: lose” versus “win: win” situations
barriers emerge that are difficult and often counter productive.
Question: What
are some examples of successful rural collaborations and networking?
Answer: Innovative collaborations and networks
have resulted from grants offered by the federal Office of Rural Health
Policy. The content of the RAC
Success Stories database currently consists
of success stories from the Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) Rural
Health Care Services Outreach Grant Program.
For additional information regarding success stories, please see RAC's Success
Stories section.
There are many other federal agencies and private foundations that offer grants that encourage networking and collaboration. Information and links to these grants are listed on the main page of this guide under Funding.
Question: Are
there grants available to rural communities that stress collaboration
and networks?
Answer: The
federal Office of Rural Health Policy offers three grants that foster
networks and collaborations among rural providers. They are
the Rural
Health Care Services Outreach Grant Program, Rural
Health Network Development Grant Program (RHND), and Rural
Health Network Development Planning Grant Program (RHNPGP). All
of these federally funded programs require a minimum of three organizational
partners to qualify for grants. These partners must be from different
formal or informal spheres. In other words, a solely owned health
system would not be considered a candidate if its proposed network
was comprised of three (3) organizations within its system.
In addition to these, local, state, and
federal resources – both
public and private should be researched. Each state has an office
of rural health which should be contacted for additional information. Another
good resource is The Foundation Center.
At this site there are both member only and public resources that lead
researchers to specific grants using a web based search tool. Other
funding agencies at the national level include the Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention,
the National Institutes of Health, U.S.
Department of Agriculture and
the Universal Service Administrative
Company.
Question: Is
there more than one type of network, and if so what are they?
Answer: Networks typically are distinguished
on the basis of structural characteristics. Networks have been described
as being either horizontal, composed of similar types of entities, such
as an all-hospital or all-nursing home network, that serve different
geographic markets, or vertical, formed with organizations from different
classes or with different purposes such as a network made up of a hospital,
public health unit, nursing home, and ambulance system. Networks can include more than organizations focused on health services. Local networks focused on community well-being could include human service agencies, the housing authority, the economic development commission, and public safety. They are all
a network if they are collaborating with a common goal. Networks can
also be formal, based on a legal contractual agreement or an informal
gentleman's agreement that is based on honor and thus not legally binding.
Examples of Vertical
and Horizontal Networks are available from the federal Office
of Rural Health Policy.
Question: How
important is local leadership to successful collaboration?
Answer:
Strong local leadership is crucial to developing rural collaborations
because leaders are the basis for strong community and economic development. A
strong leader has credibility in their community, they understand different
points of view, are able to join together diverse cultures and are comfortable
with the sharing authority, resources, and ideas. Informal local leaders
in rural communities are often hidden and not clearly identified by an
outside party. For example, the local grocer may know everyone
in town and be the person everyone turns to for help or advice. These
informal leaders can ‘make or break’ an emerging collaborative
and are essential to achieving success.
Question: What
resources are available to help develop leadership skills?
Answer: The Heartland
Center for Leadership Development is an independent, non-profit
organization that focuses on leadership training, citizen participation,
community planning, facilitation, evaluation, and curriculum development.
The National Public Health Leadership
Institute (PHLI)
is an innovative, 12-month leadership development program funded by the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The Aspen Institute offers seminars, programs and leadership initiatives with a core mission of “fostering enlightened leadership and open-minded dialogue.”
The Center for Rural Entrepreneurship is partnering with the Heartland Center for Leadership Development
in offering a wide range of training opportunities. From half-day in-service trainings to full week-long institutes, E2 Energizing Entrepreneurs in Rural America provides community leaders, economic development practitioners and policymakers with a variety of professional development opportunities.
Credits
Patricia J. Kota, Community
Health Systems Development, Georgia Health Policy Center
Keith J. Mueller, and Jocelyn B. Richgels, Rural
Policy Research Institute (RUPRI)
Developed by: Marilyn Fundingsland,
fundings@medicine.nodak.edu
Last revised 10/24/2007
