SF Health Improvement Partnerships (SF HIP) Logic Model (DRAFT 10/9/12)

1. SF Health Improvement Partnerships (SF HIP) Logic Model (DRAFT 10/9/12) Problem Statement: Despite overall relatively high health status in San Francisco, communities experience health disparities and poor health outcomes. UCSF researchers and findings aren’t well integrated into efforts in San Francisco to address health inequities. City agencies, community service providers and University resources are often siloed (even within each of these sectors) and coordination is lacking. Decreased funding also requires collaboration. Although the study of partnerships between academic institutions and communities is an emerging and promising enterprise, it is not yet well understood or standard practice. Inputs/Assets Activity Output Immediate Outcomes Intermediate Outcomes Impact Identify partners and allies to engage across sectors NIH CTSA Funds • CC with community, city, and university stakeholders convened 8x/year • PWGs formed with input from faculty, city, CBOs, policy makers • Increased number of partnerships between DPH, CBOs, community institutions and UCSF among SF HIP participants • Community awareness of and involvement in collaborative efforts • Integrated efforts across stakeholders (city, university, community) • Increased UCSF participation in addressing discrete health disparities Convene Coordinating Council (CC) Productive, efficient collaborations Planning Group Convene Partnership Working Groups (PWGs) DPH Leadership, CBOs and other community partners Identify areas of community-prioritized health topics and UCSF expertise • Evidence and emanant-based programs and policies implemented addressing identified health disparities • Multiple sectors collaborating on implemented CBPR projects • New strategies, options, and evidence collected.. • Shared information for decision-making • Convergence of diverse stakeholders to implement strategies • "Best" (feasible and promising) community- approved, academic-vetted practices identified • Best practices documented and selection of interventions based on these • Best policies documented and selection of policy to implement Decreased health disparities, increased health equity • 10 health topics identified • 4-5 initial health topics prioritized in year 1-2 • Baseline outcomes for 4 health topics identified • Relevant baseline data identified and collected for each of the 4 prioritized health topics • Literature review and community input process for each prioritized health topic completed • Literature review . on policy options for each prioritized health topic CE & HP Staff Identify health outcome indicators and baseline measures Navigators Conduct primary and secondary data collection to identify potential health outcomes for PWG activities Faculty members (including IHPS, Int Med, Peds, Epi) Improved health outcomes at the community level Best practices/policies and successful partnership planning models a d activities documented in publications or manuals Interns/Volunteers Gather evidence and emanant-based practices and policies f rom community and literature CTSI Staff • 50% of funding supporting SF HIP projects external to NIH grant • promotional materials with bibliographies of published results prepared for potential funders Ensure funding through grant making Increased funding for collaborative health disparity programs and research Identify external funding sources External funding sources identified for at least 3 PWGs 3 PWGs supported by internal and external funds Provide consultation and linkage to funding sources

2. Inputs/Assets Activity Output Intermediate Outcomes Impact Immediate Outcomes National CTSA CE Consortium Attend CTSA KFC events and webinars - Participation in KFC and workgroup monthly meetings Teaching and adopting identified strategies, helpful lessons from SF HIP shared KFC equipped to enhance implementation strategies Graduate Students Integrate learners into SF HIP activities 3-5 Graduate students matched with SF HIP placements University learners trained with skills to be meaningful community partners Learners engage with and advocate for effective community health programming Community engagement practices adopted as the standard UCSF and DPH -Internal Communication (wiki, emails, shouting between cubicles) -External Communication (website, twitter, YouTube) • Establish and post internal documents to wiki • Establish and post to website for SF HIP monthly • Post SF HIP information and updates to CTSI website, twitter, YouTube • Wiki website established and maintained with meeting minutes, calendar and administrative documents in congruence with each meeting • CTSI website information updated with xx # of stories monthly • SF HIP participants and community members can navigate websites, twitter, YouTube as modes of communication • General public, other programs and funders get, understand and use information about SF HIP Effective communication maintained within SF HIP and to the public Lessons learned and disseminated nationally about academic/ community partnerships Establish evaluation team and implement quantitative/ qualitative study on process of SF HIP and partnership building Distilled lessons learned on process of academic/ community partnership Evaluation Team Coord council and PWGs members engaged in evaluation activities Quantitative and qualitative analyses and reports. Evaluation Measures [coming soon]