Public Health Partnerships
Partnership in public health is nothing new given that over the years the profession has been reliant on multidisciplinary collaborations to achieve its goals. A case in point of a real world example of such partnerships is the interdisciplinary approach adopted during disease outbreaks like Ebola and SARS. Without the partnerships, their control would have been difficult. An understanding of this valuable concept is thus of utmost significance. In essence, this discussion will seek to shed more light on its life cycle, its importance and the reasons for termination.
Primarily, the life cycle of public health partnerships entails three stages. The first stage is the pre-collaboration stage where informal relationships between the members dominate. In the second phase, the partnership replaces informal relationships with ones that are more formal. In this phase of the cycle, evaluation and monitoring of contractors for performance is vital in determining its success. The last stage of the cycle is the termination phase in which relationship among the partners end due to goal fulfillment, inadequate performance or high cost for maintenance (Hunter, & Perkins, 2014).
Collaborative partnerships are critical to public health in several ways. Firstly, they facilitate tackling of difficult situations through the harnessing of strengths of different entities into one force that offers a solution to the problem. Moreover, collaborative partnerships enhance delivery of coordinated packages of health for the individuals in the society. Besides, partnerships help prevent the duplication of services, which makes health costly (Hunter, & Perkins, 2014). Evidently, with such possibilities, it is beyond doubt that collaborative partnerships hold much significance in public health.
Lastly, termination of partnerships occurs because of many reasons that are worth noting. One fundamental reason for termination is the accomplishment of set goals. Furthermore, termination may also ensue after the realization that the partnership is too expensive to maintain. Finally, another possible reason could be dissatisfaction with the performance of the collaboration initiative (Novick, Morrow, & Mays, 2008).
Concisely, this discussion aimed at determining the life cycle, importance and reasons for termination of public health partnerships. Indeed, it is apparent that partnerships are of the essence to the public health given the need to strengthen relationships that are a prerequisite for handling complex issues like disasters within this profession. As such, going into the future, putting more emphasis on partnerships is vital to the success of public health initiatives.
References
Hunter, D. J., & Perkins, N. (2014). Partnership working in public health. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
Novick, L. F., Morrow, C. B., & Mays, G. P. (2008). Public health administration: Principles for population-based management. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Pub.
