Cited by 97Community Health and DevelopmentPublic Health Policies and EducationHealth Policy Implementation Science

Predictors and Level of Sustainability of Community Prevention Coalitions

Feinberg, Mark E., Bontempo, Daniel E., Greenberg, Mark T.·2008·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Background After many years in which evaluations had generally not found the coalition approach to be effective, the community-coalition approach has recently been shown to produce a public health impact if best practices are utilized. The next challenge is to foster sustainability among coalitions in order to achieve long-term public health outcomes. This study examined the level of and predictors of sustainability among Communities That Care (CTC) sites in Pennsylvania.Methods Board functioning and the funding of 110 CTC sites were assessed through the reports of board members, staff, and technical-assistance providers from 2003 through 2006; data were analyzed in 2007.Results Ninety percent of CTC coalitions continued after the 3-year initial funding period, with 3%-8% of sites terminating each year thereafter. Approximately two thirds of CTC sites continued to operate 4 years after the termination of the original 3-year implementation grant. Many of the sites attracted funding at a level equivalent to or greater than the initial grant. Overall coalition functioning, as reported by either board members or technical-assistance providers, along with planning for sustainability, predicted both survival and post-launch funding.Conclusions Evidence suggests that board functioning predicts survival, at least in part independently of its influence on funding; and that planning for sustainability predicts sustainability, at least in part independently of overall coalition functioning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.030

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study of 110 CTC sites in Pennsylvania found that 90% of coalitions continued after the three-year initial funding period, with 3-8% of sites terminating each year after.

    “A study of 110 CTC sites in Pennsylvania found that 90% of coalitions continued after the three-year initial funding period, with 3–8% of sites terminating each year after (36).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 35 · Cited by 97

Authors
Feinberg, M. E., Bontempo, D. E., & Greenberg, M. T.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Feinberg, Mark E.
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-06
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
495-501
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1993755840
Cited by
97
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
8.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
sustainability, Communities That Care, sustainability planning, community-based prevention
MeSH terms
Community Participation, Governing Board, Health Care Coalitions, Humans, Health Behavior, Public Health Practice, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review