Search

Purpose: This article presents findings that explore investment in organizational capacity building for chronic disease prevention. Specifically, this analysis examines variation in investment inputs, intervention outputs, and capacity changes to inform expectations of health-promotion capacity-building investment., Design/setting: This multiple case study involving both qualitative and quantitative data is based on seven provincial dissemination projects involved in the Canadian Heart Health Initiative., Methods: Data on investment, number, and type of capacity-building activities and capacity changes come from a questionnaire, key informant interviews, and project report analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and for trends, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically., Results: Per capita investments in capacity building ranged from a low of $0.21 in Ontario to $167.41 in Prince Edward Island. Multiple, tailored capacity-building interventions were used in each project. Mostly positive but modest changes were observed in at least five dimensions of capacity in all but one project., Conclusion: These findings reveal that capacity building for chronic disease prevention requires a long-term investment and is context specific. Even limited investment can produce interventions that appear to positively influence capacity for chronic disease prevention. The findings also suggest an urgent need to expand surveillance to include indicators of capacity-building investments and interventions to allow policy makers to make more informed decisions about investments in public health.

Background: The Canadian Heart Health Initiative began in 1987 as an 18-year undertaking to address the epidemic of cardiovascular disease in Canada. There is growing recognition in Canada of the need for an integrated approach to prevention that addresses common risks for many chronic diseases., Context: Research and intervention activities of the Canadian Heart Health Initiative have shifted toward chronic disease prevention and health promotion. This study explores the contributions of the Canadian Heart Health Initiative to document how single-disease strategies can evolve into integrated chronic disease prevention efforts., Methods: Key informant interviews were conducted with project researchers and health system stakeholders from seven Canadian Heart Health Initiative provincial projects. A review of provincial health policy documents was also performed., Consequences: Findings indicate that the Canadian Heart Health Initiative projects contributed to public health capacity development, including coalition and partnership building, and development of health knowledge and resource infrastructure. The Canadian Heart Health Initiative projects helped put chronic disease prevention issues onto local and provincial health agendas and provided community-based models to help develop public health policies., Interpretation: Experience with the Canadian Heart Health Initiative shows the need for integrated health programs to build on existing infrastructure. Other requirements for integrated chronic disease prevention programs include shared goals, partnerships at various policy levels and in multiple sectors, ongoing information sharing, and funding that is flexible and long-term.

In this article, the authors present an empirical example of triangulation in qualitative health research. The Canadian Heart Health Dissemination Project (CHHDP) involves a national examination of capacity building and dissemination undertaken within a series of provincial dissemination projects. The Project's focus is on the context, processes, and impacts of health promotion capacity building and dissemination. The authors collected qualitative data within a parallel-case study design using key informant interviews as well as document analysis. Given the range of qualitative data sets used, it is essential to triangulate the data to address completeness, convergence, and dissonance of key themes. Although one finds no shortage of admonitions in the literature that it must be done, there is little guidance with respect to operationalizing a triangulation process. Consequently, the authors are feeling their way through the process, using this opportunity to develop, implement, and reflect on a triangulation protocol.