Search results

Successful development of health and social care partnerships is contingent on the contribution of all stakeholder groups to overcome the ‘wicked’ issues that beset the field. This article explores four key issues, identified by a network of diverse stakeholders as vital to the future of health and social care partnerships, and proposes ways in which individuals and organisations from all stakeholder groups can support health and social care organisations to work together to deliver good outcomes to service users and their carers.

The personalisation agenda currently appears as a key strand of the Government's approach to health and social care services. On the face of it this offers an exciting new future where service users drive the way services are joined up, which for some may be welcome given the paucity of evidence to show that the organisationally‐driven partnership working of the past decade has delivered real and tangible outcomes for service users. There is some suggestion that in the future any talk about partnerships will be about this citizen‐state interaction, rather than one between health and social care agencies. This paper argues that there is a real danger in suggesting that personalisation negates the need for health and social care agencies to work together in partnership; instead this interface is more imperative than ever. In this paper we provide an overview of the debates around personalisation and partnership and set out the case why partnership should not be forgotten, and indeed will be key, in the success of the personalisation agenda.

The proposed chapter will focus on university partnerships for sustainable development, specifically in relation to the health and social care sector. As this is a burgeoning field of research and enterprise, this chapter would provide a valuable resource and much-needed exploration of how and with whom universities partner in terms of sustainability in health and social care.

The majority of universities have health sciences and social care departments delivering courses at undergraduate, postgraduate, and doctorate levels. As such, the chapter presents the range of opportunities for interdisciplinary learning and working, shares methods to foster social responsibility through partnerships between students, staff, clinicians, and service users, and acknowledges the prospect of lifelong learning that partnerships in sustainability can generate.

The purpose of this paper was to develop deeper insights into the practices enacted by entrepreneurial healthcare managers to enhance the implementation of a partnership logic in integrated care models for older adults.

A multiple case study design in two urban centres in two jurisdictions in Canada, Ontario and Quebec. Data collection included 65 semi-structured interviews with policymakers, managers and providers and analysis of key policy documents. The institutional entrepreneur theory provided the theoretical lens and informed a reflexive iterative data analysis.

While each case faced unique challenges, there were similarities and differences in how managers enhanced a partnership’s institutional logic. In both cases, entrepreneurial healthcare managers created new roles, negotiated mutually beneficial agreements and co-located staff to foster inter-organisational partnerships between public, private and community organisations in the continuum of care for older adults. In addition, managers in Ontario secured additional funding, while managers in Quebec organised biannual meetings and joint training to enhance inter-organisational partnerships.

This study has two main implications. First, efforts to enhance inter-organisational partnerships should strategically include institutional entrepreneurs. Second, successful institutional changes may be supported by investing in integrated implementation strategies that target roles of staff, co-location and inter-organisational agreements.

This article follows an earlier article in this journal (Goldman, 2010), examines the emerging government policy on integration and considers some of the implications for joint financing. Most primary care trusts (PCTs) and councils with adult social care responsibilities are engaged in joint financing and wider health and social care partnership arrangements. But, with the demise of PCTs and the growth in GP commissioning, there are issues and questions about the future of such arrangements. However, despite these organisational changes, partners must continue to be able to demonstrate the outcomes that integrated health and social care services are achieving.

There is currently much policy emphasis on both partnership working between health and social services in the UK and on the outcomes delivered by services. This article provides an account of two consecutive projects centred on these two themes. The first project, at the University of Glasgow, sought to address the lack of evidence about the outcomes delivered to service users by partnerships. Following from this project, the Joint Improvement Team of the Scottish Government commissioned the researchers to develop a toolkit to involve users and unpaid carers in performance management in community care in Scotland. The remit of this second project expanded during 2007 as it became linked with the development of the emerging National Outcomes Framework for community care in Scotland. This article outlines the outcomes‐based piloting work currently under way in Scotland.

In this paper, the Scottish Government's approach to improving outcomes for patients and service users by integrating health and social care planning and provision is described. The Scottish Parliament passed primary legislation in February 2014, which places requirements on Health Boards and Local Authorities to work together more closely than ever before. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper sets out the Scottish Government's legislative approach to integrating health and social care, based on previous experience of encouraging better partnership between health and social care working without legislative compulsion.

The Scottish Government has concluded that legislation is required to create the integrated environment necessary for health and social care provision to meet the changing needs of Scotland's ageing population.

The paper is confined to experience in Scotland.

Legislation is now complete, and implementation of the new arrangements is starting. Evaluation of their impact will be ongoing.

The new integrated arrangements in Scotland are intended to achieve a significant shift in the balance of care in favour of community-based support rather than institutional care in hospitals and care homes. Its social implications will be to support greater wellbeing, particularly for people with multimorbidities within communities.

Scotland is taking a unique approach to integrating health and social care, focusing on legislative duties on Health Boards and Local Authorities to work together, rather than focusing on structural change alone. The scale of planned integration is also significant, with planning for, at least, all of adult social care and primary health care, and a proportion of acute hospital care, included in the new integrated arrangements.

Unlike the rest of the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland has had a system of integrated health and social care since the early 1970s. Following devolution, the reconfiguration of services has strengthened this integration with a smaller number of trusts with responsibilities for all heath and social care. This article examines the current and planned operation of this more comprehensive form of integration of health and social care. It considers how this experience of integrated structures and working can inform approaches in other areas of the UK. Finally, it assesses the main achievements of this system and identifies remaining problems.

Within the space of three years, the Department of Health oscillated between a commitment to partnership working and the imposition of structural change in the pursuit of integrated care. The idea of care trusts which integrate health and social care functions acquired political currency, despite the absence of any evidence base to inform the model. This article urges caution and suggests that the partnership model deserves a chance to deliver results.