Capacity building : just rhetoric, or a way forward in addressing health inequality?

Issue addressed: It is time to move beyond defining the problem of health inequality to taking action. The response required is complex and calls for system wide action. It is in this context that a discussion of increasing the capacity of the health system to respond to health inequality is both timely and essential. Methods: This paper looks at a capacity building framework that has been developed by the New South Wales Health Department and provides an example of a number of projects that have applied capacity building strategies. Conclusion: Addressing health inequality presents a significant challenge to health promotion practitioners. Emerging capacity building theory provides direction for strategies to build the capacity of a health system to address equity. It proposes a set of practical actions using the five focus areas of organisational development, workforce development, resource allocation, partnerships and leadership. So what?: A capacity building approach by itself will not provide the mandate and framework for the action that needs to be taken to address health inequality, but it helps to ensure that once potential solutions are identified the health system has the capacity to respond.

Can eLearning provide tools for capacity-building to improve performance in the nonprofit sector?

Can E-learning 2.0 provide a platform for improving performance in nonprofit organizations? It is argued that Web 2.0 technologies provide the tools that today’s students rely on in the learning environment. As such they may be the means to attract and retain learners in training and education programs designed to improve performance. E-learning delivered through a blended learning model has proven to be effective in corporate training and higher education. Can the interactive, collaborative model offered in E-learning 2 prove to be as effective? This paper reviews the literature on blended learning and capacity-building as background for a discussion of the potential that e-learning models enhanced by web 2.0 technologies have for expanding access to education and training and facilitating implementation of skills and knowledge gained in the workplace. We suggest that increasing training opportunities for staff and making nonprofit management education more accessible through online programs is not enough to meet the challenge. What is needed at this point is practicable education and training delivered in today’s user’s environment, that is online and “on the go.”

Mind the gap! : A discussion on the disparity between low and high income countries in the provision of mental health care and the implications for capacity building in Kenya’s nursing workforce.

About fourteen per cent of the global burden of disease has been attributed to mental, neurological and substance use disorders. A number of initiatives have been launched in recent years to respond to this, the World Health Organisation (WHO) introduced the Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) to address the widening gap between what is needed to provide adequate mental health services and what is currently available, especially in low and middle income countries where the gap is widest.
This discussion paper will focus on mental health nursing in Kenya, a country in East Africa with a population of 42 million people. Mental illness is common in Kenya with up to twenty five per cent prevalence rates, yet mental health services are sparse at the tertiary and primary care level and mental health remains a low budget and policy priority for the government. The aim of this paper is to raise participants’ awareness of the challenges of delivering mental health nursing care in low-income countries such as Kenya, and to explore possible solutions to the problem.

Ausaid and capacity building: sustainability of an education aid project

This thesis is concerned with the effects and sustainability of internationally funded schools in Indonesia that have been established by the AusAID. By exploring and reviewing the constraints in maintaining the sustainability of aid projects, this research provides an actual description of an education-based aid project in Indonesia in the post-funding period.

Principal led school improvement and teacher capacity building in the Barwon South Network : final report, May 2013

The period of interest for this report is the beginning of 2011 to the end of 2012. The period commenced when the Regional Network Leader of the Barwon South Network of schools in the Barwon South Region of the Department of Education and Early Childhood contacted the School of Education at Deakin University, Waurn Ponds Campus Geelong. The Regional Network Leader outlined a desire to engage with Deakin University to research a short-term-cycle model of school improvement to be implemented in the region. While the model was expected to be taken on by all schools in the region the research was limited to the 23 schools in the Barwon South Network with four schools to be investigated more closely for each of two years (2001 & 2012) – eight focus schools in total.

Many positive outcomes flowed from the implementation of short-term-cycle school improvement plans and their associated practices but there was wide variation in the nature and degrees of success and of the perception of the process. The research team asked the following questions of the data:

1. What aspects of the School Improvement Plan (SIP) approach were important for initiating and supporting worthwhile change?
2. What might we take from this, to provide guidance on how best to support change in teaching and learning processes in schools?

The School Improvement Plan (SIP) worked in a range of ways. At one level it was strongly focused on school leadership, and a need to improve principals’ capacity to initiate worthwhile teaching and learning processes in their schools. Underlying this intent, one might think an assumption is operation is that the leadership process involves top down decision-making and a willingness to hold staff accountable for the quality of their practice.

The second strong focus was on the translation into practice and the consequent effect on student learning, involving an emphasis on data and evidence led practice. Hence, along with the leadership focus there was a demand for the process of school improvement to reach down into students and classrooms. Thus, the SIP process inevitably involved a chain of decision-making by which student learning quality drove the intervention, and teachers responsible for this had a common view. The model therefore should not be seen as an intervention only on the principal, but rather on the school decision-making system and focus. Even though it was the principal receiving the SIP planning template, and reporting to the network, the reporting was required to include description of the operation of the school processes, of classroom processes, and of student learning. This of course placed significant constraints on principals, which may help explain the variation in responses and outcomes described above.

The findings from this study are based on multiple data sources: analysis of both open and closed survey questions which all teachers in the 23 schools in the network were invited to complete; interviews with principals, teachers and leaders in the eight case study schools; some interviews with students in the case study schools; and interviews with leaders who worked in the regional network office; and field notes from network meetings including the celebrations days. Celebrations days occurred each school term when groups of principals came together to share and celebrate the improvements and processes happening in their schools. Many of the themes emerging from the analysis of the different data sources were similar or overlapping, providing some confidence in the evidence-base for the findings.

The study, conducted over two years of data collection and analysis, has demonstrated a range of positive outcomes in at the case study schools relating to school communication and collaboration processes, professional learning of principals, leadership teams and classroom teachers. There was evidence in the survey responses and field notes from ‘celebration days’ that these outcomes were also represented in other schools in the network. The key points of change concerned the leadership processes of planning for improvement, and the rigorous attention to student data in framing teaching and learning processes. This latter point of change had the effect of basing SIP processes on a platform of evidence-based change. The research uncovered considerable anecdotal and observational evidence of improvements in student learning, in teacher accounts in interview, and presentations of student work. Interviews with students, although not as representative as the team would have liked, showed evidence of student awareness of learning goals, a key driver in the SIP improvement model. It was, however, not possible over this timescale to collect objective comparative evidence of enhanced learning outcomes.

A number of features of the short-term-cycle SIP were identified that supported positive change across the network. These were: 1) the support structures represented by the network leader and support personnel within schools, 2) the nature of the SIP model – focusing strongly on change leadership but within a collaborative structure that combined top-down and bottom-up elements, 3) the focus on data-led planning and implementation that helped drill down to explicit elements of classroom practice, and 4) the accountability regimes represented by network leader presence, and the celebration days in which principals became effectively accountable to their peers. We found that in the second year of the project, momentum was lost in the case study schools, as the network was dismantled. This raised issues also for the conduct of research in situations of systemic change.

Alongside the finding of evidence of positive outcomes in the case study schools overall, was the finding that the SIP processes and outcomes varied considerably across schools. A number of contextual factors were identified that led to this variation, including school histories of reform, principal management style, and school size and structure that made the short-term-cycle model unmanageable. In some cases there was overt resistance to the SIP model, at least in some part, and this led to an element of performativity in which the language of the SIP was conscripted to other purposes. The study found that even with functioning schools the SIP was understood differently and the processes performed differently, raising the question of whether in the study we are dealing with one SIP or many. The final take home message from the research is that schools are complex institutions, and models of school improvement need to involve both strong principled features, and flexibility in local application, if all schools’ interests in improving teaching and learning processes and outcomes are to be served.

Capacity-building in nonprofit organizations : Is there a blended learning paradigm for the sector?

Blended learning models are widely-used, successful training vehicles for e-learning and workplace training, in corporate as well as higher education environments. Increasingly, Web 2.0 applications, imbedded within blended learning models, are being recognized for their utility in these settings. Concern for the sustainability and relevance of nonprofit organizations has sharpened the interest in building effective capacity-building models for the sector. Can Web 2.0 technologies enhance capacity-building models in the Third Sector? Because blended learning is a remarkably adaptable and fluid model, its potential for transforming capacity-building models in the nonprofit sector is thought to be significant. This paper introduces the concept of transformational approaches to capacity-building and asks if blended learning paradigms that incorporate interactive next-generation technologies might strike a responsive chord in the sector. The authors present research to date on blended learning and capacity-building to lay the foundation for the introduction of one blended learning model for training and education in the nonprofit sector. While the authors suggest that blended learning, as it is evolving, is the key to driving innovation in capacity-building models, they recognize that tailoring blended learning to the audience is critical in achieving success. It is suggested that for optimal results, capacity-building efforts should be built on holistic approaches to the integration of individual self-actualization goals with mechanisms for organizational and sector empowerment, using the technologies imbedded with blended learning. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.

Capacity-building in nonprofit organizations using blended learning as a gateway to practitioner education

Experience to date in for-profit as well as in educational settings has demonstrated that blended learning models are effective training vehicles for online instruction and workplace training. Increasingly, technology is playing a critical role in how e-learning is being delivered. Concern for the sustainability and relevance of nonprofit organizations has heightened interest in building effective capacity-building models for the sector. Because blended learning is a remarkably adaptable and fluid model, its potential for transforming capacity-building models in the nonprofit sector can be significant. Are web-based technologies enhancing capacity-building models in the Third Sector? This chapter explores the use of blended learning models within different educational environments to provide the context for asking the question: can blended learning paradigms that incorporate interactive next-generation technologies be widely accepted and implemented in the Third Sector? To establish a baseline for future studies, researchers surveyed nonprofit practitioners in Western Pennsylvania, US and Victoria, Australia. Results from three surveys conducted in 2011 reflect an awareness of the value of web-based training and education for nonprofit practitioners, but do not provide evidence of widespread usage. © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved.