Authors

  1. Phillips, Gregory II PhD, MS
  2. Lindeman, Peter MA
  3. Janulis, Patrick PhD
  4. Johnson, Amy K. PhD, MSW
  5. Beach, Lauren B. JD, PhD
  6. Stonehouse, Patrick MA
  7. Kern, David BA
  8. Boegner, Joshua MPH
  9. Raman, Anand
  10. Greene, George J. PhD

Abstract

Context: The public health response to the HIV epidemic has increasingly centered on the uptake of and adherence to biomedical interventions (eg, pre-exposure prophylaxis [PrEP], treatment as prevention [TasP]). Traditionally, various community and health care organizations have worked to address different stages of PrEP or TasP care.

 

Objective: To understand the importance of how HIV prevention organizations providing these services interact to provide the comprehensive care needed for successful HIV and PrEP continuum outcomes.

 

Design: Utilizing an Organizational Network Survey, network ties were examined between formal and informal partnerships among community agencies.

 

Setting: This study examined community agencies in the current HIV prevention system in Chicago.

 

Participants: Seventy-two community agencies across the Chicago metropolitan area.

 

Main Outcome Measures: Using network analysis, this study examined ties between community agencies and assessed perceptions of collaboration and competitiveness in the current HIV prevention system in Chicago.

 

Results: Overall, respondents reported that the current environment of HIV prevention in Chicago was extremely (18.8%), moderately (37.5%), or somewhat collaborative (37.5%) and extremely (68.8%) or moderately competitive (25.0%). The majority of partnerships reported were informal, with less than a quarter being formalized. That said, those who reported formal partnerships reported being satisfied with those relationships. There was a significantly negative association between density and perceived collaboration-grantees experiencing a more collaborative also reported less dense networks.

 

Conclusion: These findings indicate that, despite perceived competitiveness, agencies are willing to work together and create a cohesive HIV prevention and treatment system. However, more work should be done to foster an environment that can support the formation of partnerships, to improve a coordinated response to providing HIV care, and sustain mutually beneficial relationships.