Skip to content
University of Maryland LibrariesDigital Repository at the University of Maryland
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   DRUM
    • Theses and Dissertations from UMD
    • UMD Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   DRUM
    • Theses and Dissertations from UMD
    • UMD Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Coordinated HIV Prevention across Domestic Jurisdictional Borders

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Bellows_umd_0117E_16548.pdf (5.388Mb)
    No. of downloads: 15

    Date
    2015
    Author
    Bellows, Denise Marie
    Advisor
    Boekeloo, Bradley O
    DRUM DOI
    https://doi.org/10.13016/M2VT6Z
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Problem: Urban HIV epidemics often span State and County jurisdictional borders; evidence suggests that borders create barriers to coordinated approaches to HIV prevention and treatment. No systematic assessment has been conducted to understand domestic borders and how they are perceived and navigated by HIV prevention stakeholders. Objective: The specific aims of this investigation are to: Examine the extent to which there are disconnects between services available to vulnerable populations and expertise of HIV Prevention Organizations (HPOs). Describe collaboration between HPOs across a jurisdictional border. Determine whether the Health Services Research Utilization Model (HSUM) explains organizational barriers to coordinated HIV prevention across jurisdictional borders. Methods: Data from a survey of HPOs were analyzed to explore populations served by HPOs, organizational expertise with vulnerable populations, HPOs perceived benefits and barriers to cross-jurisdictional collaboration, past and current cross-jurisdictional collaboration, and efficacy for cross-jurisdictional grant-writing. Correlations between these constructs were assessed with Spearman’s Rho and jurisdictional differences were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test statistic. The matrix method of literature review (MMLR) explored organizational barriers to coordinated HIV prevention across jurisdictional borders and the HSUM as a framework. Results: While 13 of 15 HIV-vulnerable populations were served by over 50% of the HPOs in the study, only 2 of these 13 populations were served with high expertise by more than half of the HPOs in the sample - giving credence to community leader’s concerns regarding misalliance between whom HPOs serve and with whom they have high expertise. For a majority of HPOs, inadequate staffing and resources prevented cross-jurisdictional grant applications. Cross-jurisdiction grant-writing efficacy was associated with fewer perceived barriers (r = -0.642, p<0.01). The HSUM captured all of the organizational barriers to cross-jurisdictional collaboration for HIV prevention, and the MMLR added 14 sub-constructs to the HSUM and operationalized the model for addressing organizational barriers to HIV prevention across jurisdictional borders. Conclusions: The identification of barriers to cross-jurisdictional collaboration and the validation of a framework for addressing these barriers may aid researchers and healthcare professionals in resolving inefficiencies in HIV prevention services in metropolitan areas that cross jurisdictional borders.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/1903/17200
    Collections
    • Behavioral & Community Health Theses and Dissertations
    • UMD Theses and Dissertations

    DRUM is brought to you by the University of Maryland Libraries
    University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7011 (301)314-1328.
    Please send us your comments.
    Web Accessibility
     

     

    Browse

    All of DRUMCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister
    Pages
    About DRUMAbout Download Statistics

    DRUM is brought to you by the University of Maryland Libraries
    University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7011 (301)314-1328.
    Please send us your comments.
    Web Accessibility