To summarize ways that networks of community-based organizations (CBO), in partnership with public health departments, contribute to community recovery from disaster.

The study was conducted using an online survey administered one and 2 years after Hurricane Sandy to the partnership networks of 369 CBO and the New York Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. The survey assessed the structure and durability of networks, how they were influenced by storm damage, and whether more connected networks were associated with better recovery outcomes.

During response and recovery, CBOs provide an array of critical public health services often outside their usual scope. New CBO partnerships were formed to support recovery, particularly in severely impacted areas. CBOs that were more connected to other CBOs and were part of a long-term recovery committee reported greater impacts on the community; however, a partnership with the local health department was not associated with recovery impacts.

CBO partners are flexible in their scope of services, and CBO partnerships often emerge in areas with the greatest storm damage, and subsequently the greatest community needs. National policies will advance if they account for the dynamic and emergent nature of these partnerships and their contributions, and clarify the role of government partners. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:635–643)

The purpose of this article was to describe how the Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) and other health care coalitions conceptualize and measure progress or success and to identify strategies to improve coalition success and address known barriers to success.

We conducted a structured literature review and interviews with key leaders from 22 HPPs and other coalitions. Interview transcripts were analyzed by using constant comparative analysis.

Five dimensions of coalition success were identified: strong member participation, diversity of members, positive changes in members’ capacity to respond to or recover from disaster, sharing of resources among members, and being perceived as a trendsetter. Common barriers to success were also identified (eg, a lack of funding and staff). To address these barriers, coalitions suggested a range of mitigation strategies (eg, establishing formal memoranda of agreement). Both dimensions of and barriers to coalition success varied by coalition type.

Currently, the term health care coalition is a one-size-fits-all term. In reality, this umbrella term describes a variety of different configurations, member bodies, and capabilities. The analysis offered a typology to categorize health care coalitions by primary function during a disaster response. Developing a common typology that could be used to specify capabilities or functions of coalitions may be helpful to advancing their development. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:690–697)