VPAT checklist total score per organisation at six time points
| Partnership analysis tool total score† | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Partner organisation* | Survey 1 (pre 1st meeting) | Survey 2 | Survey 3 | Survey 4 | Survey 5 | Survey 6 |
| A | 126 | 141 | 132 | 134 | 144 | 143 |
| B | 135 | 140 | 140 | 136 | 135 | 143 |
| C | 126 | 151 | 160 | 151 | 164 | 152 |
| D | 126 | 126 | 126 | 146 | 116 | 137 |
| E | 128 | 127 | 124 | 132 | 140 | 142 |
| F | 123 | 131 | 141 | 139 | 143 | NA‡ |
| G | 112 | 127 | 129 | 124 | 135 | 130 |
| Mean (SD) | 125.1 (6.9) | 134.7 (9.5) | 136.0 (12.4) | 137.4 (9.0)§ | 139.6 (14.2)§ | 141.2 (7.3)§ |
| VPAT partnership strength | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
*To protect the anonymity of the partners, they have been randomly assigned letters in the above table. †The VPAT20 suggests three recommended categories of partnership level: 3: partnership based on genuine collaboration had been established and the challenge is to maintain its impetus and build on the current success (127–175); 2: the partnership is moving in the right direction, but it will need more attention if it is going to be really successful (85–126); 1: the whole idea of a partnership should be rigorously questioned (35–84).
‡No response for survey 6 from this organisation (the data have been analysed after replacing this score by survey 5 score of the same organisation, ie, 143).
§Comparison with first survey, p<0.05.
VPAT, Victorian Health Promotion Foundation Partnership Analysis Tool.