Academic-clinical Partnership Research Articles

Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis as a Methodological Framework in Academic–Clinical Partnership Evaluation

A method called multi-attribute utility analysis (MAUA) provides a decision-making framework that facilitates comparative analysis of multiple real-world decision alternatives with unique complex attributes. Utility analysis as a measure of effectiveness has been minimally used by educational researchers to date, despite clear relevance in complex decision-making. To illustrate its viability, the application of MAUA was modeled for two example academic programs with diverse partnership priorities as a form of assessing academic–clinical partnership alignment. Simulated application indicates MAUA may be successfully utilized as an evidence-based methodological framework. The presented example is illustrative of the wide-spanning potential for this approach in different contexts, as predicted and recommended by experts in the field. Evaluators are encouraged to collaborate in new ways and strive to produce tangible, solution-oriented approaches to address key challenges and demonstrate the value of sound evaluation practices.

Transforming nursing assessment in acute hospitals: A cluster randomised controlled trial of an evidence-based nursing core assessment (the ENCORE trial)

BackgroundPatient safety is threatened when early signs of clinical deterioration are missed or not acted upon. This research began as a clinical-academic partnership established around a shared concern of nursing physical assessment practices on general wards and delayed recognition of clinical deterioration. The outcome was the development of a complex intervention facilitated at the ward level for proactive nursing surveillance. MethodsThe evidence-based nursing core assessment (ENCORE) trial was a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial. We hypothesised that ward intervention would reduce the incidence of patient rescue events (medical emergency team activations) and serious adverse events. We randomised 29 general wards in a 1:2 allocation, across 5 Australian hospitals to intervention (n = 10) and usual care wards (n = 19). Skilled facilitation over 12 months enabled practitioner-led, ward-level practice change for proactive nursing surveillance. The primary outcome was the rate of medical emergency team activations and secondary outcomes were unplanned intensive care unit admissions, on-ward resuscitations, and unexpected deaths. Outcomes were prospectively collected for 6 months following the initial 6 months of implementation. Analysis was at the patient level using generalised linear mixed models to account for clustering by ward. ResultsWe analysed 29,385 patient admissions to intervention (n = 11,792) and control (n = 17,593) wards. Adjusted models for overall effects suggested the intervention increased the rate of medical emergency team activations (adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.314; 95 % confidence interval 0.975, 1.773), although the confidence interval was compatible with a marginal decrease to a substantial increase in rate. Confidence intervals for secondary outcomes included a range of plausible effects from benefit to harm. However, considerable heterogeneity was observed in intervention effects by patient comorbidity. Among patients with few comorbid conditions in the intervention arm there was a lower medical emergency team activation rate and decreased odds of unexpected death. Among patients with multimorbidity in the intervention arm there were higher rates of medical emergency team activation and intensive care unit admissions. ConclusionTrial outcomes have refined our assumptions about the impact of the ENCORE intervention. The intervention appears to have protective effects for patients with low complexity where frontline teams can respond locally. It also appears to have redistributed medical emergency team activations and unplanned intensive care unit admissions, mobilising higher rates of rescue for patients with multimorbidity. Trial registration numberACTRN12618001903279 (Date of registration: 22/11/2018; First participant recruited: 01/02/2019).

An Exploration of Support for Clinical Education Partners

Introduction. Effective academic–clinical partnerships require a greater understanding of how academic programs can best support clinical education (CE) faculty. This study aimed to determine resources and support that clinical partners need. Review of Literature. As the number of physical therapist (PT) programs, cohort sizes, and CE weeks have risen, so has demand for CE sites. Conversely, staffing reductions, increased administrative duties, and rising productivity expectations have decreased the time available for clinical instruction. To promote a successful CE experience, there must be a renewed understanding of CE faculty needs. Subjects. Clinical education faculty affiliated with any of the 8 contributing programs from the Ohio–Kentucky Consortium participated in survey research (n = 24) and subsequent interview (n = 4) and focus group (n = 6) research. Methods. Constructivist grounded theory design was used to explore the needs of CE faculty. Academic and clinical partners developed the initial survey and used survey results to establish interview questions. The investigators iteratively assessed data saturation and clarity of results of coded survey, interview, and focus group data to determine whether the study's aims of identifying CE faculty needs had been met. Results. The aggregated results yielded 5 main themes of Director of Clinical Education support for CE faculty needs: student readiness for CE experience; effective academic–clinical partner communication; collaborative management of exceptional students; judicious standardization of CE processes; and provision of CE faculty development resources. Discussion and Conclusion. Clinical education faculty have noted challenges that affect their ability to mentor students. They want academic programs to be more collaborative and proactive with communication, resources, and support. Future research should address aids and barriers to proactive communication, resource provision, and academic–clinical partner collaboration.

Intensive Case Management to Reduce Hospital Readmissions: A Pilot Quality Improvement Project.

Hospital readmissions burden the U.S. health care system, and they have negative effects on patients and their families. The primary aim of this study was to pilot an intensive case management (ICM) intervention to reduce 30-day hospital readmissions. A secondary aim was to obtain patient- and caregiver-reported reasons for readmission. The setting was a vertically integrated health care system located in Northern California. This pilot quality improvement project occurred over a 4-month period. The intervention was delivered by master's degree students in nurse case management through an academic-clinical partnership. Patients hospitalized with a 30-day readmission were offered the ICM intervention. A total of 36 patients were identified and 20 accepted. Patient and/or caregiver was interviewed to identify reasons for their readmission. Data were collected about pre-/post-health care utilization including subsequent 30-day readmission. Mixed methods were used to analyze the findings. Thirteen of 20 enrolled patients received the weekly ICM intervention for at least 30 days. Seven declined further contact before 30 days. Patient-reported reasons for readmission included being discharged too soon, poor communication among providers and with patients/families, lack of understanding about disease management and/or treatment options, and inadequate support. Several patients believed that their readmission was unavoidable due to the complexity of their illnesses. We compared 30-day readmissions for those who participated in and those who declined the ICM intervention, finding that those who received the ICM intervention had a lower readmission rate than those who did not receive the intervention (35% vs. 37.5%).

Expanding the evidence for cross-sector collaboration in implementation science: creating a collaborative, cross-sector, interagency, multidisciplinary team to serve patients experiencing homelessness and medical complexity at hospital discharge.

Patients with medical and social complexity require care administered through cross-sector collaboration (CSC). Due to organizational complexity, biomedical emphasis, and exacerbated needs of patient populations, interventions requiring CSC prove challenging to implement and study. This report discusses challenges and provides strategies for implementation of CSC through a collaborative, cross-sector, interagency, multidisciplinary team model. A collaborative, cross-sector, interagency, multidisciplinary team was formed called the Buffalo City Mission Recuperative Care Collaborative (RCU Collaborative), in Buffalo, NY, to provide care transition support for people experiencing homelessness at acute care hospital discharge through a medical respite program. Utilizing the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) framework and feedback from cross-sector collaborative team, implementation strategies were drawn from three validated ERIC implementation strategy clusters: 1) Develop stakeholder relationships; 2) Use evaluative and iterative strategies; 3) Change infrastructure. Stakeholders identified the following factors as the main barriers: organizational culture clash, disparate visions, and workforce challenges related to COVID-19. Identified facilitators were clear group composition, clinical academic partnerships, and strategic linkages to acute care hospitals. A CSC interagency multidisciplinary team can facilitate complex care delivery for high-risk populations, such as medical respite care. Implementation planning is critically important when crossing agency boundaries for new multidisciplinary program development. Insights from this project can help to identify and minimize barriers and optimize utilization of facilitators, such as academic partners. Future research will address external organizational influences and emphasize CSC as central to interventions, not simply a domain to consider during implementation.

Academic-Clinical Collaborations to Build Undergraduate Nursing Education in Hospice and Palliative Care.

With the current shortage of hospice/palliative care (HPC) workforce, there is an urgent need to train a generation of nurses with clinical competency in HPC to ensure equitable access and optimal care for patients living with serious illness or at the end of life. The recent demand for HPC teaching in nursing education calls for innovation in establishing clinical placements. Palliative care nursing experts in New York State were surveyed between June and August 2022 about facilitators of academic-clinical partnerships between nursing schools and clinical settings. Inductive content analysis of open-ended responses revealed six major interconnected themes: (a) Increase Awareness of HPC in the Nursing Program, (b) Build a Relationship With Administrators, (c) Look Beyond Acute Care Partnerships, (d) Offer Incentives, (e) Develop Direct Care Experiential Opportunities, and (f) Develop Non-Direct Care Experiential Opportunities. Findings provide rich insights into key considerations for successful collaboration between nursing schools and clinical sites. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49(6), 13-18.].

Academic-Practice Partnership in Research: Meeting the Gold Standard.

Academic-clinical partnerships describe relationships between 2 groups to advance mutual interests, particularly collaboration on research projects. In this column, members of the Association of Leadership Science in Nursing discuss a 10-year partnership between a nurse professor at a southeast university and a nurse scientist at a health system in the southeast United States, reflections on meeting the criterion standard in our research pursuits, and lessons learned.

Revisiting Clinical-Academic Partnerships for Better Cancer Care and Research.

Author Affiliations: School of Nursing and the Abramson Cancer Center at Pennsylvania Hospital, Penn Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose. Drs Kagan and Lynch are joint first authors, listed alphabetically. Correspondence: Sarah H. Kagan, PhD, RN, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, 418 Curie Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Developing a co-production strategy to facilitate the adoption and implementation of evidence-based colorectal cancer screening interventions for rural health systems: a pilot study

BackgroundEvidence-based colorectal cancer screening (CRCS) interventions have not been broadly adopted in rural primary care settings. Co-production of implementation strategies through a bundled approach may be promising in closing this gap by helping rural healthcare practitioners select and implement the best fitting CRCS interventions to the local context. This paper describes the process and outcomes of co-development and delivery of the bundled implementation strategy to improve adoption and implementation of CRCS interventions with two rural clinics.MethodsWe used a bundle of implementation strategies with a core focus on academic-clinical partnership development (strategy 1) and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles (strategy 2) to identify clinical partner interests/preferences on delivery methods and content needed to facilitate intervention identification and implementation that improves CRCS. We also developed an implementation blueprint for each clinic (strategy 3) through an online blueprinting process based on adapted “Putting Public Health Evidence in Action” (PPHEA) training curriculum. Clinic physicians and staff (n = 7) were asked to evaluate the bundled approach based on overall reactions and perceptions of innovation characteristics using 5-point Likert scale. After completing the bundled approach, we collected implementation outcomes and limited intervention effectiveness of the CRCS evidence-based interventions (EBIs) developed through the process.ResultsOur co-production strategy yielded a prototype online blueprinting process consisting of 8 distance-learning PPHEA modules that guide selection and implementation of EBIs tailored to CRCS. Modules were delivered to clinic participants with minor adaptations, using PDSA cycle to improve quality of module contents and formats. Overall, participants in both clinics reported positive reactions toward the bundled approach. Both clinics reported improvements in how they perceived the characteristics of the innovation (the bundled approach) to tailor selected CRCS EBIs. As a result of the bundled strategies, each clinic selected and adopted specific EBI(s) with the varying degrees of implementation and CRCS outcomes.ConclusionsThe bundle of implementation strategies used were feasible and acceptable in rural primary care practices to facilitate the use of EBIs to improve CRCS.

Development, implementation, and evaluation of Teach Back curriculum for community health workers.

Teach Back is a commonly used communication method to improve patient understanding and retention of health information. The method has been shown to be effective in improving patient and healthcare system outcomes, including patient health literacy and hospital readmissions. Community health workers (CHWs) are frontline healthcare workers who can help address patient health and social needs associated with hospital readmissions. However, a gap exists in Teach Back curricula and training methods reflecting the scope of work for CHWs. The objective of this training was to provide CHWs with didactic information and skill building practice curriculum focused on the integration of Teach Back into clinical patient interactions, care coordination, and follow-up support. A multidisciplinary team of academic and clinical partners at a large academic health university developed, implemented, and evaluated a 3-week pilot Teach Back training with CHWs through a quality improvement approach. The CHWs reported overall satisfaction with the training and instructors. The academic clinical partnership allowed the training to be tailored to the daily clinical workflow as reflected in the CHWs agreement that the training was relevant and practical. With the repeated exposure to Teach Back each week, the CHWs also reported an increase in confidence and conviction in using Teach Back. Additional implementation and evaluation of the training curriculum for CHWs is needed to gain further insights into Teach Back and training best practices and translation into practice.

The Clinical Academic Partnership for Excellence: Lessons Learned From a Clinical Faculty Onboarding Program.

The Clinical Academic Partnership for Excellence (CAPE) is an innovative program designed to provide ongoing education, mentorship, and support for novice clinical faculty. The aims of this study were to (1) understand the competency of clinical faculty in their teaching, (2) discover the usefulness of CAPE modules, and (3) explore the benefits of the CAPE program. An electronic survey using Likert-style and open-ended questions was administered to clinical faculty who participated in CAPE over 2 years. Participants were able to operationalize the curriculum, objectively evaluate students, and communicate effectively using CAPE content. Benefits included collaboration with faculty, evidence-based teaching, and debriefing. Eighty-eight percent of participants planned to teach for the program again. The CAPE program is an innovative approach to bridging the gap between clinical practice and academia. It may be a sustainable solution for faculty retention, satisfaction, and quality education.

The impact and implications of virtual supportive cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic: integrating patient and clinician perspectives.

PurposeMany cancer centers made rapid shifts in supportive care delivery modalities at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Improving virtual supportive cancer care requires deeply understanding both patient’s and clinician’s experiences. We aimed to integrate the perspectives of clinicians and patients to describe the transition to virtual supportive cancer care during COVID-19.MethodsIn clinical-academic partnership between a multi-site cancer care center in the Northeastern USA and a school of nursing, we conducted a study using dimensional analysis method. Theoretical sampling drove recruitment of patients and clinicians who engaged in virtual supportive cancer care from March 15, 2020 to December 15, 2020. In this sub-analysis, we coded the dimensional analysis data from semi-structured interviews using a descriptive approach with inductive conventional content analysis.ResultsWe interviewed 17 clinicians, 18 patients, and 3 care partners about their experiences. We integrate patient and clinician perspectives in four in vivo categories: “When COVID hit,” “Not an IT expert,” “Those little moments,” and “The mothership.”ConclusionThe findings uncover shared patient and clinician fears of missing or sub-optimal care at the onset of COVID-19, technological and relational challenges to engaging in care, and the mixed impacts of virtual care on access, convenience, and efficiency. This analysis suggests concrete action items to improve virtual supportive care for patients and clinicians. The findings corroborate the importance of convenience, access, and efficiency as care quality indicators and suggest potential to emphasize the clinician-patient relationship as an additional indicator of care quality.

Partnerships to Advance Excellence in Physical Therapy Education and Practice: The Time Is Now.

A practice owner is on a morning run. He counts 20 emails from academic programs by the end of his run. He’s confused, then realizes, “It’s March 1st, the annual clinical education request date. I have significant relationships with only 3 of these people.” His thoughts turn to how he will make decisions about clinical education this year. “The staff is busy…what will I say to them to advocate? I need to hire 2–4 more clinicians…who will advocate on the clinic’s behalf?” There has been recent attention on physical therapist education in the United States arising from factors including the evolving health care and higher education climates and student debt.1–3 These factors have placed quality and sustainability of our profession in jeopardy because of the impact on training of physical therapists and the pipeline for workforce development across all sectors. The term “partnership” has emerged to describe relationships between academic and clinical stakeholders4 and has been strongly associated with excellence in physical therapist education and practice.2,5 We challenge the general assumption that these are true partnerships because of perceptions that these relationships are unbalanced.5 Given the financial realities under which both health care and education must operate, it is imperative that we advance these relationships to adapt to current and future conditions and collectively strategize educational and workforce solutions. The purpose of this Point of View is to call for action in evolving academic-clinical partnerships to prepare and sustain our workforce and meet our social contract.

Factors affecting physiotherapy clinical education: Perceptions of students and clinical educator

Introduction. Clinical education is the cornerstone of physiotherapy education. Clinical educators play a pivotal role in shaping students’ attitude towards their future role as physiotherapist. But the implementation of physiotherapy clinical education varies significantly between institutions. Research has shown several factors influencing the clinical education. Aim. To explore the factors affecting physiotherapy clinical education. Methods. This research used mixed-methods approach and recruited participants through purposive and convenience sampling. Data was collected through a survey using questionnaire and face-to-face interviews. Thirty-four physiotherapy students completed a questionnaire after attending 12 weeks of clinical placements. Twenty-six clinical educators and 9 students participated in the interview. Descriptive statistics including frequency percentage, median and percentiles were used for quantitative data analysis. Thematic analysis method was used for qualitative data analysis. Results. Quantitative study found greater student satisfaction in clinical education. But the qualitative study identified several factors affecting clinical education in the context of this study. These factors include student interest, learning style, culture, and ability to cope with challenges. In addition, clinical educator workload, teaching strategies, curriculum knowledge, academic-clinical partnership, peer learning, placement model and expectations were the other factors that influenced physiotherapy clinical education. Conclusions. The findings of this study are useful to physiotherapy clinical educators, students, and faculty. It provides insight into various factors affecting physiotherapy clinical education. Furthermore, it recommends evidence-based strategies to neutralize those factors influencing clinical education.

Toward Transformative Engagement: Ethical and Effective Clinical-Research Partnerships in Cancer Care Nursing

Background: Clinical nurses have the potential to conduct impactful practice-focused research, enhancing institutional research cultures and improving patient outcomes. However, collaboration between clinical nurses and academic nurse scientists can be challenging and resource intensive. Objective: Describe how transformative clinical-research partnership facilitates achieving mutual goals for clinical nurses and academic nurse scientists. Methods: The Virtual Supportive Cancer Care Research (ViSuCaRe) Study, a multisite, mixed-method study, was conducted through a clinical-research partnership to explore the experience of patients and clinicians engaging in supportive cancer care via telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: We describe research and quality improvement products and identify how the ViSuCaRe Study addressed three common challenges to clinical-research partnerships. (1) Study conception, construction, and development prioritized frontline clinical staff involvement; (2) Data collection and analysis engaged clinical partners in recruitment, interviewing, data management, coding, and theory-building; (3) Subsequent analyses, products, and dissemination efforts emerged from evolving needs of clinical partners and shifted in accordance with their arising priorities. Conclusions: Using an approach to collaboration centered on transformative engagement offers clinical nurses and academic nurse scientists. Implications for Practice: Frontline clinical staff should have consistent and meaningful roles in developmental, analytic, and dissemination-directing processes. Supporting clinical nurses’ engagement in research activities will enable them to identify and address problems that impact practice, enhance research cultures, and promote evidence-based practice. Foundational: Using a model of transformative engagement, rooted in community engagement, allows nurses to carry out collaborative practice-focused research. Clinical-academic partnerships offer an economical approach to enhancing clinical nurses’ research capacities.

Increasing Exposure to Primary Care Nursing Through Curriculum Revision and an Innovative Nursing Minor.

The changing health care environment dictates a workforce competently trained to address chronic health care issues particularly in primary care settings. Curriculum analysis identified deficits in primary care education and the need to create academic opportunities that bridge the gap between primary health care needs and nursing preparation. An existing academic-clinical partnership was leveraged to create a primary care minor for BSN students designed to provide a comprehensive adjunct to the traditional baccalaureate nursing curriculum. A total of 19 credits and 150 clinical hours are necessary to complete the minor. Additionally, the BSN curriculum was revised to include primary care for all students. A total of 45 students and 26 preceptors have participated in the elective courses. Eight students have completed the minor with 11 additional students in the final course. A nursing curriculum with increased primary care exposure may improve workforce preparation and address health care needs.

The Effect of On-Site Visits From the Physical Therapy Clinical Instructor Perspective: A Mixed-Methods Approach

Introduction and Review of the Literature. Strong academic–clinical partnerships are necessary to conduct effective, sustainable clinical education for entry-level physical therapy students. On-site visits are conducted by the entry-level physical therapist education program at affiliated clinical sites with identified clinical instructors. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to explore the experience and impact on-site visits have on the academic–clinical partnership as perceived by physical therapy clinical instructors. Subjects. Participants were licensed physical therapists who have acted as a clinical instructor for at least 1 student from the study program. Ninety-five participants completed an anonymous survey and 14 participated in concurrent semi-structured interviews during the survey period. Methods. A concurrent, triangulation mixed-methods design was used to integrate quantitative and qualitative approaches in data analysis. A validated, novel survey was developed to assess perspectives of partnership using ordinary linear regression equations. A transcendental phenomenological approach explored perspectives of partnership after an on-site visit. The Partnership Success theoretical framework was used to define and frame the concept of partnership within this study. Results. Key findings showed that on-site visits demonstrated a statistically significant increase in perceptions of commitment among participants. On-site visits also appear to improve communication, result in stronger connections between the clinical site and physical therapist education program, and enhance resource sharing based on clinical instructor's interviews. Additionally, program alums demonstrate higher perceptions of trust and communication behaviors as compared with nonalums. Discussion and Conclusion. On-site visits are viewed favorably by clinical instructors who felt the visits positively contribute to the academic–clinical partnership and contribute to elements of the academic–clinical partnership, particularly in the area of perceived commitment. Program alums have different perceptions of partnership than nonalums.

Nurse practitioners in home-based prepalliative care demonstrate an innovative, value-based approach to end-of-life care planning.

Nurse practitioners (NPs) demonstrate value-based, home-based primary health care (HBPC) to home-bound patients with high disease burden at reduced cost. The research questions were as follows: (a) Does patient-centered, prepalliative care delivered by HBPC NPs decrease number of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits and increase patient satisfaction? and (b) What are the criteria for patients to receive end-of-life (EOL) discussions by NPs? This was a quasi-experimental, retrospective two-group design with a convenience sample of 233 HBPC patients from an academic clinical partnership compared with 234 clinic patients matched on age and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score over 4 years. Measures included signed advanced directives (ADRs), medical orders of life-sustaining treatment (MOLST) forms, number and length of home visits, hospitalizations, and ED visits after diagnosis. Chi-square analyses and general linear models using a Poisson distribution were conducted. Home-based primary health care patients had higher disease burden, statistically higher CCI scores, and signed ADR and MOLST agreements more often than clinic patients with significantly fewer hospitalizations and ED visits, and longer visits with providers. Patients receiving HBPC for prepalliative, EOL illness benefit from more time to discuss the difficult factors surrounding access to care for those with life-threatening illnesses. Recipients of prepalliative HBPC by NPs could require fewer provider visits, hospitalizations and ED visits, patient satisfaction, and a potential decrease in health care spending at EOL.

Journey to a new era: An innovative academic-practice partnership.

Successful academic-clinical partnerships are mutually beneficial for academic nursing and clinical organizations, supporting the long-term success of nursing programs while simultaneously improving patient outcomes. Advocated by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing in their 2016 report, Advancing Healthcare Transformation: New Era for Academic Nursing, this position paper provides six actions for transforming academic nursing. However, developing sustainable academic-practice models has proven challenging despite this roadmap, as research has not substantiated their benefits. This article describes an innovative academic-practice model that transitioned advanced practice registered nurses practicing at Le Bonheur Children's Hospital to full-time faculty, with a continued primary clinical practice role, in the College of Nursing at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center. We present the origin, development, and implementation of this academic-practice partnership model, offering recommendations for its replication by other universities and clinical agencies on this journey. Creating a sustainable model requires a shared vision, buy-in at all levels, frequent and transparent communication, planning that considers the individual policies of the partnering agencies, and persistence despite leadership changes. Two years into the partnership and remaining intact despite critical leadership changes within the clinical agency, the next phase of the relationship will permit us to document the model's impact on academic and clinical outcomes.

Collaborating to Integrate Education and Practice: A Model of a Physical Therapy Academic–Clinical Partnership

Background and Purpose. Strong academic–clinical partnerships have been advocated to optimize the training of the next generation of health professionals and to best meet the needs of patients and society. Despite the benefits of partnerships, there is a lack of literature describing successful models for collaboration between physical therapist (PT) schools and academic medical center hospitals. The purpose of this article was to describe the formal partnership between the Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences (DPTHMS) and Shirley Ryan AbilityLab in Chicago, Illinois. Method/Model Description and Evaluation. The partnership is presented through the lens of D'Amour's 4-dimensional model of collaboration highlighting 4 critical dimensions of collaboration: shared goals and activities, internalization, formalization, and governance. Outcomes. The establishment of this partnership has fostered the institutions' achievement of mutual goals supporting their interconnected visions and missions. Examples of the collaboration's shared goal and activities include: the tripling of clinical education experiences for professional Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students; establishment of 2 post professional PT residency programs; proliferation of DPT teaching opportunities for Shirley Ryan AbiltyLab clinical PTs with formal university academic appointments for 6 Shirley Ryan Ability Lab PTs; and clinical appointments for 7 of 34 eligible DPTHMS faculty members. The internalization dimension is evidenced by regularly scheduled communications; promotion of opportunities for mutual acquaintanceship through shared boards and teams; socialization opportunities; and trust-building across institutions. The primary example of formalization is the legal collaboration agreement signed in 2013 and amended in 2019. Partnership governance is achieved through a structure of designated liaisons, shared boards, and regular interinstitutional leadership meetings. Discussion and Conclusion. D'Amour's structuration model describes predictors for successful interinstitutional clinical–academic partnerships. The model's 4 collaboration dimensions facilitate the assessment of partnership success for both established partnerships and for institutions in the planning stage of such collaborations.