Home / RHTP Hub / RHTP Partnership & Collaboration

RHTP Partnership & Collaboration

RHTP explicitly rewards collaboration. With ~1,800 LOIs submitted, many organizations are working on overlapping problems without knowing it. This page provides the tools to find partners, formalize agreements, and build collaborative structures.

This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute official RHTP guidance, legal advice, or compliance direction. Verify all information with the Alaska Department of Health and qualified professionals. Full Disclaimer.

Why Partnerships Matter for RHTP

The Alaska Department of Health received 160 external responses with 400+ project concepts during the planning phase. The program design favors proposals demonstrating collaborative relationships. RHTP is structured as a system-level transformation requiring coordination across providers, organizations, and regions.

Partnership Frameworks

Collective Impact Model

Requires five conditions: a common agenda, shared measurement systems, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and a backbone support organization. The NOSORH Community Development Toolkit provides detailed guidance for rural health settings.

Hub-and-Spoke Model

A regional hub (hospital or large clinic) coordinates with spoke facilities (community health centers, tribal clinics) across the region. RHTP technology investments can strengthen spokes through telehealth connectivity.

Shared Services Arrangements

Small organizations can pool resources for compliance infrastructure, IT systems, or administrative staff. One organization with federal grant experience can serve as the administrative backbone for multiple smaller partners.

Formalizing Partnerships

Key Distinction: Subrecipient vs. Contractor

Federal regulations (2 CFR 200.331) require every payment to be classified as a subaward or a contract:

  • Subrecipient: Carries out a portion of the RHTP program. Subject to same federal compliance requirements. Requires monitoring.
  • Contractor: Provides goods or services within normal business operations. Subject to procurement rules, not grant compliance.

Misclassification is a common audit finding.

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

Non-binding framework for collaboration. Include: purpose, roles, resource commitments, governance structure, duration, termination provisions.

Subaward Agreement

Legally binding. Must include all elements in 2 CFR 200.332: federal award identification, compliance requirements, indirect cost rate, access to records, closeout provisions, scope of work, and budget.

Data Sharing Agreement

Required when exchanging patient health information. Must comply with HIPAA. For Tribal Health Organizations, additional protections under tribal data sovereignty principles may apply.

Tribal Health Organization Partnership Protocols

Critical Context

Tribal Health Organizations serve approximately 44% of Alaska’s rural population. Any RHTP project in communities served by THOs should engage these organizations as partners. Key protocols:

  • Tribal consultation: Engage leadership early, not after plans are finalized. Many communities have formal consultation processes.
  • Data sovereignty: Tribal health data belongs to the tribe. Data sharing must respect tribal authority.
  • CHAP coordination: Projects intersecting with Community Health Aide services should coordinate through the relevant THO.
  • ISDEAA: THOs operate under federal authority giving them unique legal standing. Agreements should acknowledge this.

Consult with the Alaska Community Foundation for official guidance on partnership structures within the RHTP framework.