Table 4.

Results of the DISC-analyses based on the transcribed interviews and document analysis

	Education	Health Promotion	Government
External factors	Policies and regulations Inclusive education: this puts a strain on individual pupil care in regular schools inhibiting attention for health promotion and prevention at group level Attitudes financing bodies Lump sum financing for schools Additional finances for pupil care in schools in deprived areas	Policies and regulations - Attitudes financing bodies - Introduction of free market mechanisms in health promotion and welfare feeds feelings of competition among partners, especially at the advisory level	Policies and regulations - Decentralization of tasks and regulations from national to regional and local governments
Context	Existing collaborations - A collaborative history with youth health care and youth monitoring with limited results so far - For schools in deprived areas a collaborative history with youth welfare with mixed evaluations - Safe schools working group with municipality, police, justice and public health Organizational characteristics - Autonomy of teaching staff - No planning and reporting of HP actions Research power - Not present locally Relevant local policies - Safe schools policy - Youth welfare in schools	Existing collaborations - The public health institute has positive collaborative experiences with all HP partners. - Limited collaborative experiences exists among the partners themselves - Participation in safe schools working group Organizational characteristics - Innovation minded management - Limited internal support for HP Research power - Around half of the HP organizations involved have academic research experience. Relevant local policies - Youth welfare in schools as pilot welcomed by schools - Regional shared care networks for youth policy	Existing collaborations - Negative experiences prevail with the institute providing most of the schoolBeat-leadership. - Positive attitude towards another schoolBeat-partner - Neutral towards other parties involved. - Coordinator of the safe schools working group Organizational characteristics - Influenced by political changes - Bureaucratic Research power - A lack of expertise and direct interest in generating and using academic evidence. Relevant local policies - Regional shared care networks for youth policy
Change Management	Innovation perspective - Based on educational expertise Change strategies - Not actively applied Network development - Inclusion of leadership of a primary schools' representative and a care coordinator would be desirable	Innovation perspective - Based on empirical evidence combined with existing expertise among partners Change strategies - Network meetings - Education of HP staff Network development - More active support from HP management is desired.	Innovation perspective - not clearly defined Change strategies - open for information regarding the collaborative process Network development - wish to start sharing information with members of local and regional politics
Project management	No participation of schools in the project organization at this stage.	Whom: actors filled in by the HP organizations only What & How: tasks & structure described by the coordinator and agreed upon by the management of partner organizations	No official governmental participation One civil servant participated in the project group but started as education support staff before changing jobs and was allowed by his new employer to keep participating once joining an education department at municipality level.
Support Perceptions Intentions Actions	Perceptions: goals/importance - Quality improvement - Creation of a pupil care support continuum Perceptions: win-win - Workload sharing regarding pupil care with organizations outside the school - School health profiles add to internal school assessments for planning purposes. Perceptions: consensus - Tailored support from a single point of contact - Unease regarding the attention not yet paid to individual pupil care Perceptions: involvement - Direct involvement of public service is missed by some Intentions: willingness to trust - Seems present based on previous experiences with the HP partners Intentions: willingness to commit - Based on perceived added value most school administrators are willing to commit Actions: innovative actions and adaptations - Appointment of prevention teams in the first schools - High level of participation in evaluation Overall: sufficient	Perceptions:goals/importance - Quality improvement - Strengthening HP within schools - Creation of a HP support continuum Perceptions: win-win - Workload sharing provides a win to all HP organizations involved Perceptions: consensus - Consensus is present regarding the basic outline of the methodology - Tension is present regarding specific elements of the methodology Perceptions: involvement - Direct involvement of schools and public service is missed by some Intentions: willingness to trust - Feelings of competition among HP advisors and managers Intentions: willingness to commit - Moderate to high, with major differences among organizations Intentions: willingness to change - Is present, but partners are keen on experiencing some positive results first and do not know yet what exact changes would be necessary Actions: innovative actions and adaptations - Appointment of schoolBeat – support staff to schools by the four key-partners - Description of support options in unified format by all partners Overall: sufficient/good	Perceptions: goals/importance - Improvement of efficiency and quality of HP and pupil care support - Deleting overlap in HP support Perceptions: win-win - Unclear about the value for the municipalities involved Intentions: willingness to trust - Benefit of the doubt based on the core ideas of the collaborative subject: whole-school health promotion Intentions: willingness to commit - Moderate, as long as requirements set at the start are met Actions: innovative actions and adaptations - Nearly absent - Limited participation in evaluation Actions: resources - The collaborative process needs to produce a methodology which entails no additional costs to local governments Overall: sufficient/good
Coordinated school health promotion	Idea – start of a project	Main focus on project (beyond idea phase)	Main focus on project (beyond idea phase)