The aim of this study was to investigate expert consensus on barriers and facilitators to the organizational implementation of Father-Inclusive Practice (FIP) in child and family services to establish strategic priorities for implementation. An international panel of 56 experts in child and family service provision and father inclusion were surveyed using the Delphi technique. Three online questionnaires were used to gather opinions and measure experts’ levels of agreement in regard to factors that enable or hinder the organizational implementation of FIP. Survey design, analysis and interpretation was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Consensus was achieved for 46.4% (n = 13) statements. Eight barriers and five facilitators were identified as strategic priorities to organizational implementation of FIP. The key factors were related to the following CFIR themes: leadership engagement, access to information and knowledge, implementation climate, structural characteristics, networks and communication, client needs and resources, external policies and incentives, and reflecting and evaluating. The study findings suggest that issues related to central prioritization, top-down organizational processes and external policy context should represent priority areas for implementation. Our results prioritise methods for improving FIP by highlighting the key areas of organizational practice to be addressed by tailored implementation strategies.

Purpose: Service-level factors that influence father engagement within child and family services are not well understood due to diversity in research studies and evidence from different contexts. Accordingly, the aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesise available qualitative evidence across contexts to identify the common service-level barriers and facilitators of father engagement in child and family services.Methods: The following six databases were systematically searched: AMED, EMBASE, Medline, CAB Abstracts, PsycINFO, and Global Health). A screening process conducted by two independent reviewers identified twenty-three eligible qualitative studies. Results from the included studies were synthesised thematically.Results: Thematic synthesis identified seven main themes encompassing service-level barriers and facilitators to father engagement: practitioner factors; environment; marketing; resource factors; staff education; policy and practice guidelines; and evaluation.Conclusions: The findings show that father engagement is dependent on a mixture of top-down policies and procedures, as well as individual practitioner competencies. Addressing the barriers and prioritizing facilitators requires an overall service commitment to father-inclusive practice, that takes into account the organizational structure, policies, and procedures, and the skills and knowledge of the workforce.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate expert consensus on barriers and facilitators to the organizational implementation of Father-Inclusive Practice (FIP) in child and family services to establish strategic priorities for implementation.Methods: An international panel of 56 experts in child and family service provision and father inclusion were surveyed using the Delphi technique. Three online questionnaires were used to gather opinions and measure experts’ levels of agreement in regard to factors that enable or hinder the organizational implementation of FIP. Survey design, analysis and interpretation was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).Results: Consensus was achieved for 46.4% (n=13) statements. Eight barriers and five facilitators were identified as strategic priorities to organizational implementation of FIP. The key factors were related to the following CFIR themes: leadership engagement, access to information and knowledge, implementation climate, structural characteristics, networks and communication, client needs and resources, external policies and incentives, and reflecting and evaluating.Conclusions: The study findings suggest that issues related to central prioritization, top-down organizational processes and external policy context should represent priority areas for implementation. Our results prioritise methods for improving FIP by highlighting the key areas of organizational practice to be addressed by tailored implementation strategies.