Bringing evidence based programs to scale was a major initial impetus for the development of the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF). The ISF demonstrates the importance of the Support System in facilitating the uptake of innovations in the community (the Delivery System). Two strategies that members of the Support System commonly use are training-of-trainers (TOT) models and technical assistance (TA). In this article, we focus on the role of the Support System in bringing evidence-based programs (EBPs) to scale in the Delivery System using a case example, with special attention on two strategies employed by Support Systems-training-of-trainers (TOT) and proactive technical assistance. We then report on findings from a case example from the Promoting Science Based Approaches to Teen Pregnancy Prevention project that furthers our conceptualization of these strategies and the evidence base for them. We also report on the limitations in the literature regarding research on TOTs and proactive TA and provide suggestions for future research on TOTs and proactive TA that will enhance the science and practice of support in the ISF.
Among the continuing challenges naturalistic evaluators face is the practical need for defensible conclusions. Guba and Lincoln's external evaluation audit represents one response to this need. In this article, we share our firsthand experiences with such audits, including the evaluation context and the audits'purpose, procedures, and findings. From these experiences, we offer suggestions for future audit practice and discuss several controversies surrounding the audit concept. We conclude with the call for further discussion on these and other controversies, but also with an interim consensus that the audit represents a viable metaevaluative tool for enhancing the internal quality, the external defensibility, and thus the stature and utilization of naturalistic evaluation.
Table of contentsIntroduction to the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration: advancing efficient methodologies through team science and community partnershipsCara Lewis, Doyanne Darnell, Suzanne Kerns, Maria Monroe-DeVita, Sara J. Landes, Aaron R. Lyon, Cameo Stanick, Shannon Dorsey, Jill Locke, Brigid Marriott, Ajeng Puspitasari, Caitlin Dorsey, Karin Hendricks, Andria Pierson, Phil Fizur, Katherine A. ComtoisA1: A behavioral economic perspective on adoption, implementation, and sustainment of evidence-based interventionsLawrence A. PalinkasA2: Towards making scale up of evidence-based practices in child welfare systems more efficient and affordablePatricia ChamberlainA3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementationGregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. WillgingA4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiencesMaria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-GuentherA3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementationGregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. WillgingA4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiencesMaria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-GuentherA5: Efficient synthesis: Using qualitative comparative analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research across diverse studiesLaura J. Damschroder, Julie C. LoweryA6: Establishing a veterans engagement group to empower patients and inform Veterans Affairs (VA) health services researchSarah S. Ono, Kathleen F. Carlson, Erika K. Cottrell, Maya E. O’Neil, Travis L. LovejoyA7: Building patient-practitioner partnerships in community oncology settings to implement behavioral interventions for anxious and depressed cancer survivorsJoanna J. Arch, Jill L. MitchellA8: Tailoring a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy implementation protocol using mixed methods, conjoint analysis, and implementation teamsCara C. Lewis, Brigid R. Marriott, Kelli ScottA9: Wraparound Structured Assessment and Review (WrapSTAR): An efficient, yet comprehensive approach to Wraparound implementation evaluationJennifer Schurer Coldiron, Eric J. Bruns, Alyssa N. HookA10: Improving the efficiency of standardized patient assessment of clinician fidelity: A comparison of automated actor-based and manual clinician-based ratingsBenjamin C. Graham, Katelin JordanA11: Measuring fidelity on the cheapRochelle F. Hanson, Angela Moreland, Benjamin E. Saunders, Heidi S. ResnickA12: Leveraging routine clinical materials to assess fidelity to an evidence-based psychotherapyShannon Wiltsey Sti...
There has been a recent groundswell of support in the American Evaluation Association' s Independent Consulting Topical Interest Group (IC TIG) for evaluating evaluators' work just as evaluators evaluate the work of their clients. To facilitate this self-evaluation, the IC TIG elected to create a peer review process that focuses on written evaluation products. Through participation in the resulting peer review model, evaluation colleagues engage in constructive and respectful critiques of their peers' evaluation reports. The process affirms strengths in written communication and identifies areas for growth. We are the principal architects and cochairs of the IC TIG Peer Review and in this chapter discuss the unique needs of independent evaluators for professional feedback and describe the model we have designed to work in the context of a community of independent evaluators. Other communities of independent evaluators may find this model or a variation of it useful for their own professional development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.