Assessing the Impacts of Creating Active Schools on Organisational Culture for Physical Activity

Abstract

Background: National and international guidance recommends whole-school approaches to physical activity, but there are few studies assessing their effectiveness, especially at an organisational level. This study assesses the impact of the Creating Active School's (CAS) programme on organisational changes to physical activity provision. Methods: In-school CAS leads completed a 77-item questionnaire assessing school-level organisational change. The questionnaire comprised 19 domains aligned with the CAS framework and COM-B model of behaviour change. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Tests assessed the pre-to-nine-month change. Results: >70% of schools (n= 53) pre-CAS had inadequate whole-school physical activity provision. After nine months (n= 32), CAS had a significant positive effect on organisational physical activity. The positive change was observed for: whole-school culture and ethos, teachers and wider school staff, academic lessons, physical education (PE) lessons, commute to/from school and stakeholder behaviour. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary evidence that CAS is a viable model to facilitate system-level change for physical activity in schools located within deprived areas of a multi-ethnic city. To confirm the results, future studies are required which adopt controlled designs combined with a holistic understanding of implementation determinants and underlying mechanisms.

Initial insights into the impact and implementation of Creating Active Schools in Bradford, UK

“…Our ndings align with a school-based physical activity initiative in Ireland where adoption was also incentivised through rewards (45). While incentives positively in uenced initial buy-in, a concurrent CAS evaluation identi ed no differences in programme effects between schools with and without nancial incentives (25). Concerning intervention characteristics, other adoption reasons aligned with schools perceiving CAS as a professional development programme that met their own needs and priorities to enhance children's health outcomes.…”

“…The Creating Active School (CAS) framework (16) responded to calls for the co-production of schoolbased activity promotion programmes (17) by involving nine stakeholder groups in the initial design process. The framework informed the rigorous development of the CAS programme, embedding behavioural (22) and implementation science (23,24) in the design, delivery and evaluation of a programme focussed on organisational change for physical activity in schools (25). The CAS programme is underpinned by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a conceptual framework that organises implementation domains across ve domains: (i) characteristics of individuals (school stakeholders), (ii) inner setting (schools), (iii) outer setting (beyond the school), (iv) intervention characteristics, and (v) implementation processes (23).…”

Initial insights into the impact and implementation of Creative Active Schools in Bradford, UK

“…1). For further programme details refer to Helme et al, (25). The programme was developed by a CAS strategic lead based in Bradford with the continuous support of the CAS national team (Yorkshire Sport Foundation, University of Bradford, and Bradford Institute for Health Research).…”

“…Once recruited, schools took part in the four-stage annual CAS cycle (see 25). In brief, this included (i) inschool CAS leads completing the pro ling tool to assess current whole-school physical activity provision, (ii) in-school CAS leads completing a Planning for Change document using the APEASE quality assurance criteria (36) to identify evidence-informed initiatives, (iii) Champions supporting the implementation of individual and collective school initiatives, and (iv) schools evaluating initial impact to inform the next annual cycle.…”

“…The CAS programme is underpinned by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a conceptual framework that organises implementation domains across ve domains: (i) characteristics of individuals (school stakeholders), (ii) inner setting (schools), (iii) outer setting (beyond the school), (iv) intervention characteristics, and (v) implementation processes (23). Despite preliminary evidence on the effectiveness of CAS (25), little is known about the determinants that in uence initial implementation, especially with schools located in diverse, multi-ethnic and underserved areas within a large UK city, such as Bradford (26). Moreover, while CFIR is widely adopted in healthcare research (27)(28)(29)(30), there has only been a limited use within whole-school physical activity and wellness programmes (31,32).…”