Table 3.
Core Implementation Facilitation (IF) Activities Identified by Expert Panel Members (N = 15)
| High Complexity Innovation | Low Complexity Innovatio | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-Implementation Phase | ||||
| Core IF activities | N (%) | Mean ‘importance’ score (range) | N (%) | Mean ‘importance’ score (range) |
| Action / implementation planninga | 15 (100%) | 13.0 (5–30) | 15 (100%) | 13.3 (5–20) |
| Engaging stakeholders, obtaining buy-ina | 14 (93%) | 14.8 (10–20) | 14 (93%) | 14.4 (10–20) |
| Identification/selection of local change agentsa | 14 (93%) | 12.3 (10–20) | 11 (73%) | 15.0 (10–30) |
| Data collection to assess context and baseline performancea | 13 (87%) | 12.2 (5–30) | 14 (93%) | 12.9 (8–30) |
| Describing/clarifying roles and responsibilitiesa | 10 (67%) | 7.3 (2–12) | 12 (80%) | 9.6 (5–15) |
| Administrative tasksa | 10 (67%) | 9.4 (5–15) | 11 (73%) | 7.7 (5–15) |
| Goal/priority settinga | 10 (67%) | 8.8 (5–11) | 10 (67%) | 9.1 (5–15) |
| Problem identificationa | 10 (67%) | 9.5 (5–15) | 10 (67%) | 8.5 (5–10) |
| Implementation Phase | ||||
| Problem-solvinga | 13 (87%) | 11.8 (5–15) | 13 (87%) | 11.5 (10–16) |
| Providing supporta | 13 (87%) | 9.6 (4–15) | 14 (93%) | 10.5 (5–20) |
| Conduct ongoing monitoring of program implementationa | 12 (80%) | 10.3 (5–15) | 13 (87%) | 14.2 (10–20) |
| Fostering organizational change: structurala | 10 (67%) | 10.4 (9–15) | 10 (67%) | 11.9 (7–20) |
| Administrative tasksa | 9 (60%) | 9.1 (5–15) | 9 (60%) | 9.0 (5–20) |
| Managing group/team processesb (approved in 3rd stage of expert panel) | 13 (87%) | 12.1 (5–20) | 8 (53%) | 9.5 (5–15) |
| Providing updates and feedbackb (approved in 3rd stage of expert panel) | 8 (53%) | 10.1 (10–11) | 13 (87%) | 12.1 (5–20) |
| Adapting program to local context without compromising fidelityb (approved in 3rd stage of expert panel) | 10 (67%) | 8.6 (5–10) | 5 (33%) | 6.6 (3–10) |
| Sustainment Phase | ||||
| Pulling back and letting sites take leada | 14 (93%) | 24.1 (10–40) | 14 (93%) | 28.6 (10–50) |
| Conduct ongoing monitoring of program implementationa | 12 (80%) | 12.9 (5–25) | 13 (87%) | 16.2 (10–25) |
| Providing updates and feedbacka | 9 (60%) | 17.8 (10–50) | 11 (73%) | 17.3 (10–40) |
| Providing supportb (approved in 3rd stage of expert panel) | 10 (67%) | 10.3 (5–20) | 8 (53%) | 9.4 (5–20) |
a
Approved as a core IF activity for fidelity monitoring by meeting the ≥ 60% super-majority threshold through the first two stages of the expert panel process
b
Approved as a core IF activity for fidelity monitoring in the 3rd stage of the expert panel process by meeting the ≥ 60% super-majority threshold on the final (Stage 3) panel vote. Implementation Phase: ‘Managing group/team processes’ (100% vote; 10/10); ‘Providing updates and feedback’ (60% vote; 6/10); and ‘Adapting program to local context without compromising fidelity’ (90% vote; 9/10). Sustainment Phase: Providing support (90% vote; 9/10)