Table 4.

Quality of implementation per implementation tool.

Implementation Tool	Target Group	Dose Delivered and Received Objective n (%)		Dose Received Subjective a n (%)		Satisfaction b Mean (SD)
Questionnaire school	Each school	Invited	10	-		3.56 (0.88)
		Started	9 (90.0%)
		Completed	9 (90.0%)
Questionnaire stakeholder	All stakeholders	Invited	46	-		3.40 (0.87)
		Started	34 (73.9%)
		Completed	24 (52.2%)
Canteen Scan	Each school	Invited	10	Used	3 (30%)	3.50 (0.66)
Advisory meeting and report	All stakeholders	Sent to	27	Received	19 (67.9%)	4.17 (0.44)
				Read	18 (64.3%)
Communication materials	All stakeholders	Given to the stakeholders present at the meeting		Received	17 (60.7%)	3.98 (0.23)
				Read	14 (50.0%)
Online community	All stakeholders	Invited	34	Subscribed	5 (17.86%)	2.61 (1.31)
		Subscribed	21 (61.8%)
		Read	17 (50.0%)
Newsletter (was sent 4 times)	All stakeholders	Sent to	34	Received	13 (46.4%)	3.35 (0.58)
		Average read	15.3 (45.0%) Range per newsletter 14–17	Read	9 (32.1%)
		Average click on topic	4.8 (14.1%) Range per newsletter 2–6
Students’ fact sheet	Each school	Sent to	10	Received	8 (80%)	4.31 (0.40)
				Read	6 (60%)

^a Dose received was measured by 1, 3, 5, or 6 questions, with a 5-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree). To calculate the percentage, the 24 persons who filled in the questionnaire were taken as 100%, except for the Canteen Scan and Students’ fact sheet were 10 persons who received these materials are 100%. ^b The questions to assess Satisfaction were answered by the stakeholders who used/read/completed the implementation tool. Satisfaction was measured by 1 to 6 questions, depending the implementation tool (see Supplementary Tables S1 and S2), with a 5-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree, 5 = totally agree).