Table 1.

| Implementation model similarities and differences

Key similarities for both health plans
Eligibility data	Health plan data are used to generate lists of plan members due for screening
Mailing through a vendor	An independent vendor prepared and mailed the kits, thereby offloading this time-intensive activity from individual clinics and the health plans

Key differences	Centralized model/Washington	Collaborative model/Oregon
FIT kit return	Kits returned to central lab contracted through the health plan	Kits returned to clinics
Phone and mail reminders	Outreach through centralized vendor-supplied health coaches	Outreach through a variety of clinic/health plan staff or no phone outreach. Vendor mailed reminder postcards for all clinics.
Mailed materials	All members received the same FIT and explanatory information from the health plan via the vendor	Letters were co-branded by the health plan and the clinic, FIT type varied by clinic, and different materials (i.e., consent-to-treatment forms) were included depending on clinic
Lab results	Lab vendor sent FIT results to mail vendor. Mail vendor mailed a copy of the FIT results to the health plan and clinics.	Clinics received results directly and health plan does not receive FIT results
Follow-up care	Clinics needed to incorporate results into EHR for follow-up. Health plan provided phone follow-up to encourage members with positive FIT tests to see their primary care providers	Follow-up care followed usual clinic procedures

FIT fecal immunochemical testing.