TABLE 3.

CFIR Valence Matrix

CFIR DOMAIN/Construct COMMUNITY PARTNER GROUP	MFD LEADERSHIP V1.0	MFD LEADERSHIP V2.0	MFD STAFF V1.0	MFD STAFF V2.0	ED STAFF	AP STAFF	TP STAFF	Safe Station CLIENTS V1.0	Safe Station CLIENTS V2.0
SAFE STATION PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS
Relative Advantage	+		+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Design Quality and Packaging	+		+		+	o	+	+	+
Evidence Strength and Quality	+	+	o		+	−	+	+	+
Cost	o	−						+	+
Complexity	+						o
INNER SETTING
RFI: Available Resources	−	−	−	−		o	−
IC: Tension for Change	+		+			+	+
IC: Compatibility	+	+	+		o
Networks and Communications	−	−	−	−
RFI: Access to Knowledge and Information	o	o	o	o
Culture	+		+
OUTER SETTING
Client Needs and Resources	+		+		+	+	+
Cosmopolitanism	+	+	o	−	o	o	o
SAFE STATION STAFF CHARACTERISTICS / ATTITUDES
Knowledge and Beliefs about Safe Station/ Safe Station Clients	o		o	−		o	o
Self-Efficacy	+		o	o
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS w/in MFD
Planning	−	−	−

CFIR = The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, MFD = Manchester Fire Department, AP = ambulance partner, TP = treatment partner, ED = emergency department, IC = Implementation Climate, RFI = Readiness for Implementation

(+) – Facilitator: consensus among analysts that construct surfaced pervasively as a positive influence in the organization/work processes/implementation efforts.

(−) – Barrier: consensus among analysts that construct surfaced pervasively as a negative influence in the organization/work processes/implementation efforts.

(o) – Neutral: consensus among analysts that construct surfaced as a neutral influence (i.e., mentioned generically without evidenc e of +/− influence, and/or credible interviewees contradict each other)

Empty cells – data were either not collected relevant to the construct for a community partner group OR there were insufficient data (e.g., consensus among analysts that coding was not pervasive enough to establish valence).

^*Constructs that did not surface in at least two datasets were not included in the matrix (e.g., trialability, peer pressure); n = 23/39.