Table 3.

RE-AIM Summary of Quantitative and Qualitative Evaluation

RE-AIM Domain	Definition	Quantitative	Qualitative
Reach	Participation rate of the targeted population	How does the study population at each site reflect general population characteristics? What were the participation rates and dropout rates across sites? What were the reasons for screening ineligibility? Among those who were eligible, how many successfully signed consent and proceeded to randomization? Of those who enrolled, what percentage completed the PFW primary outcome measure without the need for further outreach from the study staff?	Participant Interview: How did you learn about the study? What were your reasons for participating in the study? Did the Covid-19 pandemic influence your decision to participate in the study? Did you face any challenges in enrolling in the study?
Effectiveness	The impact of the intervention on important outcomes	Did PFW Scale repeated measures improve for participants in the ad hoc and active arms? Was there a dose effect among participants whereby those who engaged with navigation services with increased frequency and/or increased duration showed subsequent improvement on their PFW scores?	Participant Interview: What type of guidance and/or referrals did the FN provide? Did these help with your overall financial wellness? Did you address issues with the FN that you were not expecting to talk about? How many of the referrals/resources from the FN did you utilize?
Adoption	Institutions ’ uptake of the intervention	Was there a difference in uptake of the intervention between different institutions? Were institutions receptive to internal referrals (referring patients back for services)?	FN Interview: How well did the intervention assist patients in managing their financial distress while meeting their financial obligations to the institution?
Implementation (FN Perspective)	Intervention integrity, quality, and consistency of delivery	Was there a change in the frequency and/or the length of the encounters through the duration of the study between the participants? Was there a change in the frequency and/or the length of the encounters between different FN? Was there a difference in the types or number of referrals made between different FN when addressing similar issues?	FN Interview: Did FN feel that there were implementation differences between the different sites? Did the FN feel that there was consistency of delivery between the participants? Did the FN feel that the intervention changed over the duration of the study? Did the FN navigator feel that some financial problems were easier to address then others? Was there a perceived difference in providing the intervention based on the FN age and/or experience?
Implementation (Participant Perspective)	Intervention integrity, quality, and consistency of delivery	Did participants in the active and ad hoc groups prefer email, phone or video? In the active group how many reminders did it take to successfully schedule the check-ins? What was the rate of rescheduling or failure to complete the scheduled checkin? In the ad hoc group how often did participants reach out to the FN to discuss financial concerns?	Participant Interview: What were your overall interactions with the FN? Did you feel comfortable talking about financial issues? For those in the active arm: In addition to the four-scheduled check-ins did you also reach out in between the check-ins? Did you like having scheduled meetings or prefer to check in as needed?
Maintenance (FN Perspective)	Sustainability of the intervention over time	Were the weekly FN meetings and research staff meetings adequate in helping to maintain the structure and quality of the intervention? If not, did their frequency or structure need to be increased and/or changed during the study?	Study Team Interview: Did the FN feel that their level of training was adequate over time? Did the study team observe drift during the intervention? Where the study meetings effective in identifying drift and maintaining intervention fidelity? Did the FN feel that executing the intervention became easier over time due to gained experience? How did it feel to navigate scheduling, increasing enrollment, and participants at different time-points during the study?
Maintenance (Participant Perspective)	Sustainability of the intervention over time	What proportion of the active participants completed the intervention? How were they different from non-completers? What were the completion rates of their scheduled check-ins? Among all participants were the study measures completed, as scheduled, with or without further outreach by the study staff? Of those enrolled in the intervention arms, how many completed check-ins with navigators? How many check-ins were completed? Of those enrolled in the ad hoc arm, how many reached out to the study team?	Participant Interview: How did you feel about the duration of the study? Did it provide enough time to address your financial concerns?

Adapted from RE-AIM framework, presented by Ma et al., 2015. [40]

Abbreviations: FN, financial navigation/navigators.