Table 2 CFIR construct definition adaptations for Project TRUST organized by domaina
CFIR Construct | TRUST operationalization of construct definition |
|---|---|
I. Intervention Characteristics | |
Adaptability | Degree that participatory processes allowed for intervention adaptations to meet stakeholder needs |
Complexity | Perceived complexity and flexibility of the TRUST intervention components (i.e., professional development, YPAR, and PPAR) |
General Intervention Logistical Complexityb | Perceived complexity and flexibility of the TRUST research and evaluation components |
Design Quality & Packaging | Perceived quality in how TRUST was presented in terms of materials, process, and potential impact/return on investment |
II. Outer Setting | |
Participant Needs & Resources | Extent to which school/district understands and is oriented to the needs and preferences of students |
Cosmopolitanism | Degree to which school leadership is networked with other schools and/or community organizations |
External Policy & Incentives | External mandates that exerted pressure on schools to participate in TRUST (e.g., school improvement status and other federal, state or district policies) |
III. Inner Setting | |
Social Structural Characteristics | School contextual and social organizational components, such as demographics, school structure, degree of staff turnover, and concentration of decision-making autonomy |
Networks & Communications | Degree to which people involved in TRUST had strong working relationships |
Quality of Formal Communicationsc | The nature and quality of formal and informal communications within the school and between TRUST and the school |
Social Capitalc | The quality and the extent of relationships within schools and across partnering organizations |
Culture | School culture regarding student and parent voice |
Implementation Climate | A school’s capacity to change school practices and/or procedures |
Tension for Change | Degree to which leaders see the identified issues as problematic and their openness to address them |
Compatibility | Alignment with leadership beliefs about how to address the proposed recommendations, and how TRUST fits with existing school workflows and systems |
Relative Priority | Importance of TRUST in comparison to other initiatives |
Organizational Incentives & Rewards | Extrinsic incentives that TRUST offered for participants (e.g., awards, salary, performance reviews, stature, respect) |
Readiness for Implementation | Indicators of school’s commitment to implement TRUST |
Leadership Engagement | Commitment, involvement, and accountability of those in school leadership roles with TRUST components |
Available Resources | Level of resources within the schools themselves that can be dedicated for TRUST implementation and ongoing operations |
Access to Information & Knowledge | Ease of access of school members without direct TRUST affiliation to digestible information about TRUST and how to incorporate it into work tasks |
IV. Characteristics of Individuals | |
Knowledge & Beliefs About the Intervention | School leadership and staff familiarity with, attitudes toward, and value placed on TRUST |
Agencyd | School leadership and staff socioculturally-mediated capacity to implement TRUST components |
Individual Stage of Change | Stage of change of school leadership and staff as they progress toward skilled, enthusiastic, & sustained use of the intervention |
Individual Identification with the Organization | How school leadership and staff perceive their relationship and degree of commitment to their school |
V. Process | |
Planning | Degree to which implementation methods were developed in advance and the quality of these methods |
Engaging | Degree to which appropriate individuals inside and external to the school were attracted to and involved with TRUST implementation |
Opinion leaders | Individuals in the school who had formal or informal influence on the attitudes and beliefs of their colleagues relative to TRUST implementation |
Formally Appointed Internal Implementation Leaders | Individuals within the school who were formally appointed for implementing TRUST |
Champions | Individuals who dedicated themselves to supporting, marketing, and driving through TRUST implementation |
External Change Agents | Individuals affiliated with an outside entity that formally (& positively) influenced or facilitated TRUST implementation decisions |
Executing | Degree to which TRUST implementation was carried out according to plans |
Reflecting & Evaluating | Degree to which participants debriefed throughout TRUST implementation as a means of promoting shared learning and improvements |