Skip to main content

Table 1 Framework for documenting RB-TPP programme implementation and data sources

From: Mixed-methods process evaluation of a residence-based SARS-CoV-2 testing participation pilot on a UK university campus during the COVID-19 pandemic

Programme implementation questions used to guide the documentation of programme implementation

Process Evaluation Data Sources

Testing Service

Quantitative

Qualitative

RB-TPP Engagement and design

RB-TPP Implementation

Student Survey

Student Ambassadora Interviews

Staff Interviews

Student Participant Focus Groups

Programme design

1. Who were the target participants? What was the uptake and reach?

✓

 

✓

   

2. What were the target settings? Did settings change over time?

✓

✓

    

3. What theoretical model/theory-of-change were the strategies based on?

✓

     

3. What essential elements were to be delivered in the programme?

✓

✓

    

Testing service provision

4. What selection process was used to identify the provider? What were the credentials of providers?

✓

     

5. What information did the testing service providers communicate to students (what was the content and format, and were there any changes over time?)

✓

 

✓

✓

✓

✓

Recruitment to RB-TPP

6. How were students recruited as participants?

✓

     

7. What was the nature of the relationship between the student participants and the researchers or institutions involved in the programme?

✓

     

Tailoring, messaging, incentives

8. Which behavioural components are selected?

✓

     

9. What are the reasons for that selection? (what goals are targeted)?

✓

     

10. What, if any, other goals and strategies are proposed by programme leaders and ambassadors supporting uptake, engagement and adherence?

✓

  

✓

  

Programme delivery

11. What method was used to specify and direct the implementation?

 

✓

  

✓

 

12. How long were participants involved?

✓

✓

    

13. What were the testing and social behaviour expectations?

✓

✓

  

✓

 

14. To what extent were the essential elements delivered? How were they monitored/measured?

 

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

15. Were there any planned changes made to the RB-TPP while it was in progress? Why?

 

✓

  

✓

 

16. Were there any unplanned changes? What happened?

 

✓

 

✓

✓

✓

Context

17. What was the culture and overarching context of the participating agencies at the start of the intervention?

✓

✓

 

✓

✓

✓

18. Were there any changes/initiatives during the programme that may have affected responses to the intervention?

 

✓

 

✓

✓

✓

19. What were the immediate contextual conditions around the testing?

 

✓

  

✓

 

Participation

20. Who was invited to participate: numbers, locations, campuses, institution(s)?

✓

     

21. How many potential students engaged in RB-TPP? Who were they?

 

✓

✓

✓

 

✓

22. What proportion of targeted students engaged (one PCR test) or were fully compliant (all PCR tests offered)1?

 

✓

✓

✓

 

✓

23. Did key people (public health leaders or topic specialists) support or advocate the programme?

 

✓

  

✓

 

Responses to programme activities

24. How did students participate in components of the programme?

 

✓

✓

✓

✓

✓

25. How satisfied were participants with components of RB-TPP?

  

✓

✓

✓

✓

26. Did students or staff identify or anticipate any changes in response to RB-TPP programme activities?

  

✓

✓

✓

✓

Intervention improvements

27. What improvements to the intervention design and/or implementation are suggested by this data?

  

✓

✓

✓

✓

29. What lessons might be relevant to other interventions and settings?

  

✓

✓

✓

✓

  1. Note: aStudent Ambassador Role: peer-to-peer recruitment (engagement) and implementation of social distancing (adherence). Testing: 1non-invasive saliva polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) tests for SARS-CoV-2 RNA with samples collected and analysed in the University’s laboratories