Search

INTRODUCTION: Implementation is influenced by factors beyond individual clinical settings. Nevertheless, implementation research often focuses on factors related to individual providers and practices, potentially due to limitations of available frameworks. Extant frameworks do not adequately capture the myriad organizational influences on implementation. Organization theories capture diverse organizational influences but remain underused in implementation science. To advance their use among implementation scientists, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories identified in our previous work into theoretical domains in the Organization Theory for Implementation Science (OTIS) framework. METHODS: The process of distilling organization theory constructs into domains involved concept mapping and iterative consensus-building. First, we recruited organization and implementation scientists to participate in an online concept mapping exercise in which they sorted organization theory constructs into domains representing similar theoretical concepts. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to produce visual representations (clusters) of the relationships among constructs in concept maps. Second, to interpret concept maps, we engaged members of the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) OTIS workgroup in consensus-building discussions. RESULTS: Twenty-four experts participated in concept mapping. Based on resulting construct groupings coherence, OTIS workgroup members selected the 10-cluster solution (from options of 7-13 clusters) and then reorganized clusters in consensus-building discussions to increase coherence. This process yielded six final OTIS domains: organizational characteristics (e.g., size; age); governance and operations (e.g., organizational and social subsystems); tasks and processes (e.g., technology cycles; excess capacity); knowledge and learning (e.g., tacit knowledge; sense making); characteristics of a population of organizations (e.g., isomorphism; selection pressure); and interorganizational relationships (e.g., dominance; interdependence). DISCUSSION: Organizational influences on implementation are poorly understood, in part due to the limitations of extant frameworks. To improve understanding of organizational influences on implementation, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories into six domains. Applications of the OTIS framework will enhance understanding of organizational influences on implementation, promote theory-driven strategies for organizational change, improve understanding of mechanisms underlying relationships between OTIS constructs and implementation, and allow for framework refinement. Next steps include testing the OTIS framework in implementation research and adapting it for use among policymakers and practitioners.

As persistent inequities in health gained increased attention nationally due to COVID-19 and racial justice protests in 2020, it has become increasingly important to evaluate both the process and outcomes associated with coalition-based efforts to address health inequities. "The Two Georgias Initiative" supports coalitions in 11 rural counties to (1) achieve greater health equity, (2) improve health and health care, (3) build healthier rural communities and improve social conditions that impact the health of rural populations, and (4) build community, organizational, and individual leadership capacity for health equity. Rural communities suffer significant health disparities relative to urban areas, and also experience internal inequities by race and poverty level. The evaluation framework for "The Two Georgias Initiative" provides a comprehensive mixed methods approach to evaluating both processes and outcomes. Early results related to community readiness and capacity to address health inequities, measured through a coalition member survey (n = 236) conducted at the end of the planning phase, suggest coalitions were in the preparation stage, with higher levels of readiness among coalition members and organizations/groups similar to the coalition members' own, lower levels among public officials and other leaders, and the lowest levels among county residents. In addition, coalition members reported more experience with downstream drivers (e.g., access to care) of health than upstream drivers (e.g., affordable housing, environmental or racial justice). By providing a logic model, evaluation questions and associated indicators, as well as a range of data collection methods, this evaluation approach may prove practical to others aiming to evaluate their efforts to address health equity.

Environmental justice (EJ) efforts aimed at capacity building are essential to addressing environmental health disparities; however, limited attention has been given to describing these efforts. This study reports findings from a scoping review of community-academic partnerships and community-led efforts to address environmental inequities related to air, water, and land pollution in the United States. Literature published in peer-reviewed journals from January 1986 through March 2018 were included, and community capacity theory was applied as a framework for understanding the scope of capacity-building and community change strategies to address EJ concerns. Paired teams of independent analysts conducted a search for relevant articles (n = 8452 citations identified), filtered records for content abstraction and possible inclusion (n = 163) and characterized selected studies (n = 58). Most articles implemented activities that were aligned with community capacity dimensions of citizen participation (96.4%, n = 53), community power (78%, n = 45), leadership (78%, n = 45), and networks (81%, n = 47); few articles identified a direct policy change (22%, n = 13), and many articles discussed the policy implications of findings for future work (62%, n = 36). This review synthesizes three decades of efforts to reduce environmental inequities and identifies strategic approaches used for strengthening community capacity.

Snacking occasions have increased in frequency and energy density in recent decades, with considerable implications for diet. Studies have linked presence of foods in the home with intake of those foods. This study examines home snack food inventories among a large sample of U.S. adults using latent class analysis findings to present latent classes of home snack food inventories and multinomial regression to model classes as correlates of percent of calories from fat. Participants (n = 4,896) completed an online household food environment survey including presence of 23 snack foods in the home and demographics. Less healthy snack foods were more commonly reported than healthier snack foods (M = 4.3 vs. M = 3.5). Among White and Latinx participants, high-income households reported greater numbers of both healthier and less healthy snack foods than lower income households, with larger income-based differences in inventory sizes for healthier snack foods. Latent class analysis revealed three classes by inventory size (Small, Medium, and Large) and three classes by inventory content (Healthy Snacks, Standard American, and Limited Standard American). Compared with the Small Inventory class, the Healthy Snacks class had lower caloric intake from fat (p = 0.002), the Large and Medium Inventory classes had much higher caloric intake from fat (p < 0.0001), and Standard American and Limited Standard American class members had somewhat higher caloric intake from fat (p < 0.0001, and p = 0.0001, respectively). Future research should explore the role of snacks in Americans' diets, their impact on diet quality and health, and how interventions can support healthy home food and snack food environments to foster healthy eating.

Coalitions and collaboratives are working to address many of the most pressing contemporary health and social issues. The articles in this special issue provide numerous insights into these complex collaborative processes across different contexts and focal issues. All emphasize and scrutinize the strategies that groups are using in their work. These strategies seek to navigate not only conventional notions of effectiveness but also the challenges of pursuing greater equity and justice. In this concluding article, we distill some of the key insights from these articles as a collective. This special issue on collaborating for equity and justice can serve as a launching point for new efforts by coalitions and researchers pursuing policy, systems, and structural changes, particularly those intent on addressing root causes of health and social disparities.

Community gardens offer numerous benefits, but there are also potential risks from exposure to chemical contaminants in the soil. Through the lens of the Theory of Planned Behavior, this mixed methods study examined community gardeners beliefs and intentions to conduct heavy metal soil testing. The qualitative component involved five focus groups of community garden leaders in Atlanta, Georgia. Qualitative analysis of the focus group data revealed that heavy metal soil contamination was not frequently identified as a common gardening hazard and several barriers limited soil testing in community gardens. The focus group results informed the development of a questionnaire that was administered to 500 community gardeners across the United States. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the soil testing intention was associated with attitude (aOR = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.34, 4.53), subjective norms (aOR = 3.39 95% CI: 2.07, 5.57), and perceived behavioral control (aOR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.10, 2.99). Study findings have implications for interventions involving community garden risk mitigation, particularly gardens that engage children and vulnerable populations.

INTRODUCTION E-cigarette and heated tobacco product (HTP) marketing often leverages digital media and points-of-sale (POS) and advertises risk reduction, including in Armenia and Georgia where male cigarette use rates are high. METHODS Using 2022 survey data from Armenian and Georgian adults (n=1468, mean age=42.92 years, 51.4% female; and past-month use of e-cigarettes 3.2%, HTPs 2.7%, and cigarettes 31.6%), multivariable linear regression examined 4 outcomes – e-cigarette and HTP use intentions and perceived risk (1=not at all, to 7=extremely) – in relation to past-month e-cigarette or HTP advertisement exposure via digital media, traditional media, and POS, controlling for covariates (country, age, gender, education level, relationship status, children, past-month cigarette and e-cigarette/HTP use). RESULTS E-cigarette and HTP use intentions were low (mean score=1.47, SD=1.39 each), while perceived risk was high (mean score=5.83, SD=1.6, and mean score=5.87, SD=1.56, respectively). Past-month exposure to e-cigarette and HTP advertisements, respectively, were 12.9% and 11.2% via digital media, 6.1% and 4.8% traditional media, and 22.5% and 21.1% POS. For e-cigarettes, ad exposure via digital media was associated with greater use intentions (β=0.24; 95% CI: 0.03– 0.44), ad exposure via traditional media (β= -0.32; 95% CI: -0.55 – -0.09) and POS (β= -0.30; 95% CI: -0.60 – -0.004) was associated with lower risk perceptions. For HTPs, ad exposure via digital media (β=0.35; 95% CI: 0.14–0.56) and POS (β=0.21; 95% CI: 0.04–3.63) was associated with greater use intentions, and ad exposure at POS was associated with lower risk perceptions (β= -0.23; 95% CI: -0.42 – -0.03). CONCLUSIONS Tobacco control efforts should monitor and regulate e-cigarette and HTP marketing, particularly via digital media which may effectively promote use, and via POS which may target and influence risk perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple evidence-based approaches (EBAs) exist to improve colorectal cancer screening in health clinics. The success of these approaches is tied to effective implementation. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the implementation of EBAs for colorectal cancer screening and clinic-level correlates of implementation in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). We conducted descriptive and cross-sectional analyses using data collected from FQHC clinics across seven states ( n = 51). A clinic representative completed electronic surveys about clinic characteristics (e.g., size, patient characteristics, and medical record system characteristics) and the implementation of Community Guide recommended EBAs (e.g., client reminders, small media, and provider assessment and feedback). We used bivariate Spearman correlations to assess clinic-level correlates with implementation outcomes. Most clinics were planning to implement, in the early implementation stages, or inconsistently implementing EBAs. No EBA was fully implemented by more than nine (17.6%) clinics. Clinic size variables were inversely related to implementation levels of one-on-one education; medical record variables were directly related to implementation levels of client and provider reminders as well as provider assessment and feedback; and rapid and timely feedback from clinic leaders was directly associated with implementation levels of four out of six EBAs. Given the varying levels of implementation, clinics need to assess current use of implementation strategies and improve effective program delivery to increase colorectal cancer screening among their patients. In addition, clinics should also consider how their characteristics may support or serve as a barrier to implementation in their respective settings.

ObjectiveTo operationalize constructs from each of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains and to present psychometric properties within the context of evidence-based approaches for promoting colorectal cancer screening in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).MethodsData were collected from FQHC clinics across seven states. A web-based Staff Survey and a Clinic Characteristics Survey were completed by staff and leaders (n = 277) from 59 FQHCs.ResultsInternal reliability of scales was adequate ranging from 0.62 for compatibility to 0.88 for other personal attributes (openness). Intraclass correlations for the scales indicated that 2.4 percent to 20.9 percent of the variance in scale scores occurs within clinics. Discriminant validity was adequate at the clinic level, with all correlations less than 0.75. Convergent validity was more difficult to assess given lack of hypothesized associations between factors expected to predict implementation.ConclusionsOur results move the field forward by describing initial psychometric properties of constructs across CFIR domains.

BackgroundScientists and practitioners alike need reliable, valid measures of contextual factors that influence implementation. Yet, few existing measures demonstrate reliability or validity. To meet this need, we developed and assessed the psychometric properties of measures of several constructs within the Inner Setting domain of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).MethodsWe searched the literature for existing measures for the 7 Inner Setting domain constructs (Culture Overall, Culture Stress, Culture Effort, Implementation Climate, Learning Climate, Leadership Engagement, and Available Resources). We adapted items for the healthcare context, pilot-tested the adapted measures in 4 Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), and implemented the revised measures in 78 FQHCs in the 7 states (N = 327 respondents) with a focus on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening practices. To psychometrically assess our measures, we conducted confirmatory factor analysis models (CFA; structural validity), assessed inter-item consistency (reliability), computed scale correlations (discriminant validity), and calculated inter-rater reliability and agreement (organization-level construct reliability and validity).ResultsCFAs for most constructs exhibited good model fit (CFI > 0.90, TLI > 0.90, SRMR

The 60% decline in the prevalence of cigarette smoking among U.S. adults over the past 50 years represents a significant public health achievement. This decline was steered in part by national, state, and local tobacco control programs and policies, such as public education campaigns; widespread smoke-free air laws; higher cigarette prices that have been driven by large increases in federal, state, and local cigarette excise taxes; and other tobacco control policy and systems-level changes that discourage smoking. Using the MPOWER framework informed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Office on Smoking and Health and the World Health Organization (WHO), this paper reviews these accomplishments and identifies gaps in tobacco control policy implementation and additional research needed to extend these historic successes.

The 60% decline in the prevalence of cigarette smoking among U.S. adults over the past 50 years represents a significant public health achievement. This decline was steered in part by national, state, and local tobacco control programs and policies, such as public education campaigns; widespread smoke-free air laws; higher cigarette prices that have been driven by large increases in federal, state, and local cigarette excise taxes; and other tobacco control policy and systems-level changes that discourage smoking. Using the MPOWER framework informed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Office on Smoking and Health and the World Health Organization (WHO), this paper reviews these accomplishments and identifies gaps in tobacco control policy implementation and additional research needed to extend these historic successes.

Scalable interventions remain effective across a range of real-world settings and can be modified to fit organizational and community context. "Smoke-Free Homes: Some Things are Better Outside" has been effective in promoting smoke-free home rules in low-income households in efficacy, effectiveness, generalizability, and dissemination studies. Using data from a dissemination study in collaboration with five 2-1-1 call centers in Ohio, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama (n = 2,345 households), this article examines key dimensions of scalability, including effectiveness by subpopulation, secondary outcomes, identification of core elements driving effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Evaluated by 2-1-1 staff using a pre--post design with self-reported outcomes at 2 months postbaseline, the program was equally effective for men and women, across education levels, with varying number of smokers in the home, and whether children were present in the home or not. It was more effective for nonsmokers, those who smoked fewer cigarettes per day, and African Americans. Creating a smoke-free home was associated with a new smoke-free vehicle rule (odds ratio [OR] = 3.38, confidence interval [CI 2.58, 4.42]), decreased exposure to secondhand smoke among nonsmokers (b = -2.33, p < 0.0001), and increased cessation among smokers (OR = 5.8, CI [3.81, 8.81]). Use of each program component was significantly associated with success in creating a smoke-free home. Using an intent-to-treat effect size of 40.1%, program benefits from 5 years of health care savings exceed program costs yielding a net savings of $9,633 for delivery to 100 households. Cost effectiveness, subpopulation analyses, and identification of core elements can help in assessing the scalability potential of research-tested interventions such as this smoke-free homes program.

Local coalitions can advance public health initiative but have not been widely used or well-studied in low- and middle-income countries. This paper provides (i) an overview of an ongoing matched-pairs community-randomized controlled trial in 28 communities in Armenia and Georgia (N = 14/country) testing local coalitions to promote smoke-free policies/enforcement and (ii) characteristics of the communities involved. In July-August 2018, key informants (e.g. local public health center directors) were surveyed to compare their non-communicable disease (NCD) and tobacco-related activities across countries and across condition (intervention/control). More than half of the informants (50.0-57.1%) reported their communities had programs addressing hypertension, diabetes, cancer and human papilloma virus, with 85.7% involving community education and 32.1% patient education programs. Eleven communities (39.3%) addressed tobacco control, all of which were in Georgia. Of those, all included public/community education and the majority (72.7-81.8%) provided cessation counseling/classes, school/youth prevention programs, healthcare provider training or activities addressing smoke-free environments. Informants in Georgia versus Armenia perceived greater support for tobacco control from various sectors (e.g. government, community). No differences were found by condition assignment. This paper provides a foundation for presenting subsequent analyses of this ongoing trial. These analyses indicate wide variability regarding NCD-related activities and support across communities and countries.

Smoke-free policies such as those required by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development have the potential to reduce persistent income-related disparities in secondhand smoke exposure. To understand the implementation and enforcement process, as well as barriers and facilitators to compliance and enforcement, we conducted semi-structured interviews (n=37) with representatives from 23 Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) with some level of smoking restriction in place, along with residents from 14 of these PHAs, from January to August 2016. Residents were typically notified of the new policy through group meetings, new resident orientations and/or one-on-one discussions during lease renewal or annual recertification. Timing of implementation varied, with advanced notice of 6 months or a year most common. Enforcement typically involved a series of verbal and/or written warnings, followed by written notice of lease violation, and eventual notice of lease termination and/or eviction. Challenges in enforcement were generally classified as monitoring difficulties or legal concerns. Characterizing current practices (e.g. advance notice, clear communication of escalating consequences, cessation support and concrete evidence of violation) from early adopters sets the stage for identifying best practices and helps to ensure successful and fair implementation of smoke-free policies in subsidized housing.

Qualitative methods help us understand context, explore new phenomena, identify new research questions, and uncover new models of change. To better understand how researchers in health education and health behavior use qualitative methods, we reviewed qualitative articles published in "Health Education & Behavior" from 2000 to 2015. We identified 48 articles that met our inclusion criteria and extracted information on the qualitative inquiry framework, use of theory, data collection methods, sampling strategy, general analysis approach, and reporting of results. Use of common qualitative inquiry frameworks was rare, with just one grounded theory study, five ethnographies, and one case study. No studies were framed using phenomenological or narrative inquiry approaches. Theory was used most commonly to select sensitizing constructs for analysis (41.7%) and to inform development of data collection instruments (27.1%). Interviews were the most common data collection method (66.7%), with focus groups next most common (39.6%). Sampling was typically purposive (87.5%), although often not labeled as such. Almost all (95.8%) the articles used quotes to illustrate themes and more than half (58.3%) used descriptors of magnitude (e.g., most, some) to report findings. The use of qualitative methods by health education and behavior researchers could be enriched with more intentional application of a broader range of inquiry frameworks. More deliberate application of a range of inquiry frameworks has the potential to broaden the types of research questions asked, application and generation of theory, study design, analytic strategies, and reporting of results.

Data analysis is one of the most important, yet least understood, stages of the qualitative research process. Through rigorous analysis, data can illuminate the complexity of human behavior, inform interventions, and give voice to people's lived experiences. While significant progress has been made in advancing the rigor of qualitative analysis, the process often remains nebulous. To better understand how our field conducts and reports qualitative analysis, we reviewed qualitative articles published in "Health Education & Behavior" between 2000 and 2015. Two independent reviewers abstracted information in the following categories: data management software, coding approach, analytic approach, indicators of trustworthiness, and reflexivity. Of the 48 (n = 48) articles identified, the majority (n = 31) reported using qualitative software to manage data. Double-coding transcripts was the most common coding method (n = 23); however, nearly one third of articles did not clearly describe the coding approach. Although the terminology used to describe the analytic process varied widely, we identified four overarching trajectories common to most articles (n = 37). Trajectories differed in their use of inductive and deductive coding approaches, formal coding templates, and rounds or levels of coding. Trajectories culminated in the iterative review of coded data to identify emergent themes. Few articles explicitly discussed trustworthiness or reflexivity. Member checks (n = 9), triangulation of methods (n = 8), and peer debriefing (n = 7) were the most common procedures. Variation in the type and depth of information provided poses challenges to assessing quality and enabling replication. Greater transparency and more intentional application of diverse analytic methods can advance the rigor and impact of qualitative research in our field.

Introduction: Armenia's and Georgia's high rates of smoking and secondhand smoke and recent implementation of smoke-free laws provide a timely opportunity to examine factors that increase compliance, like social enforcement and support for governmental enforcement. Methods: Using 2022 data from 1,468 Armenian and Georgian adults (Mage=42.92, 48.6% male, 31.6% past-month smoking), multilevel linear regression examined tobacco-related media exposures, social exposures, and perceptions/attitudes in relation to: 1) likelihood of asking someone to extinguish cigarettes where a) prohibited and b) allowed; and 2) support of fines for smoke-free violations (1=not at all to 4=very). Results: There was low average likelihood of asking someone to extinguish cigarettes where allowed (M=1.01, SD=1.12) or prohibited (M=1.57, SD=1.21) and "little" agreement with fines for smoke-free violations (M=2.13, SD=1.06). Having fewer friends who smoked, greater support for indoor smoke-free laws, and no past-month cigarette use were positively associated with all 3 outcomes. Greater exposure to media and community-based action supporting smoke-free policies, and witnessing more requests to stop smoking where prohibited were associated with higher likelihood of asking someone to extinguish cigarettes where allowed or prohibited. Less exposure to news stories opposing smoke-free policies and cigarette ads and higher perceived harm of cigarettes were also related to higher likelihood of asking someone to stop smoking where prohibited. Higher perceived harm of cigarettes was also associated with greater agreement with fines for smoke-free violations. Conclusions: Comprehensive strategies targeting social norms, media exposure, and risk perceptions are needed to effectively facilitate strategies to enhance smoke-free law enforcement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The EQUIPPED (Enhancing Quality of Prescribing Practices for Older Adults Discharged from the Emergency Department) medication safety program is an evidence‐informed quality improvement initiative to reduce potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) prescribed by Emergency Department (ED) providers to adults aged 65 and older at discharge. We aimed to scale‐up this successful program using (1) a traditional implementation model at an ED with a novel electronic medical record and (2) a new hub‐and‐spoke implementation model at three new EDs within a health system that had previously implemented EQUIPPED (hub). We hypothesized that implementation speed would increase under the hub‐and‐spoke model without cost to PIM reduction or site engagement. Methods: We evaluated the effect of the EQUIPPED program on PIMs for each ED, comparing their 12‐month baseline to 12‐month post‐implementation period prescribing data, number of months to implement EQUIPPED, and facilitators and barriers to implementation. Results: The proportion of PIMs at all four sites declined significantly from pre‐ to post‐EQUIPPED: at traditional site 1 from 8.9% (8.1–9.6) to 3.6% (3.6–9.6) (p < 0.001); at spread site 1 from 12.2% (11.2–13.2) to 7.1% (6.1–8.1) (p < 0.001); at spread site 2 from 11.3% (10.1–12.6) to 7.9% (6.4–8.8) (p = 0.045); and at spread site 3 from 16.2% (14.9–17.4) to 11.7% (10.3–13.0) (p < 0.001). Time to implement was equivalent at all sites across both models. Interview data, reflecting a wide scope of responsibilities for the champion at the traditional site and a narrow scope at the spoke sites, indicated disproportionate barriers to engagement at the spoke sites. Conclusions: EQUIPPED was successfully implemented under both implementation models at four new sites during the COVID‐19 pandemic, indicating the feasibility of adapting EQUIPPED to complex, real‐world conditions. The hub‐and‐spoke model offers an effective way to scale‐up EQUIPPED though a speed or quality advantage could not be shown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction to the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration: advancing efficient methodologies through team science and community partnerships Cara Lewis, Doyanne Darnell, Suzanne Kerns, Maria Monroe-DeVita, Sara J. Landes, Aaron R. Lyon, Cameo Stanick, Shannon Dorsey, Jill Locke, Brigid Marriott, Ajeng Puspitasari, Caitlin Dorsey, Karin Hendricks, Andria Pierson, Phil Fizur, Katherine A. Comtois A1: A behavioral economic perspective on adoption, implementation, and sustainment of evidence-based interventions Lawrence A. Palinkas A2: Towards making scale up of evidence-based practices in child welfare systems more efficient and affordable Patricia Chamberlain A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A3: Mixed method examination of strategic leadership for evidence-based practice implementation Gregory A. Aarons, Amy E. Green, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging A4: Implementing practice change in Federally Qualified Health Centers: Learning from leaders’ experiences Maria E. Fernandez, Nicholas H. Woolf, Shuting (Lily) Liang, Natalia I. Heredia, Michelle Kegler, Betsy Risendal, Andrea Dwyer, Vicki Young, Dayna Campbell, Michelle Carvalho, Yvonne Kellar-Guenther A5: Efficient synthesis: Using qualitative comparative analysis and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research across diverse studies Laura J. Damschroder, Julie C. Lowery A6: Establishing a veterans engagement group to empower patients and inform Veterans Affairs (VA) health services research Sarah S. Ono, Kathleen F. Carlson, Erika K. Cottrell, Maya E. O’Neil, Travis L. Lovejoy A7: Building patient-practitioner partnerships in community oncology settings to implement behavioral interventions for anxious and depressed cancer survivors Joanna J. Arch, Jill L. Mitchell A8: Tailoring a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy implementation protocol using mixed methods, conjoint analysis, and implementation teams Cara C. Lewis, Brigid R. Marriott, Kelli Scott A9: Wraparound Structured Assessment and Review (WrapSTAR): An efficient, yet comprehensive approach to Wraparound implementation evaluation Jennifer Schurer Coldiron, Eric J. Bruns, Alyssa N. Hook A10: Improving the efficiency of standardized patient assessment of clinician fidelity: A comparison of automated actor-based and manual clinician-based ratings Benjamin C. Graham, Katelin Jordan A11: Measuring fidelity on the cheap Rochelle F. Hanson, Angela Moreland, Benjamin E. Saunders, Heidi S. Resnick A12: Leveraging routine clinical materials to assess fidelity to an evidence-based psychotherapy Shannon Wiltsey Stirman, Cassidy A. Gutner, Jennifer Gamarra, Dawne Vogt, Michael Suvak, Jennifer Schuster Wachen, Katherine Dondanville, Jeffrey S. Yarvis, Jim Mintz, Alan L. Peterson, Elisa V. Borah, Brett T. Litz, Alma Molino, Stacey Young McCaughanPatricia A. Resick A13: The video vignette survey: An efficient process for gathering diverse community opinions to inform an intervention Nancy Pandhi, Nora Jacobson, Neftali Serrano, Armando Hernandez, Elizabeth Zeidler- Schreiter, Natalie Wietfeldt, Zaher Karp A14: Using integrated administrative data to evaluate implementation of a behavioral health and trauma screening for children and youth in foster care Michael D. Pullmann, Barbara Lucenko, Bridget Pavelle, Jacqueline A. Uomoto, Andrea Negrete, Molly Cevasco, Suzanne E. U. Kerns A15: Intermediary organizations as a vehicle to promote efficiency and speed of implementation Robert P. Franks, Christopher Bory A16: Applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs directly to qualitative data: The power of implementation science in action Edward J. Miech, Teresa M. Damush A17: Efficient and effective scaling-up, screening, brief interventions, and referrals to treatment (SBIRT) training: a snowball implementation model Jason Satterfield, Derek Satre, Maria Wamsley, Patrick Yuan, Patricia O’Sullivan A18: Matching models of implementation to system needs and capacities: addressing the human factor Helen Best, Susan Velasquez A19: Agency characteristics that facilitate efficient and successful implementation efforts Miya Barnett, Lauren Brookman-Frazee, Jennifer Regan, Nicole Stadnick, Alison Hamilton, Anna Lau A20: Rapid assessment process: Application to the Prevention and Early Intervention transformation in Los Angeles County Jennifer Regan, Alison Hamilton, Nicole Stadnick, Miya Barnett, Anna Lau, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A21: The development of the Evidence-Based Practice-Concordant Care Assessment: An assessment tool to examine treatment strategies across practices Nicole Stadnick, Anna Lau, Miya Barnett, Jennifer Regan, Scott Roesch, Lauren Brookman-Frazee A22: Refining a compilation of discrete implementation strategies and determining their importance and feasibility Byron J. Powell, Thomas J. Waltz, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica M. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A23: Structuring complex recommendations: Methods and general findings Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Monica J. Matthieu, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A24: Implementing prolonged exposure for post-traumatic stress disorder in the Department of Veterans Affairs: Expert recommendations from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project Monica M. Matthieu, Craig S. Rosen, Thomas J. Waltz, Byron J. Powell, Matthew J. Chinman, Laura J. Damschroder, Jeffrey L. Smith, Enola K. Proctor, JoAnn E. Kirchner A25: When readiness is a luxury: Co-designing a risk assessment and quality assurance process with violence prevention frontline workers in Seattle, WA Sarah C. Walker, Asia S. Bishop, Mariko Lockhart A26: Implementation potential of structured recidivism risk assessments with justice- involved veterans: Qualitative perspectives from providers Allison L. Rodriguez, Luisa Manfredi, Andrea Nevedal, Joel Rosenthal, Daniel M. Blonigen A27: Developing empirically informed readiness measures for providers and agencies for the Family Check-Up using a mixed methods approach Anne M. Mauricio, Thomas D. Dishion, Jenna Rudo-Stern, Justin D. Smith A28: Pebbles, rocks, and boulders: The implementation of a school-based social engagement intervention for children with autism Jill Locke, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Colleen Harker, Anne Olsen, Travis Shingledecker, Frances Barg, David Mandell, Rinad S. Beidas A29: Problem Solving Teletherapy (PST.Net): A stakeholder analysis examining the feasibility and acceptability of teletherapy in community based aging services Marissa C. Hansen, Maria P. Aranda, Isabel Torres-Vigil A30: A case of collaborative intervention design eventuating in behavior therapy sustainment and diffusion Bryan Hartzler A31: Implementation of suicide risk prevention in an integrated delivery system: Mental health specialty services Bradley Steinfeld, Tory Gildred, Zandrea Harlin, Fredric Shephard A32: Implementation team, checklist, evaluation, and feedback (ICED): A step-by-step approach to Dialectical Behavior Therapy program implementation Matthew S. Ditty, Andrea Doyle, John A. Bickel III, Katharine Cristaudo A33: The challenges in implementing muliple evidence-based practices in a community mental health setting Dan Fox, Sonia Combs A34: Using electronic health record technology to promote and support evidence-based practice assessment and treatment intervention David H. Lischner A35: Are existing frameworks adequate for measuring implementation outcomes? Results from a new simulation methodology Richard A. Van Dorn, Stephen J. Tueller, Jesse M. Hinde, Georgia T. Karuntzos A36: Taking global local: Evaluating training of Washington State clinicians in a modularized cogntive behavioral therapy approach designed for low-resource settings Maria Monroe-DeVita, Roselyn Peterson, Doyanne Darnell, Lucy Berliner, Shannon Dorsey, Laura K. Murray A37: Attitudes toward evidence-based practices across therapeutic orientations Yevgeny Botanov, Beverly Kikuta, Tianying Chen, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Anthony DuBose, Kathryn E. Korslund, Marsha M. Linehan A38: Predicting the use of an evidence-based intervention for autism in birth-to-three programs Colleen M. Harker, Elizabeth A. Karp, Sarah R. Edmunds, Lisa V. Ibañez, Wendy L. Stone A39: Supervision practices and improved fidelity across evidence-based practices: A literature review Mimi Choy-Brown A40: Beyond symptom tracking: clinician perceptions of a hybrid measurement feedback system for monitoring treatment fidelity and client progress Jack H. Andrews, Benjamin D. Johnides, Estee M. Hausman, Kristin M. Hawley A41: A guideline decision support tool: From creation to implementation Beth Prusaczyk, Alex Ramsey, Ana Baumann, Graham Colditz, Enola K. Proctor A42: Dabblers, bedazzlers, or total makeovers: Clinician modification of a common elements cognitive behavioral therapy approach Rosemary D. Meza, Shannon Dorsey, Shannon Wiltsey-Stirman, Georganna Sedlar, Leah Lucid A43: Characterization of context and its role in implementation: The impact of structure, infrastructure, and metastructure Caitlin Dorsey, Brigid Marriott, Nelson Zounlome, Cara Lewis A44: Effects of consultation method on implementation of cognitive processing therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder Cassidy A. Gutner, Candice M. Monson, Norman Shields, Marta Mastlej, Meredith SH Landy, Jeanine Lane, Shannon Wiltsey Stirman A45: Cross-validation of the Implementation Leadership Scale factor structure in child welfare service organizations Natalie K. Finn, Elisa M. Torres, Mark. G. Ehrhart, Gregory A. Aarons A46: Sustainability of integrated smoking cessation care in Veterans Affairs posttraumatic stress disorder clinics: A qualitative analysis of focus group data from learning collaborative participants Carol A. Malte, Aline Lott, Andrew J. Saxon A47: Key characteristics of effective mental health trainers: The creation of the Measure of Effective Attributes of Trainers (MEAT) Meredith Boyd, Kelli Scott, Cara C. Lewis A48: Coaching to improve teacher implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) Jennifer D. Pierce A49: Factors influencing the implementation of peer-led health promotion programs targeting seniors: A literature review Agathe Lorthios-Guilledroit, Lucie Richard, Johanne Filiatrault A50: Developing treatment fidelity rating systems for psychotherapy research: Recommendations and lessons learned Kevin Hallgren, Shirley Crotwell, Rosa Muñoz, Becky Gius, Benjamin Ladd, Barbara McCrady, Elizabeth Epstein A51: Rapid translation of alcohol prevention science John D. Clapp, Danielle E. Ruderman A52: Factors implicated in successful implementation: evidence to inform improved implementation from high and low-income countries Melanie Barwick, Raluca Barac, Stanley Zlotkin, Laila Salim, Marnie Davidson A53: Tracking implementation strategies prospectively: A practical approach Alicia C. Bunger, Byron J. Powell, Hillary A. Robertson A54: Trained but not implementing: the need for effective implementation planning tools Christopher Botsko A55: Evidence, context, and facilitation variables related to implementation of Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Qualitative results from a mixed methods inquiry in the Department of Veterans Affairs Sara J. Landes, Brandy N. Smith, Allison L. Rodriguez, Lindsay R. Trent, Monica M. Matthieu A56: Learning from implementation as usual in children’s mental health Byron J. Powell, Enola K. Proctor A57: Rates and predictors of implementation after Dialectical Behavior Therapy Intensive Training Melanie S. Harned, Marivi Navarro-Haro, Kathryn E. Korslund, Tianying Chen, Anthony DuBose, André Ivanoff, Marsha M. Linehan A58: Socio-contextual determinants of research evidence use in public-youth systems of care Antonio R. Garcia, Minseop Kim, Lawrence A. Palinkas, Lonnie Snowden, John Landsverk A59: Community resource mapping to integrate evidence-based depression treatment in primary care in Brazil: A pilot project Annika C. Sweetland, Maria Jose Fernandes, Edilson Santos, Cristiane Duarte, Afrânio Kritski, Noa Krawczyk, Caitlin Nelligan, Milton L. Wainberg A60: The use of concept mapping to efficiently identify determinants of implementation in the National Institute of Health--President’s Emergent Plan for AIDS Relief Prevention of Mother to Child HIV Transmission Implementation Science Alliance Gregory A. Aarons, David H. Sommerfeld, Benjamin Chi, Echezona Ezeanolue, Rachel Sturke, Lydia Kline, Laura Guay, George Siberry A61: Longitudinal remote consultation for implementing collaborative care for depression Ian M. Bennett, Rinad Beidas, Rachel Gold, Johnny Mao, Diane Powers, Mindy Vredevoogd, Jurgen Unutzer A62: Integrating a peer coach model to support program implementation and ensure long- term sustainability of the Incredible Years in community-based settings Jennifer Schroeder, Lane Volpe, Julie Steffen A63: Efficient sustainability: Existing community based supervisors as evidence-based treatment supports Shannon Dorsey, Michael D Pullmann, Suzanne E. U. Kerns, Nathaniel Jungbluth, Lucy Berliner, Kelly Thompson, Eliza Segell A64: Establishment of a national practice-based implementation network to accelerate adoption of evidence-based and best practices Pearl McGee-Vincent, Nancy Liu, Robyn Walser, Jennifer Runnals, R. Keith Shaw, Sara J. Landes, Craig Rosen, Janet Schmidt, Patrick Calhoun A65: Facilitation as a mechanism of implementation in a practice-based implementation network: Improving care in a Department of Veterans Affairs post-traumatic stress disorder outpatient clinic Ruth L. Varkovitzky, Sara J. Landes A66: The ACT SMART Toolkit: An implementation strategy for community-based organizations providing services to children with autism spectrum disorder Amy Drahota, Jonathan I. Martinez, Brigitte Brikho, Rosemary Meza, Aubyn C. Stahmer, Gregory A. Aarons A67: Supporting Policy In Health with Research: An intervention trial (SPIRIT) - protocol and early findings Anna Williamson A68: From evidence based practice initiatives to infrastructure: Lessons learned from a public behavioral health system’s efforts to promote evidence based practices Ronnie M. Rubin, Byron J. Powell, Matthew O. Hurford, Shawna L. Weaver, Rinad S. Beidas, David S. Mandell, Arthur C. Evans A69: Applying the policy ecology model to Philadelphia’s behavioral health transformation efforts Byron J. Powell, Rinad S. Beidas, Ronnie M. Rubin, Rebecca E. Stewart, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Samantha L. Matlin, Shawna Weaver, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans, Trevor R. Hadley, David S. Mandell A70: A model for providing methodological expertise to advance dissemination and implementation of health discoveries in Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions Donald R. Gerke, Beth Prusaczyk, Ana Baumann, Ericka M. Lewis, Enola K. Proctor A71: Establishing a research agenda for the Triple P Implementation Framework Jenna McWilliam, Jacquie Brown, Michelle Tucker A72: Cheap and fast, but what is “best?”: Examining implementation outcomes across sites in a state-wide scaled-up evidence-based walking program, Walk With Ease Kathleen P Conte A73: Measurement feedback systems in mental health: Initial review of capabilities and characteristics Aaron R. Lyon, Meredith Boyd, Abigail Melvin, Cara C. Lewis, Freda Liu, Nathaniel Jungbluth A74: A qualitative investigation of case managers’ attitudes toward implementation of a measurement feedback system in a public mental health system for youth Amelia Kotte, Kaitlin A. Hill, Albert C. Mah, Priya A. Korathu-Larson, Janelle R. Au, Sonia Izmirian, Scott Keir, Brad J. Nakamura, Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan A75: Multiple pathways to sustainability: Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis to uncover the necessary and sufficient conditions for successful community-based implementation Brittany Rhoades Cooper, Angie Funaiole, Eleanor Dizon A76: Prescribers’ perspectives on opioids and benzodiazepines and medication alerts to reduce co-prescribing of these medications Eric J. Hawkins, Carol A. Malte, Hildi J. Hagedorn, Douglas Berger, Anissa Frank, Aline Lott, Carol E. Achtmeyer, Anthony J. Mariano, Andrew J. Saxon A77: Adaptation of Coordinated Anxiety Learning and Management for comorbid anxiety and substance use disorders: Delivery of evidence-based treatment for anxiety in addictions treatment centers Kate Wolitzky-Taylor, Richard Rawson, Richard Ries, Peter Roy-Byrne, Michelle Craske A78: Opportunities and challenges of measuring program implementation with online surveys Dena Simmons, Catalina Torrente, Lori Nathanson, Grace Carroll A79: Observational assessment of fidelity to a family-centered prevention program: Effectiveness and efficiency Justin D. Smith, Kimbree Brown, Karina Ramos, Nicole Thornton, Thomas J. Dishion, Elizabeth A. Stormshak, Daniel S. Shaw, Melvin N. Wilson A80: Strategies and challenges in housing first fidelity: A multistate qualitative analysis Mimi Choy-Brown, Emmy Tiderington, Bikki Tran Smith, Deborah K. Padgett A81: Procurement and contracting as an implementation strategy: Getting To Outcomes® contracting Ronnie M. Rubin, Marilyn L. Ray, Abraham Wandersman, Andrea Lamont, Gordon Hannah, Kassandra A. Alia, Matthew O. Hurford, Arthur C. Evans A82: Web-based feedback to aid successful implementation: The interactive Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)TM tool Lisa Saldana, Holle Schaper, Mark Campbell, Patricia Chamberlain A83: Efficient methodologies for monitoring fidelity in routine implementation: Lessons from the Allentown Social Emotional Learning Initiative Valerie B. Shapiro, B.K. Elizabeth Kim, Jennifer L. Fleming, Paul A. LeBuffe A84: The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) implementation development workshop: Results from a new methodology for enhancing implementation science proposals Sara J. Landes, Cara C. Lewis, Allison L. Rodriguez, Brigid R. Marriott, Katherine Anne Comtois A85: An update on the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) Instrument Review Project

IntroductionThe field of public health is increasingly implementing initiatives intended to make policies, systems, and environments (PSEs) more supportive of healthy behaviors, even though the evidence for many of these strategies is only emerging. Our objective was 3-fold: 1) to describe evaluations of PSE-change programs in which the evaluators followed the steps of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health, 2) to share the resulting lessons learned, and 3) to assist future evaluators of PSE-change programs with their evaluation design decisions.MethodsSeven Prevention Research Centers (PRCs) applied CDC's framework to evaluate their own PSE-change initiatives. The PRCs followed each step of the framework: 1) engage stakeholders, 2) describe program, 3) focus evaluation design, 4) gather credible evidence, 5) justify conclusions, and 6) ensure use and share lessons learned.ResultsEvaluation stakeholders represented a range of sectors, including public health departments, partner organizations, and community members. Public health departments were the primary stakeholders for 4 of the 7 evaluations. Four PRCs used logic models to describe the initiatives being evaluated. Their evaluations typically included both process and outcome questions and used mixed methods. Evaluation findings most commonly focused on contextual factors influencing change (process) and the adoption or implementation of PSE-change strategies (outcome). Evaluators shared lessons learned through various channels to reach local stakeholders and broader public health audiences.ConclusionFramework for Program Evaluation in Public Health is applicable to evaluations of PSE-change initiatives. Using this framework to guide such evaluations builds practice-based evidence for strategies that are increasingly being used to promote healthful behaviors.

BackgroundEnhancing the capability of community health centers to implement best practices (BPs) may mitigate health disparities. This study investigated the association of practice adaptive reserve (PAR) with the implementation of patient-centered medical home (PCMH) colorectal cancer (CRC) screening BPs at community health center clinics in 7 states.MethodsA convenience sample of clinic staff participated in a self-administered, online survey. Eight PCMH CRC screening BPs were scored as a composite ranging from 0 to 32. The PAR composite score was scaled from 0 to 1 and then categorized into 3 levels. Multilevel analyses examined the relation between PAR and self-reported implementation of PCMH BPs.ResultsThere were 296 respondents, and 59% reported 6 or more PCMH BPs at their clinics. The mean PAR score was 0.66 (standard deviation, 0.18), and the PCMH BP mean scores were significantly higher for respondents who reported higher clinic PAR categories. In comparison with the lowest PAR level, adjusted PCMH BP means were 25.0% higher at the middle PAR level (difference, 3.2; standard error, 1.3; t = 2.44; P = .015) and 63.2% higher at the highest PAR level (difference, 8.0; standard error, 1.9; t = 4.86; P

Diet and physical activity are behavioral risk factors for many chronic diseases, which are among the most common health conditions in the United States. Yet most Americans fall short of meeting established dietary and physical activity guidelines. Faith-based organizations as settings for health promotion interventions can affect members at multiple levels of the social ecological model. The present study investigated whether change in the church social environment was associated with healthier behavior at church and in general at 1-year follow-up. Six churches received mini-grants and technical assistance for 1 year to support policy and environmental changes for healthy eating (HE) and physical activity (PA). Socioenvironmental (social support and social norms) and behavioral (HE and PA at church and in general) outcomes were derived from baseline and 1-year follow-up church member surveys (n = 258). Three of six churches demonstrated significant improvements in all three socioenvironmental aspects of HE. Two of five churches exhibited significant socioenvironmental improvements for PA at follow-up. Church social environmental changes were related to health behaviors at church and in general (p < .05). Change in social support for HE, social support for PA, and social norms for PA were each associated with three church-based and general behavioral outcomes. Social norms for healthy eating were related to two general behavior outcomes and social norms for unhealthy eating to one general behavioral outcome. Study findings demonstrate that socioenvironmental characteristics are essential to multilevel interventions and merit consideration in designing policy and environmental change interventions.

BackgroundSpecial events are common community-based strategies for health promotion. This paper presents findings from a systematic literature review on the impact of special events to promote breast, cervical or colorectal cancer education and screening.MethodsArticles in English that focused on special events involving breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer conducted in the U.S. and published between January 1990 and December 2011 were identified from seven databases: Ovid, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstract, Cochrane Libraries, and EconLit. Study inclusion and data extraction were independently validated by two researchers.ResultsOf the 20 articles selected for screening out of 1,409, ten articles on special events reported outcome data. Five types of special events were found: health fairs, parties, cultural events, special days, and plays. Many focused on breast cancer only, or in combination with other cancers. Reach ranged from 50-1732 participants. All special events used at least one evidence-based strategy suggested by the Community Guide to Preventive Services, such as small media, one-on-one education, and reducing structural barriers. For cancer screening as an outcome of the events, mammography screening rates ranged from 4.8% to 88%, Pap testing was 3.9%, and clinical breast exams ranged from 9.1% to 100%. For colorectal screening, FOBT ranged from 29.4% to 76%, and sigmoidoscopy was 100% at one event. Outcome measures included intentions to get screened, scheduled appointments, uptake of clinical exams, and participation in cancer screening.ConclusionsSpecial events found in the review varied and used evidence-based strategies. Screening data suggest that some special events can lead to increases in cancer screening, especially if they provide onsite screening services. However, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that special events are effective in increasing cancer screening. The heterogeneity of populations served, event activities, outcome variables assessed, and the reliance on self-report to measure screening limit conclusions. This study highlights the need for further research to determine the effectiveness of special events to increase cancer screening.

BackgroundAlthough cancer research has advanced at a rapid pace, a gap remains between what is known about how to improve cancer prevention and control (CPC) and what is implemented as best practices within health care systems and communities. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN), with more than 10 years of dissemination and implementation research experience, aims to accelerate the uptake and use of evidence-based CPC interventions.MethodsThe collective work of the CPCRN has facilitated the analysis and categorization of research and implementation efforts according to the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation (ISF), providing a useful heuristic for bridging the gap between prevention research and practice. The ISF authors have called for examples of its application as input to help refine the model.ResultsWe provide examples of how the collaborative activities supported by the CPCRN, using community-engaged processes, accelerated the synthesis and translation of evidence, built both general and innovation-specific capacity, and worked with delivery systems to advance cancer control research and practice.ConclusionsThe work of the CPCRN has provided real-world examples of the application of the ISF and demonstrated that synthesizing and translating evidence can increase the potential that evidence-based CPC programs will be used and that capacity building for both the support system and the delivery system is crucial for the successful implementation and maintenance of evidence-based cancer control.ImpactAdoption and implementation of CPC can be enhanced by better understanding ISF systems and intervening to improve them.

Community coalitions depend on their members to synergistically pool diverse resources, including knowledge and expertise, community connections and varied perspectives, to identify and implement strategies and make progress toward community health improvement. Several coalition theories suggest synergy is the key mechanism driving coalition effectiveness. The Community Coalition Action Theory (CCAT) asserts that synergy depends on how well coalitions engage their members and leverage their resources, which is influenced by coalition processes, member participation and satisfaction and benefits outweighing costs. The current study used mixed methods, including coalition member surveys (n  = 83) and semi-structured interviews with leaders and members (n  = 42), to examine the process of creating collaborative synergy in 14 community coalitions for smoke-free environments in Armenia and Georgia. Members, typically seven per coalition representing education, public health, health care and municipal administration sectors, spent an average of 16 hr/month on coalition-related work. Common benefits included making the community a better place to live and learning more about tobacco control. The greatest cost was attending meetings or events at inconvenient times. Members contributed various resources, including their connections and influence, skills and expertise and access to population groups and settings. Strong coalition processes, greater benefits and fewer costs of participation and satisfaction were correlated with leveraging of member resources, which in turn, was highly correlated with collaborative synergy. Consistent with CCAT, effective coalition processes created a positive climate where membership benefits outweighed costs, and members contributed their resources in a way that created collaborative synergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]