Implementation Leadership Archives - Implementation Science at UW

✪ Study protocol for testing the efficacy of the Helping Educational Leaders Mobilize Evidence (HELM) implementation strategy in elementary schools: a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled trial

Abstract:

Background

Schools need to implement universal student supports that prevent social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties; minimize associated risks; and promote social, emotional, and behavioral competencies. The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy of the Helping Educational Leaders Mobilize Evidence (HELM) implementation strategy for promoting school-level implementation leadership, implementation climate, and high-fidelity delivery of an evidence-based practice. We will test HELM with an exemplar EBP, Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS). The specific aims of the study are to: 1) experimentally evaluate the effects of HELM versus PBIS training and technical assistance only (control condition); and 2) explore for whom, under what conditions, how equitably, and through which processes HELM works to improve outcomes, as well as its cost-effectiveness.

Methods

This study will use a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial to provide a rigorous test of the effects of HELM in elementary schools. Schools will be randomly assigned to HELM + PBIS training and technical assistance (n = 21 schools; n = 210 educators) or PBIS training and technical assistance only (n = 21 schools; n = 210 educators) in a 1:1 ratio within cohorts using covariate constrained randomization that accounts for degree of prior PBIS exposure (measured using the Tiered Fidelity Inventory at baseline) and school size. A series of mixed effects models (time within educator, educator within school) will test within-subject/between-subject interactions across three timepoints (12 months total) to examine whether HELM will show steeper gains than the control on implementation leadership (primary outcome), implementation climate, PBIS fidelity, and student outcomes. Mediational analyses will test hypothesized mechanisms of change (i.e., implementation leadership and climate) of HELM on PBIS fidelity. Sequential mixed-methods data collection and analyses will further explore how organizational mechanisms are linked to implementation outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analyses will compare costs and outcomes of PBIS training and technical assistance only versus PBIS implementation with HELM.

Discussion

The nature of leadership support in schools can make the difference between successful and unsuccessful EBP implementation. Testing HELM within the context of PBIS implementation will provide rigorous evidence about whether and how HELM can equitably address important EBP and student outcomes.

Trial Registration

Clinical Trials ID: NCT06586723. Date of Registration: August 27, 2024. Prospectively registered. URL of Trial Registry Record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06586723?intr=helm&rank=1

Contributions to the Literature

Few effective strategies to enhance evidence-based practice implementation in schools address implementation leadership and climate, and those that do have only been evaluated qualitatively.
Schools have unique organizational characteristics, and it is important to test whether organizational implementation strategies developed in other contexts can be effective in improving implementation outcomes in schools.
This study will evaluate the effects of a tailored adaptation of the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation (LOCI) strategy for schools, entitled Helping Educational Leaders Mobilize Evidence (HELM), on implementation mechanisms (implementation leadership and implementation climate), PBIS fidelity, and student outcomes.
This study also will explore for whom, under what conditions, and how equitably HELM demonstrates its effects, providing critical information about influence on – and the limitations of – the impact of this organizational implementation strategy.
Finally, the study will evaluate the processes through which HELM works to improve outcomes, contributing to the emerging literature on implementation mechanisms, as well as its cost-effectiveness.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

Name of the registry
clinicaltrials.gov.

Peer Review reports

✪ Not getting better but not getting worse: A cluster randomized controlled pilot trial of a leadership implementation strategy

Abstract:

Background

Implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in schools is fraught with challenges. Even when EBPs are initiated, deterioration of implementation efforts often hinders their long-term success. School leadership behaviors can influence teachers’ EBP implementation. Our study tested an implementation strategy called Helping Educational Leaders Mobilize Evidence (HELM), adapted from the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation strategy, to enhance EBP implementation through improvements in school leadership teams’ implementation leadership and climate to buffer against the deterioration of implementation efforts. This study explores the impact of HELM on theorized mechanisms of change (i.e., implementation leadership, climate), educator-level factors (i.e., implementation citizenship), and implementation outcomes (i.e., fidelity, initiative stability).

Method

One school district and 10 schools in Washington participated. Five of the schools were randomized to receive the HELM strategy and the remaining five schools received an alternative leadership training as an implementation attention control. Teachers at every school (n = 341) received training for an EBP called Positive Greetings at the Door that has been previously demonstrated to reduce student behavior problems. Principals and Assistant Principals (n = 18) received the HELM strategy or alternative leadership training. Three district Administrators also participated in HELM as part of the Organizational Strategy Development meetings.

Results

HELM significantly slowed the average decline of implementation leadership (perseverant leadership and communication), three dimensions of implementation climate (recognition, rewards, and existing supports) and total implementation climate, and one dimension of implementation citizenship (keeping informed). No significant effects were found with regard to implementation outcomes (i.e., fidelity, initiative stability).

Conclusions

HELM shows promise in buffering the deterioration of EBP implementation efforts in schools. HELM positively influenced implementation leadership and climate, which are the hypothesized mechanisms for promoting successful long-term implementation efforts. An appropriately powered trial is needed to determine the efficacy of HELM in the future.

Trial Registration Information

Name of the registry: clinicaltrials.gov
Trial registration number: NCT06340074
Date of registration: March 29, 2024. Retrospectively registered
URL of trial registry record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06340074?intr=helm&rank=

Plain Language Summary

Using practices that have been proven to work in research to support youth social, emotional, and behavioral well-being in schools is hard. Efforts to use these practices decrease across the school year. School leadership behaviors can influence educators’ use of these practices. Our study tested an implementation strategy or support designed to help educators use a research-backed practice called Helping Educational Leaders Mobilize Evidence (HELM). HELM was adapted from the Leadership and Organizational Change for Implementation (LOCI) strategy, to enhance school leadership teams’ specific leadership behaviors to protect against the decline in implementation effort. This study explores the impact of HELM on outcomes related to practice use. One school district and 10 schools in western Washington State participated. Five of the schools received the HELM strategy and the remaining five schools received an alternative leadership training. Teachers at every school (n = 341) received training in a practice called Positive Greetings at the Door (PGD) that has been shown to reduce student behavior problems. Principals and Assistant Principals (n = 18) received the HELM strategy or alternative leadership training. Three district administrators also participated in HELM. HELM unexpectedly slowed the average decline of implementation leadership (perseverant leadership and communication), three dimensions of implementation climate (recognition, rewards, and existing supports), total implementation climate, and one dimension of implementation citizenship (keeping informed). No significant effects were found with regard to use of the practice. The HELM strategy shows promise in slowing the deterioration of practice in schools and positively influenced implementation leadership behaviors.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Study protocol for a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation trial of a team-based implementation strategy to support educators’ use of a social engagement intervention

Abstract:

Background

Remaking Recess (RR) is a school-based evidence-based peer social engagement intervention for autistic students. RR involves direct training and coaching with educators; however, educators face several barriers to implementation at both the individual- and organizational-levels. This protocol paper describes a multi-site study that will test whether an educator-level implementation strategy, coaching, with or without a school-level implementation strategy, school-based teams, will maximize educators’ use (fidelity and sustainment) of RR for autistic students and their peers who are socially-isolated, rejected, or peripheral and may need additional support during recess.

Methods

This study will employ a hybrid type-3 effectiveness-implementation trial. Fifty-five elementary schools will be recruited as well as 121 educators (e.g., classroom assistants, aides), 55 general and special educator teachers, and 83–138 other school personnel (e.g., administrators). Additionally, at least 118 autistic students and allistic or non-autistic classmates will be recruited as RR recipients. Participants will complete baseline assessments at the beginning of the year, and all schools will be provided RR training. Schools will be randomized to coaching with or without school-based teams. This study will measure RR fidelity (primary outcome), RR sustainment, as well as peer engagement, social network inclusion, and social skills (secondary outcomes). It is expected that coaching with school-based teams will improve both RR fidelity and social network inclusion, while coaching with and without school-based teams will result in improved peer engagement and social skills.

Discussion

Previous research has documented barriers to RR implementation at both the individual- (provider) and organization-level (school). Using multi-level implementation strategies such as coaching with school-based teams may address these barriers and support RR implementation in schools. Findings from this study may guide future efforts to scale up tailored implementation strategies for use in public school districts, with the ultimate goal of increasing intervention access and improving student outcomes.

Trial registration

Name of the Registry: clinicaltrials.gov.
Trial Registration: Clinical Trials ID: NCT06559267.
Date of Registration: August 15, 2024. Prospectively registered.

Contributions to the literature

Remaking Recess (RR) is an intervention that improves peer engagement and classroom inclusion in autistic students. Educators, who play an important role in supporting autistic youth and their peers who are socially-isolated, rejected, or peripheral during the school day and at recess, can deliver RR.
Schools face many challenges, at both the individual- (i.e., educator) and organizational-levels (i.e., school), when implementing new interventions.
This study will evaluate the impact of two implementation strategies on the fidelity and sustainment of RR: (a) individual direct coaching for educators (coaching), and (b) supporting a team of school personnel (school-based teams) in addition to coaching.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

✪ Uncovering determinants of perceived feasibility of TF-CBT through coincidence analysis

Abstract:

Introduction

A mental health provider's perception of how well an intervention can be carried out in their context (i.e., feasibility) is an important implementation outcome. This article aims to identify determinants of feasibility of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) through a case-based causal approach.

Methods

Data come from an implementation-effectiveness study in which lay counselors (teachers and community health volunteers) implemented a culturally adapted manualized mental health intervention, TF-CBT, delivered to teens who were previously orphaned and were experiencing posttraumatic stress symptoms and prolonged grief in Western Kenya. The intervention team identified combinations of determinants that led to feasibility among teacher- and community health volunteer-counselors through coincidence analysis.

Results

Among teacher-counselors, organizational-level factors (implementation climate, implementation leadership) determined moderate and high levels of feasibility. Among community health volunteer-counselors, a strong relationship between a clinical supervisor and the supervisee was the most influential determinant of feasibility.

Conclusion

Methodology and findings from this article can guide the assessment of determinants of feasibility and the development of implementation strategies for manualized mental health interventions in contexts like Western Kenya.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

Understanding the Organizational Implementation Context of Schools: A Qualitative Study of School District Administrators, Principals, and Teachers

Discrepancies and Agreement in Perceptions of Implementation Leadership: Associations with Dosage of School-Based Evidence-Based Practices for Children with Autism

Leadership profiles associated with the implementation of behavioral health evidence-based practices for autism spectrum disorder in schools

✪ Individual and organizational factors that affect implementation of evidence-based practices for children with autism in public schools: a cross-sectional observational study

Abstract:

Background

Children with autism receive most of their intervention services in public schools, but implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for autism varies. Studies suggest that individual (attitudes) and organizational characteristics (implementation leadership and climate) may influence providers’ use of EBPs, but research is relatively limited in this area. This study examined individual and organizational factors associated with implementation of three EBPs—discrete trial training, pivotal response training, and visual schedules—for children with autism in special education classrooms in public elementary schools.

Methods

Participants included 67 autism support teachers and 85 other classroom staff from 52 public elementary schools in the northeastern United States. Participants reported their attitudes toward EBPs (e.g., intuitive appeal, willingness if required, openness, and divergence), implementation leadership and climate of their school, and the frequency with which they deliver each of three EBPs. Linear regression was used to estimate the association of attitudes about EBPs with organizational characteristics and intensity of EBP use. Demographic covariates with a bivariate association with EBP use significant at p < .20 were entered into the adjusted models.

Results

There were significant findings for only one EBP, discrete trial training. Teachers who reported higher perceived divergence (perceived difference of usual practice with academically developed or research-based practices) between EBPs and current practices used less discrete trial training (ƒ² = .18), and teachers who reported higher appeal (willingness to adopt EBPs given their intuitive appeal) of EBPs used more discrete trial training (ƒ² = .22). No organizational factors were significantly associated with implementation with any of the three EBPs.

Conclusions

Attitudes toward EBPs may affect teachers’ decisions to use EBPs; however, implementation leadership and climate did not predict EBP use. Future implementation efforts ought to consider the type of EBP and its fit within the context in terms of the EBP’s similarities to and differences from existing practices and programs in the setting. Implementation strategies that target individual attitudes about EBPs may be warranted in public schools.

^{**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**}

Understanding the processes that Federally Qualified Health Centers use to select and implement colorectal cancer screening interventions: A qualitative study

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial Registration

Contributions to the Literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Research and Practice

Abstract:

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Trial Registration Information

Plain Language Summary

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Contributions to the literature

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Research and Practice

Abstract:

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Authors:

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Read the full text in the subscription access journal School Mental Health

Authors:

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

Authors:

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Autism

Authors:

✪ Open Access

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Authors:

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Translational Behavioral Medicine