Skip to content
Implementation Science at UW

Keywords: Peggy Hannon

✪ Characterizing screening champions in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP)

Authors:

Cam Escoffery, Juzhong Sun, Amy DeGroff, Krishna Sharma, Manal Masud, Thuy Vu, Dara Schlueter & Peggy Hannon

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: July 2025

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science Communications

Abstract:

Background

CDC’s Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) aims to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence by implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in health system clinics partnering with the program. Program champions, as one of the key program components, are expected to facilitate the implementation of EBIs and support desired changes in many ways. Given limited information about the champions in clinical systems, this study investigated champion types, roles, and sustainability within the CRCCP.

Methods

This mixed methods, cross-sectional study included a survey of 205 respondents (health system and clinic staff) representing 303 clinics and 12 qualitative interviews of CRCCP award recipients and partnering clinics. The survey assessed clinic characteristics, EBI implementation, information about program champions, and sustainability. Interview topics included champion roles, benefits, turnover, and maintenance.

Findings

Champions worked at either the health system or clinic level. Among health systems, champions were quality improvement (QI) managers (48.5%), physicians (36.4%), or high-level administrators (27.3%). In clinics, champions were physicians (37.0%), QI managers (26.1%) or medical assistants (23.9%). Champions in both health systems and clinics were most often assigned the role (45.5% and 45.7%, respectively); yet clinic champions were more likely to naturally emerge than health system champions (26.1% vs. 15.2%). Among naturally emerging champions, 64.3% experienced zero turnover, more than for assigned champions. While champions in both groups received training, more champions in health systems reported being trained than those in clinics (75.8% vs 52.2%). No significant differences in EBIs implemented were observed between those clinics with and without a champion. Zero champion turnover was associated with great or very great leadership support (68.9%), program adaptation (60.7%) and organizational capacity (54.1%). Interviews found that champions’ roles included advocating for CRC screening, providing technical assistance for EBI implementation, creating organizational policies for CRC screening, and overseeing QI. Interviewees reported a desire to address champion sustainability.

Conclusion

These findings inform the use of program champions for clinic-based public health programs. Naturally emerging champions were more stable than those assigned the role.

Contributions to the literature

  • Research has demonstrated that program champions can assist in the implementation of evidence-based interventions; however, there is limited understanding of the types of champions, their roles, and turnover.
  • These findings contribute to this gap by describing the types of program champions, their training and major roles in implementing evidence-based interventions for colorectal cancer screening.
  • Common roles for champions were implementers, advocates, connectors, motivators, changemakers, data wranglers, educators, and sustainability resource.

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

✪ Twenty years of capacity building across the cancer prevention and control research network

Authors:

Mary Wangen, Cam Escoffery, Maria E. Fernandez, Daniela B. Friedman, Peggy Hannon, Linda K. Ko, Annette E. Maxwell, Courtney Petagna, Betsy Risendal, Catherine Rohweder & Jennifer Leeman

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: April 2023

Read the full text in the open access journal Cancer Causes and Control

Abstract:

Purpose

To improve population health, community members need capacity (i.e., knowledge, skills, and tools) to select and implement evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to fit the needs of their local settings. Since 2002, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has funded the national Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) to accelerate the implementation of cancer prevention and control EBIs in communities. The CPCRN has developed multiple strategies to build community members’ capacity to implement EBIs. This paper describes the history of CPCRN’s experience developing and lessons learned through the use of five capacity-building strategies: (1) mini-grant programs, (2) training, (3) online tools, (4) evidence academies, and (5) evaluation support for partners’ capacity-building initiatives.

Methods

We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed publications and grey literature reports on CPCRN capacity-building activities. Guided by the Interactive Systems Framework, we developed histories, case studies, and lessons learned for each strategy. Lessons were organized into themes.

Results

Three themes emerged: the importance of (1) community-engagement prior to and during implementation of capacity-building strategies, (2) establishing and sustaining partnerships, and (3) co-learning at the levels of centers, networks, and beyond.

Conclusion

CPCRN activities have increased the ability of community organizations to compete for external funds to support implementation, increased the use of evidence in real-world settings, and promoted the broad-scale implementation of cancer control interventions across more than eight states. Lessons from this narrative review highlight the value of long-term thematic networks and provide useful guidance to other research networks and future capacity-building efforts.

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