« Back to Assessment Instruments
Qualitative/Quantitative:
Type of Instrument:
Number of Items:
39Subscale Information:
Not FoundLanguage Availability:
Brief Description:
The Local Wellness Policy Survey includes questions about involvement in development of the Local Wellness Policy, the policy development process, satisfaction with the policy, concerns about policy implementation, and strategies to facilitate policy implementation.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
McDonnell, E., & Probart, C. (2008). School wellness policies: employee participation in the development process and perceptions of the policies. Journal of Child Nutrition Management, 32(1).Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Probart, C., McDonnell, E. T., Jomaa, L., & Fekete, V. (2010). Lessons from Pennsylvania's mixed response to federal school wellness law. Health affairs (Project Hope), 29(3), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0732. PMID: 20194986.Website:
Not FoundAttachments:
Version:
Not FoundRelated Instruments:
Local Wellness Policy Survey
Qualitative/Quantitative:
The assessment instrument uses quantitative and/or qualitative data
- Quantitative
Type of Instrument:
The type of the assessment instrument
- Survey
Number of Items:
Number of items in the assessment instrument
39Subscale Information:
Names of each of the subscales and the number of items for each of the subscales
Not FoundLanguage Availability:
Language(s) in which the assessment instrument is available
- English
Brief Description:
Brief summary description of assessment instrument
The Local Wellness Policy Survey includes questions about involvement in development of the Local Wellness Policy, the policy development process, satisfaction with the policy, concerns about policy implementation, and strategies to facilitate policy implementation.Citing Literature - Development/Original:
Reference for publication describing the development of the assessment instrument
McDonnell, E., & Probart, C. (2008). School wellness policies: employee participation in the development process and perceptions of the policies. Journal of Child Nutrition Management, 32(1).Citing Literature - Empirical Use/Application:
Reference for publications on the application of the assessment instrument
Probart, C., McDonnell, E. T., Jomaa, L., & Fekete, V. (2010). Lessons from Pennsylvania's mixed response to federal school wellness law. Health affairs (Project Hope), 29(3), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0732. PMID: 20194986.Website:
Website providing access to and/or describing the assessment instrument
Not FoundAttachments:
Related files uploaded (instrument if directly available) including descriptions for each
Version:
Number/name of the most recent version of the assessment instrument
Not FoundRelated Instruments:
Indicate if assessment instrument is related to another instrument in the repository.
Implementation Science Considerations
- Active Implementation Framework
- CDC DHAP's Research-to-Practice Framework
- Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
- Conceptual Framework for Research Knowledge Transfer and Utilization
- Conceptualizing Dissemination Research and Activity: Canadian Heart Health Initiative
- Conduct and Utilization of Research in Nursing (CURN)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)
- Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) 2.0
- Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework
- Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
- Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
- Dissemination of Evidence-based Interventions to Prevent Obesity
- EMTReK - Evidence-based Model for the Transfer and Exchange of Research Knowledge
- EQ-DI Framework
- Evidence Integration Triangle
- Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
- Facilitating Adoption of Best Practices (FAB) Model
- Framework for Dissemination of Evidence-Based Policy
- Framework for Enhancing the Value of Research for Dissemination and Implementation
- Framework for Spread
- Framework for Translating Evidence into Action
- Framework for the Dissemination & Utilization of Research for Health-Care Policy & Practice
- Framework for the Transfer of Patient Safety Research into Practice
- Framework of Dissemination in Health Services Intervention Research
- Generic Implementation Framework
- Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations
- Health Promotion Technology Transfer Process
- Interacting Elements of Integrating Science, Policy, and Practice
- Intervention Mapping
- Kingdon's Multiple-Streams Framework
- Knowledge Exchange Framework
- Knowledge Transfer and Exchange
- Model for Improving the Dissemination of Nursing Research
- Pathways to Evidence Informed Policy
- Precede-Proceed Model
- Process Model of Implementation from a Policy Perspective Depicting the Process at One Policy Level
- Push-Pull Capacity Model
- Real-World Dissemination
- Replicating Effective Programs Framework
- Stetler Model of Research Utilization
- Technology Transfer Model
- The SPIRIT Action Framework
- Theoretical Domains Framework
- Transcreation Framework for Community-engaged Behavioral Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities
- Utilization-Focused Surveillance Framework
- Weiner organizational readiness
- Acceptability
- Pre-Implementation
Constructs Assessed:
Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)Theories, Models, Frameworks Assessed:
The D&I TMFs relevant for the assesment instrument based on constructs assessedImplementation Outcomes:
The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomesImplementation Strategies:
Not FoundThe implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrumentPhase of Implementation Process:
Phase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used
Intended Focus
- Individual (Patient, Community Member)
- Implementer
- Community Members/Patients
- Administrator
- Teacher/Trainer
- Employer
- School
- Public (Laws, Regulations)
Levels of Data Collection:
The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects dataIntended Priority Population:
Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrumentIntended Priority Setting:
Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is usedPolicy:
Assessment instrument is relevant to policyEquity Focus:
Not Found
Psychometric Properties
Scoring:
YesThe assessment instrument produces a composite scoreNorms:
Not FoundMeasures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample sizeResponsiveness:
Not FoundThe ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).Validity:
Not FoundThe extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.Reliability:
Not FoundThe extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.Factor Analysis:
Not FoundA statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.
Pragmatic Properties
- Guidance to Administer
- Medium: Asyncronous collection of data
Time to Administer:
Not FoundThe amount of time required to complete the assessment instrumentSecondary Data:
Not FoundCost:
FreeCost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some instruments might require login.)Literacy:
YesReadability of the items reported on.Interpretation:
NoExpertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.Training:
NoExpertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reportedResources Required to Administer:
None/LowResources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)User Guidance:
Guides are provided to support administration of assessment instrument/data collection, and/or analysis of data from the assessment instrument, and/or interpretation of data, and/or action/decision on how to use dataObtrusiveness:
Degree of intrusion the participants will experience because of the data collection when using the assessment instrument (e.g., assessment instruments that rely on use of secondary data or automated data will be less obtrusive)Interactivity:
Not FoundData collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.
Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write one.