Implementation of Evidence-Based Programs within an Australian Place-Based Initiative for Children: a Qualitative Study

Burgemeister, Fiona; Crawford, Sharinne; Hackworth, Naomi; Hokke, Stacey; Nicholson, Jan M.

doi:10.1007/s10826-021-02191-z

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a deductive method that helps extend knowledge or understanding of existing theory or prior research (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005 ). The lead author reviewed all responses and applied the codes and categories generated by our previous qualitative study of government‐level CfC staff to the data (Burgemeister et al, 2022 ). Text that could not be coded with the predetermined coding scheme was given a new code, and some codes and categories were re‐worded to better‐reflect survey responses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in CfC, the Australian government has mandated that while communities can take a place‐based approach to program choice, 50% of funding must be spent on EBPs. Our recent qualitative study (Burgemeister et al, 2022 ) found that government personnel tasked with overseeing implementation of the EBP policy in CfC perceived implementation as more challenging outside Eastern Seaboard states and in regional and remote areas due to limited staff availability and high staff turnover and the concentration of training and support services in major cities on the Eastern Seaboard (Figure 1 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does place matter in the implementation of an evidence‐based program policy in an Australian place‐based initiative for children?

Burgemeister

Hokke

Crawford

et al. 2022

Health Social Care Comm

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy‐mandated requirements for use of evidence‐based programs (EBP) in place‐based initiatives are becoming more common. Little attention has been paid to the geographic aspects of uneven market development and urbanicity in implementing EBPs in large place‐based initiatives. The aim of this study was to explore geographic variation in knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of service providers who implemented an EBP policy in Australia's largest place‐based initiative for children, Communities for Children. A cross‐sectional online survey of Communities for Children service providers was conducted in 2018–2019, yielding 197 participants from all of Australia's eight states and territories. Relationships between two measures of ‘place’ (thick and thin market states; urbanicity: urban, regional and remote) and study‐designed measures of knowledge, attitudes, and implementation experiences were analyzed using adjusted logistic and multinomial regressions. Participants from thin market states (outside the Eastern Seaboard) were more resistant to the policy and experienced greater implementation challenges than those from thick market states (Eastern Seaboard). Regional participants reported greater knowledge about EBPs but experienced greater dissatisfaction and implementation challenges with the policy than both urban and remote participants. Our study found that place does matter when implementing EBPs in a place‐based initiative.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%