Introduction: The health-promoting school (HPS) approach was developed by the World Health Organization to create health promotion changes in the whole school system. Implementing the approach can be challenging for schools because schools are dynamic organizations with each a unique context. Many countries worldwide have a health promotion system in place in which healthy school (HS) advisors support schools in the process of implementing the HPS approach. Even though these HS advisors can take on various roles to provide support in an adaptive and context-oriented manner, these roles have not yet been described. The current study aims to identify and describe the key roles of the HS advisor when supporting schools during the dynamic process of implementing the HPS approach. Methods: The study was part of a project in which a capacity-building module was developed for and with HS advisors in the Netherlands. In the current study, a co-creation process enabled by participatory research was used in which researchers, HS advisors, national representatives, and coordinators of the Dutch HS program participated. Co-creation processes took place between October 2020 and November 2021 and consisted of four phases: (1) a narrative review of the literature, (2) interviews, (3) focus groups, and (4) a final check. Results: Five roles were identified. The role of “navigator” as a more central one and four other roles: “linking pin,” “expert in the field,” “critical friend,” and “ambassador of the HPS approach.” The (final) description of the five roles was recognizable for the HS advisors that participated in the study, and they indicated that it provided a comprehensive overview of the work of an HS advisor in the Netherlands. Discussion: The roles can provide guidance to all Dutch HS advisors and the regional public health organizations that employ them on what is needed to provide sufficient and context-oriented support to schools. These roles can inspire and guide people from other countries to adapt the roles to their own national context.
DOCUMENT
Background: Although principles of the health promoting school (HPS) approach are followed worldwide, differences between countries in the implementation are reported. The aim of the current study was (1) to examine the implementation of the HPS approach in European countries in terms of different implementation indicators, that is, percentage of schools implementing the HPS approach, implementation of core components, and positioning on so‐called HPS‐related spectra, (2) to explore patterns of consistency between the implementation indicators across countries, and (3) to examine perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the HPS approach across countries. Methods: This study analyzed data from a survey that was part of the Schools for Health in Europe network's Monitoring Task 2020. The survey was completed by HPS representatives of 24 network member countries. Results: Large variations exist in (the influencing factors for) the implementation of the HPS approach in European countries. Observed patterns show that countries with higher percentages of schools implementing the HPS approach also score higher on the implementation of the core components and, in terms of spectra, more toward implementing multiple HPS core components, add‐in strategies, action‐oriented research and national‐level driven dissemination. In each country a unique mix of barriers and facilitators was observed. Conclusion: Countries committed to implementing the HPS approach in as many schools as possible also seem to pay attention to the quality of implementation. For a complete and accurate measurement of implementation, the use of multiple implementation indicators is desirable.
DOCUMENT
Evidence concerning psychosocial interventions for children and young people with externalizing behavior problems has amassed at an impressive pace in recent years. Interventions that have been proven effective are now considered vehicles through which the knowledge of “what works” can be applied in practice. Outcomes for children, young people, and their families, however, have not improved in line with these advances in knowledge. This difference between the knowledge of “what works” and the application of this knowledge in real-life practice has become known as the “implementation gap”. This dissertation explores questions considering the implementation gap, with a focus on whether professionals are delivering the interventions as intended (treatment integrity).The results of the research underlying this dissertation show that 1) although measuring treatment integrity is important, it is often missing or not examined under adequate circumstances in studies, 2) applying interventions with a high level of treatment integrity makes a real difference to the end-users of the services and 3) targeted and continued support to professionals with a focus on providing feedback on levels of treatment integrity is necessary to enable them to deliver interventions as intended. Organizing support around common factors of interventions can be a first step in integrating and providing feasible support for professionals that provide more than one intervention.
MULTIFILE
