From: Scaling up complex interventions: insights from a realist synthesis
Outcomes, Actions or Contexts | As identified in program theory | As observed in case study documentation |
---|---|---|
Outcomesa | Initiative adapted to context | Initiative adapted to local community needs |
Increased organizational/community capacity and readiness | Increased local organizational capacity | |
Finalized scaling up strategy | Intentional and explicit efforts to scale-up through planned processes | |
Increased demand for action | Issue prioritized | |
Increased participation of communities | Increased community participation | |
Actions | Develop and adapt funding models and partners involved | Develop mergers between existing organizations with shared objectives |
Adapt funding model to engage community based organizations | ||
Implement membership fee for peer learning community | ||
Identify external resources | ||
Develop competitive funding proposals | ||
Assess potential readiness and demand for intervention | Conduct needs assessment | |
Engage leaders and other stakeholders: develop shared vision; align priorities; recruit champions | In-person engagement sessions for community groups and organizations in peer learning networks | |
Engage national leaders in cross jurisdictional summits | ||
Identify and engage local representatives and leaders | ||
Identify and engage local champions | ||
Launch campaigns to secure local political support | ||
Establish cross-sectoral and jurisdictional partners | Form new partnerships with key funding and social policy organizations | |
Develop coalitions of local and national organizations | ||
Adapt the initiative design to changing contexts | Refine criteria by which communities/sites are selected | |
Adapt governance mechanism for initiative | ||
Wind-up/ descale the initiative | ||
Develop an action and implementation plan | Develop action plans by founding individuals | |
Hold strategic dialogue for developing action plans | ||
Systematically evaluate implementation and outcomes | Commission external evaluations | |
Conduct evaluations of pilot settings | ||
Conduct interim evaluations | ||
Conduct end of campaign evaluations | ||
Conduct data mining to derive maximal learning | ||
Develop/implement shared measures | ||
Conduct economic evaluation | ||
Conduct social return on investment | ||
Develop, implement and evaluate a knowledge-to-action strategy | Hold information session for community members | |
Share promising results from early evaluations through a range of products and mediums | ||
Disseminate results widely through tailored information packages | ||
Conduct site visits | ||
National summits to encourage in-person knowledge exchange | ||
Develop communities of practice | ||
Publicly release evaluation results | ||
Implement learning community for disseminating information | ||
Create supportive amendments to policy | Identify and engage lobby groups | |
Encourage a systems perspective | Not observed in case study documentation | |
Integrate change into organizational culture | Not observed in case study documentation | |
Provide technical assistance and training to communities | Provide coaching support to communities | |
Review existing evidence | ||
Review best practices | ||
Advocated on behalf of community | ||
Contexts | Availability of resources: money, training, technical expertise, data systems, effective communication channels, human resources, managerial skills, evaluation capacity, leadership skills, existing relationships | Credibility of organization |
Staff difficulty in implementing action plan | ||
High turnover of staff | ||
Scarcity of financial resources | ||
Lack of staff skills and capacity | ||
High quality leadership skills | ||
History of collaboration | ||
Funding available | ||
Lack of time among funders | ||
Staff skilled in relevant activities | ||
Degree of political support | Uncertain political support | |
Strong political support | ||
Degree to which socio-cultural conditions and climates support scaling up | Persistent sociological problem | |
Social and economic hardship | ||
Stalling of efforts | ||
Tragedy in community | ||
Degree of readiness for intervention | Recognized need for change | |
Available local funds | ||
Realistic expectations | ||
Evidence of impact of the intervention | Uncertainty/variability of intervention effectiveness | |
Promising early results | ||
A history of intervention success | ||
Degree of consistency in objectives and mandates between stakeholders | Organizational mandate supports solution | |
Alignment with user needs | ||
Unrealistic expectations | ||
Users value owned interventions | ||
Degree of interest and demand for interventions (in communities and organizations) | Other comparable interventions | |
Unique needs identified | ||
Growing support for issue | ||
Interventions and models available | ||
Interest from funding organizations | ||
Variability in funding support |