Description of multi-strategy implementation intervention* and fidelity to and satisfaction with the intervention
| Implementation strategy (timeframe strategy was delivered) | Implementation strategy description | Barrier addressed | BCW and (TDF domain) | Process measures | |
| % of schools that received and or engaged with the implementation strategy | % very satisfied with (N=35 school champions; N=158 teachers)† | ||||
| Centralise technical assistance and provide ongoing consultation (Terms 1–Term 4) | Project officers (a PE teacher and health promotion practitioner) provided technical assistance to schools throughout the study period, to support policy implementation by working directly with schools and school champions to collaborate to overcome barriers and provide expertise support and resources. Project officers provided ongoing consultation to in-school champions via telephone, email or if needed face-to face to support implementing the intervention. The focus of these meetings was to help school champions brainstorm solutions to barriers as they arose, review progress teachers were making with the school’s implementation plan and, if necessary, modify and reset goals. | Teachers knowledge, ability or competence Lack of time Perceived priority of the policy in the schools | Psychological capability (beliefs about capabilities; knowledge) Opportunity—social (environmental context and resources) Motivation—reflective (goals) | 100% of schools were allocated a project officer and all received ongoing consultation | 89% of school champions were very satisfied with the ongoing consultation support they received from the project officer |
| Identify and prepare champions (Term 1) | Each school nominated up to three in-school champions (existing teachers at the school) who drove the implementation of the intervention in their school and, with support from project officers, overcome indifference/ resistance that the intervention provoked in the school. The number of school champions was dependent on the size of the school with 3 schools nominating 1 champion, 13 nominating 2 champions and 14 schools nominating 3 champions). To prepare in-school champions for their role they completed a 1 day (5 hours) face-to-face training workshop run by project officers which included; education about the policy, instruction and demonstration of energisers and PE lessons, time to begin action planning including identification of barriers/ facilitators, to implementation and possible solutions to overcome these via a ‘if-then-what’ plan. The inclusion of this contingency planning was an adaptation from the pilot study where it had been identified that if teachers had physical activity scheduled but unexpected events occurred in the school, for example, special assemblies or wet weather they did not adapt their schedule for the day to include the physical activity elsewhere. The training was accredited by the state educational authority and provides time towards teachers continuing professional development hours. | Lack of time in the curriculum Teachers knowledge, ability or competence | Opportunity—social (environmental context and resources) Psychological and physical capability (beliefs about capabilities) | 100% schools had at least 1 nominated school champion 97% of school champions attended the training workshop | 100% of school champions were very satisfied with the training they received 73% of teachers were very satisfied with the support they received from their school champion |
| Conduct educational outreach visits. (Term 2–4) | Project officers met with all teachers (face-to-face) as a group in each school for 1–2 hours where they:
| Teachers knowledge, ability or competence | Psychological and physical capability (beliefs about capabilities) | 97% of schools accepted an educational outreach visit 70%–100% of staff in these schools attended the educational outreach visit | 100% of school champions and 81% of teachers were very satisfied with the educational outreach visit |
| Mandate change (Term 1) | To gain school executives ‘‘buy-in’ for the policy so that they would mandate change to their staff, project officers met face to face with principals and school executives to communicate the importance and benefits of policy implementation. The school executive was asked to demonstrate support for the implementation of the policy through the development of a ‘Sport and Physical Activity Procedures document’ (as required by the policy) and to mandate change by communicating to staff (eg, via newsletters, assemblies and staff meetings) that the implementation of the policy was a priority and that there was an expectation for it to be implemented by all staff. | Support from school boards Physical activity considered a lower priority than other subjects | Opportunity—social (social influences) Motivation—reflective (goals) | 100% of schools developed a school policy 81% of principals mandated change for policy implementation during the educational outreach visit | Not assessed |
| Develop a formal implementation blueprint. (Term 1) | School champions were supported to develop a plan for the implementation of the policy in their school. The plan identified what the school was aiming to achieve, the strategies to do so and by when, the resources available or required to implement the plan. The plan was segmented into school terms to allow school champions to break up some of the more complex policy requirements into achievable tasks. | Perceived priority of the policy in the schools | Motivation—reflective (goals) | 100% of schools developed a formal implementation blueprint | 100% of school champions were satisfied with the support they received to develop their implementation blueprint |
| Develop and distribute educational materials (Term 1–4) | In-school champions received an ‘intervention manual’ which included policy and timetable templates, exemplar physical activity timetables and physical education curriculum schedules. Classroom teachers received various educational materials including practical games and strategies for increasing physical activity in lessons. These materials were available in print and via an online portal. The portal also contained professional learning videos for all teachers (including school champions) which reinforced the information they received via face-to-face training. School champions were asked to view the videos and to organise a time for their staff to watch them during a staff meeting or to provide access for staff to watch individually. | Teachers knowledge, ability or competence | Psychological capability (beliefs about capabilities; knowledge) | 100% of schools were provided the intervention manual 78% of school champions viewed the professional learning videos on the online portal 59% of school champions organised staff viewing of the professional learning videos at staff meetings 68% of school champions used the online portal to access educational resources | 95% of school champions and 96% of teachers were very satisfied with the professional learning videos 75% of school champions and 68% of teaches were very satisfied with the online portal resources |
| Capture and share local knowledge (Term 2–4) | Project officers developed ‘case studies’ from other intervention schools on how school champions and teachers made ‘something work’ in their setting. This was used during project officers ongoing consultation meetings with in-school champions and included on the online portal as an ‘infocus school’. | Teachers knowledge, ability or competence Lack of time in the curriculum | Opportunity—social (social influences) Motivation—reflective (belief about consequences) | 100% of case studies were provided to schools | Not assessed |
| Change physical structure and equipment (Term 1) | Schools were provided with one basic physical activity equipment pack which included bean bags, balls, hoops, etc which school champions were shown how to use through classroom energisers and integrated lessons. School champions were encouraged to develop ‘physical activity packs’ for all teachers to keep in each classroom which included a class set of similar equipment from the schools existing sports equipment enabling teachers to implement PA more easily. | Availability of equipment | Opportunity— physical (environmental context and resources) | 68% of schools accepted an equipment pack 64% of school champions organised purchasing of equipment packs for all classrooms | 84% of school champions and teachers were very satisfied with the equipment packs |
*Please see the protocol paper for more detailed explanation of the hypothesised mechanisms of action via the BCW and TDF.
†NB proportions are those who completed the survey, that is, 35 school champions and 158 teachers.
BCW, Behaviour Change Wheel; PA, physical activity; PE, physical education; TDF, Theoretical Domains Framework.