Research to Translation: The Healthy Schools Toolkit and New Approaches to the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child Model.

BACKGROUND: The Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child (WSCC) model is an evidence-based comprehensive framework to address health in schools. WSCC model use improves health and educational outcomes, but implementation remains a challenge. METHODS: Working with 6 schools in 2 districts in the Midwest, we used a mixed-methods approach to determine the people, systems, and messages needed to activate WSCC implementation. We report on social network analysis and message testing findings and research translation to develop the Healthy Schools Toolkit. RESULTS: Social networks for both districts included more than 150 individuals. Both demonstrated network densities less than half of the desirable threshold, with evidence of clustering by role and minimal cross-school relationships, posing challenges for WSCC implementation. Across stakeholder groups, messages that emphasize empathy, teamwork, and action were well-received, especially when shared by trusted individuals through communication channels that align with stakeholder needs. CONCLUSIONS: The Healthy Schools Toolkit provides an example of a translational product that helps to bridge research with practice. With features that highlight 6 design principles, the toolkit provides complementary activities that schools and districts can use as they plan for integration of the WSCC model.

Small media and client reminders for colorectal cancer screening: current use and gap areas in CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program.

INTRODUCTION: CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) funds 25 states and 4 tribal organizations to promote and increase colorectal cancer screening population-wide. The CRCCP grantees must use evidence-based strategies from the Guide to Community Preventive Services, including small media and client reminders. METHODS: To assess the existing resources and needs to promote colorectal cancer screening, we conducted 2 web-based surveys of CRCCP grantees and their community partners. Survey 1 sought to identify priority populations, the number and quality of existing colorectal cancer resources for different population subgroups, and the types of small media and client reminder they were most interested in using. Survey 2 assessed screening messages that were used in the past or might be used in the future, needs for non-English-language information, and preferences for screening-related terminology. RESULTS: In survey 1 (n = 125 from 26 CRCCPs), most respondents (83%) indicated they currently had some information resources for promoting screening but were widely dissatisfied with the quality and number of these resources. They reported the greatest need for resources targeting rural populations (62% of respondents), men (53%), and Hispanics (45%). In survey 2 (n = 57 from 25 CRCCPs), respondents indicated they were most likely to promote colorectal cancer screening using messages that emphasized family (95%), role models (85%), or busy lives (83%), and least likely to use messages based on faith (26%), embarrassment (25%), or fear (22%). Nearly all (85%) indicated a need for resources in languages other than English; 16 different languages were mentioned, most commonly Spanish. CONCLUSION: These findings provide the first picture of CRCCP information resources and interests, and point to specific gaps that must be addressed to help increase screening.