The Data-to-Action Framework: A Rapid Program Improvement Process
Open accessAbstract
Although health education programs may benefit from quality improvement methods, scant resources exist to help practitioners apply these methods for program improvement. The purpose of this article is to describe the Data-to-Action framework, a process that guides practitioners through rapid-feedback cycles in order to generate actionable data to improve implementation of ongoing programs. The framework was designed while implementing DELTA PREP, a 3-year project aimed at building the primary prevention capacities of statewide domestic violence coalitions. The authors describe the framework's main steps and provide a case example of a rapid-feedback cycle and several examples of rapid-feedback memos produced during the project period. The authors also discuss implications for health education evaluation and practice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Fieldwork ended when there was good enough material, guided by information power, data saturation, diversity of times, places and persons, and passing 100 hours in the field.
“The fieldwork ended when there was ‘good enough’ material [27], guided by information power [28], data saturation (repeating ideas) [29], capturing a diversity of ‘times, places, persons’ and passing 100 hours in the field.”
From Shared decision-making with older people on TReatment Escalation planning for Acute deterioration in the emergency Medical Setting - Observed (STREAMS-O): an ethnographic study (2025) · cites this paper as [27]
The Implications for Practice section describes gathering “good enough” data during planned trainings, supporting the cited phrase. It does not say that reaching a “good enough” threshold was a criterion for ending fieldwork. The other criteria in the sentence have separate citations or are uncited, so they are not attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E., & Marcus, A. C. (2003) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.93.8.1261 · Cited by 1,836 · see citing works
Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., Blachman, M., Dunville, R., & Saul, J. (2008) · American Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z · Cited by 1,339 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- Bauer JE Duffy GL Westcott RT 2006 The quality improvement handbook 2 Milwaukee, WI ASQ Press
- Beaudry ML Bialek R Moran J 2014 Using quality improvement tools and methods throughout the accreditation lifecycle Journal of Public Health Practice 20 49 51 24322686
- Bialek R Duffy GL Moran JW 2009 The public health quality improvement handbook Milwaukee, WI ASQ Press
- Davis MV Vincus A Eggers M Mahanna E Riley W Joly B … Bowling M 2012 Effectiveness of public health quality improvement training approaches: Application, application, application Journal of Public Health Practice 18 E1 E7 22139319
- Dilley JA Bekemeier B Harris JR 2012 Quality improvement interventions in public health systems: A systematic review American Journal of Preventive Medicine 42 5 Suppl 1 S58 S71 22502926
- Freire KE Zakocs R Le B Hill JA Brown P Wheaton J 2015 Evaluation of DELTA PREP: A project aimed at integrating primary prevention of intimate partner violence within state domestic violence coalitions Health Education & Behavior 42 4 436 448 26245932 PMC5991473
- Institute of Medicine 2001 Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century Washington, DC National Academies Press 25057539
- Livingood WC Sabbagh R Spitzfaden S Hicks A Wells L Puigdomenech S … Wood DL 2013 Quality improvement evaluation case study: Impact on public health outcomes and agency culture American Journal of Preventive Medicine 44 445 452 23597806
- McLees AW Thomas CW Nawaz S Young AC Rider N Davis M 2014 Advances in public health accreditation readiness and quality improvement: Evaluation findings from the national public health improvement initiative Journal of Public Health Practice 20 29 35 PMC4699179 24322683
- Patton MQ 2011 Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use New York, NY Guildford Press
- Riley WJ Moran JW Corso LC Betsch LM Bialek R Cofsky A 2010 Defining quality improvement in public health Journal of Public Health Management 16 1 5 7 20009636
- Schober DJ Fawcett S 2015 Using action planning to build organizational capacity for the prevention of intimate partner violence Health Education & Behavior 42 4 449 457 26245933
- Tague NR 2005 The quality tool box 2 Milwaukee, WI ASQ Press
- Thigpen S Puddy RW Singer HH Hall DM 2013 Moving knowledge into action: developing the rapid synthesis and translation process within the interactive systems framework American Journal of Community Psychology 50 285 294 PMC4739647 22777207
- Verma P Moran JW 2014 Sustaining a quality improvement culture in local health departments applying for accreditation Journal of Public Health Practice 20 10 43 48 24322685
- Wilson KM Brady TJ Lesesne C 2011 An organizing framework for translation in public health: The Knowledge to Action Framework Prevention of Chronic Disease 8 A46 Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2011/mar/10_0012.htm PMC3073439 21324260
- Woodhouse LD Toal R Nguyen T Keene D Gunn L Kellum A … Livingood WC 2013 A merged model of quality improvement and evaluation: Maximizing return on investment Health Promotion Practice 14 885 892 23407061
- Zakocs R Freire KE 2015 The DELTA PREP initiative: Accelerating coalition capacity for intimate partner violence prevention Health Education & Behavior 42 4 458 470 26245934 PMC5990002
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Warner, B. E., Wells, M., Vindrola-Padros, C., & Brett, S. J. (2025) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-025-06893-7
- Authors
- Zakocs, R., Hill, J. A., Brown, P., Wheaton, J., & Freire, K. E.
- Affiliations
- Insight Evaluation, LLC, Portland, OR, USA
- Sunflower Group, LLC, Decatur, GA, USA
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
- ORCID
- Freire, Kimberley E.
- Venue
- Health Education & Behavior
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-08
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 471-479
- ISSN
- 1090-1981 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-6127
- PMC
- PMC5990006
- OpenAlex
- W1920413916
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 3.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Health Education & Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (CC999999)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
- Keywords
- quality improvement, primary prevention, health education evaluation
- MeSH terms
- Intimate Partner Violence, Feedback, Humans, Organizational Innovation, Organizational Objectives, Public Health Administration, United States, Program Evaluation, Program Development, Quality Improvement
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
