CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 100Public Health Policies and EducationHealth Policy Implementation ScienceEvaluation and Performance Assessment

Using the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool to Assess and Plan for Sustainability

Open access
Calhoun, Annaliese, Mainor, Avia, Moreland-Russell, Sarah, Maier, Ryan C., Brossart, Laura, Luke, Douglas A.·2014·Preventing Chronic Disease
DOI 10.5888/pcd11.130185PMC PMC3900327
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Implementing and growing a public health program that benefits society takes considerable time and effort. To ensure that positive outcomes are maintained over time, program managers and stakeholders should plan and implement activities to build sustainability capacity within their programs. We describe a 3-part sustainability planning process that programs can follow to build their sustainability capacity. First, program staff and stakeholders take the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool to measure their program's sustainability across 8 domains. Next, managers and stakeholders use results from the assessment to inform and prioritize sustainability action planning. Lastly, staff members implement the plan and keep track of progress toward their sustainability goals. Through this process, staff can more holistically address the internal and external challenges and pressures associated with sustaining a program. We include a case example of a chronic disease program that completed the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool and engaged in program sustainability planning.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5888/pcd11.130185

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The PSAT has been found to be easy to use, requiring no or minimal training.

    “In addition, the PSAT has been found to be easy to use, requiring no or minimal training (34).”

    From Assessing the sustainability capacity of evidence-based programs in community and health settings (2022) · cites this paper as [34]

    The Limitations and Implications for Practice section calls the PSAT a “simple, user-friendly tool,” supporting the claim that it is easy to use. Our copy does not say that using it requires no or minimal training; searches for training did not establish that part of the claim. The supplied passages have no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The PSAT and CSAT have been completed online over 13,000 times to measure sustainability capacity across a variety of settings.

    “Together, the PSAT and CSAT have been completed online over 13,000 times to measure the sustainability capacity of programs and practices across a variety of settings, including public health [10, 13], clinical care [9, 14], behavioral health [15], and education [16].”

    From Lowering the burden: Shorter versions of the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool (PSAT) and Clinical Sustainability Assessment Tool (CSAT) (2024) · cites this paper as [10]

    The “Complete the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool” section says the PSAT can be completed online, and “Limitations and Implications for Practice” reports its use by more than 550 public health practitioners and managers to assess programs. The paper does not report over 13,000 online completions or discuss the CSAT, so it supports only the PSAT-in-public-health portion of the claim. No page numbers were available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • There is emerging evidence for the reliability and validity of a small number of sustainability-specific assessments and tools designed to determine an organization's capacity in key factors linked to sustainment success and to develop strategic action plans.

    “There is emerging evidence for the reliability and validity of a small number of sustainability-specific assessments and tools, which are designed to determine an organization's capacity in key factors (e.g., partnerships, strategic planning) that have been shown to be linked to sustainment success (61, 76) and to develop a strategic action plan for building capacity in areas of weakness (19, 35,”

    From The Sustainability of Evidence-Based Interventions and Practices in Public Health and Health Care (2018) · cites this paper as [19]

  • These sustainability assessment and planning strategies have only begun to be evaluated in small pilot studies.

    “However, these strategies have only begun to be evaluated in small pilot studies (19, 65).”

    From The Sustainability of Evidence-Based Interventions and Practices in Public Health and Health Care (2018) · cites this paper as [19]

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [16]Herman RD. Executive leadership. In: Renz DO, editor. The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management. 3rd revised edition. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2010. p. 157–77.
  2. [18]Goodman RM. Bridging the gap in effective program implementation: from concept to application. J Community Psychol 2000; 28(3): 309– 21. 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(200005)28:3<309::AID-JCOP6>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Calhoun, A., Mainor, A., Moreland-Russell, S., Maier, R. C., Brossart, L., & Luke, D. A.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Calhoun, Annaliese
ORCID
Venue
Preventing Chronic Disease
Publisher
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Preventing Chronic Disease
Published
2014-01-23
Volume
11
Pages
130185-130185
ISSN
1545-1151 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5888/pcd11.130185
PMC
PMC3900327
OpenAlex
W2055071990
Cited by
100
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Preventing Chronic Disease (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • U.S. Public Health Service (200-2011-42065)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK092950)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
program sustainability, sustainability planning, public health programs, stakeholder engagement, program evaluation
MeSH terms
Community Health Services, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Health Promotion, Humans, Public Health, Reproducibility of Results, Program Evaluation

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