Who's "in the room where it happens"? A taxonomy and five-step methodology for identifying and characterizing policy actors.

Policy Policy actors Policy implementation Policy implementation strategies Policymakers

Journal

Implementation science communications
ISSN: 2662-2211
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101764360

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 04 04 2023
accepted: 28 08 2023
medline: 19 9 2023
pubmed: 19 9 2023
entrez: 18 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Engaging policy actors in research design and execution is critical to increasing the practical relevance and real-world impact of policy-focused dissemination and implementation science. Identifying and selecting which policy actors to engage, particularly actors involved in "Big P" public policies such as laws, is distinct from traditional engaged research methods. This current study aimed to develop a transparent, structured method for iteratively identifying policy actors involved in key policy decisions-such as adopting evidence-based interventions at systems-scale-and to guide implementation study sampling and engagement approaches. A flexible policy actor taxonomy was developed to supplement existing methods and help identify policy developers, disseminators, implementers, enforcers, and influencers. A five-step methodology for identifying policy actors to potentially engage in policy dissemination and implementation research was developed. Leveraging a recent federal policy as a case study-The Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA)-publicly available documentation (e.g., websites, reports) were searched, retrieved, and coded using content analysis to characterize the organizations and individual policy actors in the "room" during policy decisions. The five steps are as follows: (1) clarify the policy implementation phase(s) of interest, (2) identify relevant proverbial or actual policymaking "rooms," (3) identify and characterize organizations in the room, (4) identify and characterize policy actors in the "room," and (5) quantify (e.g., count actors across groups), summarize, and compare "rooms" to develop or select engagement approaches aligned with the "room" and actors. The use and outcomes of each step are exemplified through the FFPSA case study. The pragmatic and transparent policy actor identification steps presented here can guide researchers' methods for continuous sampling and successful policy actor engagement. Future work should explore the utility of the proposed methods for guiding selection and tailoring of engagement and implementation strategies (e.g., research-policy actor partnerships) to improve both "Big P" and "little p" (administrative guidelines, procedures) policymaking and implementation in global contexts.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Engaging policy actors in research design and execution is critical to increasing the practical relevance and real-world impact of policy-focused dissemination and implementation science. Identifying and selecting which policy actors to engage, particularly actors involved in "Big P" public policies such as laws, is distinct from traditional engaged research methods. This current study aimed to develop a transparent, structured method for iteratively identifying policy actors involved in key policy decisions-such as adopting evidence-based interventions at systems-scale-and to guide implementation study sampling and engagement approaches. A flexible policy actor taxonomy was developed to supplement existing methods and help identify policy developers, disseminators, implementers, enforcers, and influencers.
METHODS METHODS
A five-step methodology for identifying policy actors to potentially engage in policy dissemination and implementation research was developed. Leveraging a recent federal policy as a case study-The Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA)-publicly available documentation (e.g., websites, reports) were searched, retrieved, and coded using content analysis to characterize the organizations and individual policy actors in the "room" during policy decisions.
RESULTS RESULTS
The five steps are as follows: (1) clarify the policy implementation phase(s) of interest, (2) identify relevant proverbial or actual policymaking "rooms," (3) identify and characterize organizations in the room, (4) identify and characterize policy actors in the "room," and (5) quantify (e.g., count actors across groups), summarize, and compare "rooms" to develop or select engagement approaches aligned with the "room" and actors. The use and outcomes of each step are exemplified through the FFPSA case study.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The pragmatic and transparent policy actor identification steps presented here can guide researchers' methods for continuous sampling and successful policy actor engagement. Future work should explore the utility of the proposed methods for guiding selection and tailoring of engagement and implementation strategies (e.g., research-policy actor partnerships) to improve both "Big P" and "little p" (administrative guidelines, procedures) policymaking and implementation in global contexts.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37723580
doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00492-6
pii: 10.1186/s43058-023-00492-6
pmc: PMC10506261
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

113

Subventions

Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R25 MH080916
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : P50 MH113662
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : K01 MH128761
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : R25 DA037190
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : K01 DA056838
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH131649
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : K01 DA056838-01
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R21 MH125261
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd.

Références

Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020 May 01;9(5):185-197
pubmed: 32563219
Eur J Public Health. 2008 Aug;18(4):355-6; discussion 356
pubmed: 18644826
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2018 Mar/Apr;24(2):102-111
pubmed: 28885319
Health Serv Res. 2022 Jun;57 Suppl 1:122-136
pubmed: 35243638
Implement Sci. 2015 Jan 16;10:11
pubmed: 25592163
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Jan;38(1):4-23
pubmed: 21197565
Psychiatr Serv. 2022 Apr 01;73(4):388-395
pubmed: 34384231
Implement Sci. 2008 May 16;3:26
pubmed: 18485219
Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 05;8:103
pubmed: 24007206
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2000 Aug;25(4):689-715
pubmed: 10979517
Public Health Nutr. 2021 Jun;24(9):2737-2745
pubmed: 32819452
Implement Sci. 2020 Jun 19;15(1):47
pubmed: 32560661
Psychiatr Serv. 2020 Nov 1;71(11):1170-1178
pubmed: 32517640
Implement Sci Commun. 2023 Feb 16;4(1):16
pubmed: 36797794
Am J Public Health. 2009 Sep;99(9):1576-83
pubmed: 19608941
Implement Sci. 2016 Jan 04;11:2
pubmed: 26729367
Implement Sci. 2017 Nov 3;12(1):125
pubmed: 29100551
Am J Public Health. 2016 Feb;106(2):308-13
pubmed: 26691109
Implement Sci. 2022 Jan 6;17(1):3
pubmed: 34991638
Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 10;8:63
pubmed: 23758952
Ethn Dis. 2021 Jan 21;31(1):133-138
pubmed: 33519163
Prev Sci. 2020 Nov;21(8):1059-1064
pubmed: 33040271
Implement Sci. 2021 Apr 7;16(1):36
pubmed: 33827716
Psychiatr Serv. 2023 Jun 1;74(6):652-655
pubmed: 36300284
Implement Sci. 2016 Jan 04;11:1
pubmed: 26727969
Implement Sci. 2013 Dec 01;8:139
pubmed: 24289295
Prev Sci. 2022 Sep 1;:
pubmed: 36048400
Psychiatr Serv. 2016 Dec 1;67(12):1355-1361
pubmed: 27364817
Implement Sci. 2007 Jun 05;2:17
pubmed: 17550597
J Community Health. 2018 Oct;43(5):856-863
pubmed: 29500725
Public Health. 2020 Sep;186:107-109
pubmed: 32795769
Eur J Public Health. 2008 Aug;18(4):354-5
pubmed: 18524802
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2020 Feb;17(1):82-91
pubmed: 31638315
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Aug 22;17(1):82
pubmed: 31438977
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Jan 5;3(1):2
pubmed: 34983685
Implement Sci. 2018 Sep 19;13(1):121
pubmed: 30231934
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2016 Jan;43(1):52-66
pubmed: 25711392
Implement Sci. 2022 Dec 12;17(1):80
pubmed: 36503520
Implement Sci Commun. 2020 Apr 30;1:42
pubmed: 32885199
Implement Sci. 2021 Feb 15;16(1):18
pubmed: 33588878
Am Psychol. 2020 Nov;75(8):1130-1145
pubmed: 33252950
N Engl J Med. 2021 Jan 14;384(2):101-103
pubmed: 33502832
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Mar;50(3):293-301
pubmed: 21334569
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2022 Aug 1;47(4):497-518
pubmed: 35044466
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2020 Apr 1;45(2):277-309
pubmed: 31808787
Implement Sci. 2019 Dec 5;14(1):102
pubmed: 31806037
Health Educ Behav. 2020 Apr;47(2):213-223
pubmed: 32090653
Implement Sci. 2021 Jan 19;16(1):13
pubmed: 33468166
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285
Implement Sci. 2021 Mar 11;16(1):24
pubmed: 33706785
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2017 Mar;44(2):160-163
pubmed: 27418342
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Aug 7;157(3):207-10
pubmed: 22868839
BMJ Open. 2021 Oct 18;11(10):e053474
pubmed: 34663668

Auteurs

Gracelyn Cruden (G)

Chestnut Health System, Lighthouse Institute-Oregon Group, Eugene, OR, 97401, USA. gcruden@chestnut.org.

Erika L Crable (EL)

Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.

Rebecca Lengnick-Hall (R)

Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.

Jonathan Purtle (J)

School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York City, NY, USA.

Classifications MeSH