Expert Appraisal of the 2022 Canadian Para Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Adolescents With Disabilities.

This report provides an expert appraisal of the Canadian Para Report Card on physical activity (PA) for children and adolescents with disabilities. Thirteen indicators were graded by a panel of researchers, representatives from disability and PA organizations, and parents of children and adolescents with disabilities using benchmarks of the Global Matrix 4.0 and previous Canadian PA Report Cards. Facilitated panel discussions were used to appraise the available evidence based on data gaps, opportunities, and recommendations. The available data sources included four nationally generalizable or representative data sets. Grades were assigned to 8/13 indicators and ranged from B+ to F. Data gaps in measurement and national surveillance systems were identified. Ableism was an issue identified within some of the reporting benchmarks. The absence of PA from existing accessibility legislation in Canada was a policy gap of concern. Recommendations related to research, surveillance, and policy are provided to enhance PA among children and adolescents with disabilities in Canada.

Using mixed methods and partnership to develop a program evaluation toolkit for organizations that provide physical activity programs for persons with disabilities.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this paper is to report on the process for developing an online RE-AIM evaluation toolkit in partnership with organizations that provide physical activity programming for persons with disabilities. METHODS: A community-university partnership was established and guided by an integrated knowledge translation approach. The four-step development process included: (1) identify, review, and select knowledge (literature review and two rounds of Delphi consensus-building), (2) adapt knowledge to local context (rating feasibility of outcomes and integration into online platform), (3) assess barriers and facilitators (think-aloud interviews), and (4) select, tailor, implement (collaborative dissemination plan). RESULTS: Step 1: Fifteen RE-AIM papers relevant to community programming were identified during the literature review. Two rounds of Delphi refined indicators for the toolkit related to reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Step 2: At least one measure was linked with each indicator. Ten research and community partners participated in assessing the feasibility of measures, resulting in a total of 85 measures. Step 3: Interviews resulted in several recommendations for the online platform and toolkit. Step 4: Project partners developed a dissemination plan, including an information package, webinars, and publications. DISCUSSION: This project demonstrates that community and university partners can collaborate to develop a useful, evidence-informed evaluation resource for both audiences. We identified several strategies for partnership when creating a toolkit, including using a set of expectations, engaging research users from the outset, using consensus methods, recruiting users through networks, and mentorship of trainees. The toolkit can be found at et.cdpp.ca. Next steps include disseminating (e.g., through webinars, conferences) and evaluating the toolkit to improve its use for diverse contexts (e.g., universal PA programming).

Organizations that provide sport and exercise programming for people with disabilities need to evaluate their programs to understand what works, secure funding, and make improvements. However, these programs can be difficult to evaluate due to lack of evidence-informed tools, low capacity, and few resources (e.g., money, time). For this project, we aimed to close the evaluation gap by creating an online, evidence-informed toolkit that helps organizations evaluate physical activity programs for individuals with disabilities. The toolkit development process was guided by a community-university partnership and used a systematic four-step approach. Step one included reviewing the literature and building consensus among partners and potential users about indicators related to the success of community-based programs. Step two involved linking indicators with at least one measure for assessment. Step three involved interviews with partners who provided several recommendations for the online toolkit. Step four included the co-creation of a collaborative plan to distribute the toolkit for academic and non-academic audiences. Our comprehensive toolkit includes indicators for the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of physical activity programs for individuals with disabilities. This paper provides a template for making toolkits in partnership with research users, offers strategies for community-university partnerships, and resulted in the co-creation of an evidence-informed evaluation resource to physical activity organizations. Users can find the toolkit at et.cdpp.ca.