Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change (ORIC)

Constructs Assessed:

Constructs assessed by the assessment instrument (linked to constructs included in the D&I models webtool)

• Acceptability/feasibility
• Readiness

Theories, Models, Frameworks Relevant:

• Active Implementation Framework
• Choosing Wisely Deimplementation Framework
• Conceptual Framework for Research Knowledge Transfer and Utilization
• Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research
• Davis' Pathman-PRECEED Model
• Dissemination and Implementation Framework for an Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Program
• EMTReK - Evidence-based Model for the Transfer and Exchange of Research Knowledge
• Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) model (Conceptual Model of Evidence-based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors)
• Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations
• Implementation Effectiveness Model
• Intervention Mapping
• Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Model and Guidelines
• Kingdon's Multiple-Streams Framework
• Knowledge Exchange Framework
• Model for Improving the Dissemination of Nursing Research
• Model for Predictors of Adoption
• Organizational Theory of Innovation Implementation
• Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)
• Proctor's Implementation Outcomes
• Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS)
• Transcreation Framework for Community-engaged Behavioral Interventions to Reduce Health Disparities
• Weiner organizational readiness

Implementation Outcomes:

The relevance of the assessment instrument to various implementation outcomes

• Feasibility

Implementation Strategies:

The implementation strategy/ies evaluated by the assessment instrument

• Use evaluative and iterative strategies

Phase of Implementation Process:

Phase of implementation process when the assessment instrument can be used

• Pre-Implementation

Levels of Data Collection:

The level(s) from which the assessment instrument collects data

• Individual (Patient, Community Member)
• Implementer
• Organizational

Intended Priority Population:

Intended priority population from whom data are collected using the assessment instrument

• Community Members/Patients
• Researcher/Evaluator
• Clinician
• Administrator
• Public Health Practitioner
• Teacher/Trainer
• Employer

Intended Priority Setting:

Intended priority setting in which the assessment instrument is used

• Clinical Outpatient
• Clinical Inpatient
• Residential Care
• Community Organization
• Public Health Agency
• School
• Workplace

Policy:

Assessment instrument is relevant to policy

• Clinical Practice

Equity Focus:

Scoring:

The assessment instrument produces a composite score

Norms:

Measures of central tendency and distribution for the total score are based on small, medium, large sample size

Responsiveness:

The ability of the assessment instrument to detect change over time (i.e., sensitivity to change or intervention effects).

Validity:

The extent to which an instrument measures what it is intended to measure accurately.

• Unspecified Validity

Reliability:

The extent to which results are consistent results over time, across raters, across settings, or across items intended to measure the same thing.

• Internal Consistency
• Intra-Rater Reliability

Factor Analysis:

A statistical method that uses the correlation between observed variables to identify common factors.

Time to Administer:

The amount of time required to complete the assessment instrument

Secondary Data:

Cost:

Cost associated with access to assessment instrument (Some insturments might require login.)

Literacy:

Readability of the items reported on.

Interpretation:

Expertise needed for interpretation of data is reported.

Training:

Expertise needed to use the assessment instrument is reported

Resources Required to Administer:

Resources needed to administer the assessment instrument (FTE for data collector, equipment, etc.)

User Guidance:

Guides are provided to support administration of assessment instrument/data collection, and/or analysis of data from the assessment instrument, and/or interpretation of data, and/or action/decision on how to use data

Obtrusiveness:

Degree of intrusion the participants will experience because of the data collection when using the assessment instrument (e.g., assessment instruments that rely on use of secondary data or automated data will be less obtrusive)

• Medium: Asyncronous collection of data

Interactivity:

Data collection and/or result generation involves interactive components.