This table is based on the Hexagon Tool (Blase et al. 2013b).
The Hexagon Tool helps states, communities, and agencies systematically evaluate new and existing interventions via six broad factors: needs, fit, resource availability, evidence, readiness for replication and capacity to implement.
5 point rating scale: Team members can individually rate each area on a 1 to 5 scale, where 1 indicates a low level of feasibility, 3 a moderate level and 5 indicates a high level for the factor. Midpoints can be used and scored as a 2 or 4.
Download a printer-friendly version of the Eligible Program Review
| Activity | High | Medium | Low |
| *Review and discuss “eligible” programs and practices in relation to: | |||
| Need in agency, community, province, state | |||
| Health, human service, and socially significant issues | |||
| Community perceptions of need | |||
| Data indicating need | |||
| Fit with, and impact on, current initiatives | |||
| Agency, community, province, state priorities | |||
| Organizational structures | |||
| Community values | |||
| Resources and supports for: | |||
| Practice settings | |||
| Technology supports | |||
| Staffing | |||
| Training | |||
| Data systems | |||
| Coaching and supervision | |||
| Administration and systems | |||
| Strength of Evidence | |||
| Outcomes – Is it worth it? | |||
| Fidelity data | |||
| Cost effectiveness data | |||
| Number of studies | |||
| Population similarities | |||
| Diverse cultural groups | |||
| Efficacy or effectiveness | |||
| Readiness for replication | |||
| Qualifications of team | |||
| Available expertise | |||
| Mature sites to observe | |||
| Operational definitions of essential functions |
