Effectiveness of the Educator Well-being Program

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Using a stepped wedge design (prospective cohort with concurrent controls) among six paired, elementary schools, investigators will implement and evaluate the Educator Well-being Program. The investigators will evaluate whether the process improves organizational-level factors, teacher mental well-being (stress, depression and anxiety symptoms).

Official Title
-----------------
CPH-NEW IV - Total Worker Health - Total Teacher Health

Conditions
-----------------
Participatory Action Research, Occupational Health, Educator Well-being, Employee Health

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Healthy Workplace Participatory Program


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: All staff aged 18 years or older at the time of survey administration within the three school districts will be eligible for participation. Exclusion Criteria: None.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
Interventional Model Description: A stepped wedge design (prospective cohort with concurrent controls) among six paired, elementary schools, implement and evaluate the Total Teacher Health Toolkit
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Educator Well-being Program<br>Staff at participating schools will experience the Educator Well-being Program process and complete pre- and post-intervention survey. | Behavioral: Healthy Workplace Participatory Program<br>* The Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workplace's (CPH-NEW's) Healthy Workplace Participatory Program (HWPP) is a participatory process in which end-users design TWH interventions that simultaneously change organizational and individual behavior to improve the health, safety and well-being of their workforce. The HWPP uses a process to empower workers to identify the root causes of health and safety concerns and then design, implement and evaluate interventions to address those problems. The Total Teacher Health Project adapted the HWPP for educators and refer to it as the Educator Well-being Program.<br>|
| Active Comparator: Delayed Intervention<br>Status quo program remains in place with new ongoing data collection, then experimental intervention as above. | Behavioral: Healthy Workplace Participatory Program<br>* The Center for the Promotion of Health in the New England Workplace's (CPH-NEW's) Healthy Workplace Participatory Program (HWPP) is a participatory process in which end-users design TWH interventions that simultaneously change organizational and individual behavior to improve the health, safety and well-being of their workforce. The HWPP uses a process to empower workers to identify the root causes of health and safety concerns and then design, implement and evaluate interventions to address those problems. The Total Teacher Health Project adapted the HWPP for educators and refer to it as the Educator Well-being Program.<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Change in Team Attendance | Attendance for each Educator Design Team meeting (1-4 times per month) | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Change in Team Engagement | Percentage of combined agree and strongly agree responses for 2 survey items collected following Educator Design Team meetings (1-4 times per month): I spoke up and gave my opinion at this meeting and The discussion was meaningful for achieving health, safety, and well-being goals. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree, Not Applicable). Items are computed individually. | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Change in Level of Committee Activity | A qualitative summary of field notes collected by research personnel following Educator Design Team and Administrator Team meetings (1-4 times per month) over the course of the study. | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Change in team-selected health/safety/well-being issue | Targeted pre- and post-intervention surveys will be designed and administered by the Educator Design Team | Through study completion, an average of two years | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Proportion of content followed according to the Educator Well-being Program protocol | A process measure that will be determined by adherence to Educator Well-being Program protocol and pre-designed agendas for Educator Design Team meetings (1-4 times per month) | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Change in scope of health/safety/well-being protocol | Periodic interviews, designed by the research team, will be conducted with Design Team co-facilitators and Administrator Team, and compared to results from baseline leadership interviews, designed by the research team, regarding scope of health/safety/well-being | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Shared staff-management awareness of job-related health, safety and well-being issues | Interim interviews, designed by the research team, will be conducted with Educator Design Team co-facilitators and Administrator Team. | Through study completion, an average of two years | 
| Stress | The All-Employee Survey for Educators includes 1 question related to stress (Eddy, 2009). The score ranges from 1-10, where higher scores indicate more stress. | Prior to random selection of immediate and delayed intervention site, and 1 years later | 
| Anxiety Symptoms | The All-Employee Survey for Educators includes 7 items from the GAD-7 (Spitzer et al., 2006). A summary score is created and scores range from 0-21, where higher scores indicate greater anxiety symptoms. | Prior to random selection of immediate and delayed intervention site, and 1 years later | 
| Depression Symptoms | The All-Employee Survey Educator includes 10 from the CES-D (Radloff et al., 1977) A summary score is created by summing items score ranges from 0-30, where higher scores indicate greater depression symptoms. | Prior to random selection of immediate and delayed intervention site, and 1 years later | 
| Supportive health climate | The All-Employee Survey Educator includes 3 items from Multi-faceted organizational health climate assessment (Zweber et al., 2018). A summary score is created by averaging the 3 items with score ranges from 1-4, where higher scores indicate more supportive health climate. | Prior to random selection of immediate and delayed intervention site, and 1 years later | 
| Supportive School Climate | The All-Employee Survey Educator includes 6 from the School Climate sub-scale for staff connection (La Salle et al. 2018) A summary score is created by averaging the items with score ranges from 1-4, where higher scores indicate a greater more supportive school climate. | Prior to random selection of immediate and delayed intervention site, and 1 years later |