Skip to main content

Table 3 Foundation for K2A indicators (adapted from Mansfield & Grunewald, 2013 [36])

From: Developing a framework to evaluate knowledge into action interventions

Type of activity Indicator Outcome levela
Online community of practice   
  # of members and types against target 3
  # of contributions (differentiated by content type, such as discussion, file, blog etc) 3
  # of views of different content types 3
  Distribution of member participation (contributors, views etc) 3
  Would target audience miss if discontinued? 3/4
  # of conversations you have had as result of the community 5
  Have you talked to someone you did not talk to before? 5
  Have you worked with anyone outside the portal that you met here? 5
  Can you give an example of what the CoP enabled you to do? Potential for 3–6
Knowledge services   
  # of requests for information by target audiences 3
  % of repeat requests from particular stakeholders/service users 4
  Would you recommend the service to others? 4
  % feedback from users 3/4
  Knowledge provided is of good quality and meets my requirements 5
Knowledge products   
  # knowledge product created 2
  % users who rate knowledge products as excellent/useful 3
  # citations of knowledge products 5
  # people having read/used knowledge product 3
  # recommendation of knowledge product 4
  Usefulness of knowledge product (likert item 1–5) as perceived by target audience 5
  Use in practice as reported by target audience 6
Knowledge sharing/brokering   
  I feel encouraged to share knowledge with my colleagues 5
  I have shared knowledge with a colleague at least once a week 5
  I know precisely who in my organisation has the specific capacity to help me identify relevant knowledge for my work 5
  I am able to find the knowledge I need quickly and easily 5
  We have structures for team and project work that encourage people to bring forward experiences and insights from other settings 5
  We encourage multiple perspectives and different points of view to emerge 5
Knowledge activities/success cases   
  #% staff who are able to provide an example of how knowledge activities have contributed to a change in practice 6
  #% staff who are able to provide an example of how knowledge activities contribute to local or national level indicators 7
  #% staff who give an example of where learning has improved a policy or programme 6
  Feedback on what would have happened without the knowledge activity Potential 3–7
  1. a7: End Outcomes, 6: Policy or practice change, 5: Capacity, Knowledge, skill, 4: Awareness, Reaction, 3: Engagement, Participation, 2: Activities and Outputs, 1: Inputs