What Does It Mean to "Employ" the RE-AIM Model?

Rodger S. Kessler, E. Peyton Purcell, Russell E. Glasgow, Lisa M. Klesges, Rachel M. Benkeser, C. J. Peek

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

188 Scopus citations


Many grant proposals identify the use of a given evaluation model or framework but offer little about how such models are implemented. The authors discuss what it means to employ a specific model, RE-AIM, and key dimensions from this model for program planning, implementation, evaluation, and reporting. The authors report both conceptual and content specifications for the use of the RE-AIM model and a content review of 42 recent dissemination and implementation grant applications to National Institutes of Health that proposed the use of this model. Outcomes include the extent to which proposals addressed the overall RE-AIM model and specific items within the five dimensions in their methods or evaluation plans. The majority of grants used only some elements of the model (less than 10% contained thorough measures across all RE-AIM dimensions). Few met criteria for "fully developed use" of RE-AIM and the percentage of key issues addressed varied from, on average, 45% to 78% across the RE-AIM dimensions. The results and discussion of key criteria should help investigators in their use of RE-AIM and illuminate the broader issue of comprehensive use of evaluation models.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)44-66
Number of pages23
JournalEvaluation and the Health Professions
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2013


  • RE-AIM
  • evaluation
  • fidelity
  • methodology
  • model testing
  • review criteria


Dive into the research topics of 'What Does It Mean to "Employ" the RE-AIM Model?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this