Abstract
The physical literacy for communities (PL4C) project aimed to promote physical literacy using a participatory community mobilization approach; organizing multi-sectoral community-led tables that developed and promoted physical literacy initiatives. As part of a scale-up across Canada, we set out to design an evaluation protocol to assess the effectiveness of the PL4C intervention that was aligned with table processes and activities. We conducted interviews with members of two original community tables that would then serve as exemplar communities for the scale-up evaluation with the goal of understanding: (1) how the existing PL4C intervention functioned; and (2) the promotion of physical literacy in these communities. Through qualitative interviews with 13 (11 women) existing PL4C table members, we identified three broad categories: working together, sustainability, and promoting physical literacy in different settings. Participants identified several areas important for evaluation of PL4C scale-up and implementation, including unpacking partnership operations and capacity building, supporting and understanding the sustainability of multi-sectoral action, and measuring the effectiveness of physical literacy program delivery. We used findings from these interviews to design an evaluation of the PL4C intervention that included milestone tracking, interviews and surveys with table members and community leaders, and direct measures of physical literacy alongside school and community-based physical literacy interventions being delivered in exemplar communities.
Introduction
Physical literacy is a holistic multidimensional concept describing the interrelationship between motivation, confidence, competence, and knowledge leading to participation in physical activity across the life course (Whitehead, 2001). In children, higher physical literacy scores are associated with greater participation in physical activity, less participation in sedentary behavior, and overall improved mental and physical health (Caldwell et al., 2020; Melby et al., 2022; Tang et al., 2023). Interventions grounded in physical literacy are effective at improving aspects of physical competence (e.g., fundamental movement skills), motivation, knowledge, and physical activity (Carl et al., 2022). As physical literacy is an interdisciplinary concept covering fields of health, education, and sport, physical literacy interventions must be embedded across sectors to achieve the impact, reach, implementation, and sustainability necessary for outcomes at the population level (Dudley et al., 2017; Houser et al., 2025). Cross-sector integration of physical literacy-based intervention delivery in communities has been poorly conceptualized and often limited in implementation (Cornish et al., 2020; Dudley et al., 2017). Mobilizing community partners to enable multi-sectoral action can support scale-up and reach of community programs and, as a multidimensional concept crossing many sectors, may be a novel and effective approach for the delivery of physical literacy-based interventions (Houser et al., 2025; Leeman et al., 2022). While there is limited previous research on physical literacy community action initiatives, in one province-wide initiative in Canada, Houser et al. (2025) identified the need for clear leadership, alignment of strategies, strong communication, and transparency.
The PL4C project was a multi-year project funded by a variety of funding bodies, with the scale-up funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) through a multi-sectoral partnership grant. The aim of the PL4C initiative was to support physical literacy development among children across Canada. Using participatory community mobilization approaches, the PL4C project included the formation of multi-sectoral collaborative tables and used training and the provision of technical support to build capacity across various settings (e.g., community, school), adapted for community needs (Physical Literacy for Communities—Public Health Agency of Canada Project, n.d.). In the context of this project, the term ‘tables’ refers to a forum or organized space (virtual or physical) where community partners came together to discuss and plan shared goals, challenges, and initiatives related to physical literacy. In its pilot stages, the PL4C project established partnership tables in 18 communities, and two of these tables were identified as exemplar communities to use as a model for scale-up and evaluation (Tang et al., 2023). These two exemplar communities were selected as they represent diversity in terms of remoteness (distance and influence from larger urban centers), climate, and a different focus related to physical literacy interventions delivered by the PL4C tables (school vs. community-based). As the PL4C project expanded across Canada, there was a unique opportunity to evaluate the expansion of physical literacy interventions and collaborative action targeting chronic disease prevention (Houser et al., 2025; Tsai et al., 2022; Wolfenden et al., 2022).
Multi-sectoral partnership projects provide an opportunity to evaluate a population health intervention as a ‘real-world’ intervention or natural experiment (Willis et al., 2016). Natural experiments can improve the evidence base in population health in cases where the exposure to the intervention is not controlled or delivered by a researcher, representing unplanned opportunities for research or evaluation (Craig et al., 2025; Crane et al., 2020). While lab-based research studies involve the design and development of research from the program's outset, the evaluation of ongoing initiatives is a considerable methodological challenge for balancing scientific rigor with the practical nature of interventions as they are being delivered or scaled. Formative evaluation of such interventions provides an opportunity to assess an intervention during or before scale-up to inform evaluation design and intervention development (O’Hara et al., 2014; Scott et al., 2020).
To inform the development of an evaluation approach for the PL4C intervention, the objectives of this study were to describe:
The PL4C intervention as a multi-sectoral partnership delivered previously in two exemplar communities.
The integration of physical literacy into the different sectors represented at PL4C tables and projects or initiatives facilitated by the tables.
Methods
Participants
Participants included any individuals who were currently or had previously been engaged as members of a PL4C table in one of the two exemplar communities identified for evaluation. These two communities were identified to represent diversity (population size, remoteness) and based on their established PL4C work as part of the first wave of communities involved in the initiative. Participants were recruited through targeted emails circulated by the broader lead organization in each community. Harmonized research ethics approval was provided by the University of Northern British Columbia Research Ethics Board (H21-02563). All participants provided informed consent.
Data Generation
Semi-structured interviews were conducted between February and April 2022 via the Zoom videoconference platform by two research team members. Interview questions focused on current or past activities of the PL4C tables, barriers to table activities, strengths and weaknesses of the partnership approach, and questions to probe background information about table activities.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was completed by two members of the research team following the framework method (Gale et al., 2013; Pelletier et al., 2025). The framework method is useful where there are multiple researchers working on a project, and for developing a holistic and descriptive overview of the entire dataset. Our analysis steps included:
Transcription and familiarization. Verbatim interview transcription was completed by a professional transcriptionist. Data immersion and familiarization included reading and re-reading transcripts, interview notes, and referring to interview audio files as necessary.
Initial coding. Two members of the research team independently coded the same two transcripts. During coding, interesting sections of text were highlighted or underlined, and content was described using brief code labels. Detailed notes, reflections, and ideas were journaled as appropriate.
Framework development. The researchers met to compare the transcripts and develop a set of codes (analytical framework). We used this framework to code the additional transcripts, adding new codes and refining existing codes in the framework. The codes were clustered into broad categories.
Applying the framework. Using the analytical framework developed in the previous step, we coded the transcripts using the specific categories of interest reflecting the research questions.
Data charting. Data were charted into a matrix based on the analytical framework. A matrix comprised of one code per column and one participant per row was developed to collect quotes representing each code.
Interpretation. Based on initial notes, discussions, and reflections with the research team, we discussed characteristics of the data, mapped connections between categories and organized or collapsed categories as appropriate. Each category was described with a definition, the examples of the codes within it, and a summary of the data accompanied by relevant quotes.
Results
Twelve interviews (mean 46 minutes) were conducted with 13 participants who were involved in the PL4C intervention prior to the new partnership scale-up funding and/or related activities, roundtables, or committees. Participants were, on average, 43 years of age and 11 (84.6%) identified as women. Participants represented various sectors, including health (n = 4), education (n = 5), and sport/recreation (n = 4).
Interview participants described the PL4C tables as productive, collaborative, and as a way for them to network with other people living in their communities with similar goals. Overall, participants felt their participation was a good use of time but identified a dominant focus on the school sector and challenges with ongoing sustainability. We identified three categories describing the PL4C intervention and challenges and successes in implementing the intervention to inform evaluation.
Working Together
As an intervention focused on multi-sectoral partnerships and collaborative action, all participants described the importance and value found in working together across sectors to carry out the PL4C intervention. Working together and forming relationships across sectors was commonly described as the true strength of the intervention. As P11 explained,
[The] power is in the relationship, that’s really what I saw for me and the fact that for our organization I felt like it capitalized into different things that I would never have even thought about.
Related to working together, participants described the need to establish common goals at the partnership tables. This was achieved through structured action at the tables (e.g., milestone or goal setting exercises), and more informally, as a common goal was what brought people to the table to begin with (e.g., an implicit understanding of the common goal or importance of the topic), as P2 explained,
[A]s a group we went through, I think quite a valuable sort of goal-setting session and visioning session to kind of figure out what the purpose behind our group was.
As described by the participants, working together provided an opportunity to share and leverage resources across sectors. As described by P7, many participants found they were able to do more together than alone and the PL4C table facilitated sharing ideas and resources:
It was quite often that one would be giving an update and someone else would be like oh I can help with that. Or, where’s someone to talk to so I think just like the network aspect of it was really valuable and people seemed to see the value in it.
Promoting Physical Literacy
In addition to describing how the tables were valued due to their collaborative action, participants described how the tables were effective at promoting physical literacy in different settings. All participants described physical literacy as a multifaceted concept, the importance of which crosses different sectors. Some participants expressed concern that the focus of many physical literacy interventions or projects was specific to the sport sector, with a dominant focus on the development of fundamental movement skills. As described by P3, the intervention was “very focused on the physical dimension of physical literacy.”
Relatedly, many participants discussed initiatives or programs initiated by the PL4C tables, primarily having a focus on children and youth either in school or sport/recreation settings, with limited focus on physical literacy to improve health and engagement in physical activity across the life course. While some participants, such as P4, described the school focus as necessary:
[A]n essential piece of the table like without schools at the table there’s a massive hole because not everybody participates in before [or]after care, sport and everything like that, whereas every child is expected to be at school or at least connected to that system. So, it became for me obvious that . . . school was kind of everything that pulled it together.
All participants recognized the value of physical literacy and its potential role as a concept to frame broader physical activity interventions. Some participants mentioned how the PL4C intervention was intended to take a life course approach, incorporating multiple sectors, but eventually focused mostly on children in a school setting, as P2 explains,
[T]he health representation kind of tried to get a lot more of a lifespan approach rather than focus on children. So that was I think well received but again the uptake was kind of more on the children end.
Sustainability
All participants expressed the value of promoting physical literacy and the PL4C intervention. The flip side of seeing the value was concerns about the sustainability of such partnerships. Participants felt it was essential to have leadership buy-in to support ongoing productive activities and ensure the work of the table moved forward. The key to sustainability was ongoing funding, as P3 mentioned:
[I]f you really wanted to keep having physical literacy for communities’ tables then you need to fund them to exist.
As suggested ways to ensure the sustainability of the table, participants mentioned the need for tables to have a clear vision agreed upon by all parties. This was an essential element necessary to ensure everyone was working toward the same goal and had a clear understanding of the purpose of the table, as P11 mentioned:
I just think that having something that is, if you want to sustain it, there just needs to be a very clear mandate and reason and justification for something or else I don’t think you can rely on, you’re really otherwise relying on individual relationships.
Related to the actual vision and goals of the table, participants discussed how the work of the table could ensure sustainability by having a clear plan of ownership. P1 describes this structure as requiring a coordinator who would be responsible for overseeing table activities and identifying who would carry on the legacy of the table’s activities once it was formally disbanded:
[W]e need to have a dedicated coordinator that is at these tables, a dedicated coordinator, a person that doesn’t have a full-time role. The coordinator who is really there who touches bases with all of the sectors and all of the committee members and knows what’s going on . . . that’s one of the most important roles.
The need for table ownership was also connected to the idea of accountability. Participants described how they often were not sure what happened or who was responsible for managing project funds or maintaining a record of work completed by the table. For example, P10 explained how having a person or organization with ownership can ensure accountability and facilitate collaborative work:
I think if somebody has the accountability for it and that can mobilize those organization, it’s really important.
Participants consistently described the tension existing between having a strong structure and clear direction for the table, with the desire to be able to adapt the table to their specific needs, context, and vision. While participants discussed how they valued having a clear structure to table activities and a common goal, participants also expressed how they needed flexibility to adapt table activities and goals to their specific communities. As P12 explained, the tension between flexibility and structure led to some people feeling overwhelmed with possibilities and others craving more direction:
But finding that between the people that are just like oh, and they’re overwhelmed by the fact that they can do whatever they want and the ones that get a little annoyed because they feel like they just can’t do all of these things.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to conduct background interviews to assist in evaluation design by enhancing our understanding of the multi-sectoral partnerships formed to mobilize physical literacy-oriented population health interventions. Our findings identified several elements of the PL4C intervention important for scale-up evaluation: coordination and functioning of the partnership tables, capacity for and delivery of physical literacy programming in schools and other settings, tracking program delivery in different communities for accountability, and understanding the sustainability of the PL4C tables.
The original PL4C tables that existed prior to scale-up funding (used as exemplar communities) were funded over a 3-year period. Many of the participants we talked to were enthusiastic about what was accomplished; however, they expressed concerns about how the table would be maintained past the funding period. This is a common sentiment in multi-sectoral partnership work (Alhassan et al., 2021; Oestman et al., 2025). Often, projects are funded by grants, which may only last a few years, and with all the work required to develop relationships, concerns are often raised about how the work will carry on after the funding period and who will assume ownership. In this project, participants mentioned that a stable organization, such as a municipality, would be a natural fit to own long-term collaborative work such as this, as they are a known entity, not necessarily subject to the same cyclical funding cycles and staff turnover, with more stable legacy and institutional memory. Often known as a backbone organization, the role may include organizing regular meetings, ensuring accountability of table work, providing mentorship and supporting visibility of partners (Alhassan et al., 2021; DePriest et al., 2025; Virtanen et al., 2021).
Adapting to local context is a key tenet of implementation and scale-up of interventions (Moore et al., 2021). The PL4C intervention is a multi-sectoral partnership table organized in each community to deliver actions to improve physical literacy, reflecting community needs and priorities. Despite the seemingly adaptable nature of the PL4C intervention, some participants discussed a tension that emerged where the openness of the intervention made them at times feel lost, but at other times the intervention was too rigid and not able to accommodate their community needs. Thus, a key tenet of any scale-up evaluation is ongoing discussions with PL4C table members to understand partnership development and determine if the overall intervention is meeting both partner needs and outcomes related to physical literacy in their communities (e.g., track goal achievement and capacity building).
As participants discussed different projects delivered by their PL4C tables, the focus was on school-based interventions to support physical literacy development in children. Thus, a key aspect of a broader evaluation approach must include a strong focus on child physical literacy development. While most initiatives described were focused on child physical literacy in schools, as it is where there is a natural touch point for all children, it is also important to develop and evaluate interventions delivered by community-based organizations. In the development of the evaluation approach for the PL4C intervention, we decided to focus on both the scale-up expansion of the intervention across Canada, as well as conducting exemplar community evaluations in two different geographical contexts and settings (see Tang et al., 2023 for a description of one exemplar community project).
Based on findings from the current study, we have developed an evaluation approach to include three main components:
Conducting cross-Canada interviews/focus groups with table leaders to evaluate partnership development
Evaluating the training offered as part of the capacity-building efforts and its impact on knowledge and capacity to support physical literacy initiatives
Measuring physical literacy in children to understand intervention effectiveness in community and school settings
We have incorporated findings from the descriptive interviews, an evaluation framework (RE-AIM; Holtrop et al., 2021), and indicators as identified by PHAC (Willis et al., 2016) to design our evaluation approach. Key goals and expected outcomes of the PL4C intervention include increased community partnership and collaboration, increased knowledge of physical literacy, increased capacity to support physical literacy interventions, and increased physical literacy (see Table 1 for evaluation plan). Because of the dual aims to both increase physical literacy and increase capacity for physical literacy programming, it is essential to evaluate both the physical literacy tables themselves as an intervention (e.g., do the physical literacy tables increase capacity for physical literacy promotion within each community?), and the physical literacy initiatives organized by PL4C community tables to see if they result in improved physical literacy. Because the exemplar communities have established PL4C tables (and therefore capacity), it was decided to conduct child-level measures of physical literacy in these two communities.
Evaluation Plan for the Physical Literacy for Communities Evaluation Using the RE-AIM Framework.
Note. PL4C, physical literacy for communities.
Limitations
As a formative evaluation conducted to inform scale-up, this study is limited by including only two exemplar communities, which represent two distinct areas in one province of Canada (British Columbia). While this limits the applicability of these findings to other areas, we have aimed to describe the process of conducting interviews and describing the intervention to support our broader evaluation development. Our study is also limited by our sample of primarily participants identifying as women.
Implications for Practice
Health promotion practitioners should consider conducting background interviews to provide important formative information to aid in designing a program evaluation. For practitioners working across sectors, it is important to identify clear leadership and ownership of collaborative work, define goals and activities, and consider the sustainability of partnership activities.
Implications for Research
Future research should explore the creation, expansion and initiation of community mobilization initiatives to understand the work of multi-sectoral groups, including partnership formation, expansion, and collaborative action. Prospective evaluation of multi-sectoral action and partnership work should assess partners’ engagement and experiences, alongside changes in outcomes (e.g., health status, health behaviors). While this project contributes to a broader understanding of multi-sectoral collaborative action, it does so only in two different community contexts within one province. Expanding the scope to different settings and populations would be informative.
Conclusion
The PL4C intervention is a community mobilization intervention based on multi-sectoral action aimed at increasing capacity for physical literacy initiatives in communities and improving physical literacy and population health. Following interviews with members of established PL4C tables, we identified three categories to describe the intervention and determine measurement priorities within the scale-up evaluation approach. We set out to evaluate the collaborations and their outputs (working together, achieving project milestones), explore the issues around the sustainability of partnerships beyond the funding period, and to track the promotion of physical literacy and its impact on participants. Using the RE-AIM framework, our evaluation approach includes a pragmatic design to evaluate the multi-sectoral work of the tables and directly measure the delivery and impact of physical literacy interventions in two different exemplar community settings. Conducting background interviews as a form of formative evaluation helped to frame our evaluation approach for a real-world intervention.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The Physical Literacy for Communities (PL4C) project was supported through the Healthy Canadians and Communities Fund from the Public Health Agency of Canada. Additional financial and in-kind contributions were received from Sport for Life and the Childhood Healthy Living Foundation.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.