Abstract
The purpose of this study was to implement a data-coaching process to address staff PA-promoting behaviors during out-of-school time (OST) programming. This single-group pre-post study involved OST programs across four elementary schools. An iterative data-coaching program (OST-Coach) was implemented that addressed staff PA-promoting behaviors. The System for Observing Staff Promotion of PA and Nutrition was used to observe staff behaviors. Binary logistic regressions were conducted to examine pre-post intervention changes in staff PA-promoting behaviors. Staff behaviors changed post-intervention, with lower odds of observing supervisory behavior (odds ratio [OR] = 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.21, 0.41]), and higher odds of PA engagement (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = [1.97, 3.58]). Odds of observing free play were lower post-intervention (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = [0.25, 0.46]), while the odds for observing organized PA were higher (OR = 4.03, 95% CI = [3.00, 5.42]). Results indicate that integration of OST-Coach offers a promising solution to improve staff PA-promoting practices during OST programming.
Physical activity (PA) engagement is vital for children due to its numerous health benefits, including supporting healthy musculoskeletal development and reducing the risk of developing chronic disease (Poitras et al., 2016). Evidence has indicated that many children in the United States miss out on these benefits with only ~20% of 6- to 17-year-olds currently meeting the national guideline of 60 minutes of daily moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA; Physical Activity Alliance, 2024). Thus, there is a need for evidence-based PA promotion strategies to address the physical inactivity epidemic facing youth (Guthold et al., 2020).
A comprehensive school physical activity program (CSPAP) is a multi-component whole-of-school model with the overarching goal of helping all children achieve 60 minutes of daily MVPA (Carson & Webster, 2019). One key element within this model is how out-of-school time (OST) related PA programming plays a key role in helping children achieve daily PA recommendations. Recent evidence has indicated that a significant percentage of U.S. children (~20%) were enrolled in an after-school program and attended these programs for an average of 5.6 hours per week (Afterschool Alliance, 2020). This makes OST programs an ideal setting for implementing strategies to help children meet daily PA recommendations. However, there is limited staff training in OST-related settings that equips program leaders with an environment that supports PA (Stoepker et al., 2021).
The National Afterschool Association (2018) developed standards for OST programming to dedicate at least 30 minutes to PA and spend at least half of that time in MVPA. Research has demonstrated that children who attend OST programming receive meaningful movement opportunities (e.g., allocated time to engage in PA) but do not consistently engage in sufficient MVPA (Tassitano et al., 2020). To address low PA levels during program time, more effective approaches are needed. A promising approach has been to target staff PA-promoting behaviors to create an OST environment that is more conducive to PA behavior (Stoepker et al., 2025). Previous research demonstrates that staff engagement (e.g., being active with children) and encouragement for PA (e.g., affirming PA behaviors) are associated with higher MVPA levels among children (Huberty et al., 2013). Expanding on this, Maher et al. (2021) conducted a review examining staff-based programs and found that programs where staff received both initial and ongoing training for promoting PA had positive effects in increasing child PA. Although these findings suggest that staff training in PA-promoting behaviors has the potential to increase PA, there is still limited evidence on best strategies for staff training implementation. Many OST program PA interventions only focus on staff training prior to the intervention which overlooks the opportunity to provide iterative feedback to program staff throughout implementation. Therefore, more comprehensive approaches are needed to address staff behavior in OST PA promotion (Stoepker et al., 2025).
The purpose of this study was to implement a data-coaching process addressing staff PA-promoting behavior during scheduled PA time in OST programming. The data-coaching process (OST-Coach) followed specific procedures outlined elsewhere (Stoepker & Dzewaltowski, 2023). Briefly, Stoepker and Dzewaltowski put forth an approach involving an iterative data-coaching process with four data-coaching sessions to be administered across an academic year following the Investigate, Design, Practice, Reflect (IDPR) cycle (Rosen et al., 2024), emphasizing tailored feedback, active problem-solving, and iterative reflection. This approach makes it a more comprehensive strategy than traditional one-time staff trainings. Due to the unique and iterative nature of this systematic data-coaching process, we hypothesized that the implementation of the intervention would significantly increase positive staff PA-promoting behaviors and promote improvements to the activity context.
Method
Design
A single-group pre-post design was used to assess the effects of OST-Coach on staff PA-promoting behaviors. Data collection was conducted at four elementary school OST programs within one state in the U.S. Midwest. The Director of the OST program selected the four locations prior to data collection. Each OST program had eight staff members, and all sites followed the same schedule. Every site had a Unit Director that was responsible for program oversight and was the main point of contact for the research team. Observations were conducted on typical program days, excluding days impacted by weather, new content implementation, etc. Observations took place while activities were in progress, which allowed for a real-time assessment of staff engagement and interaction with students.
OST-Coach Intervention
The data-coaching intervention conducted consists of four elements following Investigate, Design, Practice, Reflect Cycle (IDPR; Rosen et al., 2024) principles. Two members of the research team met with the four-unit directors and OST leadership (e.g., CEO, COO) for 1.5 hours for each of the four data-coaching sessions. The first data-coaching session (Investigate) incorporated discussions to understand the current infrastructure, curriculum, and schedule of the OST programs. The second session (Design) discussed evidence-based strategies (e.g., eliminating lines and elimination games) for integrating PA into the OST environment. Furthermore, site leaders were encouraged to create goals (e.g., increase staff verbally encouraging PA) on how to increase staff PA promotion during activity time at their site. Following this session, the first wave of staff observation data was collected. During the third session (Practice), staff behavior data from the first observation window were shared with site leaders to see how effective their staff were in promoting/facilitating PA. In addition, the research team facilitated specific data-informed conversations with the site leaders to encourage their staff to develop and implement goals on how to create a stronger PA supportive environment (e.g., increase staff activity with children, provide more positive feedback during activity time). Before the final session, a second wave of data collection occurred. Finally, the Reflect session focused on sharing data from the second staff observation window and discussing how effectively the sites were in meeting their goals and navigated the overall IDPR process.
Study Sample
The data-coaching process occurred over the entire 2024–2025 academic year, with the initial data-coaching session (Investigate) happening in the fall of 2024. In February, the Design data session took place to discuss specific strategies for designing active spaces during program time. After this session, staff observation data were collected for 13 days (n = 396 total observations) to inform the discussion for the third data-coaching session (Practice). After the third session, an additional 11 observation days were completed (n = 395 total observations). Finally, the final session (Reflect) occurred at the end of the academic year, and a final data report was shared. Figure 1 shows an overview of the study timeline. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Kansas State University Institutional Review Board #12264.
Study Timeline.
Measure
Staff PA-Promoting Behaviors
The primary method for data collection was the System for Observing Staff Promotion of Activity and Nutrition (SOSPAN; Weaver et al., 2014). This tool measures staff behaviors and the structures of play that either promote or discourage PA. The specific PA context subdomains are: small-sided games, off-task PA, organized PA, free play, standing/waiting, and elimination games. In addition, information such as the type of activity (e.g., playground games, basketball, four-square) and the availability of equipment is recorded. The specific staff PA-promoting behavior subdomains are supervise, PA instruct/lead, PA engaged, off-task, other duties, PA promotion, PA discouragement, withhold PA, and PA as punishment. SOSPAN has been found as a reliable and valid tool-assessing staff PA-promoting behaviors in OST programs (Weaver et al., 2014).
Data collectors were trained in SOSPAN methods. Observers first attended in-lab reliability practices, which included viewing example videos of children performing PA while simultaneously completing SOSPAN scans. Inter-observer reliability criteria were set at >80%. Once observers completed training and met reliability criteria, they were approved to collect data. To account for observer drift, reliability was tested on 80% of data collection days. Average reliability across all data collection days was 93%. All scans were completed during the allotted 30 minutes of scheduled OST PA time.
Data Analysis
Prior to data analysis, data were screened for non-valid values and descriptive statistics (i.e., frequencies of observed behaviors) were then calculated. After data were screened, binary logistic regressions were conducted to assess changes in all related SOSPAN variables from pre- to post-intervention. Specifically, each behavior (e.g., staff PA engaged) was entered as observed/not observed with time (pre- to post-intervention) as the predictor. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed to evaluate if staff behaviors changed significantly from before to following the OST-Coach intervention.
Results
Results indicated significant pre-post changes in staff PA-promoting behaviors and activity context (Table 1). In regard to activity context, after the Practice data-coaching session, there were no observable changes in small-sided games and off-task behavior. The odds of observing PA free play (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = [0.25, 0.46]) and children engaged in elimination games (OR = 0.07, 95% CI = [0.02, 0.21]) significantly decreased. The odds of observing organized PA (OR = 4.03, 95% CI = [3.00, 5.42]) and standing/waiting (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = [1.29, 2.37]) significantly increased. Regarding staff PA-promoting behavior, there were no observable changes in PA discouragement, withholding PA, using PA as punishment, and engaging in other duties. The odds of observing staff in a supervisory/sedentary role (OR = 0.30, 95% CI = [0.21, 0.41]) and time spent off task (OR = 0.13, 95% CI [0.03, 0.61]) significantly decreased. Odds for observing time spent instructing PA (OR = 2.32, 95% CI = [1.61, 3.34]), engaged in PA (OR = 2.63, 95% CI = [1.97, 3.58]), and verbally promoting PA (OR = 2.46, 95% CI = [1.20, 5.06]) significantly increased.
Pre-Post Intervention Changes in SOSPAN Activity Context Variables and Staff PA-Promoting Behavior Variables.
Note. Percentages indicate the observed prevalence of SOPAN variable at pre- and post-intervention; OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval; bolded = statistically significant.
Discussion
This study aimed to examine the effects of a data-coaching intervention on staff PA-promoting behaviors. Results from this study show promise in addressing staff PA-promoting behavior and changing the overall activity context. As noted, there were significant changes in many of the observed behaviors which indicates staff attempting to create a more PA-conducive OST environment. Results indicated the odds of observing staff engaged in activity and verbally promoting PA increased post OST-Coach intervention along with a decrease in supervising behavior (e.g., standing, observing play, sitting). These staff behaviors are particularly relevant given existing research demonstrating that staff engagement and encouragement are positively associated with higher levels of MVPA among children (Weaver et al., 2016). In addition, analyses demonstrated a decrease in observed elimination games. There is strong consensus that elimination games should be avoided to increase child PA levels and create a more positive PA environment (Dauenhauer et al., 2022). It has been found that reducing elimination games could have a positive impact on child MVPA during program time (Foster et al., 2010). Given this evidence, the frequent use of elimination games observed during the first wave of observations helped shape and inform subsequent data-coaching sessions. To address this, the impact elimination games could have on child PA and potential strategies for replacing elimination games during activity time were discussed.
Although counterintuitive to the aim of OST-Coach, findings also revealed an increase in the time children spent waiting. This was most likely due to the increase in OST leaders instructing and leading PA. After the practice data-coaching session, staff aimed to increase their overall PA engagement (i.e., spend less time sitting and supervising). Accordingly, we observed a significant decrease in sedentary supervising behavior and more time staff actively engaged with children. This increase in staff active engagement could lead to creating a more positive PA-promoting environment that could ultimately increase child MVPA during activity time. However, the increase in engagement and organized activity corresponded with reduced time provided for free play. Previous research has demonstrated that free play provides as much MVPA during OST time compared to organized adult-led games (Chandler et al., 2019). Thus, further examination is needed to find the optimal balance of time spent instructing/leading versus allowing for free play during OST activity time.
Although results show initial promise, limitations were still present. The study was conducted at four OST programs within a single organization, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other settings. In addition, because the intervention occurred over the school year without a comparison group, it is possible that changes in staff PA-promoting behaviors reflected maturation (e.g., staff gaining experience), history (e.g., seasonal/contextual shifts), or measurement effects (e.g., increased awareness from repeated measurement), rather than the intervention itself. Furthermore, observations were conducted only during scheduled activity time and only on typical program days. This method does not capture staff behaviors across the entire OST session or during atypical circumstances and programming. Furthermore, child PA was not measured, which limits the ability to determine whether observed changes in staff PA-promoting behaviors translated to increases in child PA. Finally, the IDPR process allowed for ongoing training and communication with staff while keeping the overall training time manageable throughout an academic year; however, we did not directly compare the effectiveness of this approach to other staff training approaches.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated promise that could help inform future practice and research. Specifically, findings from this study suggest that using data coaching is a promising approach to support changes in staff PA-promoting behaviors within existing program structures. In addition, implementing a systematic process that uses site-level data and guided discussions around the implementation of evidence-based PA-promoting practices can help inform organizational change in providing staff with proper tools and training to create a more active environment. Future research is needed to understand whether changes in those specific staff PA-promoting behaviors can influence child PA levels during program time.
Footnotes
Funding
The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided financial support for this project. The award provided 100% of total costs and totaled $65,000. The contents are those of the author. They may not reflect the policies of HRSA, HHS, or the U.S. Government.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.