Fidelity of FAST program-component delivery was high (97–98 percent overall), but reach to families fell far below design expectations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Overall fidelity of offered program services to the model was 97 percent in Year 1 and 98 percent in Year 2. → Bos 2018 q2 i? Only 25 percent of Cohort 1 and 16 percent of Cohort 2 treatment-group students attended six or more sessions (graduated), far below the anticipated 80 percent completion rate. → Bos 2018 (2)

Evidence¶

Bos 2018¶

Bos, J., Spier, E., Bandeira de Mello, V., González, R., & Huang, F. (2018). Investing in Innovation (i3) Validation Study of Families and Schools Together (FAST) Final Report. American Institutes for Research. https://evidenceforessa.org/program/families-and-schools-together-fast/

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Fidelity was measured with the FAST Program Integrity Checklist across 30 treatment schools, 12 components each measured twice per year. Overall fidelity was "97 percent" in Year 1 and "98 percent" in Year 2, with minimal difference between years.

"In Year 1, overall fidelity of the offered program services to the model was 97 percent. In Year 2, this rate was 98 percent."

Bos 2018 (2)¶

Bos, J., Spier, E., Bandeira de Mello, V., González, R., & Huang, F. (2018). Investing in Innovation (i3) Validation Study of Families and Schools Together (FAST) Final Report. American Institutes for Research. https://evidenceforessa.org/program/families-and-schools-together-fast/

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Program-reach data for Cohort 1 treatment schools showed 37 percent attended one or more sessions and 25 percent graduated; Cohort 2 figures were lower (31 percent, 24 percent, 16 percent). These were "far below the 60 percent participation rate and the 80 percent FAST completion rate anticipated."

"In the treatment group, for Cohort 1, 37 percent (n = 118) attended one or more FAST sessions, 30 percent (n = 91) attended three or more sessions, and 25 percent (n = 78) attended six or more sessions (graduated)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• FAST take-up was far below the projected 60 percent participation rate, with only about 20 percent typical participation per year — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• TNTP achieved fidelity for TLTS's two key program components across Cohorts 2 and 3 — related
• Family participation in Growing Strong Learners was high and similar for EL and non-EL families: 97% attended at least one APTT meeting and 92% participated in Ready4K — related
• The New Teacher Support Program reaches fewer than 10 percent of beginning teachers, far below the statewide mentoring program that reached all beginning teachers in the 1990s — related
• The study concluded FAST is unlikely to meaningfully contribute to turning around low-performing schools, though reading benefits may exist for participating families — related
• Offering FAST produced no meaningful, enduring effects on family functioning, family-school relationships, academic learning, or social-behavioral outcomes in a 60-school cluster RCT — related