Limited evidence-based practices exist to address the unique treatment needs of families involved in the child welfare system with parental substance abuse. Specifically, parental opioid and methamphetamine abuse have increased over the last decade, with associated increases of families reported to the child welfare system. The Families Actively Improving Relationships (FAIR) program was developed to address the complexities of these families. Evidence-based strategies to address the interrelated needs of parents—including substance abuse and mental health treatment, parent skills training, and supportive case management to improve access to ancillary needs—are integrated in an intensive community outpatient program. This study examined the clinical effectiveness of FAIR when delivered in a Medicaid billable outpatient clinic. Parents (n = 99) were randomized either to the immediate FAIR condition or to the Waitlist (WL) condition, using a dynamic wait-listed design, with all parents provided the opportunity to eventually receive FAIR. Outcomes show statistically and clinically significant reductions in parental opioid and methamphetamine use, mental health symptoms, and parenting risk, and improvements in stability in parents receiving FAIR. Providing services to families who require travel in excess of 20 miles for sessions has challenging implications for program costs under a Medicaid structure. Study outcomes highlight the need for policies to support funding of intensive family-based programs.

Background Most implementations fail before the corresponding services are ever delivered. Measuring implementation process fidelity may reveal when and why these attempts fail. This knowledge is necessary to support the achievement of positive implementation milestones, such as delivering services to clients (program start-up) and competency in treatment delivery. The present study evaluates the extent to which implementation process fidelity at different implementation stages predicts achievement of those milestones. Methods Implementation process fidelity data—as measured by the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC)—from 1287 implementing sites across 27 evidence-informed programs were examined in mixed effects regression models with sites nested within programs. Implementation process fidelity, as measured by the proportion of implementation activities completed during the three stages of the SIC Pre-Implementation phase and overall Pre-Implementation (Phase 1) and Implementation (Phase 2) proportion scores, was assessed as a predictor of sites achieving program start-up (i.e., delivering services) and competency in program delivery. Results The predicted probability of start-up across all sites was low at 35% (95% CI [33%, 38%]). When considering the evidence-informed program being implemented, that probability was nearly twice as high (64%; 95% CI [42%, 82%]), and 57% of the total variance in program start-up was attributable to the program. Implementation process fidelity was positively and significantly associated with achievement of program start-up and competency. The magnitude of this relationship varied significantly across programs for Pre-Implementation Stage 1 (i.e., Engagement) only. Compared to other stages, completing more Pre-Implementation Stage 3 (Readiness Planning) activities resulted in the most rapid gains in probability of achieving program start-up. The predicted probability of achieving competency was very low unless sites had high scores in both Pre-Implementation and Implementation phases. Conclusions Strong implementation process fidelity—as measured by SIC Pre-Implementation and Implementation phase proportion scores—was associated with sites’ achievement of program start-up and competency in program delivery, with early implementation process fidelity being especially potent. These findings highlight the importance of a rigorous Pre-Implementation process.

No abstract

Background Clinical supervision is a common quality assurance method for supporting the implementation and sustainment of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) in community mental health settings. However, assessing and supporting supervisor fidelity requires efficient and effective measurement methods. This study evaluated two observational coding approaches that are potentially more efficient than coding full sessions: a randomly selected 15-min segment and the first case discussion of the session. Method Data were leveraged from a randomized trial of an Audit and Feedback (A&F) intervention for supervisor Adherence and Competence. Supervisors ( N = 57) recorded and uploaded weekly group supervision sessions for 7 months, with one session observationally coded each month ( N = 374). Of the coded sessions, one was randomly selected for each supervisor, and a random 15-min segment was coded. Additionally, the first case discussion was coded for the full sample of sessions. Results Across all models (and controlling for the proportion of the session covered by the partial observation), Adherence and Competence scores from partial observations were positively and significantly associated with scores from full sessions. In all cases, partial observations were most accurate when the level of Adherence and Competence was moderate. At lower levels, partial observations were underestimates, and at higher levels, they were overestimates. Conclusions The results suggest that efficient observational measurement can be achieved while retaining a general level of measurement effectiveness. Practically, first-case discussions are easier to implement, whereas 15-min segments have fewer potential threats to validity. Evaluation of resource requirements is needed, along with determining whether A&F effects are retained if feedback is based on partial observations. Nevertheless, more efficient observational coding could increase the feasibility of routine fidelity monitoring and quality assurance strategies, including A&F, which ultimately could support the implementation and sustainment of effective supervision practices and EBIs in community practice settings. Plain Language Summary: When delivering evidence-based mental health interventions in community-based practice settings, a common quality assurance method is clinical supervision. To support supervisors, assessment methods are needed, and those methods need to be both efficient and effective. Ideally, supervision sessions would be recorded, and trained coders would rate the supervisor’s use of specific strategies. In most settings, though, this requires too many resources. The present study evaluated a more efficient approach. The data came from an existing randomized trial of an Audit and Feedback intervention for enhancing supervisor Adherence and Competence. This included 57 supervisors and 374 sessions across seven months of monitoring. Instead of rating full supervision sessions, a more efficient approach was to have coders rate partial sessions. Two types of partial observations were considered: a randomly selected 15-minute segment of the session and the first case discussion of the session. The aim was to see if partial observations and full observations led to similar conclusions about Adherence and Competence. In all cases, they did. The scores were most similar for sessions with moderate levels of Adherence and Competence. If Adherence and Competence were low, partial observations were underestimates, but if they were high, partial observations were overestimates. Observing partial sessions is more efficient, but in terms of accuracy, the benefits and limitations should be evaluated in light of how the scores will be used. Additionally, future research should consider whether Audit and Feedback interventions have the same effect if feedback is based on observations of partial sessions.

No abstract