Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity

If you need an accessible version of this item, please email your request to digschol@iu.edu so that they may create one and provide it to you.
Date
2016-03
Language
English
Embargo Lift Date
Committee Members
Degree
Degree Year
Department
Grantor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Found At
Springer
Abstract

Assertive community treatment is known for improving consumer outcomes, but is difficult to implement. On-site fidelity measurement can help ensure model adherence, but is costly in large systems. This study compared reliability and validity of three methods of fidelity assessment (on-site, phone-administered, and expert-scored self-report) using a stratified random sample of 32 mental health intensive case management teams from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Overall, phone, and to a lesser extent, expert-scored self-report fidelity assessments compared favorably to on-site methods in inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. If used appropriately, these alternative protocols hold promise in monitoring large-scale program fidelity with limited resources.

Description
item.page.description.tableofcontents
item.page.relation.haspart
Cite As
Rollins, A. L., McGrew, J. H., Kukla, M., McGuire, A. B., Flanagan, M. E., Hunt, M. G., … Salyers, M. P. (2015). Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-015-0641-1
ISSN
Publisher
Series/Report
Sponsorship
Major
Extent
Identifier
Relation
Journal
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Source
Author
Alternative Title
Type
Article
Number
Volume
Conference Dates
Conference Host
Conference Location
Conference Name
Conference Panel
Conference Secretariat Location
Version
Author's manuscript
Full Text Available at
This item is under embargo {{howLong}}