Table 3.
Availability, Feasibility, and Effectiveness Ratings for Financing Strategies Rated Most Relevant to Youth Mental Health Services
| Strategy | Availability M (SD) |
Feasibility M (SD) |
Effectiveness M (SD) |
% Familiar (n = 32) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braided Funding Streams | 2.08 (0.91) |
2.16 (0.80) |
2.26 (0.81) |
75% |
| Contracts for EBTs | 2.13 (0.81) |
2.45 (0.99) |
2.55 (0.78) |
91% |
| Credentialing/Rostering Providers | 1.76 (1.48) |
2.48 (1.29) |
2.57 (1.08) |
66% |
| Fee-For-Service Reimbursement | 2.71 (1.21) |
2.67 (1.04) |
2.41 (0.97) |
84% |
| Grant Funding | 2.50 (0.72) |
2.47 (0.92) |
2.66 (1.18) |
100% |
| Increased Fee-For-Service Reimbursement | 1.04 (0.96) |
1.91 (1.24) |
2.36 (1.29) |
78% |
Note. n = 32. Ratings are on 0 to 4 scale. EBT = evidence-based treatment. % familiar refers to the percentage of participants who provided a rating and did not select the option “Not familiar enough with strategy to answer.”