TABLE 1.

Mean Importance Ratings of Factors Affecting Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Implementation, Overall and by Stakeholder Group: San Diego County, CA, 2005

Cluster	Overall Rating, mean	County Rating, mean	Agency Director Rating, mean	Program Manager Rating, mean	Clinician Rating, mean	Administrative Staff Rating, mean	Consumer Rating, mean
Agency compatibility	2.68	2.36	2.64	2.54	2.72	3.11	2.91
Beneficial features of EBP	2.94	2.80	2.53	3.05	2.78	3.11	3.40
Clinical perceptions	2.88	2.70	2.53	2.82	3.08	3.33	2.95
Consumer concerns	2.85	2.59	2.67	2.84	2.87	3.26	3.03
Consumer values and marketing	2.87	2.60	2.73	2.81	2.67	3.11	3.47
Costs of EBP	3.13	2.91	3.42	3.08	2.96	3.56	3.09
EBP limitations	2.70	2.53	2.80	2.67	2.72	3.11	2.53
Funding	3.17	3.13	3.25	3.00	2.94	3.71	3.33
Impact on clinical practice	2.81	2.00	2.80	2.59	3.02	3.33	3.38
Political dynamics	2.90	2.67	3.13	2.95	2.78	3.22	2.80
Research and outcomes supporting EBP	3.09	2.91	3.11	3.21	2.95	3.15	3.22
Staff development and support	3.16	2.96	3.12	3.09	3.15	3.47	3.32
Staffing resources	3.16	3.06	3.26	3.29	3.05	3.27	3.08
System readiness and compatibility	2.81	2.50	3.00	2.60	2.81	3.06	3.10

Notes. All ratings were made for each of 105 statements on a zero to 4 scale, with 0 = not at all important and 4 = extremely important.