Table 4.

Implementation Fidelity of Tested and Effective Programs in the Intervention (CTC) and Control (C) Communities

OUTCOME	PROGRAM 2007		PROGRAM 2010		TEACHER 2007		TEACHER 2010
	CTC	C	CTC	C	CTC	C	CTC	C
	ADHERENCE
Staff Training	76%	79%	81%	70%	42%	53%	56%	54%
	W+=7, W-=8 (n=5), p<1.0		W+=21, W-=15 (n=8), p< 0.74		W+=13, W-=32 (n=9), p<0.30		W+=4, W-=6 (n=4), p<0.90
Teacher Manual	96%	80%	97%	94%
	W+=1, W-=0 (n=1), p<1.0		W+=4, W-=2 (n=3), p <0.75
Participant Materials1	92%	100%	92%	92%
			W+=3, W-=0 (n=2), p <= 0.5
Content Delivered	91%	81%	91%	91%
	W+=16, W-=5 (n=6), p<0.32		W+=24, W-=12 (n=8), p<0.46
	DOSAGE
Sessions Taught	97%	90%	96%	100%
	W+=3, W-=3 (n=3), p<1.0		W+=0, W-=6 (n=3), p<0.25
	PARTICIPANT RESPONSIVENESS
Good Attendance	82%	81%	82%	80%
	W+=21, W-=15(n=8), p<0.75		W+=26, W-=19 (n=9), p<0.73
	PROGRAM OVERSIGHT
Monitoring System	82%	90%	82%	40%	53%	28%	36%	53%
	W+=4, W-=11 (n=5), p<0.44		W+=34, W-=2.5 (n=8), p<0.02		W+=36, W-=9 (n=9), p<0.13		W+=0, W-=10 (n=4), p<0.13
Evaluation System	90%	79%	87%	75%	28%	24%	24%	35%
	W+=9, W-=1 (n=4), p<0.25		W+=27.5, W-=8.5 (n=8), p< 0.20		W+=26, W-=30 (n=10), p<0.85		W+=1.5, W-=8.5 (n=4), p<0.30
Staff Coaching	88%	90%	80%	66%
	W+=6, W-=9 (n=5), p<0.82		W+=13, W-=15 (n=7), p<0.94
Quality Assurance	82%	56%	80%	55%
	W+=13.5, W-=7.5 (n=6), p<0.57		W+=31, W-=5 (n=8), p<0.08

Note: Implementation fidelity scores were averaged across all programs in the Intervention (CTC) and Control (C) communities.

Significance tests were conducted using the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test, http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/Service/Statistics/Signed_Rank_Test.html; statistically significant (p<.05) differences based on two-tailed tests are indicated in bold.

¹There were no valid comparisons in 2007 on which to conduct the Wilcoxon significance test.