Table 3.
Agency-Level Major Outcome: FC Policy and Practices
| MINIMAL INTERVENTION | ENHANCED INTERVENTION | MI vs. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (N=22) | Follow-Up (N=17) | BL to FU | Baseline (N=22) | Follow-up (N=19) | BL to FU | EI | |
| Whether... | % | % | β 1 | % | % | β 1 | β 2 |
| There is formal agency policy about FCs | 9.1 | 6.7 | 0 | 5.0 | N/A | ||
| The FC is a strong priority | 50.0 | 76.5 | 50.0 | 63.2 | −1.62 | ||
| The FC is mentioned in the agency's mission statement | 14.6 | 13.3 | 13.6 | 12.1 | .10 | ||
| New staff are trained on the FC | 47.6 | 62.5 | 40.9 | 52.9 | −.12 | ||
| There is a mechanism for monitoring FC supply | 63.6 | 76.5 | 63.6 | 83.3 | .43 | ||
| There is a mechanism for monitoring FC promotion | 31.8 | 35.3 | 27.3 | 68.4 | 1.60 | ||
| There is integration of the FC into existing programs and services | 50.0 | 37.5 | 27.3 | 68.7 | 1.78 | ||
| FC educational materials are available | 40.0 | 6.7 | 38.9 | 66.7 | 3.38** | ||
| Mean Score | 4.0 | 4.0 | 0.0 | 4.2 | 5.0 | .77 | .77 |
1
Represents the slope of the baseline to follow-up change over time in number of FC-friendly policies and practices for the indicated condition.
2
Represents the slope of the baseline to follow-up difference in number of FC-friendly policies and practices between agencies in the EI and MI conditions.
**
p < .001