Table 2. Experience with Exploring Adopting: Implementing New Programs or Practices.
| Weighted % | ||
|---|---|---|
| Characteristic | ||
| New program or practice in last 5 years (%yes) | 93.9% | |
| Number of new programs or practices: (see output below for each items) |
||
| Mean | 2.04 | |
| Range | 0-8 | |
| Total programs mentioned | 204 | |
| Type of program/practice: | ||
| Systems reform | 35.7% | |
| Program | 47.1% | |
| Program Evidence-Based | 24.8% | |
| Exploration Strategies | ||
| Outside of the state/county: | ||
| Collaborations with child welfare researchers/program developers | 6.5% | |
| Child welfare services conferences | 0.7% | |
| Interactions with National Child Welfare Services Organizations | 5.4% | |
| State: | ||
| State child welfare agency staff | 35.7% | |
| State RFP for programmatic change | 4.4% | |
| Country: | ||
| Interactions with other county child welfare directors | 36.8% | |
| Interactions with Directors of other community agencies, (mental health, developmental disabilities) | 37.3% | |
| Agency: | ||
| Research by Agency Staff (internet or literature searches) | 54.0% | |
| Discussions with local stakeholders | 5.1% | |
| Implementation stages | ||
| Adoption | Programs | System Reforms |
| Planning (sum ‘Yes’ from 8 programs, range 1=8) | 100 % | 100 % |
| Budgeting (sum ‘Yes’ from 8 programs, range 1=8) | 94.6 % | 94.4 % |
| Implementation (sum ‘Yes’ from 8 programs, range 0=8) | 94.3 % | 94.0 % |
| Sustained (sum ‘Yes’ from 8 programs, range 0=8) | 83.4 % | 65.6 % |