Table 3. Implementation of CMT (N = 122).

Variable	Implementation of CMT
	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
	B	SE	B	SE	B	SE
Organization
State licensure	1.08	0.64	1.14	0.73	1.11	0.56
TJC accreditation	1.97*	0.64	1.86*	0.64	1.67†	0.51
Public funding	0.83	0.25	0.84	0.26	0.80	0.23
Parent organization	0.71	0.17	0.75	0.18	0.64*	0.14
Medicaid	0.63†	0.16	0.61†	0.15	0.79	0.19
Private insurance	1.68*	0.41	1.81*	0.44	1.72*	0.39
Private insurance × EBP openness					0.77	0.55
Parent organization × EBP openness					0.69	0.43
Director and staff
Director leadership			1.25†	0.23	1.20†	0.17
Staff resources for change			1.06	0.25	1.02	0.22
Staff education			0.67	0.24	0.79	0.26
Clinical supervisor
Field tenure					1.02†	0.01
Education					0.97	0.07
Attitudes toward EBP
Openness					1.44*	0.21
Regulation					1.32*	0.19
Appeal					0.88	0.13
Divergence					0.77	0.15
Attributes for change					2.17**	0.62
Constant	32.41**	19.89	11.08*	12.13	0.16**	0.24
Adjusted R2	0.17		0.21		0.39

Note Multivariate regression parameter estimates with robust standard errors from two-tailed tests. CMT contingency management treatment, TJC the joint commission

^†p < 0.10,

^*p < 0.05,

^**p < 0.01