Table 1. General Information for Individual Perceptions, Wilder, and Meeting Effectiveness Measures.

Questionnaire	Citation	Total Items	Response Choices	Other
Individual Perceptions of the Collaborative Process	Lonczak, 2006, adapted from Taylor-Powell, E., Rossing, B., Geran, J. 1998	16	Range from 1- 5 (Infrequently; Sometimes; All of the Time)	12 with 1-5 Range. 3 Open-ended (assess Project Impact; Possible Improvements; and Ways to Do Differently in the Future). 1 with 1-4 Range indicating degree of benefit to community (not for UW staff). The following open-ended question was added the first 12 questions: “If you answered 1 or 2 above, could you please elaborate and let us know how we might improve?”
Wilder Collaborative Factors Inventory	Mattessich, Murray-Close and Monsey, 2001	40*	Range from 1 - 5 (Strongly Disagree; Disagree; Neutral, No Opinion; Agree; Strongly Agree)	The following open-ended question was added to all 19 items (sub-categories): “If you answered 1 or 2 above, could you please elaborate on your thoughts and/or suggestions?”
Meeting Effectiveness Inventory	Goodman, Wandersman, Chinman, Imm, Morrisey, 1996	11	Range from 1 - 5 (Poor; Fair; Satisfactory; Good; Excellent) Includes question- specific examples for extreme ends of scale.	8 with 1-5 Range; Others assess meeting chair, balance of leadership, and meeting conflict. Spaces for comments are provided.

^*40 Individual Questions; 19 Items after sub-category questions were combined