Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: Adm Policy Ment Health. 2020 Sep 18;48(3):482–498. doi: 10.1007/s10488-020-01084-5

Table 2.

Quantitative Data Frequency Counts

Quantitative Survey Item / Quantitative Content Analysis Codes AL (n = 20) Count (%) DP (n = 26) Count (%)
Item 1. Does your agency discuss providing new intervention strategies?
 Yes 17 (85%) 18 (69.2%)
 No 2 (10%) 8 (30.8%)
 Missing 1 (5%) 0
Participants who responded yes, provided responses about their agency’s IAU process.
Identifying Practice and Delivery Gaps
 Team meeting or staff discussion 8 (40%) 8 (30.8%)
 Done by an authority (director, supervisor) but process is informal 4 (20%) 5 (19.2%)
 Global client needs assessment 5 (25%) 0
 Survey 3 (15%) 0
 Not done/ Only assess individual client needs 0 3 (11.5%)
 “Don’t know” 0 10 (38.5%)
Practice Selection
 Learn about new practices from research literature 10 (50%) 9 (34.6%)
 Learn about new practices from conferences/presentations 4 (20%) 0
 Develop new practices 4 (20%) 0
 Consult with supervisor to learn about new practices 0 7 (26.9%)
 “Don’t know” 0 8 (30.8%)
Evaluating Practice Evidence
 Review published literature 8 (40%) 6 (23.1%)
Adoption Decision
 Staff discussion before adoption decision 4 (20%) 0
 Director/Supervisor decision 2 (10%) 8 (30.8%)
 “Don’t know” 0 8 (30.8%)
Implementation Strategy Use
 Pilot then revise, if needed; Trial and error 4 (20%) 2 (7.7%)
 Staff training 4 (20%) 0
 “Just use it” 5 (25%) 6 (23.1%)
 “Implement it” 2 (10%) 6 (23.1%)
 Consult with supervisor 0 8 (30.8%)
 “Don’t know” 0 8 (30.8%)
Monitoring Fidelity
 Assess individual client progress via data collection 8 (40%) 8 (30.8%)
 Staff meetings/discussions; Supervision 6 (30%) 8 (30.8%)
 Fidelity monitoring 2 (10%) 0
 “Don’t know” 0 8 (30.8%)