Table 2.

Linear regression analyses linking principal EBP implementation leadership, school EBP implementation climate, and educator fidelity to three EBPs for autism

	Outcomes
	School EBP Implementation Climate			Educator Fidelity to PRT			Educator Fidelity to DTT			Educator Fidelity to VS
Antecedents	b	SE	p	b	SE	p	b	SE	p	b	SE	p
School EBP Implementation Climate				0.57	0.24	0.018	0.28	0.33	0.398	−0.04	0.24	0.885
Principal EBP Implementation Leadership	0.58	0.11	0.000	−0.19	0.24	0.434	−0.49	0.36	0.175	−0.47	0.23	0.037
Model R2	0.60			0.29			0.25			0.26

Note: N = 65 schools. EBP = evidence-based practice; DTT = discrete trial training; PRT = pivotal response training; VS = visual schedules. Coefficients were estimated using multiple linear regression analysis incorporating a robust maximum likelihood estimator. All models control for region of U.S. (northeast vs. northwest), school size (# of students), proportion of students of color (African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Other Race), proportion of students receiving free or reduced lunch, and proportion of students with an individualized education plan. Comparing principals with high (+1 SD) versus low (−1 SD) EBP implementation leadership, the indirect association of EBP implementation leadership with PRT fidelity through school EBP implementation climate was d = 0.49 (95% CI = 0.04 to 0.93).