Adapting the stages of implementation completion to an evidence-based implementation strategy: The development of the NIATx stages of implementation completion.

Background: Dissemination and implementation frameworks provide the scaffolding to explore the effectiveness of evidence-based practices (EBPs) targeting process of care and organizational outcomes. Few instruments, like the stages of implementation completion (SIC) examine implementation fidelity to EBP adoption and how organizations differ in their approach to implementation. Instruments to measure organizational competency in the utilization of implementation strategies are lacking.

The relative value of Pre-Implementation stages for successful implementation of evidence-informed programs.

Background: Most implementations fail before the corresponding services are ever delivered. Measuring implementation process fidelity may reveal when and why these attempts fail. This knowledge is necessary to support the achievement of positive implementation milestones, such as delivering services to clients (program start-up) and competency in treatment delivery.

Bringing Evidence-Based Interventions into the Schools: An Examination of Organizational Factors and Implementation Outcomes.

Although schools are one of the largest providers of behavioral health services for youth, many barriers exist to the implementation of evidence-based interventions in schools. This study used the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC) to examine school-based implementation outcomes for a computer-assisted cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for anxious youth. Organizational factors and predictors of program startup also were examined.

Rates of sustainment in the Universal Stages of Implementation Completion.

Background: Sustainment is a desirable outcome of implementation, but its precise definition remains unclear, contributing to the difficulty of identifying a generalized rate of sustainment. Several studies and reviews on the topic differ on both definition and levels of analysis. Furthermore, methodological limitations might have influenced the results, including the unknown quality with which some interventions were delivered.