Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity

Angela L. Rollins, John H. McGrew, Marina Kukla, Alan B. McGuire, Mindy E. Flanagan, Marcia G. Hunt, Doug L. Leslie, Linda A. Collins, Jennifer L. Wright-Berryman, Lia J. Hicks, Michelle P. Salyers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

Assertive community treatment is known for improving consumer outcomes, but is difficult to implement. On-site fidelity measurement can help ensure model adherence, but is costly in large systems. This study compared reliability and validity of three methods of fidelity assessment (on-site, phone-administered, and expert-scored self-report) using a stratified random sample of 32 mental health intensive case management teams from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Overall, phone, and to a lesser extent, expert-scored self-report fidelity assessments compared favorably to on-site methods in inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. If used appropriately, these alternative protocols hold promise in monitoring large-scale program fidelity with limited resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)157-167
Number of pages11
JournalAdministration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Volume43
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2016

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Phychiatric Mental Health
  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Rollins, A. L., McGrew, J. H., Kukla, M., McGuire, A. B., Flanagan, M. E., Hunt, M. G., Leslie, D. L., Collins, L. A., Wright-Berryman, J. L., Hicks, L. J., & Salyers, M. P. (2016). Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43(2), 157-167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-015-0641-1