# **Survey** Researchers wishing to use, adapt, or modify this instrument in their own URE Repository project should 'fork' this component, edit the forked survey instrument as appropriate, and link the modified survey to their main project describing their work. --- ## Item and Scale/Domain Generation - The research team developed a set of questions based on a review of the literature relating the use of research evidence to adoption and implementation of innovative practice and EBP. - Interview and focus group data were collected from 64 Southern California child welfare directors, probation officers, and mental health department directors or consultants. - A set of items were generated by the research team and reviewed by a group of 26 child welfare, child mental health, and juvenile justice systems leaders for face and content validity. --- ## Survey Administration # #### **Administration Format** Web-based. --- ## Survey Items and Structure --- ### **Scale 1: Input** **Component Item # = 1.1 - 1.17** **Component Question Type = Likert Scale Component** **Likert Scale = Scale Points = 5; Anchor Values = 1(not at all), 2(rarely), 3(occasionally), 4(often), 5(all the time)** #### *When I need information or research evidence related to a particular program or intervention…* - 1.1 ...I search the Internet (e.g Google or other general search engines) - 1.2 ...I search academic journals - 1.3 ...I review available training manuals/books/curricula - 1.4 ...I contact the people who developed the program - 1.5 ...I contact someone who gave a presentation about the program or intervention I heard at a conference I attended - 1.6 ...I contact someone in another county that has already implemented this program or intervention - 1.7 ...I rely on particular web-based clearinghouses (e.g., Children Trends Database, Social Care Institute for Excellence, Mental Health Services Archives, etc.) - 1.8 ...I rely on intermediary organizations like the California Institute of Mental Health (CIMH) or Center for Innovative Practice (CIP) - 1.9 ...I rely on a particular consultant to obtain it for me - 1.10 ...I rely on a particular director or senior administrator from another agency in my county - 1.11 ...I rely on particular federal or state government agencies - 1.12 ...I rely on particular nonprofit organizations/foundations - 1.13 ...I rely on data that were collected by my agency or someone we hired to collect data - 1.14 ...I obtain it through attending regularly scheduled meetings of a professional association - 1.15 ...I obtain it from conferences or training workshops - 1.16 ...I obtain it from attending regularly scheduled meetings with my staff - 1.17 ...I obtain it from attending regularly scheduled meetings with other professionals in my county --- ### **Scale 2: Process** **Component Item # = 2.1 - 2.16** **Component Question Type = Likert Scale** **Component Likert Scale = Scale Points = 5; Anchor Values = 1(not important at all), 2(not important), 3(neutral), 4(important), 5(very important)** #### *When judging the reliability of research evidence supporting a particular program or intervention I'm interested in…* - 2.1 ...I look at program outcomes - 2.2 ...I assess the credibility of those people developing the program - 2.3 ...I rely on the review by intermediary organizations like the California Institute of Mental Health (CIMH) or Center for Innovative Practices (CIP) - 2.4 ...I rely on people I know and trust to tell me if it is valid - 2.5 ...I see if it is based on theory - 2.6 ...I see whether it has been tested in the field for a period of time - 2.7 ...I see if the information is obtained from more than one source and is consistent - 2.8 ...I see if the research methods are clearly described - 2.9 ...I see if its potential strengths and weaknesses are listed - 2.10 ...I see how the evidence is structured (e.g., if it is logical, or looks like superficial advertising?) - 2.11 ...I rely upon people I know and trust to tell me if it is reliable #### *When judging the relevance to my county of research evidence supporting a particular program or intervention I’m interested in...* - 2.12 ...I see how much it costs to implement the program - 2.13 ...I compare the needs of my county with the needs of the populations in the research studies - 2.14 ...I look at the program effects in counties with similar demographics as mine - 2.15 ...I see how much time is required to train staff to use the program - 2.16 ...I rely on my professional peers to determine the relevance of the program --- ### **Scale 3: Output** **Component Item # = 3.1 - 3.12** **Component Question Type = Likert Scale** **Component Likert Scale = Scale Points = 5; Anchor Values = 1(not important at all), 2(not important), 3(neutral), 4(important), 5(very important)** #### *When deciding to adopt a new program or intervention in my county…* - 3.1 ...I compare more than one program or intervention simultaneously to evaluate their respective strengths and weaknesses - 3.2 ...I conduct an assessment of the needs of the population my agency serves and then find a program that meets those needs - 3.3 ...I tend to ignore the research evidence if there are no resources to implement the program - 3.4 ...I tend to ignore the research evidence if the program is too rigid and cannot be adapted to meet the needs of my clients - 3.5 ...I tend to ignore the research evidence if the program does not match the skill level of my staff - 3.6 ...I tend to ignore the research evidence if the program is not feasible for my county, given my county's capability - 3.7 ...I consider the wishes of my partner agencies and review research evidence as a team - 3.8 ...I will find money to implement the program anyway if the research evidence is strong enough to support it - 3.9 ...I consider research evidence along with information obtained from subject matter experts and community members - 3.10 ... I use research evidence to determine whether the program could do potential harm to participants before I consider implementing it - 3.11 ...I use research evidence to support a decision on adopting the program at the executive level - 3.12 ...I use research evidence to eliminate programs that proved to be not effective