Comparing organization-focused and state-focused financing strategies on provider-level reach of a youth substance use treatment model: a mixed-method study

Table 3 Measures used to compare state-focused versus organization-focused grants on their A-CRA provider-level reach outcomes

Activity	Measures	Participants	Time	Payment	Research Questions^a
Administrative data from CHS	Proportion certified (any, first-level, full, supervisor, TAY first-level/full) Descriptive data about fidelity scores	Providers^b(164 organizations in 35 states, n = 983)	n/a	n/a	RQs 1, 2 RQ 1
Semi-structured interviews (wave 1)			45–60 min	$25 USD	RQ 2
	Organization-reported barriers/facilitators of A-CRA implementation	Providers^b (154 organizations, n = 249)
	State agency-reported barriers/facilitators of A-CRA implementation	State substance use agency administrators^c (18 states, n = 32)
Web survey (wave 1)			~25 min	$25 USD	RQ 2
	PSAT funding stability [35, 36]	Providers^b (138 organizations, n = 202)
	PSAT organizational capacity [35, 36]	Providers^b (138 organizations, n = 202)

A-CRA Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach, CHS Chestnut Health Systems, PSAT Program Sustainability Assessment Tool, RQ research question, TAY transition-age youth
^aSee Table 1 for the details of the research questions
^bIncludes clinicians and/or supervisors and includes data collected in the previous project from organization-focused grantees as well as newly collected data from state-focused grantees
^cOnly collected for state-focused grants

ISSN: 1748-5908