Abstract
Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 173-187 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Journal of Community Psychology |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 2002 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Psychology(all)
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Cite this
Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing. / Dewa, Carolyn S; Durbin, Janet; Wasylenki, Donald; Ochocka, Joanna; Eastabrook, Shirley; Boydell, Katherine M.; Goering, Paula.
In: Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 2, 03.2002, p. 173-187.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Considering a multisite study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing
AU - Dewa, Carolyn S
AU - Durbin, Janet
AU - Wasylenki, Donald
AU - Ochocka, Joanna
AU - Eastabrook, Shirley
AU - Boydell, Katherine M.
AU - Goering, Paula
PY - 2002/3
Y1 - 2002/3
N2 - Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.
AB - Although most policy makers agree that a fundamental goal of the mental health system is to provide integrated community-based services, there is little empirical evidence with which to plan such a system. Studies in the community mental health literature have not used a standard set of evaluation methods. One way of addressing this gap is through a multisite program evaluation in which multiple sites and programs evaluate the same outcomes using the same instruments and time frame. The proposition of introducing tire same study design in different settings and programs is deceptively straightforward. The difficulty is not in the conceptualization but in the implementation. This article examines the factors that act as implementation barriers, how are they magnified in a multisite study design, and how they can be successfully addressed. In discussing the issue of study design, this article considers processes used to address six major types of barriers to conducting collaborative studies identified by Lancaster or Lancaster's six Cs - contribution, communication, compatibility, consensus, credit, and commitment. A case study approach is used to examine implementation of a multisite community mental health evaluation of services and supports (case management, self-help initiatives, crisis interventions) represented by six independent evaluations of 15 community health programs. A principal finding was that one of the main vehicles to a successful multisite project is participation. It is only through participation that Lancaster's six Cs can be addressed. Key factors in large, geographically dispersed, and diverse groups include the use of advisory committees, explicit criteria and opportunities for participation, reliance on all modes of communication, and valuing informal interactions. The article concludes that whereas modern technology has assisted in making complicated research designs feasible, the operationalization of timeless virtues such as mutual respect and trust, flexibility, and commitment make them successful.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=23044530889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=23044530889&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jcop.10001
DO - 10.1002/jcop.10001
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:23044530889
VL - 30
SP - 173
EP - 187
JO - Journal of Community Psychology
JF - Journal of Community Psychology
SN - 0090-4392
IS - 2
ER -