Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41787567›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2026

Policy actors' perspectives on improving federal grants to promote the implementation success of evidence-based behavioral health practices.

Blanche Wright, Grace M Hindmarch, Jin Kim, Sarah B Hunter, Danielle Schlang, George Timmins, Gregory A Aarons, Jonathan Purtle, Alex R Dopp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Blanche WrightDepartment of Psychology, University of Oregon, 1451 Onyx Street, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA. bwright1@uoregon.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7875-4983
Grace M HindmarchRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
Jin KimRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
Sarah B HunterRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
Danielle SchlangRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
George TimminsRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.
Gregory A AaronsDepartment of Psychiatry and Altman Clinical and Translational Research Institute Dissemination and Implementation Science Center, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr. (0812), La Jolla, San Diego, CA, 92093, USA.
Jonathan PurtleDepartment of Public Health Policy & Management and Global Center for Implementation Science, New York University School of Global Public Health, 708 Broadway, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
Alex R DoppRAND, 1776 Main St, Santa Monica, CA, 90401, USA.

Funding

Comparing Two Federal Financing Strategies on Treatment Penetration and SustainmentR01DA051545 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI DOPP, ALEX RICHARD · 2021 to 2025
$3.1M
AHRQ HHS T32HS000046NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA051545NIDA NIH HHS R01DA051545
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo promote high-quality behavioral health service delivery, federal agencies often invest in evidence-informed and evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation through discretionary (i.e., competitive) grants. However, gaps remain in understanding how federal grant mechanisms can lead to large-scale reach (i.e., the extent of EBP integration into service systems). To understand EBP reach through federal grant mechanisms and provide actionable data, we conducted a series of focus groups with relevant federal and state policy actors to gather their perspectives on how to improve federal grants to support EBP implementation.

methodsThis study was informed by ongoing research examining implementation outcomes (i.e., provider-level reach) from federal grants supporting the delivery of the Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach (A-CRA), an EBP to address youth substance use. We conducted four focus groups, two with staff from state agencies who received federal A-CRA grants (n = 12) and two with U.S. federal agency officials responsible for behavioral health grant making (n = 12). We used the policy-adapted EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment) framework, conceptualizing grants as bridging factors between the outer policy context and inner service provision context. We used directed content analysis to characterize participant perspectives on contextual influences of EBP reach, and thematic analyses to identify how to improve federal grants for EBP implementation success (e.g., high levels of reach). We codified themes by EPIS domains and phases, and by policy actors.

resultsWe identified three contextual influences in Bridging Factors, six in the Inner Contexts, nine in the Outer Contexts, and three in Innovation characteristics. We found seven themes about grant improvements spanning all EPIS phases; examples include strengthening collaboration between multilevel actors in the implementation process (specifically federal and state agencies and treatment organizations), and integrating EBPs into insurance billing practices (which also included insurance leadership as a key actor group).

conclusionsTo support large-scale EBP reach, federal funders may consider using implementation strategies that foster greater collaboration between policy actors from multiple sectors and organization levels. This work also demonstrates how implementation science frameworks can be used to study the influence of federal financing initiatives for EBPs in the area of youth behavioral health.

Indexed as

Evidence-based practiceFinancingGovernmentPolicy

Identifiers

PMID41787567
PMCPMC13077903

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.