Fidelity checklist to ensure different sites are using intervention as intended

Brown, C.
Project title: 
Independent Living for People with Psychiatric Disabilities: Using Contextual Cues to Remove Environmental Barriers - Grocery Shopping Skills Training
Project Number: 
Tool type: 
Tool class: 
Nonengineering tool
Disability targeted: 
Psychiatric disabilities
Study target: 
Sites using a skills training intervention
Study purpose or goal: 
The goal of this project is to ensure that participants are receiving comparable services at different sites.
Who administers this tool?: 
Outside observers.
Ease of use: 
Very easy
Time to complete: 
Approximately 2 hours.
Equipment required: 
Are any approvals required?: 
The checklist received approval as part of the overall protocol.
How is it administered?: 
An outside observer must watch through the entire intervention to confirm the elements on the checklist. Each item is rated as it is covered in the intervention.
What is the scope or what areas does it cover?: 
The checklist covers the content of intervention, facilities/staff, and interpersonal skills.
Development background: 
In the development of the fidelity checklist, literature review was done in the area of fidelity measures in mental health.
Development methodology: 
The questions and methodology were selected based on items from the intervention itself.
Consumer input: 
The project has a consumer who is a consultant to the grant who helped develop the checklist. In addition, consumers at each intervention site running the intervention supplied input.
Can this development process be used elsewhere?: 
The process of developing the checklist is simple and could be applied to any other population.
Has sensitivity and specificity been tested?: 
Researchers tried a more sensitive scale and couldn’t get reliability
Can this tool be used for other purposes/populations?: 
The checklist is specific to the intervention. However, it could be used as a guideline for those researchers developing similar interventions.
Sample type: 
Data analysis: 
Is in process
The checklist only uses a yes/no scale. Researchers tried a more sensitive scale and couldn’t get reliability. Questions or scaling would be more sensitive.
Data analysis was in process at the time of the interview. Several sessions were omitted from the processing because they were incomplete or otherwise not up to par. Researchers will compare across sites and look for relationship between fidelity measures and outcomes.
Impact of these findings on the field: 
If the fidelity measure proves predicative, it will show which data can and should be included.
Peer review status: 
No citations available at the time of the interview.
Who uses the collected data?: 
Internal staff
Is this tool available free of charge?: 
Tool contact: 
University of Kansas Medical Center
Catana Brown, PhD