Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity

Angela L. Rollins, John H. McGrew, Marina Kukla, Alan B. McGuire, Mindy E. Flanagan, Marcia G. Hunt, Doug L. Leslie, Linda A. Collins, Jennifer L. Wright-Berryman, Lia J. Hicks, Michelle P. Salyers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations


Assertive community treatment is known for improving consumer outcomes, but is difficult to implement. On-site fidelity measurement can help ensure model adherence, but is costly in large systems. This study compared reliability and validity of three methods of fidelity assessment (on-site, phone-administered, and expert-scored self-report) using a stratified random sample of 32 mental health intensive case management teams from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Overall, phone, and to a lesser extent, expert-scored self-report fidelity assessments compared favorably to on-site methods in inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. If used appropriately, these alternative protocols hold promise in monitoring large-scale program fidelity with limited resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)157-167
Number of pages11
JournalAdministration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 1 2016

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Phychiatric Mental Health
  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Psychiatry and Mental health


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this