Cited by 176Health Policy Implementation ScienceHealth Sciences Research and EducationEvaluation and Performance Assessment

The cost of implementing new strategies (COINS): A method for mapping implementation resources using the stages of implementation completion

Open access
Saldana, Lisa, Chamberlain, Patricia, Bradford, W. David, Campbell, Mark, Landsverk, John·2014·Children and Youth Services Review

Abstract

Objective Illustrate the value of a strategy used for measuring the costs and resources used in the implementation process over and above the costs of the intervention itself in the context of a two-arm randomized controlled trial.Methods Counties in California and Ohio (sites) were invited to implement Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC), an alternative to congregate care for youth. Participating sites (n=53) were randomized to one of two implementation = sites share information and move through the implementation process as a cohort facilitated by an MTFC purveyor or (2) Individual Implementation (IND: "as usual") where sites work individually with the MTFC purveyor. The implementations were monitored using the Stages of Implementation Completion (SIC) measure of a number of observable activities, developed as part of the trial to segment the implementation process into 8 stages of implementation. Resource data gathered from the implementation purveyors and site participants were used to map costs onto each of the 8 stages to generate total cost measures stratified by type of resource and stage of implementation for each of the study arms.Results The SIC provided a feasible costing template to map costs onto observable activities and to enable the examination of important differences in implementation strategies for an evidence-based practice. The average total implementation cost prior to program start-up of CDT was $133,106; IND cost $118,699. While CDT cost more in a number of stages, it resulted in fewer county staff hours being used and shorter mean times to implementation than IND. In cases where rapidity of implementation of reducing staff time required for implementation is valued, then CDT would be the preferable implementation approach.Conclusions The SIC is a useful tool for determining implementation resources needed for new evidence-based practice programs for youth and particularly for comparing different implementation strategies that might be tried in pilot programs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.10.006

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saldana, L., Chamberlain, P., Bradford, W. D., Campbell, M., & Landsverk, J.
Affiliations
University of Georgia (US)
Corresponding author
Saldana, Lisa
Venue
Children and Youth Services Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-04
Volume
39
Pages
177-182
ISSN
0190-7409 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974930938
Cited by
175
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6
FWCI
6.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Children and Youth Services Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH076158)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01MH076158-05S1, KDA021603)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Keywords
implementation costs, implementation resources, implementation strategies, evidence-based practice, juvenile delinquency treatment, cost mapping, implementation time, youth services

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review