Data-Informed Implementation

  • Rosalyn BertramEmail author
  • Suzanne Kerns


Data should be used across implementation stages to support program selection, fidelity, and accountability through model-pertinent feedback loops. In this chapter, we present examples of how data are used across implementation stages. We also review the development and use of symptom and intervention monitoring systems. The right data provide an incredibly useful means to assess client needs or behaviors of concern and to track client outcomes during service delivery. Well-organized implementation planning processes use data to provide accountability within an organization as well as between the organization, the community, and funding sources.


Data-informed Feedback loops Symptom monitoring 


  1. Bickman, L., Lyon, A. R., & Wolpert, M. (2016). Achieving precision mental health through effective assessment, monitoring, and feedback processes: Introduction to the special issue. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 43(3), 271–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bigfoot, D. S., & Schmidt, S. R. (2010). Honoring children, mending the circle: Cultural adaptation of trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy for American Indian and Alaska Native children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 66(8), 847–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borntrager, C., & Lyon, A. R. (2015). Client progress monitoring and feedback in school-based mental health. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 22(1), 74–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chorpita, B. F., Bernstein, A., Daleiden, E. L., & Research Network on Youth Mental Health. (2008). Driving with roadmaps and dashboards: Using information resources to structure the decision models in service organizations. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 35(1–2), 114–123.Google Scholar
  5. Fortney, J. C., Unützer, J., Wrenn, G., Pyne, J. M., Smith, G. R., Schoenbaum, M., et al. (2016). A tipping point for measurement-based care. Psychiatric Services, 68(2), 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Julian, D. A. (2006). A community practice model for community psychologists and some examples of the application of community practice skills from the partnerships for success initiative in Ohio. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37(1–2), 21–27.Google Scholar
  7. Kerns, S. E. U., Rivers, A. M., & Enns, G. W. (2009). Partnerships for success in Washington State: Supporting evidence-based programming for children’s mental health. Report on Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 9, 55–62.Google Scholar
  8. Ng, M. Y., & Weisz, J. R. (2016). Annual research review: Building a science of personalized intervention for youth mental health. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(3), 216–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Scott, K., & Lewis, C. C. (2015). Using measurement-based care to enhance any treatment. Cognitive and behavioral practice, 22(1), 49–59.Google Scholar
  10. Wandersman, A., Imm, P., Chinman, M., & Kaftarian, S. (2000). Getting to outcomes: A results-based approach to accountability. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23(3), 389–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Professor, School of Social WorkUniversity of Missouri–Kansas CityKansas CityUSA
  2. 2.Research Associate Professor, Graduate School of Social WorkUniversity of DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations