Examining implementation of contingency management in real-world settings.

Very little is known about how reward programs are implemented in real-world substance use treatment settings and whether training in contingency management (CM), an empirically supported rewards-based intervention, impacts their design quality. Providers ( = 214) completed surveys assessing CM beliefs, training, and practices related to use of tangible rewards in treatment. For providers reporting they had not used rewards in treatment previously (54%, = 116), we assessed beliefs about and interest in adopting a reward-based program. For those endorsing prior reward experience (46%, = 98), we assessed the features and delivery of rewards and the relation of reward-based intervention training to 4 parameters related to CM efficacy: reinforcement magnitude, immediacy, frequency, and escalation. Among providers without reward experience, endorsement of supportive statements about CM predicted interest in adopting a rewards-based program. Providers with reward experience most often targeted treatment attendance and engaged in behaviors likely to decrease the effectiveness of the intervention, including use of low magnitudes (≤ $25/client), delayed reinforcement, failure to escalate reward values, and offering reward opportunities less than weekly. Providers with longer durations of training were more likely to engage in behaviors consistent with effective CM, including larger magnitude rewards and immediate delivery of rewards. Results indicate that real-world treatment clinics are using reward-based programs but not in ways consistent with research protocols. Longer training exposure is associated with greater adherence to some aspects of CM protocol design. Other evidence-based design features are not being implemented as recommended, even with training. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).