Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI, USA.
Inquiry. 2022 Jan-Dec;59:469580221126295. doi: 10.1177/00469580221126295.
Recent U.S. federal government policy has required or recommended the use of evidence-based interventions (EBIs), so that it is important to determine the extent to which this priority is reflected in actual federal solicitations for intervention funding, particularly for behavioral healthcare interventions. Understanding how well such policies are incorporated in federal opportunity announcements (FOAs) for grant funding could improve compliance with policy and increase the societal use of evidence-based interventions for behavioral healthcare. FOAs for discretionary grants (n = 243) in fiscal year 2021 were obtained from the Grants.gov website for 44 federal departments, agencies and sub-agencies that were likely to fund interventions in behavioral health-related areas. FOAs for block/formula grants to states that included behavioral healthcare (n = 17) were obtained from the SAM.gov website. Across both discretionary and block grants, EBIs were required in 60% and recommended in 21% of these FOAs for funding. Numerous different terms were used to signify EBIs by the FOAs, with the greatest variation occurring among the block grants. Lack of adequate elaboration or definition of alternative EBI terms prominently characterized FOAs issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, although less so for those issued by the Departments of Justice and Education. Overall, 43% of FOAs referenced evidence-based program registers on the web, which are scientifically credible sources of EBIs. Otherwise, most of the remaining elaborations of EBI terms in these FOAs were quite brief, often idiosyncratic, and not scientifically vetted. The FOAs generally adhered to federal policy requiring or encouraging the use of EBIs for funding requests. However, an overall pattern showing lack or inadequate elaboration of terms signifying EBIs makes it difficult for applicants to comply with federal policies regarding use of EBIs for behavioral healthcare.
美国联邦政府最近的政策要求或建议使用基于证据的干预措施(EBIs),因此,确定这一优先事项在多大程度上反映在联邦干预措施资金申请中非常重要,尤其是在行为健康护理干预措施方面。了解这些政策在联邦拨款机会公告(FOAs)中被纳入的程度,可以提高政策的合规性,并增加社会对行为健康护理的循证干预措施的使用。从 Grants.gov 网站获取了 2021 财年来自 44 个联邦部门、机构和下属机构的可自由支配拨款(n=243)的 FOAs,这些部门和机构可能会资助行为健康相关领域的干预措施。从 SAM.gov 网站获取了针对包含行为健康护理的州的拨款(n=17)的 FOAs。在可自由支配拨款和拨款中,有 60%的 FOAs要求使用 EBI,21%的 FOAs建议使用 EBI。这些 FOAs 用许多不同的术语来表示 EBI,其中拨款的变化最大。尽管卫生与公众服务部发布的 FOAs 存在明显的特征,但缺乏对替代 EBI 术语的充分阐述或定义,这些 FOAs 也存在缺乏足够阐述或定义替代 EBI 术语的问题。尽管如此,司法部和教育部发布的 FOAs 较少存在这种情况。总体而言,43%的 FOAs 提到了网络上的循证计划注册,这是 EBI 的科学可信来源。否则,这些 FOAs 中剩余的 EBI 术语的大部分阐述都非常简短,通常是特殊的,且未经科学审查。这些 FOAs 总体上遵守了联邦政策,要求或鼓励在资金申请中使用 EBI。然而,总体上缺乏或缺乏对表示 EBI 的术语的阐述,这使得申请人难以遵守联邦政策关于在行为健康护理中使用 EBI 的规定。