ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

Community Partners in Care is a Research Project Funded by the National Institutes of Health (CPIC)

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01699789
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : October 4, 2012
Results First Posted : November 17, 2014
Last Update Posted : May 17, 2017
Sponsor:
Collaborators:
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
RAND

Study Type Interventional
Study Design Allocation: Randomized;   Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment;   Masking: Single (Outcomes Assessor);   Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
Conditions Depression
Information Dissemination
Social Determinants of Health
Interventions Other: Quality Improvement Program
Behavioral: Resources for Services Expert Team
Behavioral: Community Engagement and Planning Council
Enrollment 1246

Recruitment Details From March 2010 to November 2010, the study screened 4,440 clients from 93 programs in 50 agencies. The ninety-three programs, included 17 primary care/public health, 18 mental health, 20 substance abuse, ten homeless services, and 28 social/other community services.
Pre-assignment Details  
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description

The RS condition offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies, coupled with outreach from a community engagement specialty, to participate in structured reviews of components of the Quality Improvement (QI) Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The quality improvement program is an evidence-based toolkit from prior studies that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for Depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and monitoring/tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual.

RS Expert Team: The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a quality improvement expert, and staff support. T

The CEP arm supported 4 months of planning for the CEP Council consisting of representatives from all assigned programs in biweekly 2 hour meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites were provided with enrolled client lists.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit from prior studies that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for Depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and monitoring/tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual.

CEP Council: The CEP Council was supported by a workbook de

Period Title: Overall Study
Started 606 [1] 640 [2]
Baseline 492 488
6-Month Follow-Up 380 379
12-Month Follow-Up 364 369
Completed 504 [3] 514 [4]
Not Completed 102 126
Reason Not Completed
Withdrawal by Subject             18             23
Death             1             2
Lost to Follow-up             83             101
[1]
606 eligible clients enrolled and contacted by telephone for baseline or follow-up survey in RS arm
[2]
640 eligible clients enrolled and contacted by telephone for baseline or follow-up survey in CEP arm
[3]
Clients in 44 programs with complete or partially complete data at baseline, 6 and 12 mo FU analyzed
[4]
Clients in 46 programs with complete or partially complete data at baseline, 6 and 12 mo FU analyzed
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP Total
Hide Arm/Group Description

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS. Total of all reporting groups
Overall Number of Baseline Participants 504 514 1018
Hide Baseline Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Age, Continuous  
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Unit of measure:  Years
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
44.9  (12.4) 46.6  (13.2) 45.8  (12.9)
Sex: Female, Male  
Measure Type: Count of Participants
Unit of measure:  Participants
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
Female
286
  56.7%
309
  60.1%
595
  58.4%
Male
218
  43.3%
205
  39.9%
423
  41.6%
Race/Ethnicity, Customized  
Measure Type: Number
Unit of measure:  Participants
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
Latino 194 215 409
African American 239 249 488
Non-Hispanic white 45 41 86
Other (Asian, Native American etc) 26 9 35
Marital status  
Measure Type: Number
Unit of measure:  Participants
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
Married or living with partner 116 115 231
Single, widowed, divorced or separated 388 399 787
Education   [1] 
Measure Type: Number
Unit of measure:  Participants
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
Less than high school education 221 224 445
High school or above 283 290 573
[1]
Measure Description: Note that the N’s may differ slightly from published papers due to multiple imputation
Health Insurance Status  
Measure Type: Number
Unit of measure:  Participants
Number Analyzed 504 participants 514 participants 1018 participants
No health insurance 286 259 545
Had health insurance 218 255 473
1.Primary Outcome
Title Poor Mental Health Quality of Life, MCS12≤ 40
Hide Description From the Short Form, 12-item quality of life measure, mental health-related quality of life is the primary client outcome. Poor mental health related quality of life is defined as MCS12≤ 40 (one standard deviation below population mean).
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
51.4
(46.4 to 56.4)
44.1
(40.1 to 48.0)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.74
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.57 to 0.95
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
2.Primary Outcome
Title Poor Mental Health Quality of Life, MCS12≤ 40
Hide Description From the Short Form, 12-item quality of life measure, mental health-related quality of life is the primary client outcome. Poor mental health related quality of life is defined as MCS12≤ 40 (one standard deviation below population mean).
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
50.5
(44.4 to 56.6)
44.8
(38.5 to 51.0)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .77
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.61 to .97
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
3.Primary Outcome
Title PHQ-9 Score ≥ 10
Hide Description Mild/moderate depression defined as PHQ-9 score ≥ 10.
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
67.0
(60.4 to 73.6)
61.7
(54.4 to 69.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.78
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.48 to 1.26
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
4.Secondary Outcome
Title Mental Wellness
Hide Description Mental Wellness, % (at least good bit of time on 3 items on feeling peaceful or, calm, been a happy person, having energy), at least 1 item out of 3.
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
33.6
(27.9 to 39.3)
45.9
(40.7 to 51.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.75
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.19 to 2.59
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
5.Secondary Outcome
Title Physically Active
Hide Description Items on physical activity that are self-reported in the client survey, drawn from the SF-12 and measures of exercise and physical activity. how physically active you are (cond606>=3), 1=Quite/very/extreme active, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
40.3
(34.6 to 46.0)
49.6
(44.5 to 54.6)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.50
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.14 to 1.98
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
6.Secondary Outcome
Title Homeless or ≥ 2 Risk Factors for Homelessness
Hide Description Being homeless or having no place to stay for 2 nights or more; food insecurity; eviction from primary place of residence; or major financial crisis from items in client surveys. Homeless/shelter (pure, demo306=7) or >=2 risk factor for homelessness out of 4 items diff1 diff2 diff11 diff6)
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
39.8
(32.8 to 46.7)
29.7
(23.6 to 35.8)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.61
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.38 to 0.96
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
7.Secondary Outcome
Title Hospitalization for Behavioral Health
Hide Description Any hospitalization for alcohol, drug, mental health, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
10.5
(6.4 to 14.6)
5.8
(2.8 to 8.8)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.51
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.28 to 0.95
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
8.Secondary Outcome
Title Hospitalization for Behavioral Health
Hide Description Any hospitalization for alcohol, drug, mental health, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
5.0
(3.1 to 6.9)
4.3
(2.5 to 6.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.70
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.4 to 1.22
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
9.Secondary Outcome
Title MHS Outpatient Visit
Hide Description Any mental health outpatient visit, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
53.9
(47.4 to 60.4)
53.6
(46.2 to 61.0)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.99
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.69 to 1.41
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
10.Secondary Outcome
Title MHS Outpatient Visit
Hide Description Any mental health outpatient visit, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
44.5
(36.8 to 52.3)
42.6
(34.7 to 50.5)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.05
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.66 to 1.66
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
11.Secondary Outcome
Title PCP Visit With Depression Service
Hide Description Any primary care visit with depression service, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
29.2
(24.3 to 34.2)
29.4
(23.7 to 35.2)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.01
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.70 to 1.46
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
12.Secondary Outcome
Title PCP Visit With Depression Service
Hide Description Any primary care visit with depression service, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
25.1
(20.7 to 29.4)
28.4
(22.8 to 34)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.03
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.74 to 1.42
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
13.Secondary Outcome
Title Faith-based Program Participation
Hide Description Any faith-based program participation, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
59.5
(52.9 to 66.1)
57.1
(51.4 to 62.8)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.89
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.66 to 1.21
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
14.Secondary Outcome
Title Faith-based Program Participation
Hide Description Any faith-based program participation, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
57.0
(50.2 to 63.8)
53.9
(48.9 to 58.8)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .79
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.60 to 1.05
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
15.Secondary Outcome
Title Use of Park or Community Centers
Hide Description Any use of parks or community centers, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
41.1
(34.3 to 48.0)
39.4
(32.8 to 45.9)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.92
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.61 to 1.40
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
16.Secondary Outcome
Title Use of Park or Community Centers
Hide Description Any use of parks or community centers, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
34.5
(30.2 to 38.8)
36.6
(31 to 42.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .97
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.72 to 1.32
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
17.Secondary Outcome
Title Took Antidepressant 2 Months or More in Past 6 Months
Hide Description Took antidepressant two months or more past 6 months, %
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
39.2
(30.4 to 48.0)
31.5
(23.4 to 39.7)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, using logistic regression, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.65
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.34 to 1.25
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
18.Secondary Outcome
Title Took Antidepressant 2 Months or More in Past 6 Months
Hide Description Took antidepressant two months or more past 6 months, %
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
34.0
(27.0 to 41.1)
28.7
(24.0 to 33.5)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .87
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.55 to 1.39
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
19.Secondary Outcome
Title Total Outpatient Contacts for Depression
Hide Description Total outpatient contacts for depression, mental health or substance abuse from emergency rooms, primary care or public health, mental health, substance abuse, or social-community services sectors
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Mean (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: mean number of visits
22.9
(14.8 to 30.9)
21.9
(16.3 to 27.4)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, log-linear models, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Rate Ratio (RR)
Estimated Value 0.96
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.59 to 1.57
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
20.Secondary Outcome
Title Total Outpatient Contacts for Depression
Hide Description Total outpatient contacts for depression, mental health or substance abuse from emergency rooms, primary care or public health, mental health, substance abuse, or social-community services sectors
Time Frame 12 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 501 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: mean number of visits
18.7
(13.6 to 23.8)
17.0
(12.0 to 22.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat analyses of repeated measures that included all participants with available data at baseline, 6 months, or 12 months by using SAS software, version 9.2. A 3 level mixed effect regression model was used for the continuous variable MCS12 score, adjusted for age, sex, >= 3 chronic conditions, education, race ethnicity, income, family income below the federal poverty level, 12mo alcohol abuse or use of illicit drugs, 12mo depressive disorder, and community.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .91
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.65 to 1.29
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
21.Secondary Outcome
Title My Life is Organized
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
42.7
(36.7 to 48.7)
51.7
(45.1 to 58.2)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, log-linear models, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.05
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Regression, Logistic
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.45
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.03 to 2.04
Estimation Comments A response of somewhat or definitely true to "my life is organized" versus unsure or somewhat false or definitely false.
22.Secondary Outcome
Title Working for Pay
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
23.5
(18.3 to 28.6)
24.7
(18.8 to 30.7)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, log-linear models, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 1.09
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.69 to 1.70
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
23.Secondary Outcome
Title Any Missed Work Day in Last 30 Days, if Working
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 123 126
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
63.1
(53.4 to 72.8)
51.5
(43.3 to 59.7)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Adjusted analyses used multiply imputed data (N= 249), weighted for eligible sample for enrollment; logistic regression model adjusted for baseline status of the dependent variable and covariates and accounted for the design effect of the cluster randomization.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.10
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Regression, Logistic
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value .59
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.32 to 1.09
Estimation Comments Population of individuals who are working.
24.Secondary Outcome
Title >=4 Hospital Nights for Behavioral Health
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 514
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
5.8
(2.4 to 9.2)
2.1
(0.5 to 3.6)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, log-linear models, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.05
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Regression, Logistic
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.34
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.14 to 0.88
Estimation Comments Median cut point for baseline variable.
25.Secondary Outcome
Title >=2 Emergency Room Visits
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 504 512
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
28.3
(22.4 to 34.3)
24.5
(19.0 to 29.9)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Intent-to-treat, comparative-effectiveness analyses with intervention status as the independent variable, log-linear models, adjusted for baseline and covariates. We weighted data for 1,018 clients to characteristics of the eligible sample, with item-level imputation for missing data and wave-level imputation for missing surveys. Weights account for non-enrollment among eligible clients and attrition.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 0.81
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
0.52 to 1.25
Estimation Comments Median cut point for baseline variable.
26.Secondary Outcome
Title >= 2 PCP Visits With Depression Services, if Any
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 145 153
Measure Type: Number
Number (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
61.9
(53.6 to 70.2)
79.8
(70.7 to 88.8)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Adjusted analyses used multiply imputed data (N=1018), weighted for eligible sample for enrollment; logistic regression model adjusted for baseline status of the dependent variable and covariates and accounted for the design effect of the cluster randomization.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.01
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Regression, Logistic
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Odds Ratio (OR)
Estimated Value 2.63
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.40 to 4.94
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
27.Secondary Outcome
Title Medication Visits Among MHS Users
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 276 277
Mean (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
10.9
(6.2 to 15.5)
5.3
(4.1 to 6.6)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Adjusted analyses used multiply imputed data (N=553), weighted for eligible sample for enrollment; Poisson regression model adjusted for baseline status of the dependent variable and covariates and accounted for the design effect of the cluster randomization.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Risk Ratio (RR)
Estimated Value .49
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
.30 to .82
Estimation Comments [Not Specified]
28.Secondary Outcome
Title Faith-based Visits With Depression Service if Faith Participation
Hide Description For this sector, depression/mental health service is defined by client report of having assessment, counseling, education, medication discussion or referral for depression or emotional or mental health problems.
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 299 289
Mean (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of patients
.7
(.3 to 1.0)
1.9
(.9 to 2.9)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Adjusted analyses used multiply imputed data (N=588), weighted for eligible sample for enrollment; Poisson regression model adjusted for baseline status of the dependent variable and covariates and accounted for the design effect of the cluster randomization.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.01
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Log-linear model
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Risk Ratio (RR)
Estimated Value 2.84
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.39 to 5.80
Estimation Comments For this sector, depression/mental health service is defined by client report of having assessment, counseling, education, medication discussion or referral for depression or emotional or mental health problems.
29.Secondary Outcome
Title Park or Community Center Visits With Depression Service if Went to Park or Community Center
Hide Description [Not Specified]
Time Frame 6 months follow-up
Show Outcome Measure DataHide Outcome Measure Data
Hide Analysis Population Description
[Not Specified]
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description:

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
Overall Number of Participants Analyzed 210 199
Mean (95% Confidence Interval)
Unit of Measure: percentage of participants
0.3
(0.0 to 0.5)
1.6
(0.2 to 3.1)
Show Statistical Analysis 1 Hide Statistical Analysis 1
Statistical Analysis Overview Comparison Group Selection Resources for Services RS, Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Comments Adjusted analyses used multiply imputed data (N=410), weighted for eligible sample for enrollment; Poisson regression model adjusted for baseline status of the dependent variable and covariates and accounted for the design effect of the cluster randomization.
Type of Statistical Test Superiority or Other
Comments [Not Specified]
Statistical Test of Hypothesis P-Value <.01
Comments [Not Specified]
Method Log-linear model
Comments [Not Specified]
Method of Estimation Estimation Parameter Risk Ratio (RR)
Estimated Value 6.20
Confidence Interval (2-Sided) 95%
1.54 to 24.90
Estimation Comments For this sector, depression/mental health service is defined by client report of having assessment, counseling, education, medication discussion or referral for depression or emotional or mental health problems.
Time Frame [Not Specified]
Adverse Event Reporting Description [Not Specified]
 
Arm/Group Title Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Hide Arm/Group Description

RS offers time-limited technical assistance to individual agencies and outreach from a community engagement specialty, to review components of the QI Program Intervention as implemented by the RS Expert Team.

QI Program: The QI program is an evidence-based toolkit that supported team leadership, case and care management, medication management, and CBT for depression. The Case management manual supported depression screening and tracking of outcomes; patient education and activation, care coordination, and behavioral activation and problem solving. The toolkit includes education on depression and a community health worker manual. The expert team for RS consisted of 3 psychiatrists, a psychologist expert in CBT, a nurse care manager, a community engagement specialist, a QI expert, and staff support. The team offered 12 webinars to each community on components of collaborative care as well as site visits to primary care clinics on clinical assessment and medication management.

CEP supports 4 months of planning for the CEP Council of representatives from assigned programs in biweekly 2-hr meetings to fit trainings in the QI Program to the community and develop strategies across programs to collaborate as a network. The CEP Council developed a written plan for training and monitoring and supported implementation of the training plan. CEP sites received enrolled client lists. The toolkit is the same as RS. The CEP Council was supported by a workbook developed by the overall CPIC Council that provided principles, approach, agendas, and resources for the multi-sector planning meetings. The CEP Councils met twice a month for 4-6 months to develop their plan and met monthly during implementation of trainings. The study Council supported CEP meetings. Community leaders co-led trainings with study experts to help assure sustainability. Each CEP council had $15K to defray costs of venues, materials, and consultations, while the study provided that for RS.
All-Cause Mortality
Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Affected / at Risk (%) Affected / at Risk (%)
Total   --/--   --/-- 
Show Serious Adverse Events Hide Serious Adverse Events
Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Affected / at Risk (%) Affected / at Risk (%)
Total   0/606 (0.00%)   0/640 (0.00%) 
Show Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events Hide Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events
Frequency Threshold for Reporting Other Adverse Events 0%
Resources for Services RS Community Engagement and Planning CEP
Affected / at Risk (%) Affected / at Risk (%)
Total   0/606 (0.00%)   0/640 (0.00%) 
Communities had history of using CPPR for depression. Response rates moderate for agencies, high for programs. Convenience samples of sites. Client retention rates lower than other QI studies. Outcomes rely on client self-report at 6-month follow-up.
Certain Agreements
Principal Investigators are NOT employed by the organization sponsoring the study.
There is NOT an agreement between Principal Investigators and the Sponsor (or its agents) that restricts the PI's rights to discuss or publish trial results after the trial is completed.
Results Point of Contact
Name/Title: Kenneth B. Wells
Organization: RAND Corporation
Phone: 310-794-3728
Publications of Results:
Other Publications:
Responsible Party: RAND
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01699789     History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers: CPIC-2012-KW
R01MH078853 ( U.S. NIH Grant/Contract )
5G08LM011058-02 ( U.S. NIH Grant/Contract )
First Submitted: September 27, 2012
First Posted: October 4, 2012
Results First Submitted: May 6, 2014
Results First Posted: November 17, 2014
Last Update Posted: May 17, 2017