Description of a standardized treatment center that utilizes evidence-based clinic operations to facilitate implementation of an evidence-based treatment.

Donohue et al. (2009) wrote a case study about one clinic that treats people with substance-use disorder. The clinic runs Family Behavior Therapy every day.

The paper does not test the therapy itself. It maps the office routines that keep the therapy sharp: quality checks, staff files, and clear job roles.

The clinic kept high treatment fidelity, but the paper gives no scores or graphs. It simply lists the moving parts that hold the program together.

Hartzler et al. (2016) later showed the same idea works in an opioid program. They added staff-run trials and on-site champions and still hit high fidelity. The two papers echo each other: solid clinic rules keep evidence-based care alive.

Thillainathan et al. (2024) stretched the model to adults with severe behavior in a live-in home. They hit 84% integrity and big behavior drops. Their data back up Brad’s claim that a well-run system, not just a good manual, drives results.

Ragulan et al. (2023) took a different road. One ACT workshop lifted treatment integrity for four BTs. It shows you can bolt staff-level fixes onto clinic-level systems when you need a quick boost.

You can copy the clinic’s blueprint today. List every staff task, build a short quality checklist, and pick one team member to audit it weekly. Pair that with voluntary mini-trials for new hires. These low-cost steps protect fidelity without waiting for outside funding or researchers.