In Chapter Five, the role of social influence networks in implementing EBPs was highlighted. These networks included staff members of one's own organization as well as peers working in other organizations in the same jurisdiction (that is, county) or in other jurisdictions. In the case of the CAL-OH study, the networks also included researchers who developed the EBP (TFCO) and the implementation strategy (CDT) and who assessed the effectiveness of the implementation strategy in scaling up the EBP. However, the specific role of these researchers was not addressed in the CAL-OH study, but rather was viewed implicitly.

In Chapters Six and Seven, two different models of evidence and implementation were introduced: a global model that is external to most settings, scientifically rigorous and generalizable across different settings; and a local model that is internal and originates within an agency or jurisdiction, based on personal experience, and specific to the needs of an organization and the community it serves. Global models typically represent the cultural understandings of researchers, while local models typically represent the shared understandings or cultural systems of practitioners and policymakers. However, there is little understanding of how these two models operate in tandem when researchers and practitioners/policymakers work together to implement an EBP.