The purpose of this article is to describe the methods and results used to establish the district capacity assessment’s (DCA) content validity, response process validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability. The DCA measures a district’s ability to support school-level implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs). Assessment results are then used to guide action planning. The DCA is grounded in the understanding that districts must develop knowledge and skills in the use of implementation science methods if they are to support successful use of an innovation. Specifically, three studies were conducted. The first study established the DCA’s content validity, that is, the extent to which the DCA represents constructs comprising district-level implementation capacity. The second study established the DCA’s internal structure, or the relationships among the items compared to the constructs being measured and how well the items measured the same construct. The third and final study assessed how the results of the DCA varied over time, thus establishing the instrument’s test–retest reliability. District Implementation Teams, researchers, or facilitators who use the DCA can be confident that the assessment is founded on research drawing from implementation science practices and methods.

本文的目的是描述用于建立区域容量评估（DCA）内容有效性，响应过程有效性，构造有效性，内部一致性和重测信度的方法和结果。DCA衡量一个学区支持在学校一级实施循证实践（EBP）的能力。然后，评估结果将用于指导行动计划。DCA的理解是，如果地区要支持成功使用创新，就必须发展使用实施科学方法的知识和技能。具体而言，进行了三项研究。第一项研究确定了DCA的内容有效性，即DCA在多大程度上代表了包含地区级实施能力的架构。第二项研究建立了DCA的内部结构，或与被测结构相比各项之间的关系以及这些项对同一结构的测量程度。第三项也是最后一项研究评估了DCA的结果如何随时间变化，从而确定了仪器的重测可靠性。使用DCA的地区实施团队，研究人员或促进者可以确信，评估是基于实施科学实践和方法进行的研究得出的。