Skip to Content

Initially, the BPR was a collaboration between the Suicide Prevention Resource Center (SPRC) and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP). As of 2014, SPRC has assumed sole responsibility for administering the BPR.

The BPR is a source of information about evidence-based programs; expert and consensus statements; and programs, practices, and policies whose content has been reviewed according to specific standards. Its purpose is to identify, review, and disseminate information about best practices that address specific objectives of the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention.

In essence, the BPR is three registries in one. It has three sections, each of which includes different types of practices reviewed according to criteria specific to that section. The three sections are: I: Evidence-Based Programs, II: Expert and Consensus Statements, and III: Adherence to Standards. The sections do not represent "levels" of effectiveness. Fact sheets describing the approved programs and how to access the materials are posted on the BPR website. The BPR is not a comprehensive inventory of all suicide prevention initiatives, but a descriptive listing of reviewed programs. A brief description of the three sections can be found here.

The SPRC/AFSP Evidence-Based Practices Project (EBPP) was a prior effort to identify and disseminate information about evidence-based suicide prevention programs. The EBPP stopped conducting reviews in 2005, when SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP) began reviewing and listing suicide-related interventions. However, all of the programs identified by the EBPP continue to be included in Section I of the BPR (note that most programs previously identified by the EBPP are now also listed in NREPP.) For more information about the EBPP, see the EBPP Project Description and a List of Programs Identified by the EBPP.

While NREPP operates independently of the BPR, all suicide-related interventions listed by NREPP are also included in Section I of the BPR. NREPP reviews evaluated interventions and provides ratings describing (a) the quality of the research supporting the reported results and (b) the intervention's readiness for dissemination. The BPR is not linked to any other evidence-based registries. For more information about NREPP, see Section  I.

Not necessarily. Only Section I: Evidence-Based Programs have been evaluated and are included based upon their ability to produce positive outcomesrelated to suicide prevention. Section III: Adherence to Standards lists programs and practices whose contentmeets current standards in the field (the Section III review process does not examine outcomes.) Unlike the other two sections, Section II Expert and Consensus Statements does not list programs or practices, but instead consists of general recommendations and guidelines that practitioners can use while developing programs. These recommendations and guidelines are based on the best available research and expertise in the field.

Some funders may require applicants to choose among programs listed on a particular registry or list when applying for particular grants. Check the requirements for individual grant solicitations to determine whether the funder has included this type of requirement. 

To find the listings for a specific section, select the tab marked Section I, Section II, or Section IIIat the top of any page and click “View Program Listings” just below the section name (or simply scroll to the bottom of the page.) Use the Search feature to search the combined listings from all three sections.

 

 First, since the BPR is not a comprehensive listing of all programs, a literature search may yield population- or setting-specific programs. Adapting a program is also an option; however, revisions should be done thoughtfully to ensure that key intervention ingredients are not lost. Resources about “program fidelity and adaptation” can be helpful in guiding these types of program revisions. For more discussion about using the BPR to plan effective prevention programs, see Advice on Using the BPR.

 

The BPR has two sections that may be helpful. Advice on using the BPR provides information about using the BPR within the context of a systematic planning process. Resources related to Section III criteria lists links and resources for developing suicide prevention content that is accurate, likely to meet objectives, and consistent with programmatic and messaging standards in the field. In addition, the "Taking Action" section of SPRC's website includes key links and resources for developing, implementing, and evaluating suicide prevention programs. Also see SPRC’s Online Library for extensive suicide prevention resources organized by topic.
 

Each section uses specific review criteria. To be added to Section I, programs must be reviewed by NREPP and meet NREPP’s criteria. The criteria for Section II (Expert and Consensus Statements) include importance, likelihood of meeting objectives, accuracy of content, safety, congruence with prevailing knowledge, and appropriateness of the development process. The criteria for Section III (Adherence to Standards) include items related to accuracy, likelihood of meeting objectives, and adherence to messaging and program design standards. For additional detailed information about the Section III criteria, see the Section III Application Guidelines (PDF).
 

The reviewers differ by section.  To be added to Section I (Evidence-Based Programs), programs are reviewed by NREPP, which operates independently of the BPR and uses reviewers selected by NREPP staff according to specified qualifications and requirements. SPRC staff members manage the review process for Sections II and III of the BPR. Each program or practice included in Sections II and III is reviewed by three expert reviewers who have advanced degrees and/or relevant clinical, research, or programmatic experience in the field of suicide prevention. When possible, programs are reviewed by experts with specific expertise in that area (e.g., an emergency room physician would review an emergency room protocol). For more information about the review process, see How to Apply.
 

Yes! One of our guiding assumptions states that successful dissemination of best practices is facilitated when program developers, evaluators, and SPRC/AFSP staff members work collaboratively. We encourage you to contact us for assistance in deciding whether your program or materials are appropriate for submission to NREPP or the BPR. We can also provide technical assistance for program developers wishing to submit their program for NREPP and/or BPR review. Please contact Sarah Bernes.
 

NREPP submissions must be made directly to SAMHSA during an open submission period, which typically begin in October and last 3 or 4 months. Each year’s open submission dates are announced on the NREPP Web site and in the Federal Register. For more information on the NREPP submission process, see How to Apply to Section I.
 

Please see How to Apply for information about submitting materials for review for Sections II and III.
 

Section I applications are submitted directly to NREPP and follow their review process. Upon receiving an application for Sections II or III, BPR coordinator Sarah Bernes will review it for appropriateness and completeness. Based upon this initial review, she may request additional information. The application materials are then sent to three experts for review and scoring. After receiving reviewer comments and resolving any discrepancies among reviewers, the BPR coordinator will provide applicants with a summary of review results. For practices that did not meet BPR criteria, feedback to applicants will explain why the standards were not met and provide suggestions for addressing reviewer concerns. In many cases, changes to materials will qualify a practice for inclusion in the BPR with no further external review, while other practices may undergo a second round of review. After approval, applicants will be asked to approve the program fact sheet prior to posting.
 

  1.  Several factors influence the total time from BPR submission to posting of fact sheets for approved programs, including the number of practices waiting to be reviewed, external reviewers' schedules, the results of the review process, and program developers’ schedules. After the initial submission, program developers can expect to hear within two weeks whether additional materials are required for review. Occasionally, applicants will be notified that there is a waiting list to begin new reviews because of the number of programs already under review. Once the external review process begins, the process averages about three months; however, if any of the steps requires additional time, the total review time may be longer. For example, there may be unforeseen delays in receiving comments from the external reviewers, and in some instances, applicants wish to take additional time to make revisions based on reviewer comments. The BPR coordinator will make every effort to move submissions through the review process in a timely manner and to communicate with applicants about unexpected delays.

Each BPR listing includes information about where to obtain program materials, any related costs, and contact information for the program developer, expert, or agency.