CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices

Online database

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 16, 2026
Entity authorityQ18391655 ↗
Source-derived summary

The National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices (NREPP) was a searchable online database of interventions designed to promote mental health or to prevent or treat substance abuse and mental disorders. The registry was funded and administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The goal of the Registry was to encourage wider adoption of evidence-based interventions and to help those interested in implementing an evidence-based intervention to select one that best meets their needs.

The NREPP website was phased out in 2018. The phaseout section of this article has more information.

Overview

In the behavioral health field, there is an ongoing need for researchers, developers, evaluators, and practitioners to share information about what works to improve outcomes among individuals coping with, or at risk for, mental disorders and substance abuse. Discussing how this need led to the development of NREPP, Brounstein, Gardner, and Backer (2006) wrote:

not all prevention programs work. Still other programs have no empirically based support regarding their effectiveness. […] Many others have empirical support, but the methods used to generate that support are suspect. This is another reason to highlight the need for and use of scientifically defensible, effective prevention programs.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices” is online database. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through National, Registry and Evidence-Based, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2018, 2006—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, National, Registry and Evidence-Based is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “online database” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q18391655. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2018 and 2006.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices primary sources, National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices archive and National research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.