{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015317286652078774, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012399708242159009, 'mean_word_length': 5.125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A participant observation study using actors at 30 publicly funded HIV counseling and testing sites in Pennsylvania.

OBJECTIVES
This study was designed to augment an evaluation of Pennsylvania publicly funded HIV counseling and testing sites, particularly of the staff-client interaction.


METHODS
Actors were trained as research assistants and sent to 30 randomly chosen sites to be tested and counseled for HIV disease. Instruments based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines were designed and used to evaluate them.


RESULTS
Data were generated that identified the range of compliance with CDC guidelines and state policy. Among the findings were that 10 of 30 sites required signed consents despite a state policy allowing anonymous testing. Only 17% of providers developed a written risk reduction plan, even though 69% of all sites surveyed by mail asserted that such plans were developed. Only 2 of 5 HIV-positive actors were offered partner notification services, even though 100% of sites visited by an interviewer claimed to offer such services.


CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that although evaluation methods such as mail surveys and site visits are useful for evaluating the existence of appropriate policies and protocols and gathering baseline data, they might not be sufficient for assessing actual staff-client interaction.