Statement of Purpose Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) are emerging evidence-informed and cost-effective strategies to address violence. Few standardized tools exist to capture experiences of HVIP clients to ensure program relevance and responsiveness. We developed a tool to measure client satisfaction utilizing feedback from youth and caregivers participating in a pediatric HVIP.

Methods/Approach We identified the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) (Larsen et al., 1979), a general measure of satisfaction with health and human services, as an adaptable tool. After modifying the CSQ for HVIP relevance, we invited former program clients (ages 12–18) and caregivers to pilot test the questionnaire and complete cognitive interviews. During interviews, participants described their interpretation of each item, provided suggestions for alternative wording, indicated comfort in answering honestly, identified missing topics, and shared preferences for questionnaire administration. Subsequently, team members with service delivery and program evaluation experience refined a final version of the questionnaire using respondent feedback and subject matter expertise.

Results Four former clients and five caregivers completed the initial HVIP-adapted CSQ and participated in cognitive interviews. Participants demonstrated strong understanding of CSQ items, suggested alternate response scales and question wording to improve clarity, and identified redundant items. Respondents indicated preference for completing the questionnaire electronically. After incorporating recommendations and an additional item regarding cultural competency, we finalized a 12-item version of the pediatric HVIP CSQ.

Conclusion Created with client feedback, our brief tool systematizes collection of HVIP client satisfaction and supports the inclusion of client and caregiver voices in quality improvement and evaluation efforts.

Significance We developed an instrument to elicit client-reported satisfaction with HVIP services, including perceived quality, impact, and cultural relevance of care. More generally, this work highlights a systematic process to engage program participants in development of evaluation tools.