scholarly journals Capacity-Building for Sustainability

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-54
Author(s):  
Clark Shah-Nelson ◽  
Ellen A. Mayo ◽  
Patience Ebuwei
Keyword(s):  
School Districts ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Organizational Capacity ◽  
Shared Vision ◽  
Organizational Sustainability ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Systematic Review Process

An American K-12 cooperative educational services provider (“The Agency”) has an issue: partner school districts are saving money by building internal capacity for professional development, rather than fully utilizing expertise from the Agency. The aim of this evidence-based case study is to inform the Agency on capacity-building for innovation. The researchers performed three separate rapid evidence assessments, followed by a standard systematic review process to synthesize findings across 31 studies. Key findings identified from the research include (1) organizational capacity and program evaluation lead to organizational sustainability, (2) agency leadership should guide strategic organizational change in order to establish a shared vision for evaluation and feedback, and (3) organizations benefit from practicing continuous and ongoing learning through feedback loops. The findings of this study may be generalizable to other similar educational service providers or non-profits looking to strengthen organizational capacity and partnerships.

scholarly journals Addressing challenges with systematic review teams through effective communication: a case report

2021 ◽  
Vol 109 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda C. O’Dwyer ◽  
Q. Eileen Wafford
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Case Report ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Communication Strategies ◽  
Core Competency ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Low Energy ◽  
Full Participation ◽  
Systematic Review Process

Background: Every step in the systematic review process has challenges, ranging from resistance by review teams to adherence to standard methodology to low-energy commitment to full participation. These challenges can derail the project and result in significant delays, duplication of work, and failure to complete the review. Communication during the systematic review process is key to ensuring it runs smoothly and is identified as a core competency for librarians involved in systematic reviews.Case Presentation: This case report presents effective communication approaches that our librarians employ to address challenges encountered while working with systematic review teams. The communication strategies we describe engage teams through information, questions, and action items and lead to productive collaborations with publishable systematic reviews.Conclusions: Effective communication with review teams keeps systematic review projects moving forward. The techniques covered in this case study strive to minimize misunderstandings, educate collaborators, and, in our experience, have led to multiple successful collaborations and publications. Librarians working in the systematic review space will recognize these challenges and can adapt these techniques to their own environments.

Funding Structures and State Capacity for School Improvement under the Every Student Succeeds Act: Case Studies of Five States

2021 ◽  
pp. e20210005
Author(s):  
Hailey Karcher ◽  
David S. Knight
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
School Districts ◽  
School Improvement ◽  
Title I ◽  
Local Autonomy ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Improvement Strategies ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Every Student Succeeds Act

Under the Every Student Succeeds Act, the federal government allocates 7% of Title I funds, about $1 billion per year, for school improvement. States have substantial autonomy in allocating these funds, including which schools are identified for federal school improvement, what improvement strategies are used, and whether external intermediaries are involved. A growing area of research explores the private, often for-profit school improvement industry, but few studies track the finance and policy structures that funnel public funds to external K–12 intermediaries. In this study, we draw on document analysis and interview data to explore school improvement practices and finance policies in five case study states. We find that states use varied methods for identifying schools for improvement, and also vary in the extent to which they provide local autonomy to school districts. Some states, such as Texas and Tennessee, incentivize schools to adopt particular strategies or encourage partnering with an external intermediary. Texas provides a list of vetted external intermediaries they expect districts to work with (and support financially). Other states, such as California and New York, provide more state-led school improvement strategies through regional offices and give districts greater local autonomy. Findings point to possible benefits of local autonomy, while highlighting potential challenges associated with unregulated market-based reforms in education.

A general practice provider federation in a mixed health economy in England: a case study investigation

2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp18X696929
Author(s):  
Jill Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Shared Vision ◽  
Health Economy ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
The North ◽  
Common Strategy ◽  
Common Purpose ◽  
Collaborative Working ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThere is an emerging debate that general practice in its current format is out-dated and there is a requirement to move to a federated model of provision where groups of Practices come together. The emergence of federations has developed over the past 5 years but the factors that influence how federations develop and the impact of this new model is an under researched area.AimThe study explored the rationale around why a group of independent GP practices opted to pursue an alternative business venture and the benefits that this strategy offered.MethodA single organisational case study of a federation in the North of England was conducted between 2011–2016. Mixed methods data collection included individual and group semi-structured interviews and quantitative surveys.ResultsFederations promote collaborative working, relying on strategic coherence of multiple individual GP practices through a shared vision and common purpose. Findings revealed many complexities in implementing a common strategy across multiple independent businesses. The ability of the federation to gain legitimacy was two dimensional – externally and internally. The venture had mixed successes, but their approach to quality improvement proved innovative and demonstrated outcomes on a population basis. The study identified significant pressures that practices were experiencing and the need to seek alternative ways of working but there was no shared vision or inclination to relinquish individual practice autonomy.ConclusionOrganisational development support is critical to reform General Practice. Whether central funding through the GP Five Year Forward View will achieve the scale of change required is yet to be evidenced.

Asian American Dropouts: A Case Study of Vietnamese and Chinese High School Students in a New England Urban School District

2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phitsamay Uy
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
High School Students ◽  
New England ◽  
Asian American ◽  
Dropout Rates ◽  
School Students ◽  
Study Support ◽  
Asian American Student ◽  
K 12

In the world of K–12 education, the growing numbers of dropouts are a major concern. This article examines the dropout rates of Chinese and Vietnamese high school students. Using logistic regression analysis, this article examines the influence of ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status (SES) on dropout rates. The distinct contribution of this analysis lies within the intraethnic comparisons within the Asian American student population and its use of longitudinal data. The results of the study support existing research that gender and SES are related to dropout rates. Moreover, an interesting interaction between ethnicity and SES exists.

Patient and Provider Perspectives Regarding Criteria for Patient Prioritization in Rehabilitation Programs (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Déry ◽  
Angel Ruiz ◽  
François Routhier ◽  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
André Côté ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Quebec City ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Rehabilitation Programs ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Prioritization ◽  
Services Sociaux ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Patient And Provider Perspectives

BACKGROUND Queueing patients on waiting lists is a common practice to manage access to rehabilitation services. To increase fairness and equity in access, a strategy emerging from the literature is patient prioritization. The goal is for patients with the greatest needs to be treated first and for patient wait times to be determined objectively on the basis of explicit criteria. Selecting criteria, however, is a complex task because it is important to simultaneously consider the objectives of all stakeholders. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare service users’ and service providers’ perspectives regarding patient prioritization criteria in two rehabilitation programs. METHODS We conducted a multiple case study in two rehabilitation programs at the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale in Quebec City (Canada), i.e. a driving evaluation program (DEP) and a compression garment manufacturing program (CGMP). We sent a web-based survey asking two groups (patients and providers) of informed stakeholders to individually produce a set of criteria. We then conducted an inductive thematic analysis where each group’s individual answers were coded and combined in a single set of criteria. RESULTS Stakeholders from the DEP identified a total of 22 criteria to prioritize patients while those from the CGMP listed 27 criteria. Providers shared 76% of the criteria mentioned by patients. Some criteria, such as age, occupation, functional level, pain, absence of caregiver, and time since referral, were considered important by both stakeholders in both programs. CONCLUSIONS Patients and providers tended to have similar opinions about a majority of the criteria to prioritize patients in waitlists. Nonetheless, our study confirms that patients and providers base their choices on different types of knowledge and values, which explains some of the differences observed. Taking into consideration the opinions of all stakeholders concerning prioritization criteria is an important part of the decision-making process, based on a multiple constituency approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document