The Impact of Social Screening on the Performance of US and European Funds

This chapter investigates the relationship between the performance and the screening strategies of US and European socially responsible funds. For the full sample and, in particular, for US funds, the results show a curvilinear relationship between screening intensity and fund performance. Continental European funds exhibit a positive relationship between the number of screens and performance. Furthermore, for the full sample and US funds, screening on governance impacts performance positively. In turn, environment and products screens have a negative impact on US fund performance. Finally, funds certified with social labels tend to yield higher performance. Overall, the geographical differences in the impact of the screening process on SRI fund performance are consistent with the contextual nature of socially responsible investments.

Assessment of Farmers’ Utilization of Global System for Mobile (GSM) For Communication in the Fadama III Program in Taraba State, Nigeria

The study assesses the farmers’ use of Global System for Mobile (GSM) for communication among farmers in agricultural extension programs in Taraba State, Nigeria. Specifically, the objectives include: identify key areas in which GSM are used for communication in agricultural extension programs activities, determine the frequency of usage of GSM for information exchange between farmers and extension personnel; and ascertain farmers’ satisfaction in the use of GSM in obtaining information in the various agricultural extension programs. The population for this study included all beneficiaries/farmers under the agricultural extension programs in Taraba state, Nigeria. Purposive sampling was adopted because of the accessibility of the selected three Local Government Areas (LGAs), (Ardo-Kola, Jalingo & Lau) throughout the year. Five Fadama User Groups (FUGs) were randomly selected from each LGA to constitute fifteen FUGs for the study. From each FUG, ten respondents were drawn randomly to give a sample size for the study. In the Fadama III project, respondents’ key areas of communications with personnel of the project included: group formation (88%), mobilization of members for participation in Fadama III programs and activities (87.3%), awareness creation of Fadama III intervention (82.7%), capacity building activities (81.3%), convening of Fadama User Group (FUG)/FCA meetings (81.3%), sub-project preparation and management (80.7%), advisory services and input support services (80%), environmental/social screening friendly practices (72.7%), asset acquisition activities (68%), record-keeping activities (66%), small-scale community infrastructure activities (63.3%) and financial management (61.3%). Farmers indicated their satisfaction in obtaining information o;n capacity building activities by the use of GSM with the (M = 1.21), advisory services and input support activities (M = 1.28), asset acquisition activities, (M= 1.16), mobilization of members for participation in Fadama III activities (M = 1.40), convening FUG/FCA meetings ( M = 1.43), financial management (M=1.09), record-keeping activities (M = 1.17), awareness creation of Fadama III intervention (M = 1.27), group formation (M = 1.37) and environmental/social screening and environmentally friendly practices ( M = 1.17). The main challenges included no GSM phones provided by Fadama III to farmers (M = 1.37), low level of education of farmers (M = 1.55), erratic power supply (M = 1.41), high call tariff (M = 1.11), poor network coverage (M = 1.24), lack of maintenance e.g recharging (M = 1.11), and fluctuating services by the service providers (M = 1.16). The study suggested that the Information and communication unit of the Fadama III project should collaborate with other media outfits and extension units to disseminate agro-information to the benefits of the Fadama III beneficiaries.

Validation of the emotional social screening tool for school readiness

The need for contextually appropriate and accessible school readiness assessment instruments in South Africa is well documented. The Emotional Social Screening tool for School Readiness (E3SR) screens for emotional and social competencies as a component of school readiness. This competency-based screening instrument was developed as a nine-factor model consisting of 54 items. This research study reports on the psychometric properties and factor structure of the E3SR by exploratory factor analysis. Ten preschool centres registered under the Social Welfare Act in the Cape Town Metropolitan region situated in the high-, middle- and low-socio-economic status (SES) areas constituted the research setting. A pilot study using a survey design was conducted. The E3SR protocols were completed by teachers on Grade R children during the fourth term of the academic year. The data set of 330 protocols satisfied the assumptions for inferential statistics, except for normal distribution. Normality was violated statistically; however, given the time frame, learners were expected to have mastered the competencies measured. Therefore, the violation of normal distribution was supported theoretically. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a six-factor structure, including Emotional maturity, Emotional management, Sense of self, Social skills, Readiness to learn and Communication. All the extracted factors displayed an adequate internal consistency, with a good reliability (α = 0.97). The E3SR can be shortened from 56 to 36 items without losing any important content. The E3SR can supplement formative assessments and enhance communication between role players to build children’s emotional and social competencies.

Screened social risk factors & screening acceptability among oncology patients in Philadelphia.

12125 Background: This pilot study describes the cancer-specific social risk factors (SRFs) of oncology patients on active treatment and the acceptability of using SRF screening to inform care and bolster support during cancer treatment. Methods: This is an ongoing cross-sectional survey of adult cancer patients on active treatment at two outpatient cancer centers in the University of Pennsylvania Health System. Since October 2019, 176 patients have completed our two-part, 19-item social risk screening tool (44% response rate; 49% age > 65yo; 45% female; 35% non-white). Survey questions were adapted from other social screening measures (e.g., AHC-HRSN tool, PRAPARE), then pre-tested and modified for our cancer-specific population. Part 1 of our tool covers 12 SRFs in four core domains: technology (e.g., internet accessibility challenges), environmental (e.g., housing instability), emotional (e.g., social isolation), and financial (e.g., ongoing financial toxicity). In part 2, seven acceptability questions cover patients’ perceived appropriateness of and comfort with screening, expectations of clinical staff to act on identified SRFs, prior SRF assistance received, interest in receiving SRF assistance (i.e., a proxy for patients’ most pressing unmet social needs), willingness to add SRF data to electronic health records (EHR), and comfort sharing findings with other clinicians (e.g., oncologists, primary care physicians, nurses). Results: We identified an average of 2.48 SRFs per patient. The five most commonly reported SRFs were ongoing financial toxicity (57%), internet accessibility challenges (46%), social isolation (40%), housing instability (34%), and insufficient internet for telemedicine (29%). The majority of patients thought that SRF screening was appropriate (56%) and many felt comfortable being screened (63%). Half of patients expected cancer center staff to connect them to social resources (50%), fewer wanted staff to just be aware of their SRFs (43%), and a minority did not want staff to know about their SRFs (7%). Many patients had received prior SRF assistance (49%) or were interested in receiving future help (51%). Most patients felt discomfort toward listing SRF results in their EHR (63%) and some felt uncomfortable giving other clinicians access to this data (38%). Conclusions: Our study shows that oncology patients contend with SRFs while undergoing treatment and find SRF screening acceptable. These findings support clinical implementation of a cancer-specific social screening tool into routine cancer care, but also bring attention to privacy preferences and limited acceptability of EHR documentation of SRFs. Cancer centers adopting this approach may gain insights into where interventions or resources could be targeted to meaningfully address SRFs, potentially improving clinical outcomes for vulnerable populations.

Including Psychosocial Factors in Screening for Surgery: A Preliminary Literature Review from a Social Work Perspective

Introduction: The area of psychosocial screening for surgery holds considerable potential for social work practice, but to date there is little clarity regarding tools or roles.Methods: A practice-based scoping review was conducted by social workers to provide an overview of relevant issues. Articles were screened for alignment with the research question, as well as for quality and relevance. Of the 26 articles included, quality and relevance varied considerably.Results: The review summarised key psychosocial factors, screening issues, intervention issues and organisational aspects in the literature. It elucidated the importance of psychosocial factors in the acute hospital setting and specifically in the case of surgery. While the review found that there were many tools associated with psycho-social screening, there was no consensus as to which tool was most appropriate. There appeared to be little connection between tools and potential interventions, or indeed little consensus on suitable interventions.Conclusion: Reviewed articles suggested that appropriate psychosocial screening and intervention would result in considerable individual and systems benefits. This is an area that requires greater clarity and research investment from the social work profession.

Including psychosocial factors in screening for surgery: A preliminary literature review from a social work perspective (Preprint)

UNSTRUCTURED Introduction. The area of psychosocial screening for surgery holds considerable potential for social work practice, but to date there is little clarity regarding tools or roles. Methods. A practice-based scoping review was conducted by social workers to provide an overview of relevant issues. Articles were screened for alignment with the research question, as well as for quality and relevance. Of the 26 articles included, quality and relevance varied considerably. Results. The review summarised key psychosocial factors, screening issues, intervention issues and organisational aspects in the literature. It elucidated the importance of psychosocial factors in the acute hospital setting and specifically in the case of surgery. While the review found that there were many tools associated with psycho-social screening, there was no consensus as to which tool was most appropriate. There appeared to be little connection between tools and potential interventions, or indeed little consensus on suitable interventions. Conclusion. Reviewed articles suggested that appropriate psychosocial screening and intervention would result in considerable individual and systems benefits. This is an area that requires greater clarity and research investment from the social work profession.