Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Periodic Assessment (periodic + assessment)
Selected AbstractsFollow-Up Comparisons of Intervention and Comparison Schools in a State Tobacco Prevention and Control InitiativeJOURNAL OF SCHOOL HEALTH, Issue 3 2006Phyllis Gingiss The intervention, which was funded through the Texas Department of State Health Services, consisted of guidance, training, technical assistance, and reimbursement of approximately $2000 per year for program expenses. Self-administered written surveys for Principals and Health Coordinators, based on the School Health Education Profile Tobacco Module, were designed for periodic assessment of the status of school programs. Surveys were sent in 2002 to intervention (n = 74) and comparison (n = 60) schools. Response to the Principal Survey was received from 109 (81%) schools, and response to the Health Coordinator Survey was received from 84 (63%) schools. Survey analysis showed that intervention schools more frequently (p , .05) reported: (1) being extremely or moderately active in student cessation support, teacher training, policy development, family involvement, and assessment of the prevention program; (2) using recommended curricula, offering more tobacco-related lessons, involving more teachers, and using more recommended teaching methods such as role-playing, simulations or practice, and peer educators; and (3) having more interest in staff development and more funding to purchase release time. Similarities across schools are provided, as well as recommendations for future planning. (J Sch Health. 2006;76(3):98-103) [source] Asthma control or severity: that is the questionALLERGY, Issue 2 2007M. Humbert In the first National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, the level of symptoms and airflow limitation and its variability allowed asthma to be subdivided by severity into four subcategories (intermittent, mild persistent, moderate persistent, and severe persistent). It is important to recognize, however, that asthma severity involves both the severity of the underlying disease and its responsiveness to treatment. Thus, the first update of the GINA guidelines defined asthma severity depending on the clinical features already proposed as well as the current treatment of the patient. In addition, severity is not a fixed feature of asthma, but may change over months or years, whereas the classification by severity suggests a static feature. Moreover, using severity as an outcome measure has limited value in predicting what treatment will be required and what the response to that treatment might be. Because of these considerations, the classification of asthma severity is no longer recommended as the basis for treatment decisions, a periodic assessment of asthma control being more relevant and useful. [source] Capacity building as a tool for assessing training and development activity: an Indian case studyINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT, Issue 2 2008R. Krishnaveni In recognition of its increasing importance, many organizations make periodic assessments of their training and development activity. The objective of the present study was to extend the concept of capacity building to the assessment of training and development activity in an automobile component manufacturing organization, using a developed and validated instrument. The study subjects were 36 middle-level managers selected on a stratified basis. The research described here provides a new methodology for the evaluation of training and development activity. Perception-based, consensus-oriented assessment is proposed as a valuable tool for evaluating and improving training and development activity. Brainstorming sessions led to suggestions for enhancing capacity in identified lag areas. In addition, this assessment serves as a platform for subsequent evaluation of the effectiveness of training and development activity. [source] Human Factors Programs within Contra Costa CountyPROCESS SAFETY PROGRESS, Issue 3 2009Michael Dossey Abstract Starting in 1999, regulated industrial facilities in Contra Costa County, California were required to develop Human Factors Programs as part of the Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO). Human Factors Programs within the County are designed to be a thorough assessment of the interactions between equipment, work processes, procedures, practices, work environment, people, and management systems as they relate to health and safety. Committees were established at each facility to oversee the development, training, and execution of the site-specific programs. Primary areas of focus in the ongoing implementation of an effective Human Factors Program are periodic assessments and resolution of Latent Conditions, and performance of Management of Organizational Change Assessments before staffing changes. This article describes the steps that facilities in Contra Costa County have taken to develop comprehensive site specific Human Factors Programs. © 2009 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog, 2009 [source] | ||||||||||