|
|
       |
Tools of the TradeWith One Stroke of the Pen: How Can Extension Professionals Involve Developers and Policymakers in Creating Sustainable Communities?
Mark Hostetler
Pierce Jones
Michael Dukes
Hal Knowles
Glenn Acomb
Mark Clark
University of Florida IntroductionOver the last decade ~100,000 new single-family, detached homes have been built annually in Florida. A direct consequence of this growth is a steadily increasing demand for energy and water, as is the rapid transformation of Florida's natural environment. Realizing that much of the sustainability recommendations coming out of the University of Florida were not being implemented, a multi-disciplinary team of scientists within UF saw the need to form the Program for Resource Efficient Communities (PREC <http://www.energy.ufl.edu/>) as a way to interface with the public, particularly design/build professionals and practicing planners and policymakers who make critical decisions. This article discusses significant factors associated with the creation of resource efficient communities. We focus on the role of design/build professionals, planners, and policymakers. Factors Associated with Creating Sustainable Communities:Partner with a Developer to Implement Sustainable PracticesIt is difficult to implement sustainable practices within a community that is already designed. The design/build community has not been a traditional audience for Extension, but the payoff is huge if things go right. However, caution should be exercised, because some developers will use experts to help them through permitting difficulties, with little follow-through. First, make sure repercussions are in place if a developer does not implement (agreed upon) design and management practices (e.g., a building permit is revoked). Second, look at the history of this developer and relations with local planning staff; you can learn a lot by how much other people trust him/her. Third, see if the developer is willing to upfront some money on sustainable designs and management practices (before a building permit is issued). Make Sure Individuals Associated with the Development Have Understanding and Buy-InWith the three phases of a development, design, construction, and post construction, each phase has individuals who determine the success for any sustainability goals. During the design phase, design/build professionals must have a good conservation plan; during the construction phase, contractors must subscribed to practices that will minimize impact on natural resources (e.g., proper placement of barriers around trees helps preserve native flora); and during post-construction, homeowners should be aware of sustainable designs in their homes, yards, and neighborhoods so that they can manage them appropriately, while realtors should be able to convey the intent of the neighborhood to potential homebuyers. In particular, contractors and other built environment professionals should take continuing education classes about sustainable development (e.g., <http://buildgreen.ufl.edu/>). Have continuing education courses approved by trade organizations, as this will help with enrollment. For homeowners, the developer should implement a robust education program, consisting of educational signs, a Web site, and a brochure that addresses environmental issues pertinent to that community (e.g., <http://www.wec.ufl.edu/extension/gc/harmony/>). Without an on-site education program, residents could resort to traditional, non-environmental behaviors (DeLorme, Hagen, & Stout, 2003; Youngentob & Hostetler, 2005). Make Sure Recommendations Are Not Prohibited by Local PolicyLocal regulations may prohibit certain sustainable practices. For example, traditional curb, gutter, and retention ponds are enforceable measures to manage stormwater in Florida. In one case, we promoted swales, underground filtration tanks, and natural retention areas, encountering opposition from the local regulatory agency. To avoid problems, get to know the local regulatory agency, and see how certain sustainable practices fit in with local regulations. Have a Multi-Disciplinary TeamWe have found that every development is different. Sometimes there are major wildlife issues, sometimes water, and sometimes energy/transportation issues. A developer or municipality may have one major concern, but this concern can lead to other conversations with a more holistic approach being adopted. Partner with an Environmental Consulting FirmForming a partnership with an environmental consulting firm is one way to "cherry pick" projects. Consulting firms know local developers and which projects have the best chance to become a sustainable community. This partnership works both ways: Extension personnel have access to premier projects, and consultants have access to science-based information from a university. Organize a Summit on SustainabilityOrganizing a summit on sustainability and inviting design/build professionals, politicians, planners, and landowners really got the ball rolling for PREC. We partnered with Audubon International to hold a Florida summit, and we are still networking with a variety of people across the state. Help Create Incentive-Based Policies The development community responds to "carrots." Partner with local planning boards and other stakeholders to craft voluntary ordinances that include some significant economic incentives, such as fast tracking permits, permit fee reductions, and density bonuses. Having it out there as a voluntary ordinance will give the opportunity for developers and local planning staff to try out the ordinance, work out the kinks, and help set up a culture of acceptance. We emphasize, though, that incentive-based policies must have meaningful incentives and a good marketing/education plan to help ensure public acceptance, or few will take advantage of a policy. Have Developers Talk with DevelopersHaving positive recommendations about sustainable practices coming from a builder goes much further than an Extension person saying the same thing. Thus, having model communities available for tours is essential. A developer who has tried a certain practice and can show it to another developer is powerful. We have used the Town of Harmony <http://www.harmonyfl.com> to showcase particular sustainable practices. Become Familiar with Certification ProgramsDevelopers are looking for certification programs in order to market their communities as "green." Each certification program has its strength and weaknesses. Examples include Audubon International <http://www.auduboninternational.org> and United States Green Building Coalition and its LEED standards <http://www.usgbc.org/>. In some cases, collaborating with these certification groups can lead to modification of standards for certification. Further, a good collaboration can foster referrals to Extension to help out with a particular development project. ReferencesDeLorme, D., Hagen, S., & I. Stout. (2003). Consumers' perspectives on water issues: directions for educational campaigns. Journal of Environmental Education, 34(2), 28-35. Youngentob, K., & Hostetler, M. (2005). Is a new urban development model building greener communities? Environment and Behavior, 37(6), 731-759.
Key Facts and Key Resources for Program Evaluation
Maud Roucan-Kane When to Do an EvaluationEvaluation is not a useless activity for Extension programs and is increasingly required by funders and universities. Evaluations can serve different purposes, which are summarized in Figure 1 (McNamara, 2007). Figure 1. Not all programs may require or justify an evaluation (Figure 2). For programs where the outcomes may be negative, Extension staff have to ask themselves whether they want an evaluation, what the objective of the evaluation will be, and how the clients will react (PennState, 2007). Figure 2. Which Evaluation MethodThe evaluation method(s) to use will depend on the audience, the type and amount of desired information, and the available resources. There is also a trade-off between quantity and quality. Figure 3 lists methods used to evaluate programs (McNamara, 2007). Several methods can be used to evaluate the program if the budget is available. Figure 3. Create the Evaluation MaterialCreating the evaluation requires determining the questions of interest and deciding on the answer categories of those questions. The format is also important. Questions Examples and Answer CategoriesTo avoid bias in the results, evaluations start with some general questions concerning the overall feeling of the program (program focus, format, relevance). The program dose (depth, frequency, amount/quantity) is also of interest. Several evaluations also include logistics and marketing questions. Evaluations sometimes rate instructors and topics. Some demographic information may also be gathered. It is also important to know what learners think about the delivery method and if they have suggestions (Would there be a more effective way? How would you modify the program in the future?). Finally, questions have to be determined based on what the stakeholders want to know and what the objectives of the program are (PennState, 2007). Often, evaluations contain a mix of closed and open-ended questions. Closed questions may ask for a specific answer or may list suggested answers to choose from (Figure 4). Suggested answers should be typed in bold and small caps and include at least four categories. Furthermore, repeating the same set of answer categories (when possible) helps the respondent unless the set is repeated too often (PennState, 2007). Figure 4. Scales may also be used as answer categories for rating questions. Scale can have a number or word basis. Both have advantages and disadvantages (Table 1), and, therefore, some evaluations use scale numbers with a word interpretation (PennState, 2007).
Ranking questions should be avoided, particularly when many items need to be ranked. Instead, the participant should be asked to determine the main issue or the three main issues in the list (PennState, 2007). Some programs may have pre-, post-, and post-post program evaluation. Some studies have shown that participants can be more truthful about their pre-program behavior or knowledge if asked after the program. Because participants do not behave consistently, behavioral questions should ask for the frequency, include the word "ever" or propose answer categories not limited to yes or no (Figure 5) (PennState, 2007). Figure 5. Questions regarding age, race, and marital status are extremely challenging (Figures 6 and 7). Age is a sensitive question and hence should be avoided unless the information is needed. The question should be placed at the end of the questionnaire unless the screening is on age. Age categories should be used (including one higher than the oldest persons of the audience), be relevant to the audience, and be mutually exclusive. If the exact age is needed, asking for the year of birth leads to more accurate answers (PennState, 2007). Figure 6. Figure 7. Close-ended questions should replace open-ended questions if many different answers are likely to be given by the audience. To determine the suggested answers, an open-ended question can be asked the first few times the program is given. An "other" category should also be added to the suggested answer to give the participant the opportunity to add something not included in the list (PennState, 2007). FormatSurvey research demonstrates that design is more important than length to motivate completion. It has to look easy to do and be consistent. Tables are not recommended because they tend to make the evaluation look hard. For open-ended answers, lines should be shortened and centered. Suggested answers should be placed each below the others to give an impression of space (PennState, 2007). Administering the EvaluationBefore administering the evaluation, it is recommended to pretest the evaluation with a small sample. When the evaluation is administered or advertised, it is necessary to give a rationale (i.e., explain the purpose and the reasons) for the evaluation and show that confidentiality is respected (PennState, 2007). After the EvaluationFor questions involving numbers, results should be reported on a percentage form for each suggested answer. The mean or the average for each question with numbers should also be mentioned. For open-ended answers, comments should be organized into meaningful categories, and patterns should be identified. If participants are quoted and their names are reported, the participants should have given their consent (McNamara, 2007). The results should then be used for marketing purposes. Results should also be communicated to the team involved in the program. Positive results can be excellent motivation tools. Results (if requested or positive) should also be shared with the clients or grant funders. This may help generate more grants. Finally, some follow-up may be organized, and some participants may be contacted to get a better understanding of the comments or to ask for their opinion on replacement solutions. More information on the subject of program evaluation is available at: http://www.msu.edu/~suvedi/Resources/Evaluation%20Resources.htm http://www.phcris.org.au/infobytes/evaluation_gettingstarted.php Also see The Targeted Evaluation Process (Combs, W. L., & Falletta, S. V., 2000). ReferencesCombs, W. L., & Falletta, S. V. (2000). The targeted evaluation process. American Society for Training and Development. McNamara, C. (n.d.). Basic guide to program evaluation. Retrieved July 2007 from: http://www.managementhelp.org/evaluatn/fnl_eval.htm PennState, College of Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension and Outreach. (n.d.). Evaluation tipsheets. Retrieved July 2007 from http://www.extension.psu.edu/evaluation/titles.html
A User-Friendly Evaluation Resource Kit for Extension Agents Delivering Financial Education Programs
K. S. U. Jayaratne
Angela C. Lyons
Lance Palmer IntroductionFinancial education programs play an important role in helping people achieve their financial well-being (Gorham, DeVaney, & Bechman, 1998). Cooperative Extension provides educational programs to address these issues. The Family and Consumer Sciences Extension agents deliver financial education programs at the local level. These programs vary with the financial needs of local citizens. There are two main barriers agents face when trying to document the impact of financial education programs. The first is that many agents do not have the necessary evaluation knowledge and skills. The second is that user-friendly and reliable evaluation tools do not exist to help them assess the impact of their programs (Lyons, Palmer, Jayaratne, & Scherpf, 2006). To address these barriers, the National Endowment for Financial Education (NEFE) provided funding to create a resource kit that could be used to evaluate financial education programs. An evaluation toolkit was subsequently developed by the authors. This tool kit was tested with Extension agents and found to be user-friendly and reliable for designing instruments to evaluate financial education programs. Evaluation Resource KitThe resource kit is available online to Extension agents at: <http://www.nefe.org/eval/license_agreement.html>. The toolkit has two components, an evaluation manual and an online database for designing customized evaluation instruments. The Evaluation ManualThe purpose of the evaluation manual is to help Extension agents understand basic evaluation concepts and apply those concepts to document program impact. There are five parts to the manual. The first two parts provide an overview of financial education and the basics of program evaluation. The third part explains the evaluation planning process and the identification of impact indicators. The fourth part explains how to use the database to design evaluation instruments. The final part explains the processes associated with collecting, summarizing, and presenting evaluation data. The manual is available online and in printable form. The Online Evaluation DatabaseThe online database is a user-friendly resource for designing customized evaluation instruments. Users select from one of four specific evaluation formats as well as from a pool of impact indicators. Users can also add their own questions and statements and are not limited to the indicators provided. The indicators are categorized under six major financial themes. Within these six themes, the indicators are further categorized under sub-themes, and the user has the option to select questions from the topics of interest. Use of the Evaluation Resource KitTo access the toolkit, the user first needs to accept NEFE's license agreement. Once the user clicks on agree, a new Web page opens, and the user is directed to the evaluation manual and database. It is advisable to review the manual before using the database. The online version of the manual is ideal for quickly reviewing needed content. When the user clicks on the database, the process for creating a customized evaluation instrument begins. There are six to 10 steps to designing an evaluation tool, depending on the type of options selected by the user. The first step is deciding which evaluation option is best. There are four choices, "post evaluation only" for one-time short presentations, "pre and post evaluation" for one-time relatively long workshops, "stages to change evaluation" for multi-session programs, and "train-the-trainer evaluation" for instructor trainings. Once the appropriate evaluation option is selected, a new Web page opens, and the user is prompted to enter general program information such as the name of the program and organization. At this stage, the user also has the option to create an information-recording sheet for the program and a follow-up evaluation instrument. The user then moves the curser to the "Next" button and clicks on it. From here, the subsequent steps vary with respect to the type of evaluation option selected. For example, the "post evaluation only" and the "pre and post evaluation" options have 10 steps. The "post evaluation only" option documents participants' levels of knowledge, skills, and aspirations at the end of the program. The "pre and post evaluation" option captures actual changes in participants' knowledge, skills, and intended behavior. If the follow-up option is selected, participants' actual behavior change can be documented. The "stages to change evaluation" option has nine steps and is appropriate for documenting participants' progress towards actual behavior change. The "train-the-trainer evaluation" option has 10 steps and documents the impact that the training has on instructors' subject matter knowledge, training skills, personal financial management skills, and confidence levels in delivering the program. For all of the above options, a user can add to an evaluation instrument questions that capture qualitative and demographic information. Once the user is familiar with the evaluation database, and has a clear understanding of the program objectives, he or she is able to design a customized and reliable evaluation instrument within about ten minutes. Applications and RecommendationsOverall, this evaluation toolkit helps Extension agents delivering financial education create reliable evaluation instruments. In using this resource, agents can do a better job of evaluating their programs. The train-the-trainer evaluation option of the database is appropriate for financial education Extension specialists to assess their in-service training programs. The manual contains general evaluation information that can be used by any Extension professional who wants to develop a better understanding of program evaluation. Acknowledgment This project was funded by the National Endowment for Financial Education® (NEFE®). Project number 001-10-2003 ReferencesGorham, E. E., DeVaney, S. A., & Bechman, J. C. (1998). Adoption of financial management practices: A program assessment. Journal of Extension [On-line], 36 (2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998april/a5.html Lyons, A. C., Palmer, L., Jayaratne, K. S. U., & Scherpf, E. (2006). Are we making the grade? A national overview of financial education and program evaluation. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40 (2), 208-235.
Calculating the Economic Impact of Health Education Programs: Five Tools for Extension Educators
Barbara O'Neill Health/wellness programming is an important component of many Extension family and consumer sciences (FCS) programs and includes topics such as childhood obesity, physical activity, and diabetes. Impact evaluation often focuses on positive changes in participants' health practices (e.g., increased daily exercise) and changed health status (e.g., reduction in weight or body mass index). Increasingly, stakeholders are requesting analyses of the economic impact of health education programs in addition to changes in the health status of participants. There is also pressure to compare program costs and benefits. Unlike financial management programs that have built-in economic indicators (e.g., increased savings), health education programs impacts must often be calculated indirectly. Following are five methods to quantify the economic impacts of health education programs. Survey Program ParticipantsOne way to assess financial impacts of health education programs is to ask participants directly. Historically, health and financial literacy initiatives have proceeded on parallel tracks with separate literature, programs, and advocacy efforts (Vitt, Siegenthaler, Siegenthaler, Lyter, & Kent, 2002). This is changing with the use of interdisciplinary programs such as Small Steps to Health and Wealth™ (SSHW), which encourages participants to make positive behavior changes to simultaneously improve their health and personal finances. On evaluation surveys that SSHW participants complete semi-annually are questions about how their health status has affected their finances and vice versa. Qualitative data about financial impacts of health education programs can complement quantitative impacts described below. Respondents are also asked to estimate a dollar value for improved health practices, which can be compared with time value calculations. Time Value of Money AnalysesThe time value of money has been described as "the single most important concept in personal finance" (Garman & Forgue, 2006, p. 16) and involves calculations of a lump sum or series of deposits in different time periods. Time value of money calculations can be used effectively to determine financial impacts of health programs. One example is a present value calculation for economic impact of the delayed onset of diabetes resulting from an effective health education program. Delaying health care expenses is a major financial impact for both participants and employers. Present value is the current value of money that will not be spent on health care in a series of future payments. To do an accurate calculation, you need a reliable estimate of annual health care costs and lost wages for people with type 2 diabetes and conservative estimates of the number of positively impacted individuals and their average age relative to the mean age of diabetes diagnosis, which is now 46 (Koopman, Mains, Dia, & Geese, 2005). Add in a conservative discount rate and the calculation is complete. Here is an example. Health care costs for a person with diabetes are $13,243, compared to $2,560 for people who don't have diabetes (Study Shows, 2003), a difference of $10,683. Suppose the average age of program participants is 40 and a 5% discount rate is assumed. If a realistic one-fifth (200) of 1,000 program participants, based on those who are at risk for developing diabetes and able to delay its onset with a healthy diet and exercise (Rice & McCorkle, 2005), push back the age of diabetes onset 6 years and avoid $10,683 of increased annual medical costs, the financial benefit is (N = 6 years, %i = 5, present value of annuity factor = 5.2421) $10,683 x 5.2421 or $56,001 per person x 200 = $11,200,271! Furthermore, it is estimated that people with diabetes complications pay almost $1,600 out-of-pocket for costs that are not reimbursed by insurance, such as deductibles and co-payments (The Surprisingly High Cost, 2007). A conservative future value calculation could also be done of participants' potential savings if money required for diabetes expenses not incurred is invested. Extrapolation from Published Cost EstimatesAnother way to calculate economic impact from health education programs is extrapolations from reliable estimates of the dollar savings of improved financial practices using a technique known as "shadow pricing" (Richardson, n.d.). For example, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a 10% weight loss will reduce an overweight person's lifetime medical costs by $2,200 to $5,300 (Preventing Chronic Diseases, 2003). Using simple math with the lowest dollar figure of this range, if 500 participants each lost 10% of their body weight (e.g., 16 pounds from 160) following a health education program, the economic impact is $1,100,000. A study by Andreyeva & Sturm (2006) found that regular physical activity by adults age 54 to 69 was associated with reduced health care costs of $483 annually. Additionally, studies have found effects of women's body mass on their socioeconomic status. Conley and Glauber (2005) found that a one percent increase in body mass index or BMI (e.g., from 25 to 25.25) results in .6 of a percentage point decrease in family income. Findings such as these can inform computations of economic impact. Cost-Benefit AnalysesCost-benefit analyses also provide perspective on the impacts of health education programs. The costs of program inputs (Logic Model, n.d.), such as staff and supplies, are divided into calculated economic benefits. The larger the dollar value of benefits relative to program costs, the better (O'Neill & Richardson, 1999). For example, using the weight loss program with $1.1 million of economic impact cited above, if it costs $200,000 to deliver the program, the cost-benefit ratio is 5.5 to 1 or $5.50 of economic benefit for every $1 spent to implement the program. Return on Investment CalculationsReturn on Investment (ROI) calculations are commonly used in the business world. The formula is:
In the above example, the ROI would be 4.5 ($900,000 divided by $200,000) x 100 or 450%. This means that, even after all program costs are subtracted, the program generated $4.50 in net benefits for every $1 invested. As with cost-benefit ratios, the higher the ROI multiple, the more impressive the economic impact. SummaryIt has been said that "money talks." This article described five ways to calculate the economic impact of health education programs. Framing improved health practices on program participants in financial terms can help improve accountability and meet demands of stakeholders for economic analyses. ReferencesAndreyeva, T., & Sturm, T. (2006). Physical activity and changes in health care costs in late middle age. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 3, S6-S19. Conley, D., & Glauber, R. (2006, May 19). Gender, body mass, and economic status. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 11343. Retrieved May 19, 2006 from http://papers.nber.org/papers/W11343. Garman, E. T., & Forgue, R. E. (2006). Personal finance. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Koopman, R. J., Mains, A. G., Dia, V. A., & Geese, M. E. (2005). Changes in age at diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States, 1988 to 2000. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(1), 60-63. Retrieved April 26, 2007 from: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/4988563_print Logic model (n.d.). University of Wisconsin Extension. Retrieved April 27, 2007 from: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodel.html. O'Neill, B., & Richardson, J. G. (1999). Cost-benefit statements: A tool for Extension accountability. Journal of Extension [On-line], 37(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1999august/tt3.html Rice, C. A., & McCorkle, D. (2005, December). Planning effective programs with significant outcomes and economic impacts. Paper presented at the National Urban Symposium: Youth and Family Wellness, Dallas, TX. Richardson, J. G. (n.d.). Developing cost and benefit estimates. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Retrieved September 6, 2005 from: http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/AboutCES/Factsheets/benefits.html. The surprisingly high cost of diabetes (2007, April 11). U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved April 26, 2007 from: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/070411/11health.diabetes.htm. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). Preventing obesity and chronic diseases through good nutrition and physical activity. Preventing chronic diseases: Investing wisely in health. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved October 28, 2004 from: http://www.healthierus.gov/steps/summit/prevportfolio/PA-HHS.pdf U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2003). Study shows sharp rise in the cost of diabetes nationwide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved February 25, 2008 from: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2003press/20030227a.html. Vitt, L. A., Siegenthaler, J. K., Siegenthaler, L., Lyter, D. M., & Kent, J. (2002, January). Consumer health care finances and education: Matters of values. Issue Brief Number 241. Washington DC: Employee Benefit Research Institute.
Food Safety Education as a Risk Management Strategy
Deborah L. Angell IntroductionWhat would the consequences be if food served at an Extension event caused a food borne illness outbreak? Extension professionals conduct educational outreach in order to improve the lives of citizens in the communities they serve. Often the program efforts involve risks, which, if unmanaged, could lead to potential financial loss or harm to people, property, or organizational goodwill. Just as important in program planning as choosing the topic, teaching methods, and evaluation tools, is identifying the risks associated and appropriate measures to manage these risks. Risk analysis and management is widely utilized in development of food safety standards at all levels of food industry. Non-profit organizations preparing or serving food, including Extension, should use this process as well. Food Safety is one of many areas where Ohio State University (OSU) Extension has taken a proactive approach to risk management. Extension events are steeped in tradition, traditions that often involve preparation and/or service of food or food demonstrations. Another Extension tradition is the involvement of volunteers to assist with programs or to run events. The food safety risks involved in these events are an important concern. Nationally there are an estimated 76 million cases of food borne illness annually, causing 5,000 deaths (Centers for Disease Control, 2005; Mead et al., 1999). Two to three percent of food borne illness cases lead to secondary long-term illnesses, including rheumatoid and reactive arthritis, meningitis, and chronic kidney disease (Centers for Disease Control, 2005). The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the national costs of food borne illness to be between $260 and $13.3 billion annually in medical costs, lost of income and productivity, and other costs (Battelle, 2005; Busby, Roberts, Lin, & MacDonald, 1996). Individuals, including Extension personnel and volunteers, are often unaware of the risks. They need to understand the risks involved with preparation and service of food and be knowledgeable about measures required to manage these risks. The potential consequences for an organization of a food borne illness outbreak are serious enough that the risk cannot be left to chance. Program DescriptionThe Ohio State University Extension Food Preparation/Service Policy and Procedures went into effect March 1, 2006 and address the risks associated with events involving preparation and/or service of food. The purpose of the policy is to take a proactive approach to managing the inherent risks of a food event or program (OSU Extension, 2006). Basic requirements of the policy include:
The OQC training can be conducted in several formats. The original curriculum was designed to be six 1-hour lessons. The curriculum has been adapted by OSU Extension educators for a 2-hour overview suitable for training Extension staff and volunteers. A training DVD was also developed for use in counties where no Extension educator has the expertise to teach the program. The curriculum covers an overview of what is required to carry out a food event. Topics include planning, purchasing, storage, food preparation, food service, and handling leftovers. The training materials include Power Point presentations, handouts, activities, posters, and a participant manual that can be provided to participants for their use as a reference. After finishing the training, participants complete an on-line survey and are entered into a statewide database. They are issued a certificate of participation that they need to renew through update training every 5 years. To date there are over 1,400 people in the OSU Extension database documenting completion of the OQC training. Anecdotal evidence shows this program is making a difference in practices. One group no longer has volunteers prepare individual batches of sloppy joe at home to donate and combine into one large batch for their concession stand. Now they take money donations to purchase supplies and prepare all sloppy joe on site in an approved kitchen. Other behavior changes reported include using proper cooling techniques, more effective hand washing, and use of gloves. Pre- and post-session survey results from one county (n=65) show significant increases in knowledge gained during the program, with a mean pre-session survey score of 57% and a mean post-session survey score of 92%. If they have the knowledge, will they use it? Research shows food safety education is effective in helping people adopt safe food handling behaviors (Medieros, Hillers, Kendall, & Mason, 2001; Bruhn, 1997; Hillers, Medeiros, Kendall, Chen, & DiMascola, 2003).
Results and DiscussionRisks are everywhere around us in life and are impossible to totally eliminate or avoid. Extension would do no programming at all if the organization attempted to avoid all risk. On the other hand, certain risks cannot be ignored. The proactive approach of engaging in the process of continuous risk management allows for safe, effective programs and events. This continuous process involves identifying and acknowledging potential risks, evaluating the risks, and implementing risk management strategies (including educating staff and volunteers), and monitoring and updating as required (Graf, 2003). The OSU Extension Food Preparation/Service Policy and required training provide proactive risk management for the organization. The Original Safe Food Handling for Occasional Quantity Cooks curriculum is available on CD, including all the Power Point Presentations, Participant Manual, and all program materials. For information on ordering contact OSU Publications at 614-292-1607 or by email at pubs@ag.osu.edu. ReferencesBattelle Memorial Institute. (January, 2005). Ohio State University Extension: A generator of positive economic impacts for Ohio (Executive Summary). Retrieved July 7, 2007 from: http://extension.osu.edu/about/executive_summmary.pdf Bruhn, C.M. (1997). Consumer concerns: Motivating to action. Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 3, No. 4. Busby, J. C., Roberts, T., Lin, C. T., & MacDonald, J. (1996) Bacterial foodborne disease: Medical costs and productivity losses. Food and Consumer Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report No. 741. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer741/AER741fm.PDF Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.) Annual listing of foodborne disease outbreaks, United States, 1990 - 2005. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from: http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneoutbreaks/outbreak_data.htm Graf, L. (2003). Better safe… Risk management in volunteer programs and community service. Dundas, Ontario, Canada: Linda Graf and Associates, Inc. Hillers, V. N., Medeiros, L., Kendall, P., Chen, G., & DiMascola, S. (2003). Consumer food-handling behaviors associated with prevention of 13 foodborne illnesses. Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 66, No. 10, pp. 1893-1899. Mead, P. S., Slutsker, L., Dietz, V., McCaig, L., Bresee, J. S., Shapiro, C., Griffin, P. M., & Tauxe, R. V. (1999). Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5:607-625. Medeiros, L., Hillers, V., Kendall, P., & Mason, A. (2001). Evaluation of food safety education for consumers. Journal of Nutrition Education, 33: S27-S34. Ohio State University Extension. (rev. 2005). The original safe food handling for occasional quantity cooks. Ohio State University Extension. (2006). Ohio State University Extension Food preparation/service policy and procedures. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from: http://www.ag.ohio-state.edu/~admin/handbook/PDF%20files/FoodServiceFinal.pdf
Facilitating Best Practices When Youth Aren't Displaying Their Best Behavior
Javiette Samuel IntroductionAccording to Guerino, Hurwitz, Noonan, and Kaffenberger (2006) roughly 46% of public schools reported taking some form of significant disciplinary measures during the 2003-04 school year. Nearly three out of four consequences were suspensions lasting 5 days or more, 5% were removals with no services, and 21% were transfers to specialized schools. Parents and teachers alike are concerned with these issues. In 2004, Public Agenda, a nonpartisan research organization, conducted a national study to examine discipline problems in public schools. Seven hundred twenty-five middle and high schools and over 600 parents of middle and high schoolers were randomly sampled. Results indicated that 73% of parents and 85% of teachers reported that the school experience of the majority of students suffers because of a few habitual wrongdoers. Indeed, more than one in three teachers reported that they have seriously contemplated quitting or know a co-worker who is no longer in the profession because of unbearable discipline and behavior problems. Behavior is a complex interaction of temperament, formal and informal education, cultural background, innate strengths and weaknesses, medical and health conditions, economic status, family history, and other variables. This is evident in youth who act appropriately and gain the life skills needed to develop into their fullest potential and those who need direction and require extra assistance to realize their capabilities. In light of the recent tragedy at Virginia Polytechnic University and State University, the Columbine High School calamity (1999), and countless other violent occurrences committed by youth, professionals should not ignore such inappropriate behaviors as bullying, aggression, fighting, and threatening. School SettingsUnless an individual is a certified teacher and has complete dominion over the educational setting, it may seem as if the intervention that can be taken is limited. The majority of youth-serving professionals working in a traditional classroom setting are not certified teachers, thus it can feel as though they do not have the authority to implement and enforce rules and apply consequences for inappropriate behavior. Indeed, countless 4-H professionals have reported feeling like the "powerless substitute teacher." To help eliminate and/or diminish these feelings, the following steps can be implemented. These recommendations are the result of over 15 years of professional experience with children and youth, 10 of which were in a therapeutic/clinical setting emphasizing behavior modification.
CampMore inappropriate behavior may be observed at camp than any other time or setting. This could be due in part for the following reasons:
As a preliminary step, encourage parents in newsletters, camp overview, orientation information, or other general materials to send medications if their child has a prescription drug that he or she routinely takes to help regulate their behavior and mood. What to Do if Rules Are Not in Place
Behaviors to Maximize Across Settings
Actions to Minimize in Various ContextsTo combat some of the issues outlined, avoid:
Biases, Perceptions, & Intrapersonal CommunicationProfessionals should be cognizant of what and how they communicate. This includes mood, attitude, perceptions, body language, voice tone, volume, and pitch. Equally important are internal biases and perceptions such as stereotypes, misconceptions, generalizations, and prejudices. All of these factors can influence discipline, behavior management, and decision-making processes. ConclusionOne of 4-H's primary roles is to provide intentional opportunities for young people to develop life skills. This skill set may be attitudinal, social, or behavioral. Most youth workers do not know a child's history, if he or she has had a Functional Behavior Assessment, and what the results are. It is important to report any behavior that appears chronic, extreme, or out of the ordinary. The average kid fairs well; others require intervention that is beyond the scope of Extension. ReferencesGuerino, P., Hurwitz, M. D., Noonan, M. E., & Kaffenberger, S. M. (2006). Crime, violence, discipline, and safety in U.S. public schools: Findings from the School Survey on Crime and Safety: 2003-04 (NCES 2007-302rev). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved May 22, 2007 from: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007302rev Teaching interrupted: Do discipline policies in today's public schools foster the common good? Public Agenda (2004). Retrieved May 22, 2007 from: http://www.publicagenda.org/research/research_reports_details.cfm?list=3
Mobilizing Extension for Youth Suicide Prevention Using the Signs of Suicide (SOS) Program
Bruce Jacobs
Lynne Beam Our Youth Need Extension's HelpOur youth need Extension's help, and it's literally a matter of life and death. American youth are shooting, hanging, and poisoning themselves or finding other ways to end their lives because life has become unbearably painful for them. Many more of our youth are considering killing themselves but have not taken that final step, and are at risk for doing so. Regarding U.S. youth, 11-19 years of age:
Additionally, the 2005 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006) shows:
ONE youth suicide is one too many. The impact of a suicide reverberates throughout the family, the school, and the community, sending in its wake a plethora of deeply felt emotions, including the painful awareness about the suffering that must have been endured by the person who committed suicide--until they could no longer endure that suffering. Furthermore, a suicide can prompt another suicide among peers, family members, or others in the community. The Signs of Suicide (SOS) Program: An Evidence-Based Youth Suicide Prevention ProgramThe Signs of Suicide (SOS) program is a youth suicide prevention program that uses a "gatekeeper" strategy. "Gatekeepers" in the school environment are any persons who can potentially come into contact with an at-risk student, such as administrators, faculty, staff, and peers. The goal of this strategy is to increase gatekeepers' knowledge, skills, and abilities to:
The SOS program has two versions: one for high schools, the other for middle schools (the middle school version was developed after, and based on, the high school version). The nationally recognized high school version, evaluated in a randomized-control study, has demonstrated a reduction of suicide attempts by 40% (Aseltine & DeMartino, 2004) and a dramatic increase in help-seeking behavior (Aseltine, 2003), a critical element in preventing suicide. The original SOS program is the only school-based suicide program selected by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services (SAMHSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to be included on its National Registry of Effective Programs. It is also endorsed by leading school-based professional organizations including the American School Counselor Association, National Association of School Nurses, National Association of School Psychologists, and National Association of Secondary School Principals. The education part of the SOS program can be implemented in one class period, such as in a health class. The main teaching tools for the high school version are a video and discussion guide, and a brief 7-question, non-diagnostic screening tool for depression. The main teaching tools for the middle school version are a video and discussion guide, classroom games, and student/parent newsletters. Students are then given the opportunity to meet with counselors following the program, for themselves or for a friend. The SOS program kit provides extensive, detailed step-by-step information on how to implement the program. Implementation will need support from the school's administration, counselors, nurses, and teachers, as well as support of local mental health professionals. The current cost of SOS program kit is $300. Our Experience with Using the Signs of Suicide ProgramOur statewide youth suicide prevention initiative began after one of our county directors requested help for his community regarding youth suicide (there had been a number of youth suicides in his community). In doing a literature review and internet search for youth suicide prevention programs, the health specialist determined the SOS program was one of the best programs available based on positive evaluated outcomes and ease of implementation. Subsequently, the health specialist's role has been one of contacting school personnel throughout the state, showing interested schools the SOS program, offering technical assistance (minimal has been needed), and developing a state Plan of Work for county agents to facilitate the use of the SOS program in their communities. The role of county agents has been, for example, to take a lead role in the planning team for the program's implementation. By serving as facilitator of the SOS committee, the county agent schedules meetings, develops time lines, and coordinates staff and volunteer training efforts. School personnel--with some background of mental health training (such as counselors, social workers, and nurses)--assume the role of presenting the actual program to students. As a result of our recent youth suicide prevention initiative, approximately 4,600 students in New Mexico have received the SOS program, with more anticipated for the upcoming school year. Approximately 10% of those receiving the program had met with a counselor either for themselves or for a friend; students were then referred for further counseling as clinically indicated. ConclusionWhile youth suicide has not traditionally been an issue Extension has tackled, the tragic situation of youth suicide in our states and nation calls for action. Extension specialists (such as health specialists) and county agents can expand their purview and mobilize Extension for youth suicide prevention. The Signs of Suicide (SOS) program is one evidence-based curriculum that can be used in schools. While school counselors, nurses, and social workers present the actual SOS program to students, Extension can help schools facilitate program planning and implementation. With our extensive infrastructure in our states, our expertise and experience in working with youth and schools, our community connections, and our care and dedication, we can make the difference between tragedy and hope--and save lives. For more information about the SOS program, go to Screening for Mental Health's Web page at <http://www.mentalhealthscreening.org>. ReferencesAseltine, R. (2003). An evaluation of a school based suicide prevention program. Adolescent & Family Health, 3(2), 81-88. Aseltine, R., & DeMartino, R. (2004). An outcome evaluation of the SOS suicide prevention program. American Journal of Public Health, 94(3), 446-451. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2006). Youth risk behavior surveillance - United States, 2005. Surveillance summaries. MMWR 2006; 55(No. SS-5). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2007). WISQARS injury mortality reports, 1999 - 2004. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org. If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support. |
