An evaluation of the impact of Inner City Development's Cooperative Home School: An educational alternative program to increase the quality and level of education in San Antonio's West Side community

The research study was intended to evaluate the effectiveness of Inner City Development's (I.C.D.) Cooperative Home School, an educational alternative program to the Title I public schools of San Antonio's West Side community. The study investigated students', parents' and tutors' perception of parental involvement and educational resources. The study also investigated each student's academic achievement. ^ The study found that students progressed toward expected math proficiency at a faster rate than they did in reading proficiency. However, because the target population size was small and a comparison group was not used, the results of this study are only suggestive. This research also indicated that study subjects believed students' quality and level of education increased substantially since program exposure. Study subjects mainly attributed the students' strides in academic performance to the increased amount of individualized attention students received in the small twelve-student class size. Study subjects were more satisfied with the home school's educational resources than those of the Title I public schools. Study subjects also perceived that parental involvement both at home and at school increased since enrollment in the home school program because: (1) there were more opportunities for involvement in the home school; and (2) parents felt closer to the tutors than the teachers in public school. ^ This evaluation also suggested improvements to program operations. With the help of additional volunteers, I.C.D. program operators could improve collection and organization of academic records. Furthermore, as suggested by program participants, science could be added to the curriculum. Lastly, a formal tutor orientation could be implemented to familiarize and train tutors on classroom management procedures. ^

The determinants of improvements in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care

This study aims to address two research questions. First, ‘Can we identify factors that are determinants both of improved health outcomes and of reduced costs for hospitalized patients with one of six common diagnoses?’ Second, ‘Can we identify other factors that are determinants of improved health outcomes for such hospitalized patients but which are not associated with costs?’ The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2003 to 2006 was employed in this study. The total study sample consisted of hospitals which had at least 30 patients each year for the given diagnosis: 954 hospitals for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), 1552 hospitals for congestive heart failure (CHF), 1120 hospitals for stroke (STR), 1283 hospitals for gastrointestinal hemorrhage (GIH), 979 hospitals for hip fracture (HIP), and 1716 hospitals for pneumonia (PNE). This study used simultaneous equations models to investigate the determinants of improvement in health outcomes and of cost reduction in hospital inpatient care for these six common diagnoses. In addition, the study used instrumental variables and two-stage least squares random effect model for unbalanced panel data estimation. The study concluded that a few factors were determinants of high quality and low cost. Specifically, high specialty was the determinant of high quality and low costs for CHF patients; small hospital size was the determinant of high quality and low costs for AMI patients. Furthermore, CHF patients who were treated in Midwest, South, and West region hospitals had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. Gastrointestinal hemorrhage and pneumonia patients who were treated in South region hospitals also had better health outcomes and lower hospital costs than patients who were treated in Northeast region hospitals. This study found that six non-cost factors were related to health outcomes for a few diagnoses: hospital volume, percentage emergency room admissions for a given diagnosis, hospital competition, specialty, bed size, and hospital region.^