A qualitative assessment of the impact of Texas policy changes on nutrition in child care centers in Travis County, Texas

Background. Over half of children in the United States under age five spend 32 hours a week in child care, facilities, where they consume approximately 33-50% of their food intake. ^ Objectives. The aim of this research was to identify the effects of state nutrition policies on provision of food in child care centers. ^ Subjects. Eleven directors or their designee from ten randomly selected licensed child care centers in Travis County, Texas were interviewed. Centers included both nonprofit and for-profit centers, with enrollments ranging from 19 to 82. ^ Methods. Centers were selected using a web-based list of licensed child care providers in the Austin area. One-on-one interviews were conducted in person with center directors using a standard set of questions developed from previous pilot work. Interview items included demographic data, questions about state policies regarding provision of foods in centers, effects of policies on child care center budgets and foods offered, and changes in the provision of food. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed, and themes were identified using standard qualitative techniques. ^ Results. Four of the centers provided both meals and snacks, four provided snacks only, and two did not provide any food. Directors of centers that provided food were more likely to report adherence to the Minimum Standards than directors of centers that did not. In general, center directors reported that the regulations were loosely enforced. In contrast, center directors were more concerned about a local city-county regulation that required food permits and new standards for kitchens. Most of these local regulations were cost prohibitive and, as a result, centers had changed the types of foods provided, which included providing less fresh produce and more prepackaged items. Although implementation of local regulations had reduced provision of fruits and vegetables to children, no adjustments were reported for allocation of resources, tuition costs or care of the children. ^ Conclusions. Qualitative data from a small sample of child care directors indicate that the implementation and accountability of food- and nutrition-related guidelines for centers is sporadic, uncoordinated, and can have unforeseen effects on the provision of food. A quantitative survey and dietary assessment methods should be conducted to verify these findings in a larger and more representative sample.^

Financial performance drivers and strategic control: The case of cancer treatment centers

Strategic control is defined as the use of qualitative and quantitative tools for the evaluation of strategic organizational performance. Most research in strategic planning has focused on strategy formulation and implementation, but little work has been done on strategic performance evaluation particularly in the area of cancer research. The objective of this study was to identify strategic control approaches and financial performance metrics used by major cancer centers in the country as an initial step in expanding the theory and practice behind strategic organizational performance. Focusing on hospitals which share similar mandate and resource constraints was expected to improve measurement precision. The results indicate that most cancer centers use a wide selection of evaluation tools, but sophisticated analytical approaches were less common. In addition, there was evidence that high-performing centers tend to invest a larger degree of resources in the area of strategic performance analysis than centers showing lower financial results. The conclusions point to the need for incorporating higher degree of analytical power in order to improve the tracking of strategic performance. This study is one of the first to concentrate in the area of strategic control.^

Environmental sustainability and the human element: Decision making in National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers and Practice Greenhealth subscribing institutions

Background. Various aspects of sustainability have taken root in the hospital environment; however, decisions to pursue sustainable practices within the framework of a master plan are not fully developed in National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer centers and subscribing institutions to the Practice Greenhealth (PGH) listserv.^ Methods. This cross sectional study was designed to identify the organizational characteristics each study group pursed to implement sustainability practices, describe the barriers they encountered and reasons behind their choices for undertaking certain sustainability practices. A web-based questionnaire was pilot tested, and then sent out to 64 NCI-designated cancer centers and 1638 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv.^ Results. Complete responses were received from 39 NCI-designated cancer centers and 58 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv. NCI-designated cancer centers reported greater progress in integrating sustainability criteria into design and construction projects than hospitals of institutions subscribing to the PHG listserv (p-value = <0.05). Statistically significant differences were also identified between these two study groups in undertaking work life options, conducting energy usage assessments, developing energy conservation and optimization plans, implementing solid waste and hazardous waste minimization programs, using energy efficient vehicles and reporting sustainability progress to external stakeholders. NCI-designated cancer centers were further along in implementing these programs (p-value = <0.05). In comparing the self-identified NCI-designated cancer centers to centers that indicated they were both and NCI and PGH, the later had made greater progress in using their collective buying power to pursue sustainable purchasing practices within the medical community (p-value = <0.05). In both study groups, recycling programs were well developed.^ Conclusions. Employee involvement was viewed as the most important reason for both study groups to pursue recycling initiatives and incorporated environmental criteria into purchasing decisions. A written sustainability commitment did not readily translate into a high percentage that had developed a sustainability master plan. Coordination of sustainability programs through a designated sustainability professional was not being undertaken by a large number of institutions within each study group. This may be due to the current economic downturn or management's attention to the emerging health care legislation being debated in congress. ^ Lifecycle assessments, an element of a carbon footprint, are seen as emerging areas of opportunity for health care institutions that can be used to evaluate the total lifecycle costs of products and services.^

Perceptions of institutional support of community -based participatory research within prevention research centers

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the future of health care states that the focus on health needs to shift to the management and prevention of chronic illnesses and that academic health centers (AHCs) should play an active role in this process through community partnerships (IOM, 2002). Grant funding from the National Institutes of Health and the creation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Research Centers (PRC) across the county represent a transition toward more proactively seeking out community partnerships to better design and disseminate health promotion programs (Green, 2001). ^ The focus of the PRCs is to conduct rigorous, community-based, prevention research, to seek outcomes applicable to public health programs and policies. The PRCs work is to create and foster partnerships among public health and community organizations, to address health promotion and disease prevention issues (CDC, 2003). ^ The W.K. Kellogg Foundation defines CBPR as "a collaborative approach to research that equitably involves all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique strengths that each brings. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community with the aim of combining knowledge and action for social change to improve community health." ^ In 1995, CDC asked the IOM to review the PRC program to examine the extent to which the program is providing the public health community with strategies to address public health problems in disease prevention and health promotion (IOM, 1997). No comprehensive evaluation n of the individual PRCs had ever been done (IOM, 1997). ^ The CDC was interested in understanding how it could better support the PRC program through improved management and oversight to influence the program's success. The CDC only represents one of the entities that influence the success of a PRC. Another key entity to consider is the support of and influence of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside. Using evaluation criteria similar to those that were developed by the IOM, this study examined how aspects of structural capacity of the Schools of Public Health in which the PRCs reside are perceived to influence PRC community-based research activities. ^