Utilization of needs assessments by decision makers: A comparative analysis of assessment methods

The major purpose of this study was to ascertain how needs assessment findings and methodologies are accepted by public decision makers in the U.S. Virgin Islands. To accomplish this, the following five different needs assessments were executed: (1) population survey; (2) key informants survey; (3) community forum; (4) rates-under-treatment (RUT); and (5) social indicators analysis. The assessments measured unmet needs of older persons regarding transportation, in-home care, and socio-recreation services, and determined which of the five methodologies is most costly, time consuming, and valid.^ The results of a five-way comparative analysis was presented to public sector decision makers who were surveyed to determine whether they are influenced more by needs assessment findings, or by the methodology used, and to ascertain the factors that lead to their acceptance of needs assessment findings and methodologies.^ The survey results revealed that acceptance of findings and methodology is influenced by the congruency of the findings with decision makers' goals and objectives, feasibility of the findings, and credibility of the researcher.^ The study also found that decision makers are influenced equally by needs assessment findings and methodology; that they prefer population surveys, although they are the most expensive and time consuming of the methodologies; that different types of needs assessments produce different results; and, that needs assessment is an essential program planning tool. Executive decision makers are found to be influenced more by management factors than by legal and political factors, while legislative decision makers are influenced more by legal factors. Decision makers overwhelmingly view their leadership style as democratic.^ A typology of the five needs assessments, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses, is offered as a planning guide for public decision makers. ^

Utilization of needs assessments by decision makers : a comparative analysis of assessment methods

The major purpose of this study was to ascertain how needs assessment findings and methodologies are accepted by public decision makers in the U. S. Virgin Islands. To accomplish this, the following five different needs assessments were executed: (1) population survey; (2) key informants survey; (3) community forum; (4) rates-under-treatment (RUT); and (5) social indicators analysis. The assessments measured unmet needs of older persons regarding transportation, in-home care, and sociorecreation services, and determined which of the five methodologies is most costly, time consuming, and valid. The results of a five-way comparative analysis was presented to public sector decision makers who were surveyed to determine whether they are influenced more by needs assessment findings, or by the methodology used, and to ascertain the factors that lead to their acceptance of needs assessment findings and methodologies. The survey results revealed that acceptance of findings and methodology is influenced by the congruency of the findings with decision makers' goals and objectives, feasibility of the findings, and credibility of the researcher. The study also found that decision makers are influenced equally by needs assessment findings and methodology; that they prefer population surveys, although they are the most expensive and time consuming of the methodologies; that different types of needs assessments produce different results; and, that needs assessment is an essential program planning tool. Executive decision makers are found to be influenced more by management factors than by legal and political factors, while legislative decision makers are influenced more by legal factors. Decision makers overwhelmingly view their leadership style as democratic. A typology of the five needs assessments, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses is offered as a planning guide for public decision makers.

A State and Territorial Survey Regarding Utilization of Environmental Health Shelter Assessments during Disasters, and a Secondary Analysis of Available Shelter Assessment Data

Disasters are complex events characterized by damage to key infrastructure and population displacements into disaster shelters. Assessing the living environment in shelters during disasters is a crucial health security concern. Until now, jurisdictional knowledge and preparedness on those assessment methods, or deficiencies found in shelters is limited. A cross-sectional survey (STUSA survey) ascertained knowledge and preparedness for those assessments in all 50 states, DC, and 5 US territories. Descriptive analysis of overall knowledge and preparedness was performed. Fisher’s exact statistics analyzed differences between two groups: jurisdiction type and population size. Two logistic regression models analyzed earthquakes and hurricane risks as predictors of knowledge and preparedness. A convenience sample of state shelter assessments records (n=116) was analyzed to describe environmental health deficiencies found during selected events. Overall, 55 (98%) of jurisdictions responded (states and territories) and appeared to be knowledgeable of these assessments (states 92%, territories 100%, p = 1.000), and engaged in disaster planning with shelter partners (states 96%, territories 83%, p = 0.564). Few had shelter assessment procedures (states 53%, territories 50%, p = 1.000); or training in disaster shelter assessments (states 41%, 60% territories, p = 0.638). Knowledge or preparedness was not predicted by disaster risks, population size, and jurisdiction type in neither model. Knowledge: hurricane (Adjusted OR 0.69, 95% C.I. 0.06-7.88); earthquake (OR 0.82, 95% C.I. 0.17-4.06); and both risks (OR 1.44, 95% C.I. 0.24-8.63); preparedness model: hurricane (OR 1.91, 95% C.I. 0.06-20.69); earthquake (OR 0.47, 95% C.I. 0.7-3.17); and both risks (OR 0.50, 95% C.I. 0.06-3.94). Environmental health deficiencies documented in shelter assessments occurred mostly in: sanitation (30%); facility (17%); food (15%); and sleeping areas (12%); and during ice storms and tornadoes. More research is needed in the area of environmental health assessments of disaster shelters, particularly, in those areas that may provide better insight into the living environment of all shelter occupants and potential effects in disaster morbidity and mortality. Also, to evaluate the effectiveness and usefulness of these assessments methods and the data available on environmental health deficiencies in risk management to protect those at greater risk in shelter facilities during disasters.

Measuring Hotel Service Quality: Tools for Gaining the Competitive Edge

As the hotel industry grows more competitive, quality guest service becomes an increasingly important part of managers' responsibility measuring the quality of service delivery is facilitated when managers know what types of assessment methods are available to them. The authors present and discuss the following available measurement techniques and describe the situations where they best meet the needs of hotel managers: management observation, employee feedback programs, comment cards, mailed surveys, personal and telephone interviews, focus groups, and mystery shopping.

Elemental analysis and forensic comparison of soils by laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) and laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS)

The elemental analysis of soil is useful in forensic and environmental sciences. Methods were developed and optimized for two laser-based multi-element analysis techniques: laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) and laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS). This work represents the first use of a 266 nm laser for forensic soil analysis by LIBS. Sample preparation methods were developed and optimized for a variety of sample types, including pellets for large bulk soil specimens (470 mg) and sediment-laden filters (47 mg), and tape-mounting for small transfer evidence specimens (10 mg). Analytical performance for sediment filter pellets and tape-mounted soils was similar to that achieved with bulk pellets. An inter-laboratory comparison exercise was designed to evaluate the performance of the LA-ICP-MS and LIBS methods, as well as for micro X-ray fluorescence (μXRF), across multiple laboratories. Limits of detection (LODs) were 0.01-23 ppm for LA-ICP-MS, 0.25-574 ppm for LIBS, 16-4400 ppm for μXRF, and well below the levels normally seen in soils. Good intra-laboratory precision (≤ 6 % relative standard deviation (RSD) for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 8 % for μXRF; ≤ 17 % for LIBS) and inter-laboratory precision (≤ 19 % for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 25 % for μXRF) were achieved for most elements, which is encouraging for a first inter-laboratory exercise. While LIBS generally has higher LODs and RSDs than LA-ICP-MS, both were capable of generating good quality multi-element data sufficient for discrimination purposes. Multivariate methods using principal components analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were developed for discriminations of soils from different sources. Specimens from different sites that were indistinguishable by color alone were discriminated by elemental analysis. Correct classification rates of 94.5 % or better were achieved in a simulated forensic discrimination of three similar sites for both LIBS and LA-ICP-MS. Results for tape-mounted specimens were nearly identical to those achieved with pellets. Methods were tested on soils from USA, Canada and Tanzania. Within-site heterogeneity was site-specific. Elemental differences were greatest for specimens separated by large distances, even within the same lithology. Elemental profiles can be used to discriminate soils from different locations and narrow down locations even when mineralogy is similar.

Elemental Analysis and Forensic Comparison of Soils by Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) and Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS)

The elemental analysis of soil is useful in forensic and environmental sciences. Methods were developed and optimized for two laser-based multi-element analysis techniques: laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) and laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS). This work represents the first use of a 266 nm laser for forensic soil analysis by LIBS. Sample preparation methods were developed and optimized for a variety of sample types, including pellets for large bulk soil specimens (470 mg) and sediment-laden filters (47 mg), and tape-mounting for small transfer evidence specimens (10 mg). Analytical performance for sediment filter pellets and tape-mounted soils was similar to that achieved with bulk pellets. An inter-laboratory comparison exercise was designed to evaluate the performance of the LA-ICP-MS and LIBS methods, as well as for micro X-ray fluorescence (μXRF), across multiple laboratories. Limits of detection (LODs) were 0.01-23 ppm for LA-ICP-MS, 0.25-574 ppm for LIBS, 16-4400 ppm for µXRF, and well below the levels normally seen in soils. Good intra-laboratory precision (≤ 6 % relative standard deviation (RSD) for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 8 % for µXRF; ≤ 17 % for LIBS) and inter-laboratory precision (≤ 19 % for LA-ICP-MS; ≤ 25 % for µXRF) were achieved for most elements, which is encouraging for a first inter-laboratory exercise. While LIBS generally has higher LODs and RSDs than LA-ICP-MS, both were capable of generating good quality multi-element data sufficient for discrimination purposes. Multivariate methods using principal components analysis (PCA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) were developed for discriminations of soils from different sources. Specimens from different sites that were indistinguishable by color alone were discriminated by elemental analysis. Correct classification rates of 94.5 % or better were achieved in a simulated forensic discrimination of three similar sites for both LIBS and LA-ICP-MS. Results for tape-mounted specimens were nearly identical to those achieved with pellets. Methods were tested on soils from USA, Canada and Tanzania. Within-site heterogeneity was site-specific. Elemental differences were greatest for specimens separated by large distances, even within the same lithology. Elemental profiles can be used to discriminate soils from different locations and narrow down locations even when mineralogy is similar.