Achieving a New Standard in Primary Care for Low-Income Populations -- Case Studies of Redesign and Change Through a Learning Collaborative

Describes four case studies that focus on improving patient care delivery systems through learning collaboratives that were undertaken by New York City's nonprofit Primary Care Development Corporation

The chaotic nature of healthcare information systems: The need for transdisciplinary collaboration

Copyright @ 2013 EMCIS.This paper demonstrates one of the challenges of the healthcare information systems development, namely the chaotic nature of healthcare systems. Although the reliable evidence demonstrating the positive effects of health information systems on safety and quality remains inconclusive (a growing body of research revealing the unintended consequences and potentially error producing effects of health information systems’ implementation. Different arguments from the literature concerning the chaotic nature of healthcare, including but not limited to the nature of patients and disease have been presented. The requirements of new ways of systems design and the need for transdisciplinary dynamic teams within the requirements engineering phase as a start has been discussed. These arguments have been investigated in the context of an exploratory case addressing one of the advanced oncology centres in the US. This paper concludes that there is an important need to rethink healthcare information systems development method, which has to be in a dynamic ongoing manner for some major issues

The Boston University Photonics Center annual report 2015-2016

This repository item contains an annual report that summarizes activities of the Boston University Photonics Center in the 2015-2016 academic year. The report provides quantitative and descriptive information regarding photonics programs in education, interdisciplinary research, business innovation, and technology development. The Boston University Photonics Center (BUPC) is an interdisciplinary hub for education, research, scholarship, innovation, and technology development associated with practical uses of light.This has been a good year for the Photonics Center. In the following pages, you will see that this year the Center’s faculty received prodigious honors and awards, generated more than 100 notable scholarly publications in the leading journals in our field, and attracted $18.9M in new research grants/contracts. Faculty and staff also expanded their efforts in education and training, and cooperated in supporting National Science Foundation sponsored Sites for Research Experiences for Undergraduates and for Research Experiences for Teachers. As a community, we emphasized the theme of “Frontiers in Plasmonics as Enabling Science in Photonics and Beyond” at our annual symposium, hosted by Bjoern Reinhard. We continued to support the National Photonics Initiative, and contributed as a cooperating site in the American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated Photonics (AIM Photonics) which began this year as a new photonics-themed node in the National Network of Manufacturing Institutes. Highlights of our research achievements for the year include an ambitious new DoD-sponsored grant for Development of Less Toxic Treatment Strategies for Metastatic and Drug Resistant Breast Cancer Using Noninvasive Optical Monitoring led by Professor Darren Roblyer, continued support of our NIH-sponsored, Center for Innovation in Point of Care Technologies for the Future of Cancer Care led by Professor Cathy Klapperich, and an exciting confluence of new grant awards in the area of Neurophotonics led by Professors Christopher Gabel, Timothy Gardner, Xue Han, Jerome Mertz, Siddharth Ramachandran, Jason Ritt, and John White. Neurophotonics is fast becoming a leading area of strength of the Photonics Center. The Industry/University Collaborative Research Center, which has become the centerpiece of our translational biophotonics program, continues to focus onadvancing the health care and medical device industries, and has entered its sixth year of operation with a strong record of achievement and with the support of an enthusiastic industrial membership base

Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes, April 4-5, 1996

Minutes from the Wright State University Board of Trustees Meeting held on April 4-5, 199

Improving School Improvement

PREFACEIn opening this volume, you might be thinking:Is another book on school improvement really needed?Clearly our answer is yes. Our analyses of prevailing school improvement legislation, planning, and literature indicates fundamental deficiencies, especially with respect to enhancing equity of opportunity and closing the achievement gap.Here is what our work uniquely brings to policy and planning tables:(1) An expanded framework for school improvement – We highlight that moving from a two- to a three-component policy and practice framework is essential for closing the opportunity and achievement gaps. (That is, expanding from focusing primarily on instruction and management/government concerns by establishing a third primary component to improve how schools address barriers to learning and teaching.)(2) An emphasis on integrating a deep understanding of motivation – We underscore that concerns about engagement, management of behavior, school climate, equity of opportunity, and student outcomes require an up-to-date grasp of motivation and especially intrinsic motivation.(3) Clarification of the nature and scope of personalized teaching – We define personalization as the process of matching learner motivation and capabilities and stress that it is the learner's perception that determines whether the match is a good one.(4) A reframing of remediation and special education – We formulate these processes as personalized special assistance that is applied in and out of classrooms and practiced in a sequential and hierarchical manner.(5) A prototype for transforming student and learning supports – We provide a framework for a unified, comprehensive, and equitable system designed to address barriers to learning and teaching and re-engage disconnected students and families.(6) A reworking of the leadership structure for whole school improvement --We outline how the operational infrastructure can and must be realigned in keeping with a three component school improvement framework.(7) A systemic approach to enhancing school-community collaboration – We delineate a leadership role for schools in outreaching to communities in order to work on shared concerns through a formal collaborative operational infrastructure that enables weaving together resources to advance the work.(8) An expanded framework for school accountability – We reframe school accountability to ensure a balanced approach that accounts for a shift to a three component school improvement policy.(9) Guidance for substantive, scalable, and sustainable systemic changes –We frame mechanisms and discuss lessons learned related to facilitating fundamental systemic changes and replicating and sustaining them across a district.The frameworks and practices presented are based on our many years of work in schools and from efforts to enhance school-community collaboration. We incorporate insights from various theories and the large body of relevant research and from lessons learned and shared by many school leaders and staff who strive everyday to do their best for children.Our emphasis on new directions in no way is meant to demean current efforts. We know that the demands placed on those working in schools go well beyond what anyone should be asked to do. Given the current working conditions in many schools, our intent is to help make the hard work generate better results. To this end, we highlight new directions and systemic pathways for improving school outcomes.Some of what we propose is difficult to accomplish. Hopefully, the fact that there are schools, districts, and state agencies already trailblazing the way will engender a sense of hope and encouragement to those committed to innovation.It will be obvious that our work owes much to many. We are especially grateful to those who are pioneering major systemic changes across the country. These leaders and so many in the field have generously offered their insights and wisdom. And, of course, we are indebted to hundreds of scholars whose research and writing is a shared treasure. As always, we take this opportunity to thank Perry Nelson and the host of graduate and undergraduate students at UCLA who contribute so much to our work each day, and to the many young people and their families who continue to teach us all.Respectfully submitted for your consideration,Howard Adelman & Linda Taylo

Kresge Foundation 2010-2011 Annual Report

Contains an introduction to Kresge's strategy; board chair's letter; president's letter; foundation timeline; program information; grant summary, including geographic distribution; grants lists; financial summary; and lists of board members and staff

Reimagining Labor Market Information: A National Collaborative for Local Workforce Information

Key PointsThe economy is changing rapidly, constantly, and differently across the country. Workers, employers, and government agencies need to be prepared to respond.The US needs a new workforce information structure that provides timely, local, and actionable data and evidence.This report proposes the creation of a National Collaborative for Local Workforce Information that would be federally funded but state-managed, with states initiating projects designed to become products and ultimately put into practice

The role of user requirements research in medical device development

Aims and Objectives: This research aims to suggest a concise framework to help in the better conceptualisation and integration of users in the medical device development (MDD) process. The current economic, political and social climate concerning the matter of healthcare delivery has resulted in the emergence of numerous users and user groups for whom the healthcare system has not previously catered for. These users have created ambiguity for the designers and manufacturers of medical devices as the boundaries between their needs and requirements have blurred, outdating current methods of MDD to meet consumer needs. Research Design and Methodology: The research methodology begins primarily with conducting a literature search on the theories relating to user requirements and medical device development. The paper outlines these findings through initially describing users and user involvement and relating them to medical devices. The cross-disciplinary nature of healthcare influenced the investigation into multiple disciplines including; IT, Ergonomics – particularly participatory research, Psychology and Design. These disciplines expose various methods and processes, which are useful to user requirements research. These methods were analysed for their compatibility, and then used to construct a conceptual framework for user involvement in MDD. Results: The research insinuates the true significance of user involvement and hence resulted in the formation of a conceptual framework to aid user involvement in the MDD process. The framework is produced by the amalgamation of relevant methods examined across the disciplines, in a complimentary fashion. Conclusion: The originality of this research lies in its use of a multidisciplinary approach. Previous research claiming multi-methods has dealt with combining two disciplines or methods at a time i.e. Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) with participatory research (Scandurra et al, 2008) for the needs analysis of healthcare professionals only. Collaboration across disciplines has also been investigated (Johnson et al, 2005), but this was for the purpose of redesign rather than initial designs. This framework can help medical device designers to fully access all user requirements through more extensive collaboration right at the start. It reduces the risk of high costs involved in device rejection, usually associated with belated recognition of user needs in the design cycle

Social Entrepreneurship Collaboratory: (SE Lab): A University Incubator for a Rising Generation of Leading Social Entrepreneurs

How can universities help create, develop and sustain a rising generation of social entrepreneurs and their ideas? What new forms of learning environments successfully integrate theory and practice? What conditions best support university students interested in studying, participating in, creating and developing social change organizations, thinking through their ideas, and connecting with their inspiration? What is the intellectual content and the rationale for a curriculum addressing this at a university