整合素与健康

仅在近来才发现这些粘性的细胞表面分子已迅速表明它们对身体和生命本身的正常功能的关键性的。     

The diagnosis of LD in English learners: is it nondiscriminatory?

This study examined the operationalization of one of the key reforms initiated by the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (U.S. Congress, 1975) and continued through the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (U.S. Congress, 2004)--namely, nondiscriminatory assessment. The original and current specifications in federal law require that tests be selected and administered so as not to be racially, culturally, or sexually discriminatory. The specific dimensions studied here pertain to the nondiscriminatory diagnosis of learning disabilities (LD) in English learners. A checklist of legal and professional guidelines for making assessments of English learners was used to evaluate 19 psychological reports made on English learners as part of the assessment process for special education eligibility in a small, urban elementary school district in California. The results of this study present a fairly compelling profile of how the writers of psychological reports--school psychologists--do not use extant legal or professional guidelines for making nondiscriminatory assessments of bilingual children.     

SAFE Homes: is it worth the cost? An evaluation of a group home permanency planning program for children who first enter out-of-home care

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the SAFE Homes (SH) program, a short-term group care program for children between 3 and 12 years of age who enter care for the first time. The program aims to improve case outcomes by consolidating resources to facilitate assessment and treatment planning. METHODS: The 1-year outcomes of 342 children who received SAFE Home services and 342 matched foster care (FC) control children were compared. The 684 subjects used in this report were selected from a larger pool of 909 subjects using propensity score matching to control for hidden bias in treatment group assignment. We hypothesized that SAFE Homes would result in greater continuity of care for children (e.g., fewer placements, more placements with siblings and in towns of origin), identification of more relatives for substitute care when needed, reduced use of high-cost restrictive care settings (e.g., residential, inpatient), and reduced rates of re-abuse through earlier detection and provision of services to meet child and family treatment needs. RESULTS: Prior to the initiation of the SAFE Homes program, 75% of the children who entered care in the State experienced three or more placements in the first year. The outcomes of both the SH and FC cases were significantly improved over pre-SAFE Home State statistics. The FC group, however, had comparable or better outcomes on most variables examined. In addition, the total cost for out-of-home care for the children in FC was significantly less, despite the fact that the two groups spent similar amounts of time in care (average time in care: 7 months). This finding held when the total placement cost was calculated using the State reimbursement rate of 206.00 US dollars per day for SAFE Home care (SH: 20,851 US dollars +/- 24,231 US dollars; FC: 8,441 US dollars +/- 21,126 US dollars, p < .001), and a conservative SAFE Home program fee of 85.00 US dollars per day that only considered the child care and custodial staffing costs uniquely associated with the program (SH: 13,314 US dollars +/- 21,718 US dollars; FC: 8,441 US dollars +/-21,126 US dollars, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Improvements in outcomes related to continuity of care can be attained through staff training. The SAFE Home model of care is not cost-effective for first-time placements.