The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
A Profile of the Evaluation of LA's BEST (Better Educated Students for Tomorrow) Program
Profile Information
- Full Text (HTML)
- How to cite
- About the OST Database
Program Description
| Overview | The LA’s BEST (Better Educated Students for Tomorrow) Program is an afterschool program that serves elementary-school-aged youth in Los Angeles, California. The program provides youth with a safe environment, enhanced opportunities through integrated educational supports, educational enrichment activities to supplement and deepen the regular program, recreational activities, and interpersonal skills and self-esteem development. |
| Start Date | 1988 |
| Scope | local |
| Type | afterschool |
| Location | urban |
| Setting | public schools |
| Participants | elementary school students |
| Number of Sites/Grantees | 186 elementary schools |
| Number Served | 28,000 per year |
| Components | The program is available from the end of the school day until 6 pm, Monday through Friday, at no cost to parents. In addition, numerous citywide events and field trips are scheduled on weekends. To attend, youth must enroll in the program and are expected to participate on a regular basis. |
| Funding Level | $36 million (2009–2010) |
| Funding Sources | City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Unified School District, private sector, private foundations, 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program, California Department of Education, other federal grants, and private individuals |
Evaluation
| Overview | Beginning in the 1989–90 school year, a series of evaluation studies has been conducted that examine the program’s implementation and impact. |
| Evaluator(s) | Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California, Los Angeles |
| Evaluations Profiled | Evaluation Report, March 1, 1990 Evaluation Report, July 31, 1991 Final Evaluation Report, December 17, 1993 Final Evaluation Report: Longitudinal Study, 1992–94 The impact of the LA’s BEST after school enrichment initiative on subsequent student achievement and performance Examining the Relationship between Afterschool Staff-Based Social Capital and Student Engagement in LA’s BEST Exploring the Relationships between LA’s BEST Program Attendance and Cognitive Gains of LA’s BEST Students Exploring the Effect of Afterschool Participation on Students’ Collaboration Skills, Oral Communication Skills, and Self-Efficacy |
| Evaluations Planned | The Center for the Study of Evaluation team continues to evaluate the role of LA’s BEST in supporting youth’s academic and social development. The Center is currently conducting an exploratory study on the first year of LA’s BEST summer schools’ impact on language development—due June 30, 2012. |
| Report Availability |
Brooks, P. E., Valdes, R. M., Herman, J. L., & Baker, E. L. (1990). Evaluation report, March 1, 1990: LA’s BEST after school education and enrichment program. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California–Los Angeles. Huang, D., Coordt, A., La Torre, D., Leon, S., Miyoshi, J., Pérez, P., & Peterson, C. (2007). The afterschool hours: Examining the relationship between afterschool staff-based social capital and student engagement in LA’s BEST (CSE Technical Report 712). Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles. Available at: www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R712.pdf Huang, D., Leon, S., Hodson, C., La Torre, D., Obregon, N., & Rivera, G. (2010). Preparing students for the 21st Century: Exploring the effect of afterschool participation on students’ collaboration skills, oral communication skills, and self-efficacy. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles. Available at: www.cse.ucla.edu/products/reports/R777.pdf |
Contacts
| Evaluation |
Regino Chávez |
Denise Huang, Ph.D. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation 301 GSE & IS Bldg Los Angeles, CA 90095 Tel: 310-206-9642 Email: dhuang@cse.ucla.edu |
| Program | Carla Sanger President and CEO LA’s BEST Office of the Mayor 200 N. Main Street, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Tel: 213-847-3681 Fax: 485-6606 Email: csanger@mayor.lacity.org |
|
| Profile Updated | April 4, 2012 |
Evaluation 1: Evaluation Report, March 1, 1990
Evaluation Description
| Evaluation Purpose | To describe selected program operations, services, and experiences provided to youth; to assess various direct effects of the program on youth, teaching personnel, and parents; to permit improvement of program operations, and to explore salient issues raised in an earlier pilot study. |
| Evaluation Design | Non-Experimental: School principal, site coordinator, and on-site surveys were collected across all 13 sites in operation in the 1988–89 school year. In addition, six of the ten LA’s BEST sites in their second year of operation were randomly selected for intensive data collection, which included interviews with program participants and parents, school grades collected for 40 randomly selected LA’s BEST youth participants in grades 3–6, and surveys of LA’s BEST staff and school day teachers. |
| Data Collection Methods |
Interviews/Focus Groups: Program participant interviews gathered information about the afterschool activities in which youth participants would have engaged had the program not been available, and perceptions of the program, including its activities, safety, and staff. Parent interviews gathered information about afterschool care activities and costs prior to the program, perceptions about LA’s BEST staff and programming, parent involvement in the program, effects of the program on their children, and demographics. Secondary Source/Data Review: Information about grades was collected from the schools that the participants attended. Surveys/Questionnaires: Principal surveys gathered information about satisfaction with afterschool staff, program effectiveness and accomplishments, others’ reactions to the program, and the usefulness of other types of programming. Site coordinator surveys gathered information about their satisfaction with staff, hiring problems, program components and effectiveness, participants’ responses to the program, level of support from others, and recommendations for youth who should be in the program but were not. Staff surveys gathered information about program effectiveness, participants’ responses to the program, quality of work environment, training, and recommendations for youth who should be in the program but were not. Classroom teacher surveys gathered information about perceptions of the effects of LA’s BEST on participants, involvement in the program, and recommendations for youth who should be in the program but were not. The on-site survey gathered information about attendance, program release procedures, staffing, staff training, and program implementation. |
| Data Collection Timeframe | Data were collected between Fall 1988 and Fall 1989. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
| Activity Implementation | Youth reported that they felt safer in the afterschool program than they did in their homes or neighborhoods. Exit and sign-out procedures, however, needed continued scrutiny to ensure that programs met safety and liability concerns while responding to the reality that parents of children most at risk may not meet their pickup responsibilities. Virtually all sites provided time and assistance for homework completion. Most sites also offered students opportunities for tutoring; most implemented some library activities, and some offered basic remedial instruction. Each site offered a menu of enrichment activities including such things as special clubs, computers, music, and dance, but staff at many sites expressed interest in increasing the diversity of their enrichment offerings. Field trips were planned to supplement on-site opportunities. All sites offered recreational activities, principally traditional group sports and table games. Less frequent were physical fitness activities, skills clinics, and crafts. By providing a context for children to develop and extend friendships and interact closely and positively with a variety of caring adults, the program addressed the goal of inter-personal skills and self-esteem development. |
| Program Context/ Infrastructure | Youth participants’ responses to questions about interpersonal experiences suggested that many generally felt a sense of belonging and acceptance in the afterschool program. The great majority of children felt that the staff were helpful, cared for them, and had high hopes for them. Youth’s responses about their relationships with other children in the program were similarly positive. The majority of youth said that they would come to the program if it were offered during summer vacation. An overwhelming proportion of parents indicated that they would send their children during the summer if the program were offered. |
Summative/Outcome Findings
| Academic |
School-day teachers reported positive achievements among their LA’s BEST students as a group compared to their non-LA’s BEST students. Overall grades were found to be significantly higher after program participation, as were some areas of effort. However, science achievement, physical education achievement, and attendance rates were higher in the fall of 1998 than in the fall of 1999. |
| Youth Development | At least 80% of parents surveyed reported positive changes in their child’s ability to get along with others, liking of school, self-confidence, communication skills, English language skills, and overall happiness. |