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.

Brooks, P. E., & Herman, J. L. (1991). Evaluation report, July 31, 1991: LA’s BEST an 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.

Brooks, P. E., & Forman, R. (1993). Final evaluation report, December 17, 1993: LA’s BEST an 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.

Brooks, P. E., Mojica, C. M., & Land, R. E. (1995). Final evaluation report: Longitudinal study of LA’s BEST after school education and enrichment program, 1992–94. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California–Los Angeles.

Huang, D., Gribbons, B., Kim, K. S., Lee, C., & Baker, E. L. (2000). A decade of results: The impact of the LA’s BEST after school enrichment initiative on subsequent student achievement and performance. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles. Available at: www.pasesetter.com/reframe/documents/uclaeval.pdf

Huang, D., Choi, K., Davis, D., Henderson, T., Kim, K. Lin, S., et al. (2003). Evaluating the impact of LA’s BEST on students’ social and academic development: Study of 74 LA’s BEST Sites 2001–2002 final report. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles.

Huang, D., Choi, K., Henderson, T., Howe, J., Kim, K., Vogel, M., et al. (2004). Evaluating the impact of LA’s BEST on students’ social and academic development: Study of 100 LA’s BEST Sites 2002–2003. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles.

Huang, D. (2004). Exploring the long-term impact of LA’s BEST on students’ social and academic development. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles.

Huang, D., Kim, K. S., Marshall, A., & Perez, P. (2005). Keeping kids in school: An LA’s BEST example—A study examining the long-term impact of LA’s BEST on students’ dropout rates. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles.

Huang, D. (2005). Evaluating the effects of academic skills and academic enablers taught at LA’s BEST on the achievement of student participants. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California–Los Angeles.

Peppler, K. A., & Catterall, J. S. (2006). Year two evaluation of the LA’s BEST After School Arts Program: Evaluating student learning in the arts. Los Angeles: Graduate School of Education & Information Studies. University of California–Los Angeles.

Goldsmidt, P., Huang, D., & Chinen, M. (2007). The long-term effects of after-school programming on educational adjustment and juvenile crime: A study of the LA’s BEST after-school program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

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., Miyoshi, J., La Torre, D., Marshall, A., Perez, P., & Peterson, C. (2007). Exploring the intellectual, social and organizational capitals at LA’s BEST (CSE Technical Report 714). 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/R714.pdf

Huang, D., Leon, S., La Torre, D., & Mostafavi, S. (2008). Examining the relationship between LA’s BEST program attendance and academic achievement of LA’s BEST students (CRESST Report 749). 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/R749.pdf

Huang, D., La Torre, D., Duong, N., Huber, L. P., Leon, S., & Oh, C. (2009). A circle of learning: Children and adults growing together in LA’s BEST (CRESST Report 758). 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/R758.pdf

Huang, D., Leon, S., Harven, A. M., La Torre, D., & Mostafavi, S. (2009). Exploring the relationships between LA’s BEST Program attendance and cognitive gains of LA’s BEST students (CRESST Report 757). 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/R757.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

Regino Chávez
Director of Evaluation
LA’s BEST
711 E. 14th Place
Los Angeles, CA 90021
Tel: 213-745-1900 x52995
Email: reginoc@lasbest.lausd.net

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, perceptions of the program and its activities, the presence/absence of positive role models, expectations about the future, attitudes toward school and the afterschool program, family characteristics, and gangs and drugs.

Parent interviews gathered information about afterschool care options, perceptions of LA’s BEST staff and programming, parent involvement in the program, effects of the program on participants, parents’ aspirations for their children, neighborhood safety, and demographics.

Secondary Source/Data Review: Data on attendance, grades, academic classifications, and frequency of address/school changes were collected from school records.

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 satisfaction with staff, hiring problems, program components and effectiveness, effect of the program on participants, 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, the effect of the program on participants, the quality of the work environment, and training.

On-site surveys gathered information about program attendance, release procedures, staffing, staff training, and implementation.

In the absence of LA’s BEST, 34% of children and 23% of parents indicated that their afterschool arrangements would not include “adequate adult supervision.”

Both children and parents experienced the afterschool program as significantly safer (p < .001) than their neighborhoods. Parents interviewed in Cantonese and Vietnamese, however, while rating the afterschool program as safer than the neighborhood, rated both places as not very safe and preferred to keep their children closer to home.