You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.

www.HFRP.org

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.

Terms of Use ▼

Program Description

Overview The Making the Most of Out-of-School Time (MOST) Initiative is a system-building initiative. MOST seeks to contribute to the supply, accessibility, affordability, and quality of out-of-school time programs, especially for low-income children, by strengthening the system of out-of-school time programs. The MOST initiative involves three cities: Boston, Chicago, and Seattle.
Start Date 1994–2001
Scope national
Type after school, summer/vacation, before school, weekend
Location urban
Setting public schools, community-based organizations
Participants kindergarten through middle school students
Number of Sites/Grantees three cities (Boston, Chicago, Seattle)
Number Served not available
Components MOST began in 1994 with one-year planning grants to Boston, Chicago, and Seattle to develop three-year action plans to address the Initiative's goals. These cities then received grants of $1.4 million each for the three-year implementation of their action plans (1995–1998, Phase I). Under the umbrella of one or more lead agencies, each MOST city: brought together the stakeholders in the out-of-school time program system to set priorities, did joint planning, shared information, coordinated activities, and began to develop citywide strategies for addressing after school challenges. Then, the cities provided funds directly to out-of-school time programs through an RFP process.

The National Institute on Out-of-School Time (NIOST) received a grant from the Wallace-Reader's Digest Funds (WRDF) to provide technical assistance and training support to the cities. WRDF also made a grant to the Center for Career Development in Early Care and Education at Wheelock College in Boston, Massachusetts to help MOST communities develop career ladders, increase the availability of affordable and accessible training, and develop college-level courses that lead to a degree or certificate for local providers. WRDF has also supported the National School-Age Care Alliance's (NSACA) work to develop national standards of program quality.

In October 1998, WRDF awarded additional three-year grants totaling $3.3 million to the three cities and NIOST. The purpose of these grants is to: support efforts to strengthen, document, and assess the models in Boston, Chicago, and Seattle; work with national organizations to provide technical assistance to other communities interested in creating similar systems; and inform key decision makers about promising strategies for meeting families' needs for accessible, high-quality school-age care.
Funding Level $9.7 million over seven years
Funding Sources The Wallace-Reader's Digest Funds


Evaluation

Overview The purposes of the evaluation were to describe the MOST strategies in each city and examine their effectiveness. Additionally, the evaluation sought to describe the important dimensions of the after school program system in each city (supply, program quality, and financing) in order to provide context for understand MOST efforts, and to aid future investment in the field.
Evaluator Chapin Hall Center for Children, the University of Chicago
Evaluations Profiled Interim Evaluation Report: 1997
Final Evaluation Report: 2000
Evaluations Planned none
Report Availability Halpern, R., Spielberger, J., & Robb, S. (1998). Making the Most of Out-of-School Time: Executive summary. Interim findings from an evaluation conducted by Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.

Halpern, R., Spielberger, J., & Robb, S. (2001). Evaluation of the MOST (Making the Most of Out-of-School Time) Initiative: Final Report and Summary of findings. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Available at: www.chapinhall.org/article_abstract_new.asp?
ar=1316&L2=62&L3=105


Contacts

Evaluation Robert Halpern
Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago
1313 East 60th Street
Chicago, IL 60637
Tel: 773-753-5900
Program Ian Beckford
The Wallace Funds
Two Park Avenue, 23rd Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: 212-251-9700
Profile Updated December 2, 2001

Evaluation 1: Interim Evaluation Report: 1997


Evaluation Description

Evaluation Purpose To develop and test a methodology for ascertaining the supply of school-age care in each city, to examine National Institute for Out of School Time's (NIOST) efforts to pilot an approach called Assessing School-Age Quality (ASQ), to examine the question of what is meant by a school-age care system. ASQ, developed by NIOST, is a structured self-assessment approach to program improvement, linked to an accreditation system sponsored by the National School Age Childcare Alliance. It identifies 21 categories of program quality, under the general headings of human relationships, indoor environment, outdoor environment, activities, safety, health, and nutrition.
Evaluation Design Non-Experimental: The interim evaluation consisted of a series of mini-studies, each examining a different aspect of MOST. For the ASQ study, evaluators examined 10 school-age care programs in each city (for a total of 30). MOST staff in each city selected these programs.
Data Collection Methods Document Review: Reports and other documents were examined from the MOST lead agencies, committees, and working groups, and school-age care programs.

Interviews/Focus Groups: Interviews were conducted with MOST staff, staff of school-age care programs, host organizations, support organizations, funders, regulators, and the staff of NIOST, among others. The interviews were held to learn more about the school-age care supply and system in each city, the quality of school-age care programs, program costs and revenues, and the MOST infrastructure.

Observation: Evaluators observed MOST committees and working groups, MOST-sponsored training events and workshops, and school-age care programs.

Secondary Source/Data Review: Administrative data were collected, particularly data which related to supply and financing of out-of-school time programs.
Data Collection Timeframe Data were collected between the spring of 1997 and the summer of 1998.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

Systemic Infrastructure The ASQ Experience: Participants in the ASQ pilot process generally regarded it as a useful program improvement tool and process, although experience varied widely depending on program, organization, funding, contextual, and staff characteristics. Participants also reported being surprised and, in some cases, frustrated at the amount of work involved in the ASQ. Not every program benefited equally from the ASQ process, but most benefited to some degree. Participants found that the process created mechanisms for and sources of feedback that led programs to reflect on their strengths and weaknesses. It also raised consciousness in the host agencies around quality issues. Lessons also emerged about how to implement program improvement processes, including the fact that stronger, healthier, and more stable programs are better able to use and benefit from program improvement supports such as ASQ.

MOST as a System-Building Initiative: All three MOST cities had a patchwork of large and small providers, although there was some variation across the cities. The nature of the intermediary organizations also varied by city. There was no centralized governance mechanism or institutions for school-age care in any of the three MOST cities. Leadership of MOST initiatives was diffuse, informal, based largely on length of involvement in the field, and to some extent self-selected. The functioning of the system is shaped by a variety of working relationships between providers and funders and between providers and intermediary institutions; working relationships are also important among intermediaries, and to a lesser extent, among providers.

Evaluators noted that organizational heterogeneity, diffuse identity, and varied perspectives about the purpose of school-age care programs complicate the system-building task in school-age care. Evaluators noted that MOST reflects a complementary strategy. The strategy has been to identify the various agencies, organizations, and component elements that are part of a school-age care system, broadly defined, and try to both strengthen each in place (to help them do their daily work as it is currently defined), and to create new structures and mechanisms for citywide systemic activities. Lessons and conclusions also emerged about how to measure the supply of school-age care within a city.

Overall MOST Strategy: In each city, MOST had a distinct personality and had fit itself into the larger political, social, and institutional context in a different way. MOST staff and collaborators were responsive and attentive to the mission of strengthening school-age care in underserved neighborhood and among underserved populations. MOST funds were used to strengthen school-age care programs and lead agencies were growing steadily in their ability to manage grants. MOST was helping to clarify the attributes of a strong school-age care system. MOST's reliance on voluntary committees and working groups for oversight, planning, and priority setting has been a mixed experience.

Evaluators pointed out that the largest question facing MOST is whether its voluntary, collaborative structure is intended to serve as the germ for a more permanent governance structure for school-age care. Evaluators also noted that MOST has many objectives and, as a consequence, MOST resources have been spread too thinly in these large cities. They recommended that the second phase of MOST be focused on a well-defined strategy to strengthen program quality, and selectively promote system building, rather than on broad-based system building and increasing the supply of school-age care slots.


Summative/Outcome Findings

Systemic By the end of the first two and a half years, the three MOST cities had made moderate to substantial progress toward their goals of increasing the supply of school-age care slots. New slots were created in a variety of ways: providing MOST funds to existing programs to be used to pay part of the cost of new slots, using MOST funds to start new programs or satellite sites for existing programs, and providing funds to making existing slots more affordable.

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project