Setting and Participants Sample Clauses

Setting and Participants. We conducted a nationwide cohort study of linked data registries from Statistics Netherlands (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek), a Dutch government agency that collects and manages a wide range of data on all Dutch residents (17.5 million inhabitants). As the individual identities were not disclosed, participant consent was waived by the Medical Ethical Review Committee of Leiden University Medical Center (reference number: G21.048). We analysed data from October 9, 2016 (1 year and 12 weeks before the study start date of January 1, 2018) until December 31, 2018 (after which data were unavailable). The final cohort for analysis included all adult residents of the Netherlands who were alive on January 1, 2018 (index date). Individuals who died before January 1, 2018 or were younger than 18 years were excluded from the cohort. A detailed description of the inclusion criteria and variable definitions are provided in the Supplementary material. Individuals were considered exposed when they reimbursed at least one opioid prescription between 12 weeks before the study start date (January 1, 2018) and December 31, 2018. We assessed exposure from 12 weeks before the start of the follow- up period to ensure temporality between exposure and outcome, and because opioids are not usually prescribed on a single prescription in the Netherlands for longer than
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Setting and Participants. We conducted a nation-wide cohort study for which we analyzed national prescription datasets from the Netherlands and from Slovenia. Vital statistics of the Netherlands are managed by Statistics Netherlands, that collects information on all residents (about 17 million people). Prescription data of Slovenia are collected and managed by the Health Insurance Institute of Slovenia. In this dataset the whole population of Slovenia is covered which is about 2 million people. In this cohort study, we investigated data that pertain to the time between January 1st, 2013 and December 31st, 2019. This study was exempt from the Medical Ethical Review Committee of Leiden University Medical Center (reference number: G21.033), as well as from the National Medical Ethics Committee of Slovenia after a review (reference number: 0120- 17/2021-3). All personal information of participants in the Netherlands was identified by third parties prior to analysis. Authorized employee (M.U.) of the Health Insurance Institute of Slovenia had access to personal information of participants, and prepared identified aggregated data prior to analysis. This ensures that no personal information can be disclosed from the results.
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. The study was conducted using purposeful sampling. The sampling came from The AP Educational Group (APEG), located in Arizona, United States. APEG has 27 schools in the state of Arizona. The participants were school leaders, assistant school leaders, curriculum coaches, and teachers. The researcher's educational network recruited participants via her employment, AP Educational Group (pseudonym name). The survey was sent to all high school leaders, curriculum coaches, and teachers in the organization.
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. This study used data from a pilot study that surveyed 26 public swimming pools in Atlanta, Georgia between July 2002 and August 2002. The pilot study collected information on microbiological and chemical water quality in public swimming pools, routine pool maintenance practices, and information on public health-related policies and response to fecal accidents. Public and private swimming pool management organizations in Atlanta, Georgia were recruited to participate in the pilot study. Out of six organizations that were recruited, three agreed to participate in the study. Two of the participating organizations were public and one was private. A meeting was held with a representative from each of the participating organizations to explain the purpose and methods of the study and to obtain permission to make unannounced visits to swimming pool facilities. Swimming pools were limited to those with a minimum of two lifeguards present. A total of 26 pools outdoor pools at 23 facility visits were made between July 2002 and August 2002. Most of the pools were categorized as “mixed adult/child pool”. Three pools were wading pools, two pools were large 50 meter lap pools, one pool was an adult pool, and one pool was a combined adult/child pool with a wading pool. Regarding facility type, 18 were community facilities (municipal or public), 3 were neighborhood homeowner’s association facilities, and 2 were private club facilities. Daily site visits were randomly selected from the list of available facilities. One to two facilities were visited per day.
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. For this study, Tier 1, school-wide data for Academic, Behavioral, and Social Emotional Interventions was measured for all students, approximately 1,100 at a suburban middle school in Orange County, CA. According to the California School Dashboard (2022), 49.7% of students at this school are socio-economically disadvantaged, 12.3% are English Language Learners, 14.6% of students have disabilities, and 70.3 % of students are Hispanic. At this school, Tier 1 interventions consisted of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Instructional Strategies, School- wide Positive Behavioral Expectations, and Acknowledgement System, along with a school-wide focus on direct instruction in Social Emotional Core Competencies and a focus on relationship building, through the Dots activity. A detailed description of these interventions is described in Chapter 4. The participants in this study were at-risk Middle Schoolers who, through Tier 1 assessment data analysis, showed a need for further intervention, due to a lack of growth. Each Tier 2 intervention had a different number of participants, based on student needs. Friday School, an academic intervention, is a weekly intervention for one hundred 8th-grade students who are in jeopardy of not promoting from Middle School. The Behavioral Intervention consisted of 15 students placed in a Behavioral Intervention class, meeting three times a week, with daily support from a teacher and weekly support from the counseling department. Twelve students were receiving small group Social and Emotional Support, in the form of lunchtime, small group counseling. Roughly 70 staff members, consisting of teachers, counselors, psychologists, and administrators, were asked to provide feedback on student outcomes and perceptions of interventions through Likert Scale surveys. This survey will ask participants if they would like to participate in a focus group. From the results, nine educators were chosen for a focus group to get an in-depth account of perceptions of interventions and the intervention process. Observations on the implementation of three Tier 2 interventions were conducted with three different interventionists. Counseling team interviews, with one counselor, one counseling intern, and one counseling department support staff were conducted by an interviewer that is not the researcher, to avoid biases.
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. To answer the research questions and hypotheses, this case study was conducted at a school district where the induction program has deemed “effective” since 2003. School District A is located in southern California and is home to approximately thirty-five thousand students, predominately Hispanic/Latino. School District A has 29 elementary schools, seven middle schools, five comprehensive high schools, and two continuation high schools. According to the Induction Coordinator, School District A’s induction program has contributed positively to the retention of educators (I. Coordinator, personal communication, August 23, 2019). School District A offers a choice of professional developments for all educators who are part of the induction program (Appendix A). Educators benefit from the acquired skills learned in the induction program and apply to their classroom practices. Upon completion of the School District A’s induction program, candidates submit the required paperwork to human resources and State Department of Education to apply for a professional clear credential. With the change of district personnel, School District A’s Induction Program is scheduled for the accreditation visit in the spring of 2020. Changes are being made, focusing on a revamping the Individualized Learning Plan. This study was conducted with teacher candidates and mentors that were employed within School District A and enrolled in the Induction Program during the 2018-2019 academic school year. School District A is located in the San Bernardino County and has managed to maintain high academic scores in all their schools as evident of the prestigious awards. Awards include Gold Ribbon Schools in 2018, Title 1 Academic Achievement Award, Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) Schools of Distinction in 2019, Best Schools by United States News in 2018, California Positive Behavioral Intervention Support (PBIS) Coalition in 2018, National Forum Schools to Watch and Microsoft Showcase Schools in 2018. School District A is home to approximately 35,000 students and 45 schools, serving students from pre-school through adult education. During the academic year 2018-2019, the student breakdown was 87% Hispanic/Latino, 6% African-American, 4% White, 1% Filipino, and 1% Asian. Student enrollment included 83% socioeconomically disadvantaged and 32% English language learners. During the 2003-2004 school year, School District A was selected to become involved in the Beginning Teacher Sup...
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. The unified school district used in this study (XXX district) is a diverse suburban Local Education Agency that encompasses 90 square miles. XXX district serves three cities and is comprised of 20 elementary schools, two K-8 schools, six junior high schools, and six high schools. The average daily attendance for the 2017-2018 was 27,069 with 49% of those qualifying under federal guidelines for free or reduced-price meals (“EdData - District Profile”, 2018). In 2017-2018 school year, the district reported that 11% of its population were English Learners and that 67% identify as Hispanic, 24% Asian, and 7% other (“EdData – District Profile”, 2018). XXX district offers many learning settings, including the traditional classroom, virtual school for families needing alternatives, and regional occupancy programs (ROP) for high school students. In nearly all areas of student achievement, the district consistently exceeds county and state averages. While the state dropout rate in 2018 was 9.6%, this district was well under that with a dropout rate of 4.3%. In order to ensure confidentiality and participation, the study used pseudonyms for the district as well as school and participant names. At the elementary level, the district invested heavily in building teacher capacity to address the rigor and relevance associated with 21st century learning and the shift to Common Core State Standards. A multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) for students needing intervention was built into the curriculum that included socio-emotional lessons, counseling services, and tiered academic intervention in 2014. At the elementary level, every school site received a full-time intervention teacher to service students needing additional reading support; the administrator had the ability to decide the grade levels receiving the additional support based on data and needs. The intervention teachers were trained in universal screening materials along with supplemental teaching curriculum to support the classroom teachers. School sites that receive Title I funds were allocated an additional full-time intervention teacher. Collectively, these actions aimed to bridge the achievement gaps for students across the district. XXX district implemented the Common Core State Standards for mathematics and English Language Arts in 2013. Teachers were given support and materials until textbook adoptions were available for review and purchase. Specifically, in math, teachers utilized the textbooks in thei...
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Setting and Participants. This research study took place in a large, urban district in Southern California, with approximately 53,500 students. The students are predominately Hispanic (96%), and 80% of all students qualify for free and reduced-price meals, while the unduplicated pupil count of free/reduced-price meals, English learners & xxxxxx youth is 92% (“Ed Data — District Profile,” n.d.). The total number of English Language Learners make up 39% of the student population,
Sample 1
Setting and Participants. The researcher conducted this study at a small Southern California, Liberal Arts College. While the school also offers graduate programs, the study spanned both the traditional and nontraditional undergraduate programs within the school. The traditional program, within the specific courses studied, had a total number of 314 students while the non-traditional program, within the specific courses studied, had 146 students. The researcher compared 15 specific courses that had the same learning objectives, 15 delivered in the Hyflex model and the same 15 delivered using the traditional campus model. Average number of students in the Hyflex courses combined was 24 while the average number of students in the Traditional campus courses combined was 39. The study sample specifically included the student population of each of the 15 courses. The professors of these courses included both full time and adjunct faculty members, some with a masters level education and some with Doctorate level education. Grades in the two modalities were compared and analyzed to determine percentages of each grade mark earned in each course. Each of the courses had approximately the same point structure and formative assessments were graded using similar grading rubrics. Courses delivered in the Hyflex model were five weeks in length, while courses delivered in the traditional model were 16 weeks in length. Students in the Hyflex courses chose the way they attended class on a weekly basis, while those in the traditional courses were required to attend their courses face to face every week. In each of the Hyflex courses students had the choice to attend one four-hour campus class, or to participate in an equivalent asynchronous online discussion each week. In each of the traditional courses, students met on campus for two 50-minute class sessions per week. The five-week Hyflex courses were offered within the nontraditional program while 16-week traditional courses were offered within the traditional program. Males in the study made up 47% of the sample while females made up 53% of the sample. Sample ethnicity percentages were as follows: 4% American Indian or Alaska Native, 2% Asian, 12% Black or African American, 32% Hispanic, 2% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 4% Nonresident Alien, 9% Two or more races, 4% Unknown, 34% White. All of these courses were taught by experienced professors. These professors’ experience included designing and teaching online, on site, and hybrid c...
Sample 1

Related to Setting and Participants

  • Sharing of Participant Information 20 7.4 REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE AND COMMUNICATIONS TO PARTICIPANTS..................................................20 7.5 NON-TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT; NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES.................................................20 7.6

  • Participants The Lender and its participants, if any, are not partners or joint venturers, and the Lender shall not have any liability or responsibility for any obligation, act or omission of any of its participants. All rights and powers specifically conferred upon the Lender may be transferred or delegated to any of the Lender's participants, successors or assigns.

  • Eligible Participants Families and individuals experiencing homelessness. For the purposes of the Program, families and individuals are considered to be homeless only when he/she/they lack(s) a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence and reside(s) in a place not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, abandoned buildings, motels, or other shelters, or for reference as further defined in 24 CFR Part 578.3 and 576.2.

  • Orientation and In-Service Program The Hospital recognizes the need for a Hospital Orientation Program of such duration as it may deem appropriate taking into consideration the needs of the Hospital and the nurses involved.

  • Eligibility and Participation An individual is deemed an “Eligible Employee” and, therefore, eligible to participate in the Plan if he or she is a member of the Company’s Management Team at the time of such individual’s termination of employment with the Company, and such employment terminates due to an event which constitutes a Qualifying Termination.

  • Rights of Participants Any participant in a Lender's interests hereunder may assert any claim for yield protection under Section 4.03 that it could have asserted if it were a Lender hereunder. If such a claim is asserted by any such participant, it shall be entitled to receive such compensation from the Borrower as a Lender would receive in like circumstances; provided, however, that with respect to any such claim, the Borrower shall have no greater liability to the Lender and its participant, in the aggregate, than it would have had to the Lender alone had no such participation interest been created.

  • Public Employees Retirement System “PERS”) Members.

  • Employment of Administrator The Company hereby employs the Administrator to act as administrator of the Company, and to furnish, or arrange for others to furnish, the administrative services, personnel and facilities described below, subject to review by and the overall control of the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”), for the period and on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. The Administrator hereby accepts such employment and agrees during such period to render, or arrange for the rendering of, such services and to assume the obligations herein set forth subject to the reimbursement of costs and expenses provided for below. The Administrator and such others shall for all purposes herein be deemed to be independent contractors and shall, unless otherwise expressly provided or authorized herein, have no authority to act for or represent the Company in any way or otherwise be deemed agents of the Company.

  • Transition to Retirement 24.1 An Employee may advise their Employer in writing of their intention to retire within the next five years and participate in a retirement transition arrangement. 24.2 Transition to retirement arrangements may be proposed and, where agreed, implemented as: (a) a flexible working arrangement (see clause 16 (Flexible Working Arrangements)); (b) in writing between the parties; or (c) any combination of the above. 24.3 A transition to retirement arrangement may include but is not limited to: (a) a reduction in their EFT; (b) a job share arrangement; or (c) working in a position at a lower classification or rate of pay. 24.4 The Employer will consider, and not unreasonably refuse, a request by an Employee who wishes to transition to retirement: (a) to use accrued Long Service Leave (LSL) or Annual Leave for the purpose of reducing the number of days worked per week while retaining their previous employment status; or (b) to be appointed to a role which that has a lower hourly rate of pay or hours (post transition role), in which case: (i) the Employer will preserve the accrual of LSL at the time of reduction in salary or hours; and (ii) where LSL is taken or paid out in lieu on termination, the Employee will be paid LSL hours at the applicable classification and grade, and at the preserved hours, prior to the post transition role until the preserved LSL hours are exhausted.

  • Payments to Plan Participants and Their Beneficiaries (a) Company shall deliver to Trustee a schedule (the "Payment Schedule") that indicates the amounts payable in respect of each Plan participant (and his or her beneficiaries), that provides a formula or other instructions acceptable to Trustee for determining the amounts so payable, the form in which such amount is to be paid (as provided for or available under the Plan), and the time of commencement for payment of such amounts. Except as otherwise provided herein, Trustee shall make payments to the Plan participants and their beneficiaries in accordance with such Payment Schedule. The Trustee shall make provision for the reporting and withholding of any federal, state or local taxes that may be required to be withheld with respect to the payment of benefits pursuant to the terms of the Plan and shall pay amounts withheld to the appropriate taxing authorities or determine that such amounts have been reported, withheld and paid by Company. (b) The entitlement of a Plan participant or his or her beneficiaries to benefits under the Plan shall be determined by Company or such party as it shall designate under the Plan, and any claim for such benefits shall be considered and reviewed under the procedures set out in the Plan. (c) Company may make payment of benefits directly to Plan participants or their beneficiaries as they become due under the terms of the Plan. Company shall notify Trustee of its decision to make payment of benefits directly prior to the time amounts are payable to participants or their beneficiaries. In addition, if the principal of the Trust, and any earnings thereon, are not sufficient to make payments of benefits in accordance with the terms of the Plan, Company shall make the balance of each such payment as it falls due. Trustee shall notify Company where principal and earnings are not sufficient.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!