No result found
Feeding America (formerly America's Second Harvest);
This report presents information on the clients and agencies served by The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc. The information is drawn from a national study, Hunger in America 2010, conducted in 2009 for Feeding America (FA) (formerly America's Second Harvest), the nation's largest organization of emergency food providers. The national study is based on completed inperson interviews with more than 62,000 clients served by the FA national network, as well as on completed questionnaires from more than 37,000 FA agencies. The study summarized below focuses on emergency food providers and their clients who are supplied with food by food banks in the FA network.
The FA system served by The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc provides emergency food for an estimated 33,800 different people annually.36% of the members of households served by The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc are children under 18 years old (Table 5.3.2).30% of households include at least one employed adult (Table 5.7.1).Among households with children, 79% are food insecure and 38% are food insecure with very low food security (Table 184.108.40.206).44% of clients served by The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc report having to choose between paying for food and paying for utilities or heating fuel (Table 6.5.1).35% had to choose between paying for food and paying for medicine or medical care (Table 6.5.1).27% of households served by The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc report having at least one household member in poor health (Table 8.1.1)The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc included approximately 86 agencies at the administration of this survey, of which 86 have responded to the agency survey. Of the responding agencies, 68 had at least one food pantry, soup kitchen, or shelter.49% of pantries, 31% of kitchens, and 22% of shelters are run by faith-based agencies affiliated with churches, mosques, synagogues, and other religious organizations (Table 10.6.1).Among programs that existed in 2006, 88% of pantries, 88% of kitchens, and 50% of shelters of The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc reported that there had been an increase since 2006 in the number of clients who come to their emergency food program sites (Table 10.8.1).Food banks are by far the single most important source of food for agencies with emergency food providers, accounting for 66% of the food distributed by pantries, 57% of the food distributed by kitchens, and 8% of the food distributed by shelters (Table 13.1.1).As many as 90% of pantries, 82% of kitchens, and 33% of shelters in The Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc use volunteers (Table 13.2.1)
Center for American Progress;
Profiles the goals, activities, implementation, and challenges of the twelve states that won Race to the Top federal funds to improve teacher quality and preparation program accountability; analyzes their strategies; and makes policy recommendations.
Describes the implementation of a model that organizes care around an interdisciplinary team of providers who work to identify and remove barriers to access and clinical effectiveness in primary care clinics. Outlines two case studies and lessons learned.
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation;
Presents findings from a survey that examines the enrollment decisions, experiences, and future concerns related to the prescription drug coverage of beneficiaries with the new Medicare prescription drug benefit. Part of a series of interviews.
Public Education Network (PEN);
In October 1999, Public Education Network (PEN) received a three-year discretionary grant from the US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), as part of a set of projects designed to better link research and data to policy and practice change.
PEN dedicated its project to building public knowledge and understanding of how to improve teaching through the collection, analysis, and dissemination of data on teachers and teaching. The project consisted of two phases of work, conducted in eight communities across the country -- Chattanooga; TN, Greenville, SC; Lincoln, NE; Los Angeles, CA; McKeesport, PA; New York, NY; Philadelphia, PA; Raleigh, NC. The first phase, which included the creation of a data framework followed by data collection and analysis, was completed in June 2001. Phase two, a public engagement effort to disseminate the findings from the data to the public, was completed in October 2002.
This action guide builds on the experiences and learning from our eight sites, and is intended as a tool for community groups that want to build public knowledge and understanding and take action to support quality teaching.
Public Education Network (PEN);
In 1994, the Public Education Network (PEN) entered into a cooperative agreement with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Adolescent and School Health (CDC/DASH) to integrate comprehensive school health programs (CSHP) into a larger, systemic school reform effort at the local and national levels. Under this agreement, PEN worked with and provided funds to six local education funds (LEFs) to implement local projects that would establish, enhance, and/or institutionalize school health programs within their districts -- and in the case of one LEF, throughout the state. This case study documents the experiences of these LEFs and their partners in the second year of the implementation of this project, which focused on activities reforming the health education curriculum reform.
PEN was able to explore and delineate the issues surrounding comprehensive services through its first federal grant from the CDC. Through the Comprehensive School Health Initiative (CSHI), PEN, along with its partner LEFs, aims to link school health and school reform by approaching the issue of school and adolescent health, including HIV prevention, with public engagement as a major component. This report looks at the challenges LEFs faced as they engaged a wide array of entities in examining health education curriculum and reform efforts to make it more comprehensive, age-appropriate and developmental.
Jobs for the Future;
How many people work in green infrastructure? What are the jobs? What level of compensation do they offer? What are the educational requirements? How much potential is there for job creation as green infrastructure investments increase? How is the green infrastructure workforce within the six U.S. cities examined for this report similar to—or different than—that in the nation as a whole?
This issue brief attempts to answer these and other questions about current and emerging workforce trends related to the rise in green infrastructure activities. It summarizes the results of research conducted by Jobs for the Future (JFF) as part of NatureWORKS, a national initiative to understand the jobs, careers, skills, credentials, and potential of the U.S. green infrastructure workforce. The study was funded by the U.S. Forest Service's National Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program as recommended by the National Urban and Community Forestry Advisory Council, NUCFAC.
The research focused on occupations involved in the direct installation, maintenance, and inspection (IMI) of the green infrastructure (GI) and their first-line supervisors. This report describes the GI-IMI involvement of occupations whose work includes green infrastructure activities. It also discusses the emerging movement to certify green infrastructure workers in the stormwater management field as a way to both raise the quality of GI work and promote green infrastructure implementation, thereby expanding the workforce.