ABSTRACT
Selected findings from a three-year study are reported regarding a prospective sample of 189 families served by the Center for Family Life's preventive services program and the nature and results of the services the families received. The program combines elements of both family preservation and family support services to provide a comprehensive, individualized response to families in need and prevent the unnecessary placement of children in care. Four program elements correspond with those typically identified as characterizing family preservation programs, and three key program elements differentiate the Center's approach from other family preservation programs. These latter characteristics are more typically found in family support programs and address limitations of current family preservation programs as identified in the literature.
Subject(s)
Child Welfare , Family Health , Preventive Health Services/organization & administration , Social Support , Social Work/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Interinstitutional Relations , Male , Models, Organizational , New York City , Organizational Case Studies , Professional-Family Relations , Program EvaluationABSTRACT
A New Jersey law enacted in 1985 requires smoking policies for work sites with 50 or more employees. In 1988, we surveyed a sample of New Jersey businesses to determine their smoking policies. Eighty-three percent of respondents with 50 or more employees reported implementing restrictive smoking policies. Of respondents with 2 to 49 employees, 35% had implemented policies. Our findings identify some of the factors other than a legal mandate that lead employers to restrict smoking in the workplace.
Subject(s)
Commerce , Organizational Policy , Smoking Prevention , New Jersey , Smoking/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
The authors surveyed a representative sample of New Jersey restaurants to determine what provisions were made for patron smoking, and whether the restaurants were in compliance with the state law intended to restrict smoking in restaurants. The authors report the results of their recent study.
