Framing an evidence based decision about 21st CCLC: How do we see the value? DOWNLOAD In this policy commentary, we do some reasoning about how 21st CCLC produces value and discuss the limitations in one particular way of seeing that value – the intent-to-treat impact evaluation design. You Might Also Like SEMIS Coalition for Place-Based Ecological Stewardship: Growing a Movement, Getting Ready for Growth March 1, 2019 Development and early validation evidence for an observational measure of high quality instructional practice for science, technology, engineering and mathematics in out-of-school time settings: The STEM supplement to the Youth Program Quality Assessment November 24, 2012 Continuous quality improvement in afterschool settings: Impact findings from the Youth Program Quality Intervention study January 1, 2012 Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment * Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Post navigation Previous Previous post: Afterschool quality systemsNext Next post: Quality-outcomes study for Seattle Public Schools summer programs, 2016 program cycle
