School-site health promotion for faculty and staff: a key component of the coordinated school health program

A worksite obesity intervention: results from a group-randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

We used a participatory process to develop an obesity intervention appropriate for elementary school personnel.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial included 16 school worksites (8 intervention, 8 control). Intervention schools formed committees to develop and implement health promotion activities for employees. Anthropometric and self-report data were collected at baseline and postintervention (2 years later). The primary outcome measures were body mass index (BMI), waist-hip ratio, physical activity, and fruit and vegetable consumption.

RESULTS

After adjustment for age, ethnicity, and job classification, employees in intervention schools reduced their BMI by an average of 0.04 kg/m2, and those in control schools increased their BMI by an average of 0.37 kg/m2. Comparisons for waist-hip ratio, weekly physical activity minutes, and fruit and vegetable consumption were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The participatory process appeared to be an effective means for stimulating change. The intervention may have slowed and perhaps reversed the tendency of adults to gain weight progressively with age.

Health Promotion of Faculty and Staff: The School Nurse’s Role

Health promotion of school faculty and staff is an important part of a coordinated school health program. The lack of evaluation of health promotion programs and inconsistent results highlighting the efficacy and benefits of programs adds to employers’ perceptions of inconsistent benefits. More studies evaluating effectiveness and development of standards for health promotion programs must be conducted. The steps essential to a successful health promotion program are assessment of the target population’s needs, planning, implementation, and evaluation of the health promotion program. School nurses are one of many groups who must be involved in the development of health promotion programs for school faculty and staff. Collaboration with other school personnel, administration, and community resources is essential to the success of a health promotion program.

Implementation of a coordinated school health program in a rural, low-income community

BACKGROUND

Coordinated school health programs (CSHPs) bring together educational and community resources in the school environment. This method is particularly important in rural areas like Kansas, where resources and trained health professionals are in short supply. Rural Stafford County, Kansas, struggles with health professional shortages and a low-income, high-need population.

METHODS

In 2001, Stafford County's Unified School District 349 began a multiyear CSHP development process, which required adaptations for implementation in a rural area. First, a CSHP team was formed of community and administrative stakeholders as well as school system representatives. Next, the CSHP team assessed school district demographics so the program framework could be targeted to health needs. During a yearlong planning phase, the CSHP team determined 4 priority areas for program development, as limited staff and funds precluded developing programs in all 8 traditional CSHP areas. Program activities were tailored to the population demographics and available resources.

RESULTS

Program outcomes were supported by School Health Index (SHI) data. Of the 8 CSHP focus areas, the SHI found high scores in 3 of the Stafford CSHP's priority areas: Health Services; Psychological, Counseling, and Social Services; and Physical Education. The fourth Stafford CSHP priority area, Nutrition Services, scored similarly to the less prioritized areas.

CONCLUSIONS

The process by which the Stafford school district modified and implemented CSHP methods can serve as a model for CSHPs in other rural, high-need areas.

Faculty and staff health promotion: results from the School Health Policies and Programs Study 2006

BACKGROUND

US schools employ an estimated 6.7 million workers and are thus an ideal setting for employee wellness programs. This article describes the characteristics of school employee wellness programs in the United States, including state-, district-, and school-level policies and programs.

METHODS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conducts the School Health Policies and Programs Study every 6 years. In 2006, computer-assisted telephone interviews or self-administered mail questionnaires were completed by state education agency personnel in 49 states plus the District of Columbia and among a nationally representative sample of school districts (n=445). Computer-assisted personal interviews were conducted with personnel in a nationally representative sample of elementary, middle, and high schools (n=873).

RESULTS

During the 2 years preceding the study, 67.3% of states provided assistance to districts or schools on how to develop or implement faculty and staff health promotion activities or services. Although nearly all schools offered at least 1 health promotion service or activity, few schools offered coordinated activities and services within a comprehensive employee wellness program. During the 12 months preceding the study, none of the health screenings were offered by more than one third of schools; only a few of the health promotion activities and services were offered by more than one third of schools; about one third of schools offered physical activity programs, employee assistance programs, and subsidies or discounts for off-site health promotion activities; and only 1 in 10 schools provided health-risk appraisals for faculty and staff.

CONCLUSIONS

More schools should implement comprehensive employee wellness programs to improve faculty and staff health behaviors and health status.