Strategic Plan Community of Conversation (CoC) Part 2


Here to talk about the Strategic Plan again today, and we also have some grantees from Minnesota and Oklahoma that are going to jump on the line and share their
stories. This report, this presentation will be recorded
and will go out like the others do after the meeting. All participants have been muted. But if you want to talk or need to talk, you
can press star 6 to unmute yourselves. And star 6 to remute. Check out the attachments pod. We have got the slides from today, and we
also have the strategic planning guidance, if you haven’t already seen that, but likely
a lot of you have. The presentation today is made possible by
the preschool development birth include through 5 initiative from the Office of Child Care
in the Administration for Children and Families within U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services and made possible in a partnership with Department of Education. We are excited to have our own in-house expert
Jim Lesko present today. And then also as I mentioned some grantees
giving their take on some of their processes. I will pop it over to Jim to get us started.>>JIM LESKO: Thank you so much, Jamie, appreciate
that. Welcome, everyone. Again this is Jim Lesko, with PDG birth to
5 technical assistance team. And Sami Couture, TA manager with the team
did our introduction so thanks, Sami. Today we are going to have a follow up conversation,
community of conversation around the strategic plan, invited participants for today were
all of the PDGB5 grantees and they are more than welcome to be including their partners
and their consultants, the PDG, B5 technical assistance team is on the line today, along
with you all. We have extended invitations to the federal
project officers and regional office representatives that are a part of the PDG-B5 effort. And as well as our partners at the state capacity
building center, along with their additional early education TA partners. Participation in the communities of conversation
is always voluntary. We will have available the select presentations
that our communities of conversation that we have done previously. They are always available on the technical
assistance website. If you go to that site, and right now you
click on resources and topics, you will see PDG B5 technical assistance center there,
and the resources that we have made available throughout 2019 are located at that site. This is an open discussion and dialogue. We do encourage states to ask questions, as
we go through the conversation today. There is the chat box, so as Sami mentioned,
for the time being, we have muted all the lines to try to keep down some of the extra
noise that happens in the background sometimes. And but we are monitoring the chat room, and
happy to bring along discussions and questions to both myself and the two presenters that
we have today. Here is the agenda for today’s conversation. I’ll go through the strategic plan guidance,
we all have, as I mentioned, parts pant questions and discussions, please send them as they
occur to you — participant questions. We will talk about the newly released strategic
plan crosswalk and that is a optional document that I’ll talk about during today’s presentation. We are very fortunate to have two grantees
that have agreed to share with us some of their experiences as they are going through
their strategic planning process, and I’ll get to them in a few minutes. Amanda, I might say that, Amanda and Bobbi
Burnham from Minnesota, and Deborah Anderson from local home so I’ll be introducing them
directly in a few slides. I’ll also talk about the strategic plan submission
process, to remind you all one more time how that is working. We will have some conversation take-aways,
and we will do some closing, I’ll have a closing slide with follow-up question and answer documents
as they are needed. First let’s talk about the strategic plan,
the purpose of the plan is to develop or revise for those states that already had a plan in
place prior to 2019, and that plan should support and facilitate collaboration and coordination
among the existing programs of early childhood education, reflecting a B to 5 mixed delivery
system within a state or territory participating currently in this initiative. The plan will focus on establishing and maintaining
an early childhood education system, designed to support all children and families, but
particularly those identified as most vulnerable by their state or territory. The context for the plan, the strategic plan,
the plan is based substantially on the needs assessment information that grantees have
been in the process of completing since early 2019. Several states have completed their needs
assessment process, and has submitted those plans for review by the departments of health
and human services and education. And in several cases, several plans have been
accepted by both departments. The plan, the strategic plan needs to reflect
a comprehensive perspective on supporting children and families birth to 5. The plan should reflect and outline the stakeholders
and partners that have been involved in providing input and collaboration from the mixed delivery
system. The plan should reflect and speak to the parents
voice, the plan should address maintenance and sustainability of effort across the time
span, and for some strategic plans, for those that have already been in existence, the plan
that gets submitted would be to reflect a revision or an update from the original plan,
and where that has happened it’s important to be reflected what changes have been made,
to health and human services and Ed, and see the input that’s been received from the state,
from the needs assessment process, and how that has impacted what was originally the
state strategic plan and how that might have been updated. There are some expectations from both departments,
as states complete their strategic plans. They include that there has been a full range
of stakeholders in the state engaged in the process. So in some cases, especially where plans were
created initially prior to the funding opportunity of being announced, and then as a result of
the updated needs assessment process, the both departments will want to see reflected
in what is submitted that there has been a broad inclusion of stakeholders and partners
in the development of the state’s strategic plan. The plan should lay out very clear, a clear
plan with goals and action steps. The plan needs to address a comprehensive
mixed delivery system and process. The plan also should identify the partnerships,
the collaborations, the coordination of the variety of agencies and individuals and organizations
that will play a role in implementing the states going forward with strategic plans
for early childhood education. The plan should also include addressing quality
improvements that may be made as a part of this comprehensive plan, and how those quality
improvements are being used to leverage policy alignments, and program service delivery across
the birth through age 5 system. The plan should identify activities that address
transition of children and families within and across systems, and into the elementary
school environment. So there are a series of dimensions to the
plan that every state should pay attention to as they draft their document or documents. One is that the plan should delineate how
state plans to build, support and enhance improved coordination and collaboration. As you craft the words for the plan, they
should reflect as the reader, the reviewer looks at these plans, how they are building,
supporting and enhancing improved coordination and collaboration. This is a good point for me to stop and say
that we have all heard Richard clearly state that what I’m going to talk about today is
a strategic plan that grantees will submit to both departments for review. Richard wants to emphasize that these plans
are intended for your state, while both departments will look to make sure that the strategic
plan incorporates the required components, as outlined in the funding opportunity that
was awarded to states, Richard would also want to make sure that you all reflect that
this is a plan that your stakeholders and partners and parents, agencies and organizations
will be able to embrace as a part of their path, your path forward. So while both departments will review and
accept your plan, he wants to be sure that this is a plan you are all comfortable with
and being very transparent in sharing with your stakeholders. The second part of expectations of the plan
is the framework, and the framework of the plan should reflect how the state addresses
increased participation of children in quality early childhood education programs, services
and settings, again across a mixed delivery system. So its delivery should include things, elements
such as family child care, home visiting, center based programs, both public and private,
profit and nonprofit, and LEA based programs, those in child care subsidy systems and private,
private entities, along with faith based, by the way. The strategic plan should also include an
assessment of any federal, state and local statutory requirements that impact the plan,
and that may be barriers to the plan, and that a state may want to identify as a future
policy leverage initiative that that particular state may need to address. The plan should also identify indicator data. It’s important for states to reflect on how
well they are going to be able to monitor the progress and journey on their strategic
plan. So both departments are going to look for
indicator data points, what has the state identified as measurable points across the
time span of the strategic plan, that they will be able to determine that they are making
progress or not, and where they are not making progress, it would be a point in time for
that state grantee to determine what they need to update, revise and enhance, to further
the progress of the plan. So in that indicator data, how are they assessing
progress, what are the desired outcomes, and what are the costs and resource efficiencies
and continuous quality improvement elements that are a part of the plan. The last expectation on this slide is for
the state to describe the continued involvement of the state’s advisory council in whatever
fashion that council has been established. Also critical to the completion of the plan
is really its connection to the needs assessment process, a number of states we know have initiated
the needs assessment process first, as a part of this funding process, and some states are
doing the needs assessment and strategic plan simultaneously. Departments health and human services and
Ed, education, are looking, will be looking for linkages in the strategic plan with the
information that came from the needs assessment results. So, they will be looking for connections around
what are the local populations the state has been asked to more definitively identify,
what are the vulnerable populations, and the connection of touching those focal populations
in their strategic plan. The second is the quality access and availability
of early childhood, early care and education programs across regions by demographics. So there is an awareness that there are differences
in urban versus suburban versus rural settings, and how those different demographics settings
first of all or geographic settings impact the availability of quality care, and then
demographics also along examples of things like racial or poverty characteristics, and
how that may impact the quality and availability of services, and how the plan is going to
address that. There has been much emphasis on trying to
identify unduplicated count in data, so this information is being reported by state, is
as closely accurate as possible to the number of children and family that meet the characteristics
of being vulnerable, are there any gaps in quality and access, are there any gaps in
collaboration, and where those gaps were identified as a part of the needs assessment process,
then how does the action steps or goals within the strategic plan addressing those particular
gaps. As mentioned already there are measurable
indicators of progress, so in the needs assessment initiative, states who identified which measurable
indicators currently exist, and then in the strategic plan, there may or may not be a
necessity to identify additional measurable indicators, and the processes that a state
would go about in collecting the data to measure that progress. Facilities was a component within the needs
assessment, and states have identified that facilities were a need, the reviewers will
look to where in the plan states are addressing the concept of facilities, and facilities
may include the concept of not enough facilities, so is there capacity to address the broader
perhaps new definition of vulnerable children in a state, so is there capacity to meet all
those children, and/or are those facilities of sufficient quality to ensure that those
children enrolled in programs are receiving a quality early education experience. Are there any barriers to funding, that’s
often something that surfaces as a part of a needs assessment. And are there any plans, strategically by
a state to address those barriers in funding. Transition has been a dominant element as
a part of this B to 5 effort most specifically focusing on that transition process between
preschool and going into the elementary grade, though we also are aware that there are a
number of other transition points happening in that birth to 5 environment, children moving
from, for instance, birth to 3 home visiting programs, into more center based 3 to 5-year-old
programs, children moving across settings so from [inaudible] preschool, in each of
those situations there are family components and elements related to assisting families
making a smooth transition as well as their children. But specifically, the funding application
addressed the issue of preschool to elementary school transition. Finally, the last three bullets address the
issues of identifying goals and action steps, that may be needed, identifying goals and
action steps for each of the domains, and addressing each domain in a narrative to reflect
consideration of those areas. It is understood that through the needs assessment
process, the state may identify that the particular domains that I just addressed, that there
may not be any gaps in service, so some additional work may not be necessary as part of the strategic
plan, but it will be important for a state to recognize that in their strategic plan,
pointing that out and they are welcome to do that within the body of the strategic plan,
or they could do that in the executive summary, which I’ll address in a few slides from now. In terms of addressing that birth to 5 mixed
delivery process, we are trying to emphasize and the departments are trying to clearly
help states understand that there is a broader system that truly impacts children and families. So it is hoped that the scope of that plan
addresses the system that supports young children and families. This graphic is identified and located in
both the needs assessment and strategic plan guidance documents. So as you look at some of the elements of
the system that impacts children and families, you see healthcare, behavioral health systems,
support for children with disabilities and developmental delays, the broader early care
and education system, child protection, economic assistance and employment support system,
family. Each of those systems surround the basic structure
of what supports programs for children and families and those include elements of policy
and governance, finance mechanisms, data quality and linkages, the workforce, family involvement,
transitions, as I’ve already discussed, quality assurance, and monitoring and evaluation. This would be just a quick point to point
out that in a earlier version of the needs assessment and strategic plan document, where
it says monitoring and evaluation, it said mentoring and evaluation and that was a typo
editing oversight on our part. So we have updated both the needs assessment
and strategic plan documents to make sure that the elements as essential to this process
are correct. The broader system should support a strong
connection between all these partners that you see in this graphic, with continued attention
to how the system elements are impacting the supports. So how does policy, for instance, impact child
protection, how does data quality impact economic assistance or the early childhood system itself. This is a good time to pause. You have listened to me sort of talk for quite
a long time. We are fortunate enough to have today as I
mentioned Amanda and Bobbi from Minnesota, I think Amanda is mostly going to take responsibility
for talking today, and Deborah Anderson also is going to join the conversation from Oklahoma. I do have a graphic for Minnesota. But before I pull that up, I thought I could
first talk and ask, I’ve given a series of questions to both states, to have some preparation
for discussion today, and the first question, if you can both talk to this question, and
then Minnesota, we can bring up your graphic. The first question is, could you please talk
about the process you used to start your state’s strategic planning process? Debra if you are on, I can ask you first and
we will go to Minnesota second. Deborah, if you are on, you need to if you
haven’t pressed star 6, so we can hear you.>>Yes, I think I did that. I hope that you can hear me.>>JIM LESKO: Super.>>Perfect. Thanks for this opportunity. We have really been thoughtful, I feel, in
how we have planned our strategic planning process so that we can ensure that we get
community voice and parent voice into the plan, and that has been a bit time-consuming,
but we also think it’s been well worth our effort. We started in our grant application, we proposed
that we would host eight strategic planning sessions in local communities. We ended up deciding that we needed 11 because
we felt we should host at least two separate community conversations as we called them
in Tulsa and Oklahoma City because about 60 percent of the population in our state resides
in a few metro areas. We started creating the structure for the
planning sessions in the way that we designed them, to create data walks, so we took indicators
that we had identified on our needs assessment, and with the help of and guidance of our contractor,
the urban institute, who is helping us with both the needs assessment and strategic plan,
we made data posters in four areas that align with some previous work that we had done through,
in Oklahoma, for a school readiness pathway. Those four areas are services for infants
and toddlers, 3s and 4s, health and mental health services and then family support and
education. We had data that aligned with those four,
and we trained facilitators to help participants walk through the data posters, reflect on
the data, think about what do those indicators tell us, and then how do they, how did that
generate ideas and recommendations. We found this to be a pretty powerful process. So the next thing we had to figure out is
how we were going to get this to the community level, and ensure that we had great participation
from all of the key important players and communities, and most importantly, parents. So we developed a mini grant opportunity for
organizations who resided in the 11 areas that we wanted to conduct the strategic planning
community conversations, and their role then was to recruit participants, announce the
locations. They had to provide two facilitators as hosts. They welcomed the group and we found that
that process of working together with them in the implementation of the community’s strategic
planning conversations really helped with their participation and buy-in and ownership. So that was sort of the first step. We have some additional steps that I can share
a little later, if you want me to talk about those now? (pause).>>Jim, are you on mute?>>Hello?>>Sorry, I was on mute. I have a tendency to do that. Yes, sorry, if you don’t mind, you can keep
going, and then we will shift over.>>Okay. Then I’ll bring it back into how we are working
with our state level partners. After we generated this amazing feedback across
our 11 sites, the urban institute took that data and has conducted some analysis on that
to arrange the feedback according to some set goals, as we have been crafting the strategic
plan. We are taking that feedback and now we are
in the process of generating strategies with our state level partners, and rather than
hosting a day or two of a big strategic planning session, we are kind of stair stepping into
this with our partners. So we have a couple of in-state consultants
that created a questionnaire, so that they could go individually interview E informants
in the state about what they saw as important issues for Oklahoma to address in the future. That was a very productive process, because
we think we got a lot richer feedback by having those individual interviews. We now are in the process of combining the
community and the parent voice along with the key partners at the state level, into
a set of strategies that, as I speak, our steering committee is organizing those strategies
into setting some priorities and identifying action steps that go along with those priorities. So that is kind of where we are so far. It’s been a very inclusive process, and then
as we, we are going to go through several iterations of smaller work group meetings
looking at those strategies, and in forming the strategic plan that will eventually be
our next draft.>>JIM LESKO: Great, thanks so much, Deborah.>>You bet.>>JIM LESKO: Appreciate you sharing that
information. Now I’m going to, we will switch over to,
I think it’s Amanda.>>It is.>>JIM LESKO: Minnesota, great, hi, Amanda.>>Hi.>>JIM LESKO: We pulled up the graphic design
that you asked, that talks about your strategic plan process, so that’s being shared right
now.>>Great. Thank you so much and thank you for the opportunity. Oklahoma, it’s great to hear from you because
I think a lot of the work that we are doing shares the same values and ways of thinking
about approaching the needs assessment and strategic plan. We are going through both of our needs assessment
and our strategic planning processes essentially concurrently. We have partnered with ten different community
organizations throughout the state, so three of them are American Indian organizations,
six are from what we call greater Minnesota, but those are the geographies outside of the
Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area. And one organization within the Minneapolis/St.
Paul. Those organizations make up a planning and
advisory committee along with other key stakeholders throughout the state. They are the group that has been advising
us on our needs assessment and strategic planning process. You can see in the graphic how we have done
it is each of those community organizations have been charged, they had a contract with
us to conduct community engagement in their geographies. In that first round, they asked questions
like what do you consider when you choose who helps care for or support your child and
your family. Another question is tell us a story about
when you needed extra help with your child, what did you need and how did you get it. Another one is if you had a magic wand, what
supports would we need to make to support your families thriving. As you can see a lot of the questions are
really broad questions, and so in those meetings, they really prioritized family voice, and
then also those that are people who are American Indian as well as people of color, and then
others that are impacted by race, geography and wealth inequity. In that first round of engagement, there were
79 events throughout the state. Those were conducted in nine different languages. We had over 900 people who were, who participated
in those. About 73 percent of the attendees were parents,
but then they also reached public health, teachers, child care providers, advocates
and others of course. Then we came back with those different communities
came back to the advisory committee and we started making sense of the information together. Now they just on Monday or Friday finished
the second round of engagements, so going back out to communities and saying, does this
reflect your values, this is what we heard, does this reflect your values, basically did
we hear you right. Then help us prioritize what we should focus
on. This is both working on making sure that we
have the right information going in for a needs assessment, as well as helping us starting
to prioritize what should be focuses for our strategic plan. On Wednesday, we meet with that community,
our community group again in the planning and advisory committee, and we start synthesizing
that information. Of course, the data will take longer to put
together, but that will give us the right information to both finalize our needs assessment
and then really shape up that strategic plan. And then the plan is to share back a strategic
plan in November and December. So our hope is to finish our strategic plan
at the end of October. One challenge is, we have our needs assessment
has, we are hearing all kinds of things, we heard we have these broad questions, and so
we are hearing information about housing, transportation, healthcare, including behavioral
and dental health, so we are really working with our partners who is leading our grants
is departments of health, education and human services, to think through what are our guardrails
to this strategic plan. And then how can we partner with our children
to lift up themes that may not be in the exact purview of our three agencies. That is the community needs assessment strategic
planning process. At the same time, the state staff, we held
a bunch of listening sessions with different tasks forces and councils. This is how we started reaching audiences,
kind of our advocates, our county leadership, our local officials, our people who work in
healthcare, all these other category stakeholders, so they are contributing that way. We tried as much as possible to try to have
the same people, the same individual people in each of these rounds of engagement. But Minnesota summer, people, they are not,
if the weather is really great, people aren’t going to show up for a meeting, I’ll just
say that. In this last round we also had a survey as
well to get feedback on how our strategic plan is going. So I can leave it there for now.>>JIM LESKO: Great, thanks so much. I do agree, there are a lot of similarities
across both states. It seems as though each of you have done a
tremendous job at trying to tap into a diverse population of individuals, which is great,
and to get that feedback, and to bring that input together into some sort of fashion that
you can then get that back out and get consensus across a diverse group. I appreciate you sharing. A question that’s come in, and neither of
you specifically addressed it because I certainly didn’t ask it in my questions, but it would
be interesting to know, have either of you actively included your head start collaboration
office, and/or their group, as a part of your planning process? And how did you do that?>>This is Amanda.>>JIM LESKO: Okay, Amanda.>>It’s Amanda from Minnesota. We have worked closely with our head start
collaboration office, and our head start, there was, the state did these meetings with
councils [inaudible] we had the opportunity to go, parents, policy leadership was having
a conference at the same time, so that was one spot where we were able to reach out with
them. Then I know each of our community grantees
has been reaching out to head start. So we have been able to work together throughout
the process.>>JIM LESKO: Excellent. Thank you. How about Deborah?>>Yes, so I’m very pleased to say that part
of my work is to staff the early childhood advisory council, and head start is one of
our required members on the board, although we have them on there even if they weren’t
required. So we do work very closely at the state level
with our collaboration office, and the director is involved in several of our, both our steering
committee and two of our work groups, family and community engagement and professional
development. But then with the mini grant that we offered
across the state, several committee action programs that house head start centers were
the grantees, and what we liked about partnering with them to host the community conversations
is that they were very helpful in being able to recruit families who were in some, participate
in some head start programs or other support services through the community action program,
so that we were ensured of getting their voice into the process.>>JIM LESKO: Great. Thank you so much both of you, for sharing
that. I’m going to go back to the slides for a few
minutes, and then Amanda and Deborah, I’m going to come back to you for another question
or two. So if you don’t mind holding on a bit. Let’s look at, oh, first of all, we did get
one question in before I go on to the next slide, are you using the terms components
and domains interchangeably? This would be a good time to, if you don’t
have your needs assessment and strategic plan guidance document available, make note, because
you will want to do this. In the needs assessment guidance document,
there is a table in the, towards the back of the guidance document with a list of domains
that were drawn directly from the funding opportunity application. So those, when I speak of the words domain,
addressing the domains that come from the needs assessment guidance document which again
were outlined and drawn directly from the funding announcement. The term components is drawn and refers you
to the strategic plan guidance document, and there is a table towards the back of that
plan, strategic plan guidance document, which lists a series of components that were also
outlined and identified in the funding application that were or are expectations to be included
in the strategic plan. So they are not being used interchangeably. But they do address two specific categories
of information, that is expected to be addressed, one in the needs assessment, one in the plan,
of course ensuring that the plan is adequately addressing the domains that were originally
listed in the needs assessment and funding application. So I hope that helps. The second question is regarding those categories
and names, can they be mixed together, combined? Can we use different words? I would say absolutely, you can. What I would recommend, if you do combine
them or do use different words, in a few minutes, I will bring up the strategic plan crosswalk,
and I would recommend, even though the crosswalk is optional, that if you do make some changes,
that you use the crosswalk so that the reviewers, federal reviewers are able to see those linkages,
so if you interchange them, the crosswalk will provide opportunities for the reviewer
to go to certain points in the document, and they will be easily able to find them even
if the words or names look different. So let’s talk about managing the scope of
the plans. You will need to identify the individuals
and representatives that will be a part, and you heard the steps that Minnesota and Oklahoma
has gone through to identify many of those individual partners. Very helpful to operate from your vision and
mission, and that was mentioned, it is not necessary to be a part of the strategic plan,
but there is some discussion about making sure that your needs assessment and strategic
plan draw from the vision and mission that the state set as part of its early childhood
initiative. Need to identify the goals, that address the
domains you have identified within the plan, and any value added strategic components as
a part of that. Please make sure you have measurable progress
indicators and/or objectives that are a part of your strategic plan, letting health and
human services and Ed know how you intend to measure the progress that you will make
in your state. The sequence of strategies or action steps,
so that they make logical sense to those that are looking at your plan, it is helpful to
identify the persons responsible and the collaborators that is not a essential part of the plan but
as a part of your measurable progress, it is always recommended that there is some go-to
people that have agreed to take some responsibility for the goals and/or action steps that are
listed in your plan. It is helpful to identify the resources that
may be available, and the completion date. Again, there is not, that is not a requirement
of the strategic planning process, but you are identifying measurable progress indicators
and outcomes, it would seem to be a little more difficult to determine progress unless
you have set some dates, at least monitoring dates to determine how successful you have
been. In the strategic plan guidance document is
a suggested sample outline for the strategic plan, this is not a requirement. The plan does not need to look like this. These are just sample components that suggested
you incorporate into your document, but you are free to create and develop your strategic
plan, that best fits the needs of your stakeholders and partners your state. This is just a optional suggestion, but you
will see that in the strategic plan document. The strategic plan should align with the plan
components, so as I mentioned, if you go back and review those domains in the needs assessment,
make sure they are addressed in some fashion. If you don’t need to address any of those
domains, it is helpful to highlight that, and bring that out in your executive summary. The components again are listed in the table
at the back of the strategic planning guidance document. Here is a crosswalk. This was just shared with you, I do believe,
last week. I’m sorry for, this is as small as it is,
but trying to fit it all on one page, you will see the strategic plan domains or components
that are listed there, stakeholder contributions, goals and action steps, partnerships, transitions,
coordination and collaboration. Framework for quality, statutory requirements,
measurable indicators and state advisory council. Then there is a table, there is actually two
sections within the crosswalk, one is the strategic plan components and the second one
are the assessment, needs assessment domains. This is a suggestion again, this is an optional
document, but especially if you decide to change the name or to combine the crosswalk
asks you to, for instance, where in a corresponding, using a page number in your strategic plan,
does the plan address the stakeholder contribution fund. Likewise, where in a corresponding number
in the guidance document does your plan address measurable indicators. Unless the measurable indicators across the
domain, I mean the whole document itself is, there is a particular section, or you can
highlight and address that, again, this is for to assist the reviewers as they go through
the process, and is optional. This is just probably better eyesight, I should
have went — I forgot I included this. Again, you know, this is to assist you. Also, this can become a helpful checklist
for yourself, to make sure that the components and the domains that are required or expected
to be addressed in your plan are included, the page number helps the reviewer, if you
check it at least, you will know that you have addressed those particular elements. So, I’m going to go back to another question. I wonder either Amanda or Deborah if you have
a place where you can currently recognize in your, even in the draft plan, where you
perhaps have taken the needs assessment result, something that a gap or something that needed
to be addressed and how you may have incorporate that had into your current strategic planning
process (background noise).>>This is Deborah. I’ll start. I think it’s been a common theme, as our partners
have gathered and thought about how we improve outcomes for young children in Oklahoma, has
been the impact of trauma and adverse childhood experiences in our state. We hear that in all sectors, as they talk
about challenges with supporting families and young children. So, this theme has, you know, crossed how
center based providers are able to keep children in placements, and do they have the right
kind of supports in order to be able to do that, how do they have the training that they
need, and many of them say that behaviors seem to be more severe than they have been
in years past, in terms of dealing with challenging behaviors and struggles with engaging families,
as well, through that process. Family child care home providers also talk
about challenges with that, and as well as all across our system. So there has been a lot of work done around
aces and resiliency and people say yes, we get it, we know that we have a lot of need
for this, so what do we need to do about it. That’s provided us a great opportunity to
think about how we might address it. We have been working with our department of
mental health and our health department that have long standing early childhood mental
health consultations networks, those have predominantly been provided, funded through
our quality child care dollars to support consultation in centers that accept child
care subsidies. We are talking about how we, A, first bring
up the proficiency of our mental health consultant, so that they have fresh training and how do
we build in supports for them to have the types of reflective supervision that would
improve their ability to provide valuable consultation. And then how do we build that workforce in
addition to improving the quality of the staff that we currently have, and then how do we
just help provide that support, broader across sectors. Many of our consultants consult on the side,
so they have a job to provide other types of services, and then oh, by the way, if you
have time, can you fit in providing some consultation. We would like to build a stronger network
of individuals that are well trained, well staffed, well supported, and that they can
really hone in that skill and be able to provide consultation across a variety of networks
and settings, be it in kinship homes or foster homes, helping home visitors, helping family
child care homes, helping head start child care, pre-K, and build that network up so
that it is seen as a supportive mechanism that helps those providers no matter what
setting really have access to that type of services and supports that help make them
more successful.>>JIM LESKO: Great, thanks, Deborah, appreciate
that.>>You bet.>>JIM LESKO: Amanda, I don’t mean to put
you on the spot, if you are not there yet, you are welcome to share, we are not there
yet.>>You know, mine is a little bit, you know,
kind of a meta (overlapping speakers) one finding that is emerging from our process
evaluation is our process for doing this type of needs assessment. We are learning that at the same time that
we are going through the preschool development grants needs assessment, our colleagues at
the department of health are conducting a very similar title 5 comprehensive needs assessment
of the health of children, mothers and families. They are taking a very similar broad brush
approach. So and then at the same time, in our process
evaluation, we have heard from some communities that are overasked what they need and we heard
from other communities who said thank you for coming and listening to my story. So one thing that we are learning from the
needs assessment process that will show up in our strategic plan is how do we go about
this work and have really intentional feedback loops with community, and work together across
different programs and funding streams to do and share those learning with one another
as well. So a roundabout finding that we weren’t really
expecting, which has been exciting for us.>>JIM LESKO: Great. Thanks so much, Amanda, I appreciate it. Thanks for the two of you, everybody else
on the phone, I put them on the spot. So I appreciate each of you stepping up to
the plate and sharing. Before I go on, a few more slides, we did
have another question which is a great relevant question to be asked, and that is from Maggie,
the needs assessment domains encompass a great deal of information. Is it accessible for the plan to triage findings,
meaning the plan is addressing certain things now, and the plan committee will choose to
revisit other needs assessment finding in the future. It’s absolutely fine, it is my understanding,
to triage the information. I think what is critical would be to highlight
that, either in the body of the plan or, probably most helpful in the executive summary. The departments want to know that each state
is cognizant of the domains and the components that need to be addressed, and if they are
not relevant at this point in time, or there are no particular needs, relative to facilities
as an example, that a state can simply say, there are no significant gaps, facilities
at this time, and we will continue to monitor the quality of facilities to make sure that
they remain high for future children that get identified or being part of the service,
just so that the Feds understand that you have not overlooked a domain or component
and it’s fine to address that, either it’s not an issue or it will be an element that
you will address in the future, absolutely. Good questions. To review the submission plan summary, make
sure each plan includes a cover page and executive summary. Identify where the reviewer can locate the
evidence of each domain and related bulleted points. Address all domains or components and recommendations,
and if you are not addressing them all in particular in a more expanded format identify
in executive summary those particular areas that will, either don’t need attention at
this time, or you will hold on to those issues for future, as I’ve mentioned. If no immediate plan of action, make sure
you say that. It would be certainly optional, but if you
would like, please feel comfortable in sharing the draft with your TA specialist for feedback. We are happy to review those drafts and give
you feedback before you submit it formally to your federal project officer. And your plan should go to Richard Gonzalez,
federal project officer, TA specialist, and your regional OCC office specialist. Those four individuals should be included
in your submission. I see I have one minute left. If you do continue to have questions around
your plan, please feel comfortable to contact either your federal projects officer, or your
TA specialist. To highlight, tomorrow, there will be a community
of conversation on Tuesday, August 27, at 3:00, and the topic, well, it will first be
hosted by the early childhood technical assistance center, and the focus will be exploring the
availability of IDEA619, and part B data that you can bring in as part of your needs assessment
process. You will see WWW.surveymonkey.com/r/pdgB5COC. We will welcome your feedback on this community
of conversation today. Person shout out to Amanda and Deborah, Amanda
from Minnesota and Deborah from Oklahoma, for a graciously agreeing to be a part of
the conversation today, and highlighting the unique elements of your state. I know that your colleagues are very appreciative
of your willingness to share your information today. If you have further questions, you can see
PDGB5TA @ Atlasresearch.U.S. but most of you have your TA specialist E-mail. Thank you for being on the line today. Thank you for your questions. Special shout out to my colleague at Atlas,
Sami, Kesley and Evelyn for managing the process behind the scenes. We couldn’t have done it without you. I see it’s 4:01. We are going to end our conversation today. Thank you very much. Please remember to contact your specialist
if you have more questions. (end of webinar at 3:01 p.m. CST) Services Provided By:
Caption First, Inc. P.O. Box 3066
Monument, CO 80132 800-825-5234
www.captionfirst.com ***
This text, document, or file is based on live transcription. Communication Access Realtime Translation
(CART), captioning, and/or live transcription are provided in
order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be
a totally verbatim record of the proceedings. This text, document, or file is not
to be distributed or used in any way that may violate copyright
law. ***




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *