Presented by Nancy Reynolds and Suzanne Tough | January 13, 2011 Policy Makers and Researchers as Partners in Knowledge Mobilization Presented by Nancy Reynolds and Suzanne Tough | January 13, 2011

Objective Identify outcomes associated with integrated KM. Discuss strategies for engaging partners. Provide an example of how The Centre engaged partners.

What is the Alberta Centre for Child, Family and Community Research (The Centre)?

The Centre A non-profit organization. Funded by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. A vision focused on evidence mobilization.

The Centre Core Functions Setting the research agenda. Supporting priority needs for evidence though research funding. Mobilizing knowledge. Building research capacity. Managing the CYDL.

What is the Child and Youth Data Laboratory (CYDL)? Analyzes linked data from nine ministries. Looks at child and youth experience accessing multiple services. Provides a comprehensive profiles of outcomes and trajectories.

The Centre & KM Key focus : Mobilizing knowledge into policy and practice. KM activities: KT Grants Events & meetings Public policy training

How The Centre works with Government The Centre works with Ministry by first assessing needs; this may be in the form of a topic directed call. Then, LOI’s for topic directed and investigator driven research go through a policy review to see if the research has policy relevance. After the research is complete, The Centre puts emphasis on knowledge mobilization activities directed towards non-academic audiences, like Ministry. The Centre also briefs the Ministry on the work that was done, and hosts events and workshops to help researchers get their evidence to the Ministry. Finally, The Centre goes back to the Ministry to assess the impact of research and their needs again.

Building Partnerships A Long and Winding Road

Travel Description Unplanned movement from problem definition to policy impact. Takes longer than planned. Detours and false starts. Success depends on guides and fellow travellers.

The Relationship between Research and Public Policy Instrumental Political Enlightenment Evidence designs policy Evidence justifies decision Evidence reframes issue - Weiss (1977)

Enlightenment Role Identifying new issues; Reframing old issues; Engaging stakeholders; and Learning from like examples. - Pestieau (2003)

Evidence and Policy Decision Making Types of Evidence Influencing Factors Policy Stages

The Relationship between Research and Public Policy Policy making is ……..an art rather than a science ….……not purely rational ………sometimes unpredictable Knowledge production is interactive. - Pestieau (2003)

Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice Policy

Defining the Gap Why evidence is not used: The research is not there. Many managers are not ‘knowledgeable’. Public sector might not act as a product champion of knowledge.

Defining the Gap Why evidence is not used: Change is more difficult than expected. Research which ignores society’s values will likely not be used. Cultural barriers. - Stocking (1995)

Bridging the Gap Step 1: Create Partnerships! Some considerations when approaching and working with the Ministry: Read their business plan. Approach during idea formation. Understand the chain of command. Define partnership.

10 Partnership Building Blocks Get to know each other. Be patient. Be respectful. Embrace diversity. Recognize the contribution of scientific knowledge AND practical knowledge.

10 Partnership Building Blocks Foster a clear, mutual frame of reference. Build the partnership incrementally. Ensure broad institutional buy-in. Equal commitments to the partnership. 10. Allow for mistakes. - Ferguson (2005)

Key Strategies for Interaction Face-to-face exchange. Education sessions. Networks and communities of practice. Facilitated meetings. - Mitton et al (2007)

Focus on Similarities Researchers and policy makers are concerned about and try to better society. Both work in institutions that have certain expectations that must be met.

Step 2: Communicating Mutual Benefits! What elements of the research project or results are important to policy makers? Example: Does the research have administrative or advocacy aims? Will it do more with less resources?

Questions Policy Makers Ask: What is the problem? What does it matter? What can and should be done about it? How should we do something? How will we know it worked? What should we stop doing? - Canadian Institute for Health Information (2004)

Questions Researchers Ask How original is the research? Will it get funded? Is it feasible to do? Is this the logical next step?

Step 3: Recognize Opportunities for Uptake Research is timely and methods are uncontested. Results are consistent and clear. Evidence has strong advocates. Recommendations can be easily implemented. Little need for additional resources. - Canadian Institute for Health Information (2004)

Critical Success Factors The involvement of stakeholders. Harnessing momentum. Highlighting results. - Ferguson (2005)

What Factors Contribute to KM? Sleeper effect. Clinical and managerial champions. Receptive policy makers. Willingness of researchers to play multiple roles.

What Should Success Look Like? That policy makers will: Take account of new knowledge; Consider different ways of tackling persistent issues; and Look for evidence to address those issues. - Pestieau (2003)

What Should Success Look Like? That researchers will: Take account of priorities and agendas; Consider different ways of interpreting issues and findings; and Look for collaborative ways to address issues.

Indicators Time allocated; Signs of opposition; and Sustained willingness. - Pestieau (2003)

Learning to be Humble Evidence informed not evidence based. Research and policy making as social processes. “the art of the possible.” - Waddell et al 2002

Case Study: The Benchmark Survey Here is an example of how The Centre built meaningful relationships with policy makers to improve the chances of uptake and to influence a positive change in society on child development.

Setting the Context The Centre and stakeholders wanted to know: What do adults know about child development? How can we address optimal development in early childhood?

Engaging from the Start Who was engaged? UpStart, Three Cheers, Academic experts, and the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. How were they engaged? Collaborating on content. Incorporating local material.

Study Methods Provincial survey of adults (2007-2008). Sample Size and Data Collection. Inclusion Criteria. 37 37

Community Findings Adults lack understanding of when certain developmental milestones should be reached. Adults recognize ways to support child development. 38 38

Public Opinion Findings Child care providers should be highly trained and are as important as elementary school teachers. Child care centers must meet top criteria. 39 39

Program Findings Most parents get child development information from physicians and nurses. Parenting classes were attended by few parents. Satisfaction with both resources are typically high.

Policy Findings Respondents want public funding for child care. Respondents want more child care support for low income compared to high income families.

Engaging Policy Makers Once the research content was ready, The Centre: Held round table discussions; Obtained feedback; Asked for suggestions; and Had facilitated dialogue.

Key Messages from the Benchmark Early childhood development is important. Children are our collective responsibility. Affordable, high-quality child care is important. Child care providers should be highly skilled. Albertans want to know more! 43

Mobilizing the Key Findings Policy brief to Ministry Presentations to non-academic audiences Workshops with program staff Manuscripts and newsletters published Lay summaries to service providers 44

Outcomes Influences to practice Ex. Parenting classes Influences to policy Building capacity Ex. Child Centre for Excellence

Considerations KM is more than publishing and presenting. KM starts at idea formation: Specifying audiences; Determining goals, objectives or messages; and Selecting methods and resources needed.

Considerations KM is a joint effort. KM succeeds primarily through successful partnerships.

Questions? Feedback?

Thank You