Lucas County, Ohio Executive Director: Aaron Baker WELCOME

2 © Strive 2013 INTRODUCTIONS What brought you to the table today? Jane Moore, United Way of Greater Toledo What would make this Design Institute successful? Aaron Baker

3 © Strive 2013 Lucas County Cradle to Career Design Institute Jeff Edmonson Colin Groth Strive – National Cradle to Career Network May 7, 2013

4 © Strive 2013 CRADLE TO CAREER IMPACT

55 From Individual Action to Collective Impact A group working towards the same outcome, Looking at student level data, To continuously improve practices over time Individual practioners working on specific issues Collecting qualitative and quantitative data To demonstrate impact with individual students A group working on the same issue, Sharing program level data To identify best practices and align efforts Collective Impact Coordinated Impact Individual Impact © Strive 2011

66 Collaboration Convene around Programs/Initiatives Prove Addition to What You Do Advocate for Ideas Collective Impact Work Together to Move Outcomes Improve Is What You Do Advocate for What Works © Strive 2011

77 © Strive 2013 © Strive 2011

88

99 © Strive 2013 Focus on Outcomes Kindergarten Readiness in Literacy 4 th Grade Reading 8 th Grade Math High School Graduation College Readiness College Entrance College Retention Degree/Certification Completion © Strive 2011

10 © Strive 2013 Percentage Report Card Year Proven Local Success: % 74% 81% Percentage of Outcomes Trending Positively 89%

11 © Strive 2013

12 © Strive 2013 © Strive 2011

The Partnership identifies a high- potential anchor entity. The Partnership secures funding for multiple years and puts in place key staff roles, including a dedicated project director, data manager, and facilitator(s). The Partnership engages in continual alignment of community and financial resources around data driven needs. The Partnership aligns/realigns policy priorities and moves forward a collective advocacy agenda to improve community level outcomes and eliminate locally defined disparities in student achievement. The community is informed and engaged in the vision and work of the Partnership © Strive BUILDING ACTION Systems Change Sustaining Emerging Exploring The Partnership puts in place a comprehensive data system that enables the collection, connection, storage and analysis of local data for continuous improvement. A cross-sector Partnership of an acceptable composition and scope organizes around a compelling need and commits to a cradle to career vision. The Partnership commits to work to improve overall outcomes and eliminate locally defined disparities in student achievement. A data team is established and commits to identify community level outcomes/ indicators, and key sub- populations by which to disaggregate local data. The Partnership understands and commits to use data to drive decision- making and for continuous improvement. A cross-sector leadership table with a documented and approved accountabilit y structure is convened. The Partnership selects community level outcomes and indicators for release in a report card. The Partnership mobilizes initial capacity to collect, manage, disaggregate (by key sub- populations) and analyze baseline data for community level indicators. The anchor entity is established with (at least) two key staffing roles in place: project director and data manager. Gateway to Emerging Gateway to Sustaining The Partnership operates with a fully-functional accountability structure with a partnership agreement in place. The Partnership regularly and consistently informs the broader community of Partnership progress. Partners take action to improve the community level outcomes, including but not limited to aligning their existing work to the community level outcomes and supporting the implementation of action plans. The Partnership collects and disaggregate s baseline data by key sub- populations for community level indicators and shares this data internally. The Partnership reaches full capacity for data analysis ensuring regular access to data for continuous improveme nt. The Partnership enables the collection and connection of student service, demographic, and academic data and makes it available across systems and partners to enable evidence-based decision making. The Partnership continuously refines community level outcomes and indicators to improve accuracy & validity, adding additional community level outcomes, when appropriate. Collaborative Action Networks are formed or engaged around a community level outcome and are supported by the partnership per a value exchange. Collaborative Action Networks use disaggregated local data in a continuous improvement process to develop an action plan comprised of strategies and improvements to impact a community level outcome(s) and eliminate locally defined disparities in student achievement. Collaborative Action Networks use a continuous improvement process to regularly update action plans. Necessary stakeholders and community members align & mobilize time, talent, and treasure directed toward improving overall community level outcomes and eliminate locally defined disparities in student achievement. Gateway to Systems Change The Partnership accountability structure evolves through transitions and needed capacity and there is collective ownership for the improvements in community level outcomes. Attribution of success is communicated effectively. The Partnership publically releases an annual report on community level outcomes, disaggregated by sub- populations. The Partnership formalizes a call to action and defines a set of messages that are aligned and effectively communicated across partners. The Partnership publically releases a baseline report to the community on the community level outcomes with disaggregated data by key sub- populations. The Partnership outlines supports and expectations in a value exchange for the Collaborative Action Networks. A continuous improvement process is selected. PROOF POINT: 60% of Indicators Trending in the Right Direction The Partnership prioritizes a subset of community level outcomes for initial focus and identifies champions to support Collaborative Action Networks. The Partnership identifies and maps out existing initiatives and community assets relevant to this work. Investment & Sustainability Shared Community Vision Collaborative Action Evidence Based Decision Making

14

15 © Strive 2013

16 © Strive 2013 YOUTH PANEL Destiny Daniels, Rogers High School Dawasha Wainwright - Polly Fox Academy Beverly Boykin - Polly Fox Academy Cody Lacure - Alternate Learning Center Tegan Hickman - Southview High School Benjamin Moyer - Northview High School

17 © Strive 2013

18 © Strive 2013 Shared Community Vision A broad set of cross-sector community partners come together in an accountable way to implement a cradle to career vision for education and communicate that vision effectively.

19 © Strive 2013 Key Lessons Make it a movement! The vision and mission need to resonate with and galvanize the community to support a cradle to career agenda. It needs to be broad enough to capture the full breadth of a C2C partnership and clear enough for the community to believe its possible. The K.I.S.S. Principle: The vision needs to capture the spirit of the partnership and succinctly communicate the 1-3 things about the partnership that matter most.

20 Glossary of Terms Example

21 © Strive 2013 Aaron Baker, Executive Director, Aspire Shared Community Vision

22 © Strive 2013 Aspire Initiative Aspire Initiative Success for Every Child, Cradle to Career Vision The Aspire vision is to be Northwest Ohio's centralizing movement empowering every child to excel from cradle to career.

23 © Strive 2013 Aspire Initiative Aspire Initiative Success for Every Child, Cradle to Career Mission The Aspire Initiative unites community partners, public and private, around shared goals, strategies, evidence-based decision making, and shared accountability to support the healthy development, education and success of every child, cradle to career.

24 © Strive 2013 Example Word Cloud

25 © Strive 2013 Table Exercise Key Questions: – What 3 words resonate with you in the current vision and mission? What 3 words are missing? – Is this Vision/Mission good enough to move forward? If not, what specific feedback do you have to improve them? – What is the best process for moving this forward? Who else needs to be engaged?

26 © Strive 2013

27 © Strive 2013 What defines Collaborative Action? Focus on a specific community/school level outcome Prioritize local data to identify what works and verify with national research and local expertise/experience Identify shared action using data that network can take to move the needle on a community/school outcome (i.e. – policy, practice, training) Develop a plan to implement identified action: – Interim measures to track success – Identification of new/existing resources – Capacity building and training requirements © Strive 2011

28 © Strive 2013 Composition of an “Ideal” Network Several and diverse partners: Partners represent different sectors, serve different demographics, or differ in overall size – Including community members and organizations Committed partners: All partners demonstrate commitment to network Sufficient scope to impact community-level outcome: Collectively, the network has capacity to improve the overall outcome © Strive 2011

29 © Strive 2013 How to form and sustain a Network to improve outcomes:

30 © Strive 2013

31 Did we get there? Yes.No. Are we missing important players? What can we refine to have greater impact? Are there other strategies to consider? Did we overlook important data? How can we expand our efforts?

32 © Strive 2013 DISCUSSION QUESTION What examples are there of collaborative action in Toledo right now or in the past?

33 © Strive 2013

34 © Strive 2013 Evidence Based Decision Making The integration of professional expertise and data to make decisions about how to prioritize a community’s efforts to improve student outcomes

35 © Strive 2013 Key Lessons “True North” The outcomes become the focus of every meeting and every decision for the partnership “Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good…” Finding data that you can agree is directionally correct AND that changes in those indicators will signal changes in the overall outcomes for kids is key “People say you can lie with data but you can lie a whole heck of a lot easier without it…” All data has flaws, but the cycle of continuous improvement has to start somewhere. Starting with the data you have, while using your experience to appropriately question it, will move you further faster than debating validity “Data is the translator…” In a complex partnership data is often the common language that helps organizations come together. Anchoring meetings, dialogue, and decisions around concrete data helps keep focus and direction.

36 © Strive 2013 Community Level Outcomes Definition: Measures of the partnership's progress in achieving the cradle to career vision and goals. They are selected from across the cradle to career continuum and ensure accountability to the community. Milestone: The community level report card (including outcomes, indicators and time-bound targets across the continuum) is published and an annual reporting process is in place.

37 © Strive 2013 Cincinnati Criteria for Selecting Outcomes/Indicators for Report Card Outcomes should be population based, representing conditions at the community level and not at the programmatic level Indicators should be a valid measure of concepts outlined on the “Roadmap” The indicator must be easily understandable to local stakeholders The indicator must be reasonably similar across school districts/providers The data must be produced by a trusted source Priority can be given to indicators that are equivalent across school districts and have the ability to be compared All or most of the indicators need to be affordable to gather and report The data should be available consistently over time The indicator should be changeable to a significant degree by local action and be useful in the day to day work of organizations and networks that are working to improve student outcomes

38

39 © Strive 2013 Evidence Based Decision Making Goal 2, 3 & 4: Every student will be SUPPORTED, SUCCEED academically and ENROLL in college Community Report Card © Strive 2011

40 © Strive 2013 Evidence Based Decision Making David Kontur Lucas County Family and Children First Council

41 © Strive 2013 Evidence Based Decision Making Initial draft outcomes presented to Aspire Leadership Team on March 22, 2013 Further revision completed Outcomes focus on Educational and Family and Community Support Outcomes, Indicators, and contributing factors Date Team – building upon and expanding Data and Evaluation Network Committee

42 © Strive 2013 Aspire Outcomes Age Range Early Childhood Prenatal-5 Childhood 6-12 Adolescence Young Adult 18 and older Education Outcomes Children enter kindergarten ready to succeed in school Children demonstrate grade-level proficiency in reading and math Youth succeed academically by obtaining a high school diploma or GED Youth are prepared for post-secondary education or training Young adults enroll in post-secondary education or training Young adults are college and/or career ready Family & Community Support Outcomes Children are born healthyChildren meet or exceed school attendance standards Children are healthy Youth engage in positive behaviors

43 © Strive 2013 Table Exercise Key Questions: Outcomes: – Are the current Outcomes critical to our work? – What additional outcomes need to be considered by this Partnership? – What criteria should be used for selecting the Partnership‘s outcomes? – Who else needs to be included in a Data Team to finalize these Outcomes? – What measurement tools and data sources are available to capture these?

44 1 st Networks Launched (Spring 2012) 2 nd Networks Launched (Summer 2012) 3 rd Networks Launched (Fall 2012) Example: Milwaukee Succeeds Selecting Priority Outcomes © Strive 2012

45 © Strive 2013 Selecting Priority Outcomes to Launch Networks Sample criteria for selecting priority outcomes – Need exists: Using best available data, there is a significant need to improve the outcome if we want to achieve success for all children – Data you can trust exists to practice continuous improvement: Data is being collected for a significant portion of the target audience and cuts across sectors. Sometimes good data may be difficult to find. – Momentum exists: Resources or appropriate partners engaged & poised to benefit from partnership supports. – Staff and facilitation support exists: Backbone or lead convening organization has capacity to staff & facilitate networks. – Lastly, the combination of areas is not concentrated at one section of the continuum. © Strive 2011

46 © Strive 2013 Shared Community Vision Partnership Accountability Structure The agreements and/or operating principles among the cradle to career partners about how they will interact with each other, accomplish goals, and improve outcomes over time, including the establishment of an anchor entity with core staff.

47 © Strive 2013 Key Lessons Shared accountability, differentiated responsibility: Demonstrates how the members of a cradle to career partnership agree to hold one another accountable for achieving a shared vision, as well as bring their own individual and organizational strengths to the table in working toward that vision. Document and move on: To ensure that the process moves forward its important to keep accurate minutes, inform partnership members of important decisions, allow time for feedback and move on once a decision has been made.

48 © Strive 2013 Key Considerations for an Accountability Structure Create/identify multiple tables needed to achieve the vision (e.g. leadership, data experts, practitioners, and advocacy) Assess factors such as experience/expertise/assets of each partner for each table (e.g. access to funding, data, or constituents) Ensure ease of communication among tables so the structure is not overly bureaucratic and can be nimble Be clear about the role of the staff as it relates to each table so there are shared expectations about roles © Strive 2011

49 Proposed Implementation and Accountability Structure Executive Committee Strategic Guidance Leadership Council Champion Vision Affirm Direction Advocate for What Works Promote and Report Data/Results (Meets quarterly) Strategy Network A W. Pleasant Street. Suite 210. Milwaukee, WI tel Strategy Network BStrategy Network C Strategy Network D, etc. Provide recommendations for process and strategy Drive the implementation and oversight of the network and support teams Operations Team Data Task Force Parent Advisory Team Youth Advisory Team Communications Team Community Outreach Team

50 © Strive 2013 Role Explanations Leadership Council: Establish, embrace and advocate for the vision, mission, and strategy of Milwaukee Succeeds. Leadership Council members represent the top level decision makers in their organizations and bring their leadership and influence to the shared effort to improve common outcomes by: Promoting collaborative continuous improvement among providers around agreed upon student outcomes that are the focus of the partnership Overcoming barriers to aligning resources behind these outcomes Advocating for funding to follow what really gets results Meets quarterly and operates on consensus basis. Executive Committee: Establish the agenda for Leadership Council and brings forward recommendations for action meetings based on feedback from its members and the Operations Team. In addition, the Council helps guide the work of the Operations Team and helps identify strategic issues that need to be addressed to sustain progress. Meets quarterly in advance of the Leadership Council meetings. Operations Team: Drive the work of Milwaukee Succeeds to support entities on-the-ground by coordinating the work of the strategy and support teams described below. Provides feedback and guidance on recommendations from those teams, and makes recommendations for action to the Executive Committee regarding how best to improve outcomes as efficiently and effectively as possible. Meet monthly and as needed based on progress of partnership.

51 © Strive 2013 Role Explanations Strategy Network Teams: These teams will be charged with furthering or implementing a proven strategy focused on a specific target measure of Milwaukee Succeeds. The team will be comprised of empowered representatives from each organization that is participating in the effort to move the identified strategy forward. The chairs of each team will also serve on the Operations Team. (Note: Currently the “Goal Area Strategy Teams” are filling this role until specific outcomes related to each goal are identified and the strategies and related partners are selected to move the work forward on-the-ground. Support Teams: These teams will be provided specific supports to each of the strategy network teams. The chairs will also serve on the Operations team. Complete descriptions of each team are being developed in full, but these include: Data Parent Youth Communications Community Outreach

52 Raise DC Accountability Structure Executive Team: Comprised of core cross-sector leaders from within the Leadership Council; provides strategic guidance; members possess the authority to leverage significant financial and/or social capital to advance Raise DC goals and outcomes; key public champions. Leadership Council: Executive-level leaders from government, businesses, universities, CBOs/nonprofits, philanthropies; drives collaborative action; use authority to align and broker resources to implement strategies; promote and report data to Raise DC partnership and public Change Networks: Comprised of existing/emerging groups and coalitions, including stakeholders, practitioners, and issue experts. Specific responsibilities include: 1) Identify initial contributing indicators and commit to integrating these indicators into own performance tracking; 2) Identify successful strategies and commit to integrating into practice/program 3) Communicate progress to Leadership Council Anchor Institution: A neutral entity; provides key staff and data supports, communicates and works across sectors to eliminate silos and deliver results, and has convening power to ensure that key leaders will consistently come to the table over time.

53 © Strive 2013 The Accountability Structur e Table Exercise Does the proposed Accountability Structure position Aspire to achieve our desired outcomes? How do the Accountability Structure roles within the Accountability Structure resonate with you? What are the biggest barriers to effective alignment and integration of partners and resources?

54 © Strive 2013 Investment & Sustainability There is broad community ownership for building cradle to career civic infrastructure, and resources are committed to sustain the work of the partnership to improve student outcomes

55 © Strive 2013 Key Lessons Aligning funders and aligning providers: The alignment of program providers is often thought of as the critical piece of this work but often aligning funders can be just as, if not more, difficult. Engaging for engagement’s sake: Mobilizing resources for impact is critical in this work. The time of community members, parents, teachers, etc. is precious and focusing engagement efforts intentionally is important.

56 Pros: Sends a message when decision is made Cons: Less direct link to the partnership Pros: Clear and visible Cons: No idea of scope of available resources Pros: Concrete commitment Cons: Potential for overlaps and gaps Supportive Preference given to Collaborative Action Network members in funding decisions Supportive Preference given to Collaborative Action Network members in funding decisions Responsive Participation in Collaborative Action Networks incorporated into formal funding applications Responsive Participation in Collaborative Action Networks incorporated into formal funding applications Aggregated Resources pooled to invest in the capacity of organizations to adopt high impact practices and the anchor entity Aggregated Resources pooled to invest in the capacity of organizations to adopt high impact practices and the anchor entity Pros: Maximum leverage & shared responsibility Cons: Requires funder time and talent Engaging Funders Commitment Continuum for Funders: Strategic Specific funds set aside to invest in high impact practices identified by Collaborative Action Networks © Strive 2011

Community Engagement Continuum © Strive 2011

58 © Strive 2013 Wrap up and Next Steps Will be captured throughout the day

59

60 © Strive 2013 Lucas County, Ohio Executive Director: Aaron Baker Thank You!