Improving Practices Within Neglect and Delinquent Systems Through Effective Communication and Collaboration

2 About NDTAC  Contract between U.S. Department of Education and the American Institutes for Research  John McLaughlin Federal Coordinator, Title I, Part D, Neglected, Delinquent, or At Risk Program  NDTAC ’ s Mission:  Develop a uniform evaluation model  Provide technical assistance  Serve as a facilitator between different organizations, agencies, and interest groups  Join our listserv at:

3 Simon Gonsoulin NDTAC Project Director American Institutes for Research Joyce Burrell Director of Juvenile Justice Programs American Institutes for Research Pat Frost State Title I, Part D, Coordinator Nebraska State Department of Education Susan Lockwood Director of Juvenile Justice Education Indiana Department of Correction

4 Introduction to the Practice Guide  Publication: Addressing the Unmet Educational Needs of Children and Youth in the Juvenile Justice and Child Welfare Systems: Peter Leone and Lois Weinberg  Partnership: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform at Georgetown University (Shay Bilchik)  Goal: Fostering better educational and related outcomes for youth in juvenile justice and child welfare systems: Title I, Part D

5 Key Principles in Meeting the Educational Needs of Youth in the Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Systems  Quality Education Services are Critical  Early Education is Essential  Outcomes that Matter are Measured  Individually Tailored Support Services for Youth are Provided  Interagency Communication and Collaboration is Vital  Change Requires Within-Agency and Cross-Agency Leadership

6 Interagency Communication and Collaboration is Vital  The problem is:  Youth in juvenile justice and child welfare systems face academic difficulties  Systems often struggle to address these youth’s challenges and meet educational needs  There are barriers to communication/collaboration:  Philosophical, structural, language and communication, staff resistance  Interagency communication and collaboration is a continual and evolutionary process:  Great work can be done at every stage  Agencies will likely need to remind themselves of the practices and strategies that promote collaboration

7 Interagency Communication and Collaboration is Vital Practice: Engage in Collaborative Decision Making  Strategies:  Memoranda of Understanding to Share Information  Consolidated/Single Case Management and a “No Wrong Door” Approach  Align Relevant Policies and Corresponding Practices of Child- Serving Agencies

8 Practice: Share Resources and Expertise  Strategies:  Co-location of Staff  Share Databases  Cross-Agency Training Interagency Communication and Collaboration is Vital

9 Practice: Target Services to Meet the Needs of Children, Youth, Parents and Caregivers  Strategies:  Engage Youth and Family as Key Decision-makers and Assets in Determining Needed Supports and Services  Implement Evidence-Based and Best Practice Programming that Supports Individual Student’s Success in School and Life Interagency Communication and Collaboration is Vital

10 Benefits of Effective Communication and Collaboration For Youth and Families:  Enhanced access to supports and services  Decreased disruption, duplication, and fragmentation of services  Improved reentry/transition outcomes  Increased engagement/connectedness to school and community

11 Benefits of Effective Communication and Collaboration For Systems:  Strengthened program sustainability  Improved system relationships  Increased information sharing  Enhanced system coordination  Increased system ownership for its children

12 State and Local Examples Overview:  Reasons for Collaboration  Who is Involved  Collaboration Strategies  Description of Collaborative Activities  Barriers, Challenges, and Lessons Learned  Outcomes

Interagency Communication and Collaboration in Nebraska: Meeting the Educational Needs of Youth in Out-of-Home Care Pat Frost State Title I, Part D, Coordinator Nebraska State Department of Education

Ad Hoc Committee on the Education of Students in Out of Home Placement Why the Need: Hawkins-Stafford Act & Improving America’s Education Act – connect Title I, student performance, accountability 1996: Multi-Agency Task Force, co-led by State Senator 2001: Ad Hoc Committee on the Education of Students in Out of Home Placement 2004: Legislation regarding students earning credits Commitment/legislation completed; Need to refocus the mission of Ad Hoc Committee – assign smaller specific work group projects

Collaboration: Who Is Involved Education Department Stakeholders – Special Education, Federal Title Programs, Accreditation, School Career Counseling Partnering Agencies – State Foster Care Review Board and Private Residential Facilities, etc. Established Committees – Special Education Advisory Committee, etc. Advisory Committees – Transition, etc. Practitioners – local teachers, principals

Collaboration Strategies Established vision, mission, and goals Gathered data through networking and surveys Enlisted other established agencies and foundations for Ad Hoc membership:  Ad Hoc Committee: 26 designees  Smaller workgroups focused on priority areas (e.g., transition, state assessments, data, school completion)

Collaborative Activities 2008: Conducted annual needs assessment for Committee priorities – identified a need for Nebraska “systems” toolkit, using information gained from:  Focus groups with stakeholders  Topical workgroups – adding a systems workgroup 2009: Supreme Court, HHS, ED, Juvenile Justice representatives attend Utah Collaborative Initiative Summit Combining the two:  Integrate toolkit with initiative  Ad Hoc Committee on the Education of Students in Out of Home Placements & Court Initiative Advisory  Develop timeline for collaborative planning and completion of initiative – partnering4students website

Barriers and Lessons Learned Use of blended funding: foundations, “in kind,” and ED grants Sustainability: Retirements & MOUs Prioritizing goals and objectives Reaching out to practitioners (e.g., Nebraska Educators of Students At Risk (NESTAR)) Continuous improvement: professional development and evaluation Dissemination of information

Works In Progress and Outcomes Online data/information sharing project State Transition Liaison (Pilot) – Special Education and Vocational Rehab funds “Training of Trainers” cadre for professional development, including cross-agency training modules Partnering conference on transition  Source of information for primary systems dealing with juveniles and education

For Additional Information Templates, bylaws, mission/vision statements, priority areas structure, practitioners samples, etc. Contact: Pat Frost State Title I, Part D, Coordinator (402)

Division of Youth Services: Indiana Department of Correction Susan Lockwood Director of Juvenile Education Indiana Department of Correction

 Department of Correction needed a formal curriculum program to teach youth post-release coping strategies  Due to a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice  The Governor advocated for the Why Try program The Why Try program provides simple, hands-on solutions for:  Dropout prevention  Violence prevention  Drug and alcohol prevention  Truancy reduction  Increasing academic success

 Director of Juvenile Education (from Dept. of Correction)  Developed a pilot program with Why Try staff, including staff training and materials  Found federal funding for the pilot program  Facility Staff  Participated in trainings  Peace Learning Center (another Dept. of Correction program)  Attended Why Try training to align programs

 Training for all facility staff, including teachers, counselors, etc.  Reinforce the idea that it was a “facility” program and not just a “school” program  Provided follow-up training for all facility staff  Introduced Why Try into 2 new facilities  Developed “Train-the-Trainer” option to develop in- house trainers for new staff at facilities

 Department of Correction was looking for a way to provide youth with skills to accept responsibility for their actions and to deal with conflict.  Peace Learning Center provided formal programming about conflict resolution and personal responsibility in public schools in the Indianapolis area.  Department of Correction wanted to incorporate Peace Learning Center programming into the Indianapolis Juvenile Facility School.  In 2005, the Peace Learning Center established an initial budget and contract with the Department of Correction for the Indianapolis Facility.

 Blended Funding ▪ Title I, Part D, Subpart 1 ▪ Title II (High Quality Teachers) Formula Grant from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute  Cross-Agency Cooperation

 Training for all facility staff (including counselors, custody staff, teachers, cafeteria workers, etc.) to support fidelity of implementation  Objectives of program (and the Peace Learning Center)  Team building exercises  Common language/vocabulary for conflict resolution  Preparation for transitioning back to the community  Curricula provided to all students at orientation  More intensive instruction given to the most needy youth

 Blended Funding  Involve agency fiscal representatives in initial meetings to “smooth the way” for contract processes and purchase orders  Ensuring Success  Identify a “champion” of the program at each facility responsible for implementation  Collaborate with those who are passionate – Peace Learning Program Facilitators

 Why Try  Successful implementation at 3 facilities  Projected implementation at all facilities by June 2012  Peace Learning Program  Continued to provide instruction to all students at orientation & give more intensive instruction to identified students  Used on-going data evaluation to determine success  Identified additional funding to provide intensive instruction as needed

 Why Try :  Peace Learning Center:  Article: gram_at_pendleton_juvenile_shows_great_results___indystar.pdf gram_at_pendleton_juvenile_shows_great_results___indystar.pdf Contact:  Dr. Susan Lockwood, Indiana Department of Correction,