The Partnership Way: Blueprint Development Session Joanne Cashman Director, The IDEA Partnership At NASDSE Luann Purcell Executive Director, CASE Stacy Skalski Dir. of Professional Policy & Practice, NASP

Purpose of Our Meeting Design a Blueprint that will help guide replication of the Partnership Way at the local and state levels. Develop self-assessment rubrics to help guide reflection and self-evaluation of the three critical elements of this way of working: Adaptive/Human Side, Technical Side, Operational Side

IDEA 1997 Required Technical, Operational and Adaptive Change Access to the general curriculum Participation in large scale assessments Evidence based practice Placement neutral funding We had knowledge and skill gaps ….but most importantly… We had relationship gaps with the partners we needed to accomplish the new vision With this understanding was born…The IDEA Partnership

The Ongoing Challenge: Humans Learning that technical solutions are necessary but often not sufficient Knowing when a persistent problem needs a adaptive (human) solution Building adaptive (human) skills as a part of strategy

DimensionExpert ModelStakeholder Model Who  Senior administrators drive policy decisions  Designated specialists  Representative cross stakeholder group  Facilitator convenes; group has authority to guide actions and decision making How  Invite interested participants to a meeting.  Participants who attend have some input.  Administrators chart path, make decisions, empower others to take action.  Leading by convening  Decisions by consensus  Utilize creative agreement strategies to bring the group to consensus Why  The buck stops with the chief…thus, they get the most say.  Leader driven  Desire buy-in across groups  Grassroots investment engages participants and empowers action  Sustainable after current leaders have moved on  Broader spectrum of possible solutions and perspectives Two Routes to Policy Decision Making

Critical Elements Adaptive Focuses on the consensus building that is needed as a pre- requisite to teamwork. People have to agree to proceed. How do they come to agreement? Requires understanding and a willingness to make behavior changes. Technical Focuses on the building of the infrastructure that is necessary to proceed to implementation. What tools do you need? What policies and procedures will guide you? Who will participate in decision making? How often will a group meet? Requires information, knowledge or tools. Operational Focuses on operational steps to implementing the Partnership Way. Reference: Heifetz and Linsky, Leadership on the Line, 2002

A Framework for Stakeholder Engagement Coalescing around issues Ensuring relevant participation Infrastructure for Engagement Doing work together Leading by convening New kinds of leadership Translate complex challenges into ways that individuals can contribute Shared Concerns What will bring people together? Focus on the work and the relationship Recognize Individual pursuits and shared goals The right mix of stakeholders Who must be involved to ensure changes in practice? Stakeholder Engagement: The IDEA Partnership Way

Leading by Convening Ensuring Relevant Participation Coalescing around Issues Doing the Work Together A New Framework for Stakeholder Engagement

The Partnership Way Coalesce around issues Ask yourself: Who cares about this issue and why? Ensure relevant participation Ask yourself: What work is already underway? Do work together Ask yourself: What shared work could unite us? Lead by convening Ask yourself: Can you successfully lead on this issue without your stakeholders ?

Our Process for our Work Together – Review Agenda – Working on a team focusing on one quadrant at a time Groups balanced across stakeholder groups Stay focused on your quadrant We will work together on quadrant 4 (Leading by Convening) – Record and save your work on a computer in the worksheets provided – Monitor your time so that your work addresses each step needed

Critical Elements Assessment Group Coalescing around Issues Adaptive-Human Ensuring Relevant Participation Technical Doing Work Together Operational AdminRich Barbacane/NAESPPat Guthrie/CASE Kevin Murphy, NH MH CoP Family/Advocate Suzanne Fornaro/LDA Diane Autin/RPTAC4 Michael Graham/AACLD Helene Fallon/LIFT Policy Maker Bill McQueary/CoP- Post Secondary Transition-AZ Frank Podobnik/SDSE- MT Carrie Heath – Phillips/CCSSO Practitioner Kevin Murphy/Co P- School Behavioral Health-NH Mary Beth Klotz/NASP Deborah Adamczyk- Dixon/ASHA Sharon Shultz/NEA StaffDiane OgelsbyPatrice LinehanMariola Rosser

Off site review Admin John Nori, NASSP Mary Summers, AASA David Lavender, Lakeview SD, MI Melissa Patsche, Big Spring SD, PA Family/Advocate Aurelia Carter, National MH CoP, Family PG Patti Solomon, GA SPDG, CAFÉ Process Policy Maker Debra Gay, SD SP Ed, GA Beth Hanselman, SD SP ED, IL Katey Mc Gettrick, CCSSO Practitioner Linda Marsal, CEC Sandy Schefkind, AOTA John Riley, NEALisa Thomas, AFT StaffDiane OgelsbyPatrice LinehanMariola Rosser

“In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice …in practice… there is….” YOGI BERRA

Questions? Discussion?