1. A Charge to Collaborate: IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT WHAT WE DO… IT’S ABOUT HOW WE DO IT…

2. How we will get there... Participants, Roles, Structure, Goals and Values of the Learning Collaborative

3. Learning Collaborative Goals  Create an environment for shared learning within and amongst county child welfare and mental health agencies and their key partners.  Facilitate peer-to-peer learning  Identify shared needs and solutions to meet those needs  Connect counties to experts in other counties and in the field.

4. Learning Collaborative Goals (Cont.)  Provide Implementation Teams with work time to establish and refine work plans with goals, actions, and a timeline  Provide new knowledge and skills related to collaboration and the CPM that empower local county implementation to do the work  Identify training needs for line staff, supervisors and community partners

5. Learning Collaborative: Structure and Sequencing  A 3-tiered structure is designed to facilitate implementation at the local, regional and statewide level;  Tier 1: Statewide Leadership Team  Tier 2: Regional Learning Sessions  Tier 3: Local Implementation Teams

6. Tier 1: Statewide Leadership Team: US! State & County Leaders in Child Welfare & Mental Health; State-level Stakeholders; Training Partners; Subject Experts ROLE:  Articulate state-level priorities for the LC  Guide the planning of the LC process  Share regional perspectives with the state  Identify common barriers to implementation around the state, in order to generate solutions

7. Tier 1: Statewide Leadership Team Objectives  Identify needed resources and supports for training and implementation across the state  Identify training and implementation tools to assist with statewide implementation  Establish a communication plan that coordinates statewide and county-level training implementation  Establish a plan for data collection

8. Tier 2: Regional Learning Sessions  Regional events and activities facilitated by the Regional Training Academies, with assistance by content experts, CDSS and DHCS representatives, and key stakeholders  Role:  Guide local implementation teams  Identify barriers to implementation and possible solutions  Share regional resources, tools and ideas  Identify areas that may benefit from statewide training or technical assistance, and communicate them to the Statewide Leadership Team.

9. Tier 3: Local County Implementation Teams  Cross-agency, cross-system teams with multi-level county staff, tribes, parent/youth reps and other stakeholders identified by the county  Role:  Guide county implementation of new practice philosophy and services.  Identify county-level barriers to implementation and potential solutions.  Determine county-specific training and technical assistance needs.  Identify areas of inquiry for the Regional Learning Sessions.

10. Sequencing of the LC process  1 st Statewide Leadership Team Oct 28 th, 2013  Regional Learning sessions occur Dec 2013 – February 2014  Regional Learning sessions occur March 2014 – June 2014  2 nd Statewide Leadership Team July, 2014  Regional Learning sessions occur Oct 2014 – Feb 2015  3 rd Statewide Leadership Team between Feb – April 2015

11. The Learning Collaborative Participants and Roles

12. BAY AREA COUNTIES

13. Initial county cohort by region – WELCOME teams!  BayCentralSouthernNorthern Contra Costa FresnoLos AngelesGlenn San Francisco San Luis Obispo OrangeInyo Santa CruzSanta Barbara San DiegoHumboldt SolanoNevadaVenturaMendocino Shasta Tuolumne

14. Roles: Initial Cohort Counties  Form a Leadership Team to guide statewide implementation and participate in the Statewide Leadership Team  Participate in Regional Learning Sessions to guide regional implementation  Form a county-level Implementation Team to guide local implementation and to direct and monitor training and implementation efforts

15. TOP FIVE PRIORITIES  System Integration (paradigm shift, culture of shared responsibility, interagency communication, Integration of initiatives and data collection)  Sustaining Family and Youth engagement  Out of County Placements (challenges: assessment, service delivery, service integration, transitions)  Trauma Informed Systems  Reflective Practice  Coaching and Supervision model/strategy  Resources (staff, fiscal, services, non-traditional services, dosage) 

16. Table introductions & expectations for the Learning Collaborative  Why did your county decide to participate in this Learning Collaborative?  What do you hope to get out of the Learning Collaborative process?  What do you hope to learn and accomplish today?

18. Thank you so much for participating!

19. SHARED SUCCESSES

20. SYSTEMS AND INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION  AGENCIES HAVE CO-LOCATED SPACE AND STAFF  PROCESSES IN PLACE TO SHARE AND RECEIVE FEEDBACK TO SOLVE AND ENHANCE SUCCESS

21. SYSTEMS CAPACITY  PROCESS IN PLACE TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE REFERRAL PROCESS AND ACCESS TO SERVICES  AGENCIES UTILIZE PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER AGENCIES TO INSURE FAMILIES HAVE ACCESS TO AN ARRAY OF SERVICES  AGENCIES ENGAGE LOCAL COMMUNITY THROUGH ACTIVITIES, PUBLIC MEETINGS, FORUMS, ETC

22. SERVICE ARRAY  TAILORED SERVICES  COMMUNITY BASED  EVIDENCED BASED

23. INVOLVEMENT OF CHILDREN YOUTH AND FAMILIES  AREA OF VERY FEW SHARED STENGTHS  ONE SHARED AREA WAS PEER NETWORKS

24. CULTURAL RESPONSIVENESS  CULTURAL IDENTITY VALUED  DIVERSITY AND LANGUAGE OF STAFF REFLECT COMMUNITY  TRAINING – YAY  MATERIALS PUBLISHED AND TRANSLATED INTO LANGUAGES FOUND IN COMMUNITY  SERVICES PROVIDED IN OWN LANGUAGE  SERVICE PLANS IN OWN LANGUAGE  PARTNER WITH CULTURALLY BASED COMMUNITY GROUPS

25. OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION  EVALUATION PLANS DEFINE SPECIFIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THAT ARE MEASURABLE  EVALUATION PLANS DESCRIBE HOW DATA INFORMS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT  BASICALLY 3 OUT OF 4 COUNTIES FEEL THEY HAVE GOOD DATA

26. FISCAL RESOURCES  UNDERSTAND FUNDING NEEDS  FISCAL AGREEMENTS AND COMMITTMENT OF FUNDING  TRACK EXPENSES  MULTIPLE FUNDING STREAMS

27. SHARED CONCERNS

28. AGENCY LEADERSHIP  SHARED RESPONSIBILITY  FORUMS FOR SHARING INFORMATION  MEANINGFUL ROLE OF FAMILIES AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS

29. SYSTEMS AND INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION  LACK OF FORMAL AGREEMENTS, MOU, SHARED TRAINING PLANS  JOINT OPPORTUNITY FOR TRAINNIG  ESTABLISHED PROCESS FOR REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES  INFORMATION SYSTEMS THAT SUPPORT SHARING OF INFORMATION

30. SYSTEMS CAPACITY  TIMELY AND FULL MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS  EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR RECRUITMENT, HIRING AND TRAINNG PERSONNEL  ADEQUATE NETWORK OF MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS

31. SERVICE ARRAY  SERVICES THAT SUPPORT TRANSITIONS TO COMMUNITY AND ADULT (NMD)  SERVICES TO MEET MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS OF COMMUNITY  NON TRADITIONAL SERVICES

32. INVOLVMENT OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES  FAMILY VOICE IN PLANNING, DELIVERY AND EVALUATION OF SERVICES  OPPORTUNITES FOR FEEDBACK  PEER SUPPORT NETWORKS  TRAINING AND WRITTEN INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO FAMILIES AS INFORMED DECISION MAKERS  FAMILY INVOLVEMENT IN QUALITY INDICATORS OF SERVICES  AREA OF GREATEST CHALLENGE

33. CULTURAL RESPONSIVENESS  ALL COUNTIES SCORED ALL AREAS AS A 2 OR 3

34. OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION  3 OUT OF 4 COUNTIES SCORED THIS AS A 2 OR 3

35. FISCAL RESOURCES  STAFF TRAINING IN TIME STUDY (SUPERVISORS GET THIS IN FOUNDATIONS)  CROSS SYSTEMS TRAINING OF STRATEGIES AND FUNDING RESOURCES  WRITTEN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ON FUNDING AND BLENDED FUNDING. (MIXED BAG – 2 COUNTIES HAD A 1 AND 2 COUNTIES HAD A 3)