1. NYS Success Fall Conference Developing Regional Partnerships and Collaborations October 2015

2. Collective Impact 2

3. 3 September 2010: Steering Committee of key leaders in juvenile justice from across the state is convened Membership reflected all interested stakeholder groups Facilitation of the visioning process was critical; an early common vision set the stage for progress Improving outcomes for youth and communities requires a coordinated, strategic effort by multiple actors working toward a shared vision and common goals NYS Juvenile Justice Collective Impact Case Study “The juvenile justice system is a highly complex network of public and private agencies, organizations, courts, policies, and procedures at a state and local level, and also includes myriad connection points to other systems.” Safe Communities Successful Youth: A Shared Vision for the New York State Juvenile Justice System

4. 4 BENEFITS OF COLLECTIVE IMPACT Benefits of Collective Impact Amplify ImpactIncrease Efficiency of Resources Drive Alignment Involves multiple partners working towards long term, systemic change Offers a holistic approach by channeling the energy of various stakeholders towards solving a problem Provides opportunities to influence the system from within and outside by coupling advocacy with action Allows more efficient use of funding, especially in times of scarce resources Enables leveraging of public and private sources of funding Opens channels for organizations to access additional funding in support of an issue Reduces duplication of services Increases coordination Embeds the drive for sustained social change within the community Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis

5. 5 Collective Impact: The commitment of a group of actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a complex social problem Common Agenda Common understanding of the problem Shared vision for change Developed a Strategy and Action Plan Shared Measurement Collecting data and measuring results Focus on performance management Shared accountability Developed County Profiles and Statewide Metrics Mutually Reinforcing Activities Differentiated approaches Coordination through joint plan of action Always Connecting the Dots! Continuous Communication Consistent and open communication Focus on building trust Meetings, Correspondence, Interaction with Localities Backbone Support Separate organization(s) with staff Resources and skills to convene and coordinate participating organizations Support from Governor’s Office, DCJS, and OCFS Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis 1 2 3 4 5

6. Regional Youth Justice Teams 6

7. 7 Ongoing Input from Localities Develop a plan to implement local interagency advisory teams Local Coordination and Continuum Analysis work group Established nine Regional Youth Justice Teams, covering the entire State Lead entities committed to serve with no funding, but were working so well that we have been able to provide some support for implementing system change

8. 8 Characteristics of Effective Local Interagency Advisory Teams Community engagement is an essential piece in providing an effective continuum of services, and local interagency advisory teams can drive ongoing input from localities Local interagency advisory teams provide a means of communication between localities and state policymakers These teams will increase the capacity of agencies, organizations, and courts across the state to adopt both NYS‐based and national innovative research‐driven and evidence‐informed practices

9. 9 Regional Youth Justice Teams – County Breakdown Capital Region: Albany, Columbia, Delaware, Greene, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren, Washington North Country: Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Hamilton, St. Lawrence, Jefferson, Lewis Central New York: Broome, Cayuga, Chenango, Cortland, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego, Tompkins, Tioga Finger Lakes: Chemung, Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Wayne, Yates, Genesee, Orleans, Wyoming Western New York: Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie, Niagara Mid-Hudson: Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Westchester, Sullivan, Ulster New York City: Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, Richmond Long Island: Nassau, Suffolk Mohawk Valley: Herkimer, Oneida, Fulton, Montgomery, Otsego, Schoharie

10. 10 Regional Youth Justice Teams – Lead Entities Capital Region: The Schenectady County Department of Probation North Country: The Children’s Home of Jefferson County Central New York: The Onondaga County Probation Department Finger Lakes: The Monroe County Probation Department Western New York: The Erie County Probation Department Mid-Hudson: The Westchester County Department of Probation New York City: The New York City Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee Long Island: The Suffolk County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Mohawk Valley: The Oneida County Probation Department and Kids Oneida

11. 11 Regional Youth Justice Teams – Rosters youth and families with experience in the juvenile justice system advocates law enforcement crime victims district and/or county attorneys attorneys for children family court judges local probation departments local departments of social services detention facilities and providers Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) regional offices county executives and other elected officials youth bureaus boards of education and schools/ school districts social service providers mental health and other health care providers faith-based organizations business/ labor organizations Team membership should include members from some or all of the following at a minimum:

12. Other Initiatives 12