A Charge to Collaborate:

IT’S NOT JUST ABOUT WHAT WE DO… IT’S ABOUT HOW WE DO IT…

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

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.

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

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

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

Tier 1: Statewide Leadership TeamObjectives

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

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.

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.

Sequencing of the LC process

1st Statewide Leadership Team Oct 28th, 2013 Regional Learning sessions occur Dec 2013 – February

2014 Regional Learning sessions occur March 2014 – June

2014 2nd Statewide Leadership Team July, 2014 Regional Learning sessions occur Oct 2014 – Feb 2015 3rd Statewide Leadership Team between Feb –

April 2015

The Learning CollaborativeParticipants and Roles

BAY AREA COUNTIES

Initial county cohort by region – WELCOME teams!

Bay Central Southern Northern

Contra Costa

Fresno Los Angeles Glenn

San Francisco

San Luis Obispo

Orange Inyo

Santa Cruz Santa Barbara

San Diego Humboldt

Solano Nevada Ventura Mendocino

Shasta

Tuolumne

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

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)

 

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?

Thank you so much for participating!

SHARED SUCCESSES

SYSTEMS AND INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION

AGENCIES HAVE CO-LOCATED SPACE AND STAFF PROCESSES IN PLACE TO SHARE AND RECEIVE FEEDBACK TO

SOLVE AND ENHANCE SUCCESS

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

SERVICE ARRAY

TAILORED SERVICES COMMUNITY BASED EVIDENCED BASED

INVOLVEMENT OF CHILDREN YOUTH AND FAMILIES

AREA OF VERY FEW SHARED STENGTHS ONE SHARED AREA WAS PEER NETWORKS

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

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

FISCAL RESOURCES

UNDERSTAND FUNDING NEEDS FISCAL AGREEMENTS AND COMMITTMENT OF

FUNDING TRACK EXPENSES MULTIPLE FUNDING STREAMS

SHARED CONCERNS

AGENCY LEADERSHIP

SHARED RESPONSIBILITY FORUMS FOR SHARING INFORMATION MEANINGFUL ROLE OF FAMILIES AND COMMUNITY

PARTNERS

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

SYSTEMS CAPACITY

TIMELY AND FULL MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR RECRUITMENT, HIRING AND

TRAINNG PERSONNEL ADEQUATE NETWORK OF MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDERS

SERVICE ARRAY

SERVICES THAT SUPPORT TRANSITIONS TO COMMUNITY AND ADULT (NMD)

SERVICES TO MEET MENTAL HEALTH NEEDS OF COMMUNITY

NON TRADITIONAL SERVICES

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

CULTURAL RESPONSIVENESS

ALL COUNTIES SCORED ALL AREAS AS A 2 OR 3

OUTCOMES AND EVALUATION

3 OUT OF 4 COUNTIES SCORED THIS AS A 2 OR 3

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)