early learning strategic plan 9:00am-2:30pm seatac four ... · 19/02/2020 · maternal health,...
TRANSCRIPT
This publication was made possible by Grant Number 90TP0018 from the Office of Child Care, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Child Care, the Administration for Children and Families, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Early Learning Strategic Plan Steering Committee February 19, 2020 9:00am-2:30pm
SeaTac Four Points Sheraton Olympic II Room
22406 Pacific Highway South Des Moines, Washington 98198
AGENDA
Time Activity
9:00-9:30 Opening: Welcome, introductions, and meeting purpose
9:30-9:45
Connections Activity: Deepening our relationships and preparing for the day’s activities by centering on equity.
9:45-10:00 Community Agreements: Reground ourselves in our community agreements.
10:15-10:25 Discussion on Vision and Values Glossary: Share the draft glossary for the Vision and Values document for comments and suggestions.
10:25-10:30 Break
10:30-12:00 Needs Assessment Update: Discuss the draft Needs Assessment document in small groups and review for unidentified gaps and clarity.
12:00-12:30 LUNCH and Reimbursement Forms
12:30-1:05 Statewide Early Learning Strategic Plan Design Process: Share the process for generating goals and strategies during the Strategic Planning Design Meetings and learnings from the January meeting.
1:05-2:15 Outreach Discussion: Gather input about our current thinking around the outreach process related to the Draft Statewide Early Learning Strategic Plan.
2:15-2:30 Closing: Next steps, written reflections, and appreciations
2:30 Adjourn!
Early Learning Strategic Plan Steering Committee - Session #9
February 19, 2020(9:00 am - 2:30 pm)
Welcome and Introductions
Introductions
● Name and role you’re representing today● Invitation: share your preferred gender pronoun
● She/her/hers● He/him/his● They/them/theirs● We/us/ours!● Other
● One word to describe what you’re feeling as you enter the meeting today
Connections Activity
Think about the development of and the work completed by this committee over the past 9 months:
● What are one or two strengths of the committee that have emerged?
●
● How can we continue to co-create ELP 2.0 in a way that lifts up and builds upon these strengths?
ConnectionsIndividually
Form a trio and share your insights:
● What are one or two strengths of this committee that have emerged?
●
● How can we continue to co-create ELP 2.0 in a way that lifts up and builds upon these strengths?
ConnectionsIn trios
Community Agreements
Community Agreements
● We welcome multiple perspectives and listen attentively to seek understanding.● Notice moments of discomfort and stay curious.● Practice confidentiality with family, parent, and personal experiences (unless you ask
for permission).● Speak truth without blame or judgement.● Make space to add and change agreements as the steering committee moves forward● Engage in open communication by using intent vs. impact.● Put children at the core of our work● Be aware of power dynamics as we strive to treat each other as equals so everyone
can speak their truth.● Be mindful of the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.● Amplify parent and provider voice by inviting them to speak first
Vision and Values
Vision
Washington State is a place where each child starts life with a solid foundation for success based on strong families,
culturally relevant early learning practices, services, and supports that lead to racial equity and the well-being of all
children and families.
(Developed by Steering Committee)
Feedback on Glossary
1. What are your observations overall about the glossary?
2. Are there any specific edits you would suggest?
3. Do you have any questions, thoughts or concerns about the glossary or definitions used?
Needs Assessment Overview
What We Know About Children and Families814,014 children in Washington State from birth to 8 years:
○ 44% are children of color
○ 38% live in households <200% FPL
○ 36,294 live in rural communities
○ 21% (5 or younger) have special health care needs
○ 39,641 were homeless in 2016
What We Know About Children and Families
● Affordability of care was one of the most frequently mentioned concerns.
● Issues of equity, particularly racial equity, were major themes in the experience of communities of color.
● Participants from rural/remote communities reported unique challenges with availability of services, distance to services, and transportation needs
Healthy Children and Families● Washington has one of the lowest rates of infant mortality
in the nation, but …
○ The rate among Black/African American families is twice that among white families
● Rates of diabetes and hypertension among pregnant women increase every year
● Estimated 3,500 children 5 years and under at risk of complex trauma
Healthy Children and Families
● Families emphasized the importance of comprehensive health care: proper health care and good nutrition, medical home, coordination across providers.
● Mental health services, for children and families, were frequently mentioned as an unmet need.
Strong, Stable, Nurturing, and Supported Families● Parents and caregivers are critical to early childhood
system.
● The system supports family stability and well-being through ECEAP (Mobility Mentoring) and other programs.
● Existing systems to connect families with services are robust but not coordinated.
Strong, Stable, Nurturing, and Supported Families● The most prevalent challenge facing families was meeting
financial needs.● The cost of child care can be an overwhelming stress, forcing
difficult choices.● Caregivers want more knowledge about parenting and child
development.
Positive Early Learning Experiences● Settings-based programs, services and supports:
40,000 children 5 years and younger
● Home visiting capacity: 7,323 families
● ESIT: 17,000 children each year; ECLIPSE: 746
Still working to meet the needs of all children.
Positive Early Learning Experiences● 251,000 children younger than 5 need child care.
● The average annual cost of child care in Washington State is $10,000 to $16,000.
○ That’s 15% of total income for family of three making $37,000 (with subsidy).
Positive Early Learning Experiences● Many parents rely on family, friend, and neighbor care.● The importance of informal activities was mentioned almost
as often as licensed child care.● Parents, caregivers, and providers said the system does not
provide adequate support for children with special needs.● ECEAP, Head Start, ECLIPSE, ESIT were described as
programs families depend on.
Empowered Communities and Responsive Early Learning System
Our complex. mixed-delivery system requires:
○ Coordination among many players, including between state and local levels.
○ Integration across robust but fragmented data systems.
○ Aligned standards for licensing and quality that support the workforce.
Empowered Communities and Responsive Early Learning System
● Many families and providers find it difficult to find appropriate services.
● Some families feel services across systems (early learning, health, economic assistance, etc.) are not coordinated.
Supported Early Learning Workforce● 39% of the workforce relies on one or more sources of
public assistance
● 53% of early learning programs report unfilled positions.
● 32% report limiting enrollment because of staffing.
Supported Early Learning Workforce● Staff are committed and compassionate toward children and
families.● Providers have a significant desire for ongoing professional
development.● Low compensation makes it difficult to attract, hire, and
retain staff.
We Want to Know
1. Gaps in the story that should be filled — now or in the future
2. Key statements or interpretations that don’t resonate with your experience
Strategic Planning Process
Early Learning Plan 2.0*: The Opportunity
•Increases coordination and collaboration across range of partners in the system•Guides policy, funding and prioritization of strategies across the system•Builds on the Early Learning Plan 1.0 •Serves as a statewide early learning plan (not a single agency plan)•Guided by learning and information in the Statewide Needs Assessment•Embracing an equity imperative
(* “Early Learning Plan 2.0” - this is placeholder language)
Early Learning Strategic Plan Design Teams
•Groups of 20-25
•Reflective of the state’s regional, racial/ethnic, experiential and cultural diversity•Organized by framework areas•Neutral process facilitators and Management Team member•Two intensive two-day planning meetings (Jan/Feb)
Timeline & Process● Increases coordination and collaboration across range of partners in the
system
● Guides policy, funding and prioritization of strategies across the system
● Builds off the Early Learning Plan 1.0 - the learning, the successes and what has evolved since then
● This is a statewide early learning plan for Washington (not an agency plan)
● DCYF in a coordination and facilitation role
Aspirational and Realistic Strategies
1. Broad (Universal) Goal
Description:
A goal = an aspired-to state of being for the stakeholder group; points to where there’s broad/societal agreement that a problem exists and that it warrants a policy response.
Example:
Children begin life healthy and parents have the support needed to ensure the physical, social and emotional health and development of their young children
2. Access General Population Performance
Description:Data, metric(s):•Needs Assessment data guides this (as available)•Other sources
Example:Maternal health, pregnancy health: In 2018, there were 103,557 pregnancies in Washington State and 86,046 live births. Preterm birth (birth at less than 37 weeks’ gestation) is slightly less common in Washington State than nationally. Low birth weight puts infants at a greater risk of dying within the first year of life and of developmental delays and disability throughout childhood. The rate of low-birth-weight infants in WA is consistently lower than in the United States as a whole (p.34-39, NA)
Infant mortality rates (IMR): IMR, death before a child’s first birthday, is a significant indicator of the overall health status of children. Washington has a low IMR when compared to other states (p.35, NA)
Child maltreatment: In 2016, nearly 51% of all the children who entered out-of-home care were under five years of age. (Partners for Our Children, 2016). These out-of-home placements are highest for children 0-3. Nationally, over 40% of babies removed from their parents’ care experience four or more changes in caregivers in their first years of life (Zero to Three, 2019).
3. Identify Groups and Places that are Performing Differently
Description:Need to identify groups (and level of specificity appropriate for this plan)•Needs Assessment data guides this (as available)•Other sources
Example:Infant mortality rates (IMR): IMR for African/American and Native American infants are twice as high as the IMR for white and Asian infants. IMR rates also tend to be higher in rural counties that counties with high urban or suburban populations. (p. 36, NA).
Child maltreatment: African American children are 2.2 times and Native American children were 2.9 times more likely to be placed in out-of-home care compared to white children.
4. Assess and Understand the Structures that Support/Impede
Description:We’re targeting the structures (not the groups/people). Both hard” and “soft” structures.•Hard = connected to material structures (policies, entities, resources, etc.)•Soft = connected to mindsets, biases, mental models, relationships•Use RETOC in this analysis.
Example:Expansion of services and supports will require additional resources. Reaching families in the geographically remote and rural communities is a challenge. Reaching families of color is a challenge given various factors.
Hard structures:
•MIECHV
•Home Visiting Services Account - portfolio approach (often private $) enables innovative practice. How might we expand that into the public sphere of funding?
Soft structures:
Mindsets (mental models) around evidence-based practice. Often these strategies aren’t tested in these communities. Can create resistance within families, communities.
Strategy Development
Details for Each Strategy
Name of Strategy:In-home screening and referral program for all new mothers and families.
What broad goal(s), from Section A, does this strategy address?Children begin life healthy and parents have the support needed to ensure the physical, social and emotional health and development of their young children.
a.Strategy: Describe the strategy your work group is proposing. What work is being proposed? What needs are addressed? Establish an in-home screening and referral program for all new mothers and families across the state. Offer 1-3 voluntary in-home visits after birth, with screening for family needs and risk factors and referrals to more intensive services as needed.
b. Who is served?: In the case of Targeted Strategies, which group(s) is the proposed strategy intended to benefit? Will the strategy impact issues of disproportionality or racial/ethnic inequities? If so, how? Universal strategy will serve all mothers and families, reducing or eliminating racial/ethnic inequities.
c. Basis for strategy: What makes us believe this strategy will work? Is it evidence-based or experience-based? Or is this a promising approach that we will need to be experimenting with and learning from? Site data and/or experience here.
d. Current system state: Characterize the current state of the system relative to this strategy (history, resources, political support, capacity, etc.). Where are we now? Is there any pertinent history for this strategy? What do we know about this strategy?
e. Outcomes: What are some hoped for shorter and longer term outcomes? List them here.
Strategic Planning Outreach
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan StrategiesShare initial thinking about community outreach - help us design approach
Background● Work groups developing strategy recommendations now● Strategies will serve as guide and will address:
* Expansion, new programs, research, learning and data, and prevent and eliminate inequities
● More limited approach to outreach than for Needs Assessment
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan Strategies● Purpose: Get community reactions to draft strategies. Will
strategies provide needed support? Anything missing?
● Audiences for Outreach○ Parents, caregivers, providers, others who play
important roles in the lives of children and families○ Hard to reach communities - don’t often have a voice
at tables to respond to planning efforts and design strategies
○ Existing groups or ad hoc groups
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan Strategies● Approach:
○ DCYF online survey (intent to translate in several languages - depending on cost)
○ DCYF reach out to existing partners in the field
○ Seeking volunteers from Steering Committee to organize and manage community conversations
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan Strategies● Resources Available:
○ Background materials for use at meetings (see draft mock-up in packets)
○ Questions to ask groups and summary forms (see draft mock-up in packets)
○ Reserving small amount of funds to support food or facility expenses
○ Translation of materials (depends on length)
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan Strategies● Schedule:
○ Feb 24/25 Second Work Group workshop○ March 2 Work Groups submit draft strategies○ March 11 Writing, review and prep of documents ○ March 20 Finalize documents for outreach○ March 23 - April 17 Community outreach activities○ April 15 Steering Committee Meeting○ April 20 All outreach summaries submitted to DCYF○ May 30 Plan Finalized
Discussion: Outreach for Draft Plan Strategies● Discussion
○ Small group discussions - ideas, suggestions welcome○ Reactions to draft mock-up of draft materials○ Reactions to questions that would be asked during
community outreach sessions○ Will have group report outs, but ALSO please use
written form so we can capture your thinking
This publication was made possible by Grant Number 90TP0018 from the Office of Child Care, Administration for
Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Child Care, the Administration for
Children and Families, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Vision:
Vision
Washington State is a place where each child starts life with a solid foundation for success based on strong families, culturally relevant early learning practices, services, and supports that lead to racial equity and the well-being of all children and families.
Values:
Values
We Keep Families and Children at the Core of All We Do We affirm the importance of nurturing the whole child – social-emotional, cognitive, and physical development; cultural, racial, gender identity; belief system, etc. - and invest in their relationships to community, family, and self-identity. We honor the diversity and strengths of children and families, and affirm the resilience that they bring. Families have an opportunity to share what is needed and co-design programs to meet those needs.
We are Culturally Responsive All the work we do is responsive to and affirms the unique cultures and needs of children and families to cultivate positive experiences. This is reflected by our practices, services, and curricula, and the diversity of our early learning staff.
We Lead with Racial Equity The early learning system incorporates a racial equity theory of change to ensure that “programs, policies and funding decisions are well-informed and prioritized in response to the experiences, perspectives, and needs of people of color.” All partners create supports and services that correct for historical racism and historical trauma that has resulted in institutionalized racism that impacts children and families today.
We Collaborate with Communities Communities have a strong influence and say in shaping the best outcomes for children and families at every level. We do this with the understanding that local communities, particularly those furthest from opportunity, are experts in understanding their unique needs and solutions. Early learning organizations and the communities they serve build trusting partnerships and co-create services and strategies. Communities throughout the state learn from one another about effective early learning practices.
We are Transparent and Open in Our Communication All partners in the early learning system are accountable to the children and families in Washington. Decisions and practices are accessible, visible, and expressed in a way that is understood by a diverse community.
We Use Adaptive and Flexible Practices We are willing to take bold actions and to course correct when needed in response to complex equity challenges. Our work is based on research, scientific findings, and community-informed practices.
We Rely on Data to Inform Decisions We gather data from multiple sources, including stories from communities, in order to ensure that all children and families wisdom and needs, especially those furthest from opportunity, drive decision-making. We work with communities to create shared meaning and understanding about this information.
We are Committed to Quality Improvement We maintain high quality early learning practices and services by analyzing outcomes for children and families disaggregated by race and ethnicity. We review current practices and make changes based on what we learn. Achieving high quality requires robust training and supports for all those who work with children and families.
DRAFT Glossary: Vision: What Washington wants to be true for young children ages birth to eight. (Taken from NC ECAP). What we aspire to (our “North Star”) Not our current state. Values: Our fundamental beliefs to be used throughout the development and implementation of the Early Childhood Action Plan. (Taken from NC ECAP) System:the interconnecting network of statewide and local policies and practices that comprise early learning? Institutional Racism: Intentional or unintentional programs, policies, practices, and organizational culture that work to benefit white people and disadvantage people of color. (DCYF Racial Equity Definitions) Equity: Equity is the notion that each and every person will receive the necessary resources he/she needs individually to thrive, regardless of national origin, race, gender, sexual orientation, first language, or differently abled or other distinguishing characteristics. (From Raise Up Oregon) Racial Equity:The vision or existence of a community, society, or world in which race or color does not predict the amount and quality of opportunities, services, and benefits. The condition where one’s race identity has no influence on how one fares in society (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion -Glossary of Equity Related Terms -“Human Rights Commission.” Accessed October 9, 2019. https://sf-hrc.org/) Furthest from Opportunity: Defining groups who are the farthest from having their needs met in a particular situation and centering the work and solutions on ensuring opportunities for them. These groups are usually defined by race (people of color), of low socioeconomic status; people who identify as LGBTQ; people who live in rural areas; people experiencing homelessness, people who are disabled, people who experience mental health issues, people who speak languages other than English, people who are refugees, or immigrants. (adapted from https://fakequity.com/2019/08/30/farthest-from-justice/) Complex Equity Challenges: are present when the solution to the problem is not known and can only be seen or known during or after the action unfolds. (National Equity Project)
Disaggregated Data: data that has been broken down by detailed sub-categories, for example by marginalized group, gender, race, region or level of education. Disaggregated data can reveal deprivations and inequalities that may not be fully reflected in aggregated data. (https://www.right-to-education.org/monitoring/content/glossary-disaggregated-data) Providers: An organization or individual that provides early care and education services. (From Raise Up Oregon). (NOTE: Dawn noted that Angela Abrams strongly suggests that the term provider be used to describe facilities where care is provided and not use it to describe people.” Culturally Responsive: A term that describes what happens when special knowledge about individuals and groups of people is incorporated into standards, policies, and practices. Cultural responsiveness fosters an appreciation of families and their unique backgrounds and has been shown to increase the quality and effectiveness of services to children. Community: refers to the various individuals, groups,neighborhoods, municipalities, businesses, and institutions that are invested in the welfare and vitality of early learning. (adapted from https://www.edglossary.org/school-community/) Community Informed Practices: early learning practices created by community members based on their lived experience and cultural knowledge. High Quality Early Learning Practices: Refers to the characteristics of early learning and development programs [and services] that research [and experience] has demonstrated are associated with positive child outcomes. (From Raise Up Oregon, with highlighted additions by JH)
Feedback on Glossary 1. What are your observations overall about the glossary?
2. Are there any specific edits you would suggest?
3. Do you have any questions about the glossary or definitions used?
4. Do you have any other questions, thoughts, or concerns about the glossary or definitions used?