What opportunities does the consolidation of early childhood education by cio18038

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 4

									               SMART START LEADERSHIP SYMPOSIUM
       Leaders Working Together in Pursuit of a Shared Early Childhood Vision

                            Monday, October 26, 2009
                 Jane S. McKimmon Conference and Training Center
                                  Raleigh, NC

NOTE: Below are selected highlights from the facilitators’ notes:

Question 1: What opportunities does the consolidation of early childhood
education and care services present to improve outcomes for young children?
      More seamless transitions – currently services overlap and are fragmented, decrease
       overlap in systems, data systems.
      Incorporation of best practices – Programs and Evaluation
      Value of setting up another division to oversee – more powerful force can’t
       “merge” program.
      Consolidation should increase tremendously investment in early childhood.
      Smoother transition from age 3 to 4 regarding subsidy.
      Leverage funds and people, Cost savings.
      More flexibility in the budget – lessen competition for funds – more flexibility of
       eligibility.
      Improve/seamless access to services for families if one agency keeps eye on
       concerns for children across services.
      Centralized dissemination of funds.
      Expand stakeholders.
      Reduce silo planning – unified voice - Common language
      Specialized voice – talk the same language to families – smoother transition to K-12
       system.
      Common outcomes and measurement approaches.
      Easier to identify gaps and strengths of individual agencies.
      Planning for children based on needs, fit, or eligibility
      Track children through DPI (Department of Public Instruction)
      Closer relationship between DPI and ECE (Early Childhood Education).
      Closer relationship between K-12 and ECE.
      Higher educational expectations for teachers.
      One group in charge of the money then moved to areas of need.
   Opportunity to create common outcomes and what you want will become driver for
    funding.
   Single portal entry for eligibility = faster service, more children, connection to
    school system for tracking.
   Strong accountability.
   Stronger voice – a single voice working together.
   Shared power.
   Reduced paperwork.
   Primary voice-cabinet level.
   Able to share thoughts/ideas-not competing.
   Opportunity to even out inequities among local partnerships.
   Integrate services for exceptional children.
   Services can be more targeted – resources leveraged in multiple ways.
   Less paperwork for teachers-more time with kids.
   Draw more attention to child care and birth – 3 programs by integrating it with pre k
   Increase attention to the “care” as much as the education.
   Consistent services across counties.
   Universal vs. layers of contracting.
   Might help early intervention program and reduce variation from county to county.
   Comprehensive system should look at all domains, not just cognitive.
   Better understanding of early childhood from birth on; including users (service
    recipients) and advocacy.
   Clearer to parents and caregivers who to contact and where to go to get resources.
   Recipients would love it: less confusion for them, so long as the integrity of the
    programs can be retained.
Question 2: What are critical local partnership governance strengthening
needs?
      In rural counties it is very difficult to find board members with any experience.
      Coaches/consultants with knowledge of the Smart Start world.
      Assessment with coaching tailored to the needs of the organization.
      Stronger technical assistance around the alternative board structure.
      Board members that know what governance means.
      Having a diverse group with less of those who have conflict of interest.
      Building succession plans for board chairs.
      Board self-assessment with individual board member self-assessment (group
       and individual).
      Fluidity in board size – not one size fits all.
      Improving level of board engagement.
      Understanding how to sustain effective boards through leadership transitions.
      Bringing in new young people.
      Diversity – board with opportunity for leadership.
      Orientation for the board members.
      Importance of fundraising beyond the state dollars.
      Need 2-3 year strategic plan – board is unfamiliar with what a strategic plan
       looks like.
      Conflict of interest – clarify how to manage this sometimes those on the board
       don’t realize the conflict. Recognizing where the conflict is a few people wear
       many hats.
      Understanding what good governance looks like.
      Support to help us be good at governance.
      Need flexibility at local level to ensure board is working well.
      Expectation of what board members will do outside of board meeting – letters to
       the editor, thank you notes, resource development.
      Assess expectations of board members – what is their common understanding?
      Board composition – need to look at alternative board composition structures.
      A skilled facilitator to work with board.
      Helping identify additional donors for local partnerships.
      Additional resources needed.
      Assistance with board retreats.
      Smart Start governance consulting assistance.
      Strategies for addressing 100% board giving.
Question 3: How can local partnerships leverage community resources to
sustain program quality and effective?

      Collaborating with other agencies that do have funding – collaborative funding.
      Partner with United Way there are agencies programs that do great job but have no
       money.
      Looking at what we do and looking for grant resources rather than other way
       around planning.
      Knowledge of finance diversifying; board mandated positions restrictive but include
       people who have money and have access to money.
      Get people to buy into the idea educating people on the board public relations is a
       big.
      Look at from youth perspective.
      Time, talent, resources.
      Take advantage of people on the board and their community connections – spotlight
       board members at meetings.
      Recruit people on board and know who is on board.
      Board needs to understand that part of their responsibility is resources.
      Blended funding.
      More in-kind sponsorships.
      Collaborate with key partners for services.
      Special events that are tailored to local community.
      Collaborate with other non profits at special events.
      LP’s share with each other their best fundraising efforts.
      NCPC has a “kit” on-line for LP’s to share fund raising information.
      Something annual – special signature event, campaign etc.
      Joint fundraisers – working with more partners.
      County pays ½ of rent.
      Partner with other agencies to write grants.
      Annual campaign – Building a Foundation $25,000.00 raised over a couple of years
       – Slogan: 15 for 15 years.
      LP’s upload fundraising materials to Smart Start website to use as clearing house
       for ideas so there’s less reinventing the wheel.
      Use graduate school students help with in-service project.
      Internships.
      Community assessment to identify community needs
      Embed fundraising plan in strategic plan
      Establish easily communicated mission.
      Coordinate with other non-profits and NCPC
      Support United Way efforts.

								
To top