The Docket Volume 4 Issue 2 | Page 12

The Docket- The Children’s Law Center without agreement on the ways success will be measured and reported. Collecting data and measuring results consistently on a short list of indicators not only ensures that all efforts remain aligned; it also enables the participants to hold each other accountable and learn from each other’s successes and failures. The interdisciplinary CQI initiative is supported with regular data reports provided to each of the 21 counties participating in our Enhanced Child Welfare Practices Initiative. These reports are based on the Child Welfare Court Data Metrics and the Foster Care Data Packets promulgated by OCFS. Each county will develop measurable outcomes that align with the aforementioned statewide goals. The data reports (as well as local sources of data and information) enable monitoring of progress towards achieving those outcomes. 3) Mutually Reinforcing Activities Collective impact initiatives depend on a diverse group of stakeholders working together, not by requiring that all participants do the same thing, but by encouraging each participant to undertake the specific set of activities at which it excels in a way that supports and is coordinated with the actions of others. Practice improvements are designed and implemented by interdisciplinary stakeholder groups in each county. Improvement strategies and activities include both joint initiatives as well as intra-organizational practice improvements that have the potential to impact mutually-defined outcomes. 4) Continuous Communication Developing trust among nonprofits and government agencies is a monumental challenge. Participants need several years of regular meetings to build up enough experience with each other to recognize and appreciate the common motivation behind their different efforts. They need time to see that their own interests will be treated fairly, and that decisions will be made on the basis of objective evidence and the best possible solution to the problem, not to favor the priorities of one organization over another. Local interdisciplinary child welfare stakeholder groups have been meeting regularly for years. At a minimum the groups include representation from the bench and bar, local child welfare agencies, foster care agencies and service providers. In some instances, health care and educational system actors are also included. Layering a data-driven CQI process onto the work that is already underway provides additional impetus to that work, but also requires a renewed commitment to ongoing communication. 5) Backbone Support Organization Creating and managing collective impact requires a separate organization and staff with a very specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire initiative. Coordination takes time, and typically none of the participating organizations has any to spare. The expectation that collaboration can occur without a supporting infrastructure is one of the most frequent reasons why it fails. The work of the CWCIP is implemented by a centrally administered team operating in offices around the state. Staff members are co-located in key family courts to support implementation at the local level Staff is specifically charged with supporting system change efforts. They provide logistical support for collaborative work, organize training programs, and support the consumption of data and information. These staff, in partnership with our colleagues in the Office of Children and Family Services and with technical assistance from the National Resource Center on Organizational Improvement,Casey Family Programs, Chapin Hall and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges form the necessary backbone support organization to sustain our CQ/effort. For more information on the work of the CWCIP please visit our web site : nycourts.gov/ip/cwcip i Funding for the Child Welfare Court Improvement Project is provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, “Children’s Bureau. ii “Collective Impact”, John Kania & Mark Kramer, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2011. 12? CLCNY Fall/Winter 2013