1. family and parenting
2. children

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Elliott Robinson, Director, Dept. of Social Services – Chair
Mary Adams, United Way Monterey County (Yuri Anderson,
Alternate)
Ray Bullick, Health Department (Dr. Edward Moreno, Health
Officer, Alternate)
Nancy Kotowski, Ph.D., Monterey County Office of Education
(Deneen Newman Ed. D, Alternate)
Marcia Parsons, Chief, Probation Department (Vice Chair)
(Todd Keating, Alternate)
MEMBERS
Jayanti Addleman, Monterey County Free Libraries (Berenice
Astengo, Alternate)
Dan Baldwin, Community Foundation for Monterey County,
(Laurel Lee-Alexander, Alternate)
Valerie Barnes, M.D., Child Abuse Prevention Council (David
Maradei, Alternate)
Stephen Bernal, Sheriff (Jerry Teeter, Alternate)
Wayne Clark, Ph.D., Behavioral Health Dept., (Sid Smith,
Deputy Director Behavioral Health, Alternate)
James Collins, Special Kids Crusade
Margaret D’Arrigo-Martin, Community
Larry Drury, Child Care Planning Council (Mary Johnson,
Alternate)
James Egar, Public Defender
Dean Flippo, District Attorney
Jean Goebel, Housing Authority of Monterey County (Joni
Ruelaz, alternate)
Jody Hansen, Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce
(Kathi Speller, Alternate)
Kristan Lundquist, City of Salinas
Robin McCrae, Community Human Services
Charles McKee, County Counsel (Annette Cutino, Alternate)
Elizabeth Modena, Superintendent, Gonzales Unified
Schools (Theresa Rouse, Alternate)
Eduardo Ochoa, Ph.D, CSUMB (Cynthia Holmsky, Alternate)
Supervisor Jane Parker (District 4) (Supervisor Simon Salinas
(District 3), Alternate)
Timothy Roberts, Judge, Superior Court, Juvenile Division
Francine Rodd, Monterey County First 5 Commission (Sandra
Chapin, Alternate
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
United Way Monterey County
60 Garden Court, Suite 350, Monterey, CA
Thursday, April 2, 2015
7:30 – 8:30 am
AGENDA
1. Welcome & Introductions, Elliott Robinson, Chair
2. Administrative Items:
a. Approve the minutes of the March 5, 2015 Executive Committee meeting
b. Accept alternate appointment – Sam Lavorato, Judge for Tim Roberts,
Judge (see attached)
3. Information/Discussion:
a. Early Childhood Development Initiative, Francine Rodd/Nina Alcaraz
i. General update
ii. Policy update
iii. Strategic plan
b. Discussion regarding defining roles and responsibilities of schools and
service providers in meeting the health/social service needs of students
4. General Assembly Agenda Setting
Action Items:
o
Approval of the minutes of the March 9, 2015 meeting
Initiative Updates:
o
All Kids, Our Kids, Ashley Powers Clark
o
Early Childhood Development Initiative, Nina Alcaraz
Presentations:
o
ECDI Strategic Plan Feedback – Nina Alcaraz
Information/Announcements
5. New Business/Announcements
Next Meeting: Thursday, May 7, 2015
Robert Taniguchi, Department of Social Services
Walter Tribley, Monterey Peninsula College
Kari Yeater, Superintendent, North Monterey County
(Marvin Biasotti, Alternate)
Staff Support
Arlene Boyd, Administrative Assistant, Dept. of Social Services
Mission
The Children’s Council provides leadership and policy direction to
encourage the development of a comprehensive and collaborative
delivery system of services to children and youth in Monterey County.
Executive Committee
Children’s Council of Monterey County
Thursday, March 5, 2015
60 Garden Court, Suite 350, Monterey, CA
Members Present: Elliott Robinson- Chair, Mary Adams, Ray Bullick, Nancy Kotowski, and Marcia
Parsons - Others Present: Yuri Anderson, Francine Rodd, Nina Alcaraz
Welcome
Robinson called the meeting to order at 7:35am. All present introduced him/herself.
Administrative Items
Parsons motioned to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2015 Executive Committee meeting and
accept the appointment of Jeannine Pacioni as an alternate to Dean Flippo, District Attorney. Adams
seconded. Motion passed.
Information/Discussion:
Update on FY13-14 Annual Report Presentation to the Board of Supervisors: Council members and
guests reflected on the report presentation, which was made on March 3, 2015. Presenters included
Robinson, Kotowski, and Alcaraz. Adams, Anderson, Rodd and Bullick were also in attendance on the
3rd. Members were pleased to see that the work of the Council had been highlighted in local papers on
the day of and the day following the presentation. It was mentioned that the Supervisors seemed highly
engaged and largely complimentary of the work of the Council, particularly as related to ECDI. It was
also noted that there seemed to be some confusion amongst the Supervisors around the role of MCOE
as it relates to the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The committee discussed the possibility of a
joint meeting between the BOS and the MCOE Board, but determined that it would not be that useful as
neither group has jurisdiction over LCFF. There was a shared sense that some members of the BOS
would like to see change happening more quickly. The Committee agreed that continued educating of
Supervisors and the community was needed to ensure that people understanding change through
Collective Impact is a long-term process, it doesn’t happen in 1-2 years. The committee also noted that a
question keeps coming up is around goals for change – we have indicators, but no goals. This is an area
for development. The committee agreed that regular updates to the various Supervisors should be
made to give them an update on what is happening in each of their districts, as related to ECDI and
possibly the PBIS work of All Kids.
Update on Early Childhood Development Initiative: Alcaraz sought direction from the committee on
concerns with the Collaborative Action Team (CAT) in Seaside. The effort in this area has stalled due to a
lack of a local champion (or team of champions). A new potential leader has stepped forward and is
requesting that CAT be reorganized to not just be Seaside, but instead by MPUSD based so that the
communities of Monterey and Marina can also be included. It seems that Marina is actually more
“ready” to do the work of ECDI than Seaside. There is concern that it is only one voice making this case
though. The committee reiterated its commitment to supporting Seaside, as this is was approved
through the Engagement Opportunity Request (EOR) process, as well as where the data showed the
greatest need. While it might require greater effort on part of ECDI to support Seaside, it is important to
do so. It was agreed that a meeting with additional members of the CAT should be convened to
determine if it is the will of the group to expand to MPUSD, as opposed to the will of the one. The
committee also brainstormed individuals of influence within the City/Community of Seaside that ECDI
leadership might reach out to cultivate local champions. It was agreed that Robinson, the Chairs of ECDI
(Rodd and Dr. E. Moreno), Alcaraz, and Bullick, would schedule a meeting with Supervisor Parker to
apprise her of issues with CATs in her jurisdiction, as well as seek her guidance on how to move forward.
It was agreed that similar meeting s be scheduled with each Supervisor.
The committee unanimously agreed that ECDI should not set a precedent of providing compensation to
individuals for participating in collaborative meetings. ECDI is able to support community member
participation by providing on-site childcare, if needed. The committee was concerned that direct
compensation would be going against established community precedent.
Update on Parent Engagement/Involvement Research and Recommended Next Steps: Robinson
explained that a small work group, including Anderson, Francine Rodd, Sandra Jaramillo (MCOE) and
himself, had met to review research on the topic. They found no difference between “parent
engagement” and “parent involvement” per se, but would suggest the Council move forward with a
framework focused on “Family Engagement.” Anderson then previewed a website the work group is
suggesting we use to guide our understanding and discussion of this topic
(https://childrwelfare.gov/fei). The work group is also recommending a multi-disciplinary team be
formed to review the website and determine its fit for our community. The team would minimally
include representatives from DSS, Child Welfare Division; MCOE; Juvenile Justice; and Behavioral Health.
The website will be shared at the next General Assembly meeting with the recommendation from the
work group/Exec committee. Kotowski will appoint MCOE’s Director of Migrant Education to the multidisciplinary team.
General Assembly Agenda Setting
The committee approved the following agenda for the March 9, 2015 General Assembly meeting:
1. Welcome & Introductions
2. Administrative Items – approve the minutes
3. Updates – reflect upon the annual report presentation, update from All Kids, update from ECDI
4. Presentation’s – CalWORKS Housing Support Program
5. Information/Announcements
New Business/Announcements
Kotowski shared that MCOE is establishing a Parent Engagement Taskforce. The taskforce is considering
bringing a television based training for parents offered by Univision to Monterey County. Kotowski
wants to ensure the work of the MCOE Taskforce and the Family Engagement effort of the Council are
supportive, as appropriate. Robinson clarified that the Council’s work in family engagement is not
focused on program provision, but along systems operations. It was also stressed that whatever we do
around family engagement in Monterey County must be culturally sensitive. Anderson will resend the
link to the Family Engagement Index to committee members, with a request to identify individuals to
serve on the multi-disciplinary review team.
Bullick will arrange for a presentation by Enlace, a Health Department effort to develop community
members into civic leaders, for the April General Assembly meeting.
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 8:55am.
T
EARLYCHILDHOOD
DEVELOPMENTINITIATIVE
STRATEGICWORKPLAN
.
The Early
Childhood
Development
Initiative aims to
maximize
community
efforts to improve
early childhood
development
outcomes
through effective
coordination,
capacity building,
empowerment
and strategic
action for
children from the
prenatal stage
through 3rd grade
and their families.
3.27.15 DRAFT
Page 1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………2
Theory of Change……………………………………………………………………………………3
Problem Statement…………………………………………………………………………………..4
Strategic Framework: Social and Ecological Change through Collective Impact……………..5
Plan of Action Summary…………………………………………………………………………….7
Plan of Action…………………………………………………………………………………………8
Page 2
Early Childhood Development Initiative (ECDI) Strategic
Work Plan through June 2016
Executive Summary:
ECDI aims to coordinate community efforts towards improving early childhood development outcomes in
Monterey County. The purpose of ECDI is to maximize the impact of existing and future resources in order to
provide support during this critical period in a child's development. The Children's Council of Monterey County
launched ECDI in September 2012 with support from the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. The plan is
being implemented using a collective impact strategy, to ensure collective ownership, build consensus, and
engender sustainable outcomes. The process includes government, non-government, non-profit organizations,
businesses, and community members. By encouraging sustainable investment and systems change for young
children and engaging the entire community to become a part of the solution, ECDI will help ensure that
Monterey County is in the forefront of economic prosperity and vitality.
Since 2012, ECDI has progressively moved forward establishing the ground work for collaboration in Monterey
County around early childhood development. By using a Collective Impact Framework and working across all
levels of the social ecological model, ECDI has been working to:






Develop a county-wide Policy Advocacy Network to advocate for policy change and sustainable
investments in early childhood at the local, state and national level.
Identify 6 key developmental indicators that can be used to measure progress.
Begin to collaborative intensively with specific communities to align resources across sectors to
achieve selected community-wide outcomes.
Provide support and technical assistance to communities interested in utilizing the ECDI collective
impact framework to achieve selected community-wide outcomes.
Coordinate outreach and education for community champions to build public will in support of early
childhood.
Partner and leverage existing collaborative work implemented in Monterey County to maximize
efficacy.
Vision: ECDI’s vision statement is the same as that of the Monterey County Children’s Council: All children in
Monterey County live in safe, nurturing homes and communities; they are healthy, valued, succeed in school
and realize their full potential.
Mission: Maximize community efforts to improve early childhood development outcomes through
effective coordination, capacity building, empowerment and strategic action for children from the
prenatal stage through 3rd grade and their families.
Page 3
ECDI Theory of Change
Improve adult capabilities to
change child outcomes
Key Levers of Change
Engage Caring
Adults in Early
Childhood
Development
•
•
Foster county -wide
community alliance
Build intersectoral
collaboration
*Adapted from Thompson, A.(2006). Partnering with Youth to Build the Future. The Kellogg Foundation.
Page 4
Problem Statement:
In Monterey County, too many of our youngest children are not able to reach their full potential. They
enter kindergarten underprepared and are not reading on grade level by third grade. Only 24% of
kindergartens are socially and emotionally ready for kindergarten (Kindergarten Readiness Assessment, 2012)
and only 33% of third graders are reading on grade level (California Standards Test English Language Arts,
2013).
Developmental gaps that emerge in early childhood reverberate through society. Research shows that
developmental and academic gaps that begin in early childhood can persist through a lifetime influencing
future academic performance (American Educational Research Association, 2011). Students who are not
reading on grade level by third grade are four times more likely to drop out of high school (Hernandez, 2011).
Moreover, students who live in poverty and are not reading on grade level by third grade are 13 times less
likely to graduate from high school (Hernandez, 2011).
Healthy early childhood development is also the foundation of a vibrant economy. When young
children grow up in an environment of positive early experiences - physically, socially, intellectually, and
emotionally – they have a greater chance to thrive and grow up to be successful adults contributing to a more
skilled and capable workforce. Research shows that there is a 10%-17% annual rate of return on investment
made in early childhood due to saved costs such as reduced crime, reduced need for social services and the
development of a more skilled workforce (Heckman, 2011, Warfield, 2006). The return on investments is
greatest when assistance is targeted in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities (Heckman, 2011).
Despite these demonstrated impacts, chronic disinvestment in early childhood and a lack of effective
coordination amongst the many different sectors that impact young children are two of the issues that have
hindered society’s ability to provide effective support to its youngest children (Legislative Analyst Office, 2012;
Kania and Kramer, 2011). In California, over $1 billion dollars was cut from state funded preschools and
childcare between 2007-2012 resulting in the elimination of almost a quarter of the subsidized licensed child
care slots (Legislative Analyst Office, 2012). Against this backdrop, many sectors and organizations including
families, schools, social services agencies, businesses and nonprofits continue to implement well intentioned
efforts to support the healthy development of young children. However, often their actions are isolated from
one another, leading to redundancies in service provisions, increased competition for limited resources and the
implementation of programs and initiatives that lack common objectives and evaluation systems. As a result,
the impact is isolated and large scale social change remains out of reach (Kania and Kramer, 2011).
ECDI is Monterey County’s strategic response to these pervasive social issues that impede the healthy
development of young children and hinder our collective progress. It utilizes the social ecological model
framework and Collective Impact as a strategy to redesign systems in ways that encourage alignment of
activities towards specific outcomes, effective collaboration and continuous improvement across sectors.
ECDI draws from the experience of other Collective Impact initiatives and employs a Theory of Action
framework to outline progress benchmarks. These frameworks guide the work of ECDI and are explained in
detail below.
Page 5
ECDI’s Strategic Framework: Social Ecological Change
through Collective Impact
Raising a healthy child is a complex task influenced by multiple factors that extend beyond the reach of
individuals, families or single organizations. Indeed, it is the interplay between government and commercial
activities that give rise to complex, interrelated challenges that impact healthy child development. The social
ecological model of human development is a framework that asserts the importance of engaging in a
continuum of activities at all levels in order to achieve sustainable, large scale outcomes (Bronfebrenner,
1994). Activities outlined in the plan of action will address all levels of the social ecological model.
The Social Ecological Model
SocietyPolicy
Community
RelationshipFamily
Individual
Collective Impact is a strategy for enacting the Socio-ecological model. It provides
*Adapted from Bronfebreener, U. (1994). Ecological Models of Human Development. In the International Encyclopedia of Human
Development. Vol. 3.
Collective Impact for Healthy Early Childhood Development
Large scale social change requires broad coordination across sectors coupled with a laser-like focus on
specific, measureable goals. Defined as “the commitment of a group of important actors from different sectors
to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem,” collective impact is a framework for achieving large
scale social change that uses four principles (Kania and Kramer, 2011; 36).
The five principles are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
creating a common vision and understanding of common strengths and challenges;
engaging in mutually reinforcing activities aligned towards the common agenda;
adopting shared measurements and evaluation systems;
continuous communication and improvement that is driven by data; and
an independent, funded staff dedicate to the initiative, the Backbone, who guides the initiative’s vision
and strategy, building public will, advancing policy and mobilizing resources.
Page 6
Collective Impact is about learning “what works” through shared data, common measurements,
continuous evaluation and working to expand and bring these efforts to scale.
Collective impact is built on collaborative relationships and implementation must begin in specific
geographic areas that are “large enough to have a population level impact, but small enough to produce
tangible change” (STRIVE, 2013). This might be a school district, a small city or town. Within the boundaries
of each defined community, programs, policies and procedures will inevitably differ as each community has a
unique character and assets, yet the strategy (Collective Impact) to achieve change remains the same across
these boundaries.
Large scale impact is achieved when local efforts connect, learn from each other to refine and improve
practices and expand upward to inform county-wide policies and systems change(STRIVE, 2013; Kania and
Kramer, 2011). ECDI will achieve county-wide change through both broad outreach and coordination across
multiple scales and through in-depth assistance in communities.
Page 7
Progress To Date
Over the past two years, ECDI has been able to effectively increase awareness around early
childhood, engage a variety of partners and design infrastructure for collaboration. Below are a
series of accomplishments that have laid the groundwork for future progress.
Objective
Research and
Assessment
Accomplishments
2013-2015
 Completed data disaggregation of the ECDI indicators countywide.
 Developed structure and framework for community opportunities and
commitments.
 Investigated and created structure for Policy and Advocacy Network.
 Designed ECDI participation and commitment documents.
 Consulted with STRIVE Together to ensure coordination and alignment with
CSUMB’s Cradle to Career Initiative.
 Created structure for Continuous Improvement Coach/Collaborative Action
Team Facilitator.
 Designed Collaborative Action Team (CAT) supporting structure.
Outreach
 Designed evaluation framework to measure progress in both process and
outcomes.
 Developed outreach materials for public distribution.
 Developed outreach plan to ensure community involvement for regional
meetings.
 Formed partnerships with individuals and organizations to leverage existing
resources.
 Presented informational sessions to specific local populations for feedback
(i.e.: faith community, teachers, elected officials, etc.). Also presented at
statewide conferences.
 Held 14 meetings in 4 regions throughout the county to identify cross-sector
collaborative action teams, and receive feedback on strengths, challenges,
and needs of communities for the ECDI process.
 Strategized media campaign for early childhood development awareness in
partnership with the Literacy Campaign, County Gang Violence Prevention
Initiative and First 5 Monterey County.
Capacity Building
 Engage unrepresented and underrepresented community groups to participate
in the ECDI process.
 Built Backbone capacity to implement the Collective Impact approach.
Page 8
 Researched local community asset mapping needs and providers.
 Collaborated on the design and implementation of the Countywide Collective
Impact Learning Community.
 Began researching common data measurement systems.
 Strategized alignment of collective impact approaches throughout Monterey
County with Champions for Change, an informal collaborative of organizations
implementing “Collective Impact” initiatives in Monterey County.
Implementing,
Improving and
Expanding
 Began supporting the formation of five Collaborative Action Teams around the
county.
 Implemented Policy Advocacy Network Advisory committee with
representation from the MCCC, community members with policy experience
and the CATs
 Conducted Request for Engagement process through the Monterey County
Children's Council to identify the five Collaborative Action Teams for initial
implementation: North Monterey County, Pajaro, Seaside, Greenfield and
Salinas
Page 9
ECDI’s Theory of Action
The Collective Impact framework allows ECDI to implement a proven road map for the Initiative. Based on
lessons from the StriveTogether Cradle to Career Network and FSG, ECDI has developed a Theory of Action
that offers quality benchmarks that differentiate the phases of the work within the five stages of Collective
Impact. The Theory of Action helps distinguish when the work transitions from traditional collaboration to
sustainable, effective partnerships. It includes the 5 core elements of Collective Impact as well as 2 cross
cutting elements that support the work of each of the core elements.
Exploring
Developing
Fostering
Integrating
Applying
Working on
the
beginning
aspects of
formulating
a
partnership.
Focus on
accessing
and collecting
data and
putting in
place the
supports
necessary for
data-driven
decision
making.
Focus on
using data in a
continuous
improvement
process to
identify
improvements
and
interventions
to impact an
outcome.
Focus on
navigating
the
necessary
evolutions,
transitions,
and
continuous
improvement
a partnership
goes through
to improve
outcomes.
See real
impact as
evident
through
improvement
in the
community
level
outcomes
and
indicators.
Common Vision:
All participants share a vision for change that
includes a common understanding of the
problem and a joint approach to solving the
problem through agreed-upon action.
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
A diverse set of stakeholders, typically
across sectors, coordinate a set of
differentiated activities through a mutually
reinforcing plan of action.
Shared Measurement
All participating organizations agree on the
ways success will be measured and
reported. A short list of common indicators is
identified and used for learning and
improvement.
Continuous Communication
All players engage in frequent and structured
open communication to assure mutual
objectives and create common motivation.
Backbone Support
An independent, funded staff dedicated to
the initiative provides ongoing support
guiding the initiative’s vision and strategy,
supporting aligned activities, establishing
shared measurement building public will,
advancing policy, and mobilizing resources.
Learning Culture*
All participants contribute to an environment
dedicated to learning from what has worked
and what hasn’t worked through support,
trust and respect.
Collective Impact Capacity*
The Initiative builds the skills, talents and
resources necessary to support moving
forward with the vision and mission.
* These categories were added in alignment with the FSG evaluation framework.
Page 10
Plan of Action:
The ECDI plan of action will be implemented in phases based on the Theory of Action for both the initiative as
a whole, along with individual plans for each community. With the understanding that the work of ECDI is part
of an iterative process, the following phases are not meant to be contingent on one another but provide a guide
for each Collective Impact element. For instance, a community may be in the Developing phase for Common
Vision, but in the Exploring phase of Joint Measurement. This is to be expected due to the fluid nature of the
work.
ECDI has provided a template action plan for each of the five supported CATs to complete. The first version of
this action plan will be completed by June 2015 and revisited approximately every six months to guide the
work.
Both the Initiative and the CATs are in the Exploring and Developing phases. The information below illustrates
the current status of the overall Initiative, specifically the work and influence of the Backbone and Steering
Committee, along with the anticipated outcomes through June 2016. Boxes shaded in green represent existing
outcomes, orange boxes represent outcomes in process and red represents outcomes that the Initiative needs
to begin developing over the next year.
Continuous
Communication
All players engage in
frequent and structured
open communication to
assure mutual objectives
and create common
motivation.
Backbone/Infrastructure
Support
An independent, funded
staff dedicated to the
initiative provides ongoing
support guiding the
initiative’s vision and
strategy, supporting
aligned activities,
establishing shared
measurement building
public will, advancing
policy, and mobilizing
resources.
Exploring
Developing
Fostering
Partners discuss and
advocate for the goals of the
Initiative
The Initiative engages
external stakeholders in
regular meetings and
integrates their feedback into
the overall strategy
An external
communications plan
communicates to the
larger community the
impact of the Initiative
Structures and processes
are in place to engage the
Initiative's external
stakeholders, keeping
them informed and
inspired
A series of talking points and
presentations exist for a
variety of different audiences
to connect with the Initiative
A variety of different outreach
methods, including website,
social media, etc. promote
the Initiative
An Initiative Steering
Committee is established
The Steering Committee
effectively guides the
Initiative's vision and strategy
The Initiative includes a
diverse set of voices and
perspectives from multiple
relevant sectors and
constituencies
The Backbone effectively
informs the Steering
Committee members in
issues of strategic importance
An effective ECDI Backbone
is established
The Steering Committee and
Backbone reach out to
policymakers and build
relationships
The Steering Committee
regularly reviews data
from the shared
measurement system on
progress toward goals
and uses it to inform
strategic decision making.
The Backbone and
Steering Committee
visibly and vocally
communicates the
importance of the shared
measurement system for
the Initiative.
The Backbone provides
project management
support connecting
partners to discuss
opportunities, challenges,
gaps and overlaps.
Page 11
The Backbone staff is
respected by important
partners and external
stakeholders
An effective accountability
structure exists for the
Monterey County Children's
Council and the ECDI
Backbone
Policy Advocacy Network
represents a range of
communities and partners,
including CATs
Learning Culture
All participants contribute
to an environment
dedicated to learning from
what has worked and what
hasn't, through support,
trust and respect.
Collective Impact
Capacity
The Initiative has the skills,
talents and resources
necessary to support
moving forward with the
vision and mission.
CAT representatives help
identify local, state and
national policies they would
like to work on.
The Policy Advocacy Network
strategizes on policy issues.
The Initiative establishes
structures and processes to
support ongoing learning
The Initiative establishes a
culture of trust respect and
humility among partners
Partners regularly make time
for group reflection and
discussion
People of different cultures
and backgrounds feel
respected and heard within
the Initiative
The Initiative has influencers
and champions that
command the respect of a
broader set of stakeholders
and bring others to the table
Leadership of the Initiative
comes from multiple sectors
with the ability to shift both
the public and private sector
The Backbone and
Steering Committee
celebrate and
disseminate
achievements of
Collective Impact partners
internally and externally.
The Backbone equips
partners for effective
advocacy.
CAT members actively
participate in ECDI Policy
Advocacy Network events
and trainings
The initiative establishes
a culture of trust, respect
and humility among
partners.
People of different
cultures and backgrounds
feel respected and heard
within the initiative
The skills and capacities
of participating CAT
organizations improve.
Participating
organizations report
improved management
and administrative
capacity.
Page 12
References
Heckmann, J. (2013). Heckman: The Case for Investing in Disadvantaged Young Children. Big Ideas for Children:
Investing in Our Nations Future. Retrieved from: http://heckmanequation.org/content/resource/case-investingdisadvantaged-young-children.
Kania, J & Kramer, M. (2011). Collective Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Winter.
Warfield, M. (2006). Assessing the Known and Estimated Costs and Benefits of Providing Mental Health Consultation
Services to Preschool-age Children in Early Education and Care Centers In Massachusetts. An Economic Evaluation of
the Together For Kids (TFK) Project. Retrieved from: https://www.hfcm.org/Together-for-Kids/288.
STRIVE Network. (2013). Theory of Action. Retrieved from: http://strivenetwork.org/theory-of-action/exploring.
Thompson, A. (2006). Partnering with Youth to Build the Future. The Kellogg Foundation.
Page 13