Joint Committee

Hismen Hinnu
January 13, 2005 12:00-2:00 p.m.
Meeting Notes

NEXT MEETING – Joint Committee Meeting – Dec. 9, 12-2 PM

DECISIONS/NEXT STEPS:

• Before Fred leaves he will hand out papers on the transition to local ownership.
• Give Sandra names and contact info for residents interested in attending resident leadership convening in Baltimore. Contact Sandra for more information.
• Those attending the Lawrence, MA peer match should make travel arrangements ASAP. Sandra will add Pat Constantine to the list.
• Let USC know if you haven’t received Result Brief #1 from the Cross-Site Survey analysis.
• Please see notes below for calendar that Fred laid out.
• Please see notes below for list of connections between work groups that came from the gallery walk.

  Work Plans

• Make sure that indicators line up; performance measures should emphasize program outcomes. Think about how you are moving towards the change you want to see? Junious and Deb are available to help.
• On evaluation question, many were research and best practice questions. We are looking for how you will assess the impact and how you will apply what you have learned in the future. Ben and Deborah will help to clarify.
• Second drafts should be submitted in another week. Budgets should also be submitted.

Attendees:

Deb Montesinos, MCO Interim Director
Elena Serrano, ESAA
Mara Guccione , USC
Junious Williams , USC
Sandra Chapin, MCO Assistant
Deborah Whittle, Self-Evaluation
Ben Bowser, Self-Evaluation
Karen Stevenson, Communications
Suzanne Takahara, ESAA
Fred Blackwell , MCO Outgoing Dir.
Lisa Prigozen , EBALDC
Beth Leeson, AECF
Brendan Leung, FES Coach
Carl Pascual , EBALDC
Bill Wong , Diarist
Sonya Shah , KQED
Jerry Henderson , EBALDC
Don Davenport , SACDC
Francell Haskins, Public Health Dept, Alameda County

I. Objectives and agenda review

• Don reported that at the next meeting, Dana from Newspaper committee should give updates and make a specific request. They will have the current edition of newspaper ready.

II. Site team updates

• Fred explained that he wanted this section to update people on his trips to Baltimore. Of late, they have been talking about transition to local ownership. Fred has some concept papers to help clarify what core capacities are and how they will drive the foundation’s thinking around local readiness to take ownership. Before Fred goes, he can give concept papers out. They are heavy on Casey speak – unique to the foundation – and he didn’t want to impose this on everyone.
• Tuesday is Fred’s last day. Deb is up to speed.
• Sandra reported about the trip to Baltimore for 5-6 residents to attend a resident leadership conference. They are looking for two more residents. Sandra passed out sheet with travel information. It’s a great opportunity for residents to interface with residents from other cities. Those already signed up to attend are Dimitri, Sam Mulberry, Mable Lopez, and Goldie Simmons. Bill asked if anyone from EBAYC is representing at the resident leadership conference Bill has been asked to be the diarist for those conferences. Elena said that she is talking to teachers and parents to find residents.
• In regards to the peer match trip to Lawrence , MA , those attending should make their travel arrangements. Deb gave a brief overview of the trip. Don made the recommendation that Pat attend. Sandra will add her name. There will be a planning call prior to the trip. Diana Lee and Spencer Cronk will facilitate the conversation.

III. Feedback on work plans and next steps

• Deb reported that overall the work plans were really strong and were a big leap from last year. She thanked everyone for their work. Fred, Sandra, Junious, Beth and Deb were the reviewers. General comments: making sure that indicators line up; performance measures were related to process outcomes instead of emphasizing program outcomes. How are you moving towards the change you want to see? Junious and Deb are available to help. Also, on evaluation question, many were research and best practice questions. We are looking for: how will you assess the impact and how will you apply what you have learned in the future. Ben and Deborah will help to clarify.
• Next steps: this afternoon, hope that you get a chance to look at other work plans and incorporate learning. They will draw grant-making priorities from the work plans. They are also missing a budget from several work plans and it is hard for them to make full decisions without seeing the entire picture. It is also helpful to distinguish between overall price tag for the work group and the amount begin asked for from the site team.
• Don said that the newspaper group is looking at how to build resident capacity. He added this thanks to Karen for helping us to figure this out and get through hurdles.
• Sonya asked for the new timeline. Deb said that folks had another week to turn in second drafts. By the next joint committee, Deb would like to bring in a snapshot of the overall initiative.
• Don asked if she could please layout how much funding is going to consultants, etc,.

IV. Self Evaluation

• Ben said that in all of the discussions, what comes up is the alignment between goals, indicators, etc. As soon as the chart is on the wall, it is dated. In the process of doing the work, things have to change. What they’ll (Ben and Deborah) try to do is give you a clear picture of the difference between what you’ve written what you want to do and what you are actually doing. When you see that you can think about changing or realigning. In that, there is a refinement and less need to change indicators, etc.
• Ben also added that they want to make this process transparent and doesn’t take up so much time. They are working closely with Junious and the LLP to make sure we are all aligned with indicators, etc. They are going to hire residents as part of the evaluation team. They will ask them to observe and ask the questions, bring us back the information.
• Karen asked: looking at the targets, how do we update what we don’t think we can do? Fred responded that we are hoping people update them as they do their work plans. Karen then asked: when we are looking at that target, who do we turn to and how do we know who is moving towards which targets?
• Sandra mentioned that it is important to note that the work charts were the original submissions.

V. Calendar

• Fred wanted to get us all on same page with between now and December. Here is the schedule:
• Feb JC meeting: Deb will give us a sense of site team investment plan for the year.
• Strategy meeting: take two work groups and ask what the challenges are to implementing, how does the work overlap with other work groups, what is happening around resident engagement?
• By June, the first six month look at where everyone is. Have a discussion about where we are with work plans, what we’ve accomplished; the self-evaluation will be able to inform.
• In July, the mid-year report is due to the foundation. In July, August, September, get back to strategic work group conversations.
• In October, have a conversation about self-evaluation results and implications for upcoming year.
• In next couple of years: 1) next year - putting things on the ground/results/seeing what is working, what is not; 2) following year (2006) we’ll have a better sense around what will have the most profound impact on the largest number of families.
• It’s important to be deliberate about when to check in about self-evaluation.
• Junious reported on progress with the Cross-Site Survey analysis: the first round is completed but had do deal with an error in the data. AECF will do a second round of the survey; currently meeting about design; design will change. USC started giving out the issue briefs and asked for feedback on the first one. Let USC know if you haven’t received the result brief one.

VI. Outreach work group

• Elena reported on the Community Outreach Work Group. It’s composed of ESAA, who is focusing on role of cultural center, the newspaper, MCMOI, and small grants (and with Karen advising from Casey side). It represents the different ways to reach out to residents. The Cultural Center is opening in fall 2005 and starting to talk to residents about the range of activities that can take place there. They can get connected to the other projects through the center as well. There is not currently one work plan that incorporates all of these pieces. They are thinking about creating a suite of intro materials to the LSAC; ways of getting info to residents. Thinking about what kind of outreach everyone needs; also combining databases is another piece of this work group. Keep in mind that some of the ways that resident engagement is happening won’t fit into this work group. Mostly this is a communications-related work group.
• Don said that they hope that the network can be intergenerational.
• Sonya said that the group is still defining what outreach really means. She agrees with the thinking about resident engagement strategies and materials. Also important that we all create our own work plans since we are doing our own work.
• Brendan asked how this links with EBAYC’s listening campaign? Elena responded that sometime we will interact with groups who aren’t part of the LSAC but we will see if our programs are tools they could use to help their work. We know the parent organizers, so they will accept us into their meetings to do outreach.

VII. Gallery Walk

• The instructions were to look at the work group charts on the walls and pay close attention to the program activities and interventions, providing feedback and opportunities to link. Also, with the resident engagement goals: look for linkages to work you are doing and another work group that you observe.

VIII. Inventory of feedback

• Elena noted that she appreciated seeing these; and that we may want to do this again as part of the mid-year review. We should build it into the calendar of future meetings.
• Sonya added that we should create a booklet with all work plans and contact information built into the plan.
• Suzanne added that it shows the need for a real events calendar.
• Elena - think about toning this down and have it on the website in straight forward language. Think about how to translate this to residents; remember sometimes there needs to be sensitive language
• Brendan – put a simplified version in the newspaper.

Connections between work groups

• Carl – Food stamps connection between FES and Health
• Karen – Article by SFSU students on food stamps
• Jerry – Link 23 rd Avenue with FES due to their entrepreneurship/small business development
• Elena – Many of the events listed can take place at the Cultural Center .
• Kerry – Health and ECE: link with childhood nutrition
• Sonya – Creating “spots” on the highlights that people want to get out there.
• Francell – Health and cultural center, ECE, utilizing the Promotoras for info-sharing.
• Don – Agnes Memorial Church is a great asset and has a pre-K through 12 th grade school. They should be in this loop. They should be at this table.

IX. Integrated Resident Engagement Strategy

• How do we have strategies that link up? How does outreach work group facilitate this?
• Lisa said that it is unclear how much the community outreach work group will be available as a resource to other work groups. What’s the capacity of this work group to link people that they’ve connected with to work groups?
• Junious expressed the concern that as the work evolves, if all work groups attempt to outreach and connect with residents, there needs to be an orientation process for residents to get consistent information and everything they need. Otherwise it won’t be clear for people what they are being invited into and who helps to facilitate that connection.
• Karen added that materials need to reflect everyone’s work and the group will be contacting everyone about that.
• Elena said that the challenge will be how to let residents know about the services but to emphasize the importance in their involvement in building this work.
• Don – think about the 3-month commitment time we learned about in San Diego . Also, when people come for help that’s when we should grab them.
• Sonya – with some of the projects, there are sub-sections that have people and these are a good place for people to start – cultivate their interest.
• Francell – the idea of leadership development has been talked about. We’ve not put together a comprehensive strategy for engaging residents and what they do when they come in.
• Sonya – this needs to start at a grassroots level.
• Francell – contacts made one on one with people they trust. As a joint committee we have to have a complete vision.
• Junious – Lawrence has figured some of this out and it will be helpful. The trip should really inform this piece.

Finally, Fred added that it was a pleasure working with everyone. Work is on the cusp; it is poised to do well.