NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING PASTEUR MEDICAL BUILDING 1111 N. LEE AVENUE, SUITE 500 OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA August 17, 2018 9:00 a.m. AGENDA I. Call to Order and Determination of Quorum Chairman Jay Scott Brown II. Welcome and Introductions Chairman Jay Scott Brown III. Review and Approval of the Minutes from the June 22, 2018 Commission Meeting. Discussion and possible action Chairman Jay Scott Brown IV. Report from the Oklahoma Office of the State Auditor and Inspector OCCY Agency Audit Discussion and Possible Action Mr. Mike Starchman, CPA, RN Mr. Eric Meigs, BBA V. Finance Report An update regarding the OCCY budget, expenses and balances Discussion and Possible Action Ms. LaTisha Edwards, CPO VI. Presentation regarding of Oklahoma County Drug Court Discussion and possible action The Honorable Kenneth Stoner VII. Presentation of the Draft SFY 2019-2023 State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Discussion and possible action Ms. Beth Martin, MA, CCC VIII. Overview of OCCY – Including Statutory Tasks and Rules Commission Departments o Office of Juvenile Systems Oversight o Post Adjudication Review Board o Child Death Review Board o Free-standing Multidisciplinary Team o Planning and Coordination o Children’s Endowment Fund Discussion and possible action Director Annette Wisk Jacobi IX. OCCY Subcommittees Discussion and Possible Action Chairman Jay Scott Brown X. Director’s Report on Agency Activities Personnel Agency Activities Discussion Director Annette Wisk Jacobi XI. Presentation by Big Brothers Big Sisters of Oklahoma Mentoring Children of Incarcerated Parents Project Discussion Ms. Melissa Ramirez, CEO XII. Commissioner Announcements (Report only – no discussion) ALL XII. Adjournment Remaining meeting dates for CY 2018: September 21 (SPECIAL) / October 26
Transcript
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING
PASTEUR MEDICAL BUILDING
1111 N. LEE AVENUE, SUITE 500 OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA
August 17, 2018
9:00 a.m. AGENDA
I. Call to Order and Determination of Quorum Chairman Jay Scott Brown
II. Welcome and Introductions
Chairman Jay Scott Brown
III. Review and Approval of the Minutes from the June 22, 2018 Commission Meeting. Discussion and possible action
Chairman Jay Scott Brown
IV. Report from the Oklahoma Office of the State Auditor and Inspector OCCY Agency Audit
Discussion and Possible Action
Mr. Mike Starchman, CPA, RN Mr. Eric Meigs, BBA
V. Finance Report An update regarding the OCCY budget, expenses and balances
Discussion and Possible Action
Ms. LaTisha Edwards, CPO
VI. Presentation regarding of Oklahoma County Drug Court Discussion and possible action
The Honorable Kenneth Stoner
VII. Presentation of the Draft SFY 2019-2023 State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Discussion and possible action
Ms. Beth Martin, MA, CCC
VIII. Overview of OCCY – Including Statutory Tasks and Rules Commission Departments
o Office of Juvenile Systems Oversight o Post Adjudication Review Board o Child Death Review Board o Free-standing Multidisciplinary Team o Planning and Coordination o Children’s Endowment Fund
Discussion and possible action
Director Annette Wisk Jacobi
IX. OCCY Subcommittees Discussion and Possible Action
Chairman Jay Scott Brown
X. Director’s Report on Agency Activities Personnel Agency Activities
Discussion
Director Annette Wisk Jacobi
XI. Presentation by Big Brothers Big Sisters of Oklahoma Mentoring Children of Incarcerated Parents Project
Discussion
Ms. Melissa Ramirez, CEO
XII. Commissioner Announcements (Report only – no discussion)
ALL
XII. Adjournment
Remaining meeting dates for CY 2018: September 21 (SPECIAL) / October 26
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ OCCY Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4 Meeting Date: June 22, 2018
OKLAHOMA COMMISSION ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH 1111 N. LEE AVE., STE. 500
OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73103
REGULAR MEETING June 22, 2018
MINUTES
Call to Order and Roll Call Angela Marsee called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. Members present were: Tom Bates, Jay Scott Brown (arrived 9:39), Sid Brown, Steven Buck, Jason Charles, Ken Couchman, Wanda Felty, Becky Pasternik-Ikard, Edward Lake, Sheryl Marseilles, Angela Marsee, Lori McGinnis-Madland, Tera Snelson (arrived 9:10), Noel Tyler, and Mike Warren. Members not present were: Jason Charles, Todd Pauley, Joy Hofmeister, and Terri White. Guests present: Jacqueline McDaniel, Sherry Fair, Jeanean South, Teresa Deck, Beth Martin, Erin Gagnon, Sherie Trice, Grant Moak, Sarah Johnson, LaTisha Edwards, Jackie Shipp, Erin Wolf, Kristi Atchley, Joe Dorman, Debra Andersen, and Nicole Poindexter. Review and Approval of the Minutes from the March 30, 2018, Commission meeting - All Dr. Brown motioned to accept the minutes as written. Director Lake seconded. Judge Warren abstained. All others present voted in the affirmative. Motion passed. Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP) Report – Interim Commissioner Tom Bates / Beth Martin Commissioner Bates began by addressing budget issues at the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH). He informed the Commission that the Office of Child Abuse Prevention (OCAP) grants will be reinstated for State Fiscal Year 2019. After speaking with the OKDHS team and other health and human service directors, Commissioner Bates feels that the grants are a good investment. He then turned his presentation over to Beth Martin, Director of the Family Support and Child Guidance Service at OSDH. Ms. Martin gave a brief update concerning the survey to collect information and opinions about child abuse and neglect services. The hard copy surveys have been distributed to parents, service providers and citizens in general. It was also possible to complete the survey online. She explained that about one thousand surveys had been returned and that they are still gathering and processing the data. Public Comment Ms. Sherry Fair thanked Commissioner Bates and staff from the State Department of Health for reinstating the OCAP grants. She gave a testimonial to the importance of these funds. She also complimented Commissioner Bates on his willingness to meet with OCAP Contractors and she wanted him to know that they felt heard. Presentation of the Green Shoe Foundation – Jeanean South / Teresa Deck Ms. Jeanean South gave a brief history of the Green Shoe Foundation and its goal of limiting the effects of childhood trauma through training retreats. She then introduced Ms. Teresa
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ OCCY Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4 Meeting Date: June 22, 2018
Deck who gave a detailed powerpoint presentation covering Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs). Presentation of the Oklahoma Alliance for Healthy Families – Jacqueline McDaniel Ms. Jacqueline McDaniel gave a detailed powerpoint presentation concerning the history and purpose of the Oklahoma Alliance for Healthy Families (Alliance). The Alliance is non-profit organization that advocates for science-based, health policies in Oklahoma, specifically advocating for pro-immunization policies. Ms. McDaniel also asked the Commission if they would partner with the Alliance and if the Agency could include the OCCY logo on materials signifying that OCCY was an Alliance partner. After a lengthy discussion, it was decided that OCCY should not be the entity to partner with as the Commission is made up of other state agencies/groups. Therefore, it was decided, that the Alliance should seek partnerships with each individual agency/group. Finance Report – LaTisha Edwards Ms. Edwards went over the OCCY financial report handout. A discussion was held about carry over funds. Secretary Buck motioned to accept the budget report as presented, Commissioner Pasternik-Ikard seconded. All present voted in the affirmative. Motion passed. Nomination and Election of Commission Officers – Chairman Jay Scott Brown Chairman Brown gave a brief explanation of rules governing officers for the Commission. Dr. Brown motioned to nominate and elect Jay Scott Brown as Chair of the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth for one year – through the end of his fourth term, June 30, 2019. Judge Warren seconded. All present voted in the affirmative. Motion passed. Child Welfare Report and Update – Director Ed Lake Director Lake updated the following:
Director Lake gave an explanation of the Office of Client Advocacy (OCA). He stated that Gail Wettstein is the Interim Advocate General for OCA.
Director Lake explained that three co-neutrals had agreed to monitor and guide the process to close the Laura Dester Shelter in Tulsa. He stated that the OKDHS was under a court mandate to close the facility by June 30th 2018. The Department instituted a deadline of June 26th to find placements for the remaining youths in the facility. Director Lake stated that he did not think there would be a need to appeal the court’s decision of the June 30th deadline because out of the 44 youths in the facility when the order was made in March, only two remained and their placement dates were set for June 25th 2018.
Director Lake explained that the OKDHS was looking for Intermediate Care Facilities (ICF) for disabled children. These ICFs would be designed for the most challenging youths. Director Lake stated that they are designed based off of adult models.
Director Lake explained that OKDHS needs more options for children with extra challenging needs such as those with dual diagnosis. He also stated that “E Enhanced” and E+ facilities are planned to help and that clinical support will be included.
Director Lake stated that specialized foster homes are being developed to help with the needs of youth similar to those currently housed at JD McCarty.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ OCCY Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4 Meeting Date: June 22, 2018
Recognition of Dr. Sid Brown – Chairman Jay Scott Brown Chairman Brown gave a history of Dr. Sid Brown’s time with the Commission. He also explained that this would be the last meeting with Dr. Brown as a Commissioner as he has served his four, two-year terms. Chairman Brown then presented a certificate of appreciation to Dr. Brown and thanked him for his contributions to OCCY. Dr. Brown then spoke to the Commission about his role with the Commission moving forward. He stated that he plans on remaining engaged with OCCY. Director’s Report on Agency Activities – Director Annette Wisk Jacobi Director Jacobi gave a presentation highlighting the following items in her written report.
Two new Galt employees are now working with OCCY. Talitha Byrd is providing overall support including reception and Tanesha Fugett is working with Child Death Review Board. In addition, Intern Sarah Johnson from Oklahoma State University will be working with Raegan Qualls in the Office of Juvenile System Oversight.
The Children of Incarcerated Parents - Mentoring contract with Big Brothers Big Sisters of Oklahoma comes to an end on June 30, 2018. However, OCCY needs more time to develop a Request for Proposal for a new contract. For this reason, the current contract will be extended for a few additional months.
The OCCY staff plans on attending an all-day retreat on July 12th. Director Lake has allowed Dr. Shannon Rios from OKDHS to present on overview of logic models during the morning. Commissioner Sheryl Marseilles has agreed to present information about burn out during the afternoon.
The OCCY staff now has professional looking id badges thanks to staff from the Office of Juvenile Affairs.
OCCY and OKDHS, specifically the Office of Client Advocacy, continue to move forward with creating a Foster Child Complaint System. There are some technological challenges in getting the OCCY and OKDHS systems to interface.
Commissioner Announcements – All DA Marsee spoke about resource availability. She explained that projects like Green Shoe are mostly available in the metro areas and that these resources are crucial in the rural areas. She explained that the DA council is always looking for ways to expand these resources to those communities that need them the most. Judge Warren updated the Commission on a project to place “Specialist Judges” in areas of the state where experience in the juvenile court system is lacking. Ms. Felty updated the Commission on the Start Project, which is collaboration between the OKDHS and the University of New Hampshire. She said that the group from New Hampshire would be back on July 24th to present their report and recommendations to the Project Ms. McGinnis-Madland gave a brief description of the Oklahoma Association of Youth Services, Inc. and stated that they are looking for a new Executive Director to start in January of next year.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ OCCY Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4 Meeting Date: June 22, 2018
Ms. Marseilles shared with the Commission details on CASA’s partnership with the Center for Applied Research at the University of Oklahoma. She said that they had been collecting data and are preparing for the second round of data collection. Secretary Buck yielded to Kristi Atchely of the Oklahoma State Department of Education (SDE) who then talked about the upcoming Trauma Informed Summit that will be held October 2nd 2018. Secretary Buck then thanked SDE for their work on this Summit. He then informed the Commission that OJA is transitioning away from a cost reimbursement model to a fee for service model. He also explained that OJA currently has a surplus of secure care beds. Mr. Couchman shared a personal story that involved a conversation between his daughter, himself and a state representative candidate in order to emphasize the importance of civic engagement. Director Tyler informed the Commission that the Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitative Services (DRS) is close to reopening their priority one group home; this will house individuals with the most severe disabilities. She also explained that DRS’s federal oversight group mandated that their State Plan be updated, which they completed. Ms. Snelson requested help from the Commission on “clean up” for upcoming laws coming into effect. She also made the Commission aware of Tulsa County’s Judge Doris Fransein retirement. Ms. Snelson reported that Judge Fransein would be retiring in approximately six months. Chairman Brown praised the PARB staff for their hard work while PARB Program Manager Sara Vincent has been on extended leave. Adjournment The Commission adjourned at 11:21 AM.
Next Meeting Date: August 17, 2018
Oklahoma State Plan
for the Prevention of
Child Abuse and Neglect
2019-2
023
http://fsps.health.ok.gov
1
The Oklahoma State Plan for the Prevention
of Child Abuse and Neglect
2019 - 2023 The Office of Child Abuse Prevention is located within the Family Support and
Prevention Service of the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) in compliance
with 63 O.S. §1-227.3. This report is also available on the OSDH website at
fsps.health.ok.gov. For more information, contact the Family Support and Prevention
Service at (405) 271-7611.
ABOUT THE FAMILY SUPPORT AND PREVENTION SERVICE
Family Support and Prevention Service promotes the health, safety and wellness of
Oklahoma's children and families by:
● providing funding, training, technical assistance and oversight to local
organizations/agencies that serve families with young children;
● providing training to professionals that work in the area of child
maltreatment prevention and intervention;
● providing information and educational materials upon request; and
● providing infrastructure to family support/child maltreatment
Child Maltreatment is a Public Health Issue ......................................................................................... 9
The Challenge........................................................................................................................................ 10
State Funding Shifts ............................................................................................................................ 10
Family Characteristics Increase Risk of Child Maltreatment ............................................................. 11
Prevention Works ................................................................................................................................. 12
Child Abuse and Neglect is Preventable ............................................................................................. 12
Introduction of the Protective Factors ............................................................................................. 13
victims-of-maltreatment?loc=1&loct=2#ranking/2/any/true/870/any/19234. 2 Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2013). Long-term consequences of child abuse and neglect. Retrieved
from https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/long-term-consequences/. 3 Psychology Today. (2015). 7 ways childhood adversity can change your brain. 4 10A, O.S. §1-1-105. Retrieved from:
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=455456. 5 Oklahoma Department of Human Services. (2017). Child abuse and neglect statistics, State Fiscal Year 2017.
https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/child-maltreatment/. 7 Oklahoma Department of Human Services. (2017). Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State Fiscal Year 2017. Retrieved
ethnicity. 10 Merskey, J.P., Topitzes, J., Reynolds, A.J. (2013). Impacts of adverse childhood experiences on health, mental
health, and substance use in early adulthood: A cohort study of an urban, minority sample in the U.S. Child
Abuse and Neglect, 37(11),917-925. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4090696/. 11 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration. (2017). Adverse childhood experiences. Retrieved from
https://www.childtrends.org/multimedia/child-welfare-financing-101-infographic/. 15 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Child abuse and neglect: Risk factors and protective
factors. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/childmaltreatment/riskprotectivefactors.html. 16 National Center for Children in Poverty. (2017). Oklahoma demographics of low-income children. Retrieved
from http://www.nccp.org/profiles/state_profile.php?state=OK&id=6. 17 Ibid. 18 Oklahoma Department of Human Services. (2003). Annual Report, SFY 2003. Retrieved from
http://www.okdhs.org/OKDHS%20Report%20Library/S03148_2003AnnualReport_okdhs_03092007.pdf. 19 Oklahoma Department of Human Services. (2017). Annual Report, SFY 2017. Retrieved from
22 Ibid. 23 OSDH Survey Results. See Appendix A. 24 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Child and neglect: Prevention strategies. Retrieved from:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/childabuseandneglect/prevention.html. 25 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s
Bureau. Protective Factors to Promote Well-Being. Retrieved from
https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/preventing/promoting/protectfactors/. 26 Center for the Study of Social Policy. The protective factors framework. Retrieved from:
PERSONNEL Intern: Ms. Sarah Johnson completed her internship with OCCY in July. Her future plans include
working as a teacher’s aide and pursuing a degree in education.
OMES Personnel: While Dan Ingram was technically an employee of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services, previous to that work he was an OCCY employee. He remained at OCCY even after his position was consolidated within OMES. We are sad to announce that Dan will no longer be serving nor housed at OCCY beginning mid‐August. He is being assigned to work for the Oklahoma Corporation Commission. FINANCES State Audit: Defer to the presentation by Mr. Meigs and Mr. Starchman during the meeting. Budget Meetings: Defer to the presentation by Ms. Edwards during the meeting. LEGISLATIVE ISSUES Interim Studies of Interest to OCCY:
18‐015 Juvenile Life Without Parole; Reps. Emily Virgin and Mark Lepak
18‐036 How DHS has allocated and used federal funds given to Oklahoma. What state funds are for improving child care, both number served and quality of care; Rep. Todd Russ
18‐041 DHS/Foster Care; Reps. Rhonda Baker and Cyndi Munson
18‐042 Review process to safely reunify Oklahoma children to parents or guardian custodian; to include data comparison of other states; Rep. Mark Lawson
18‐057 An in depth look at domestic violence in the Northeast and South quadrant of OKC; Rep. George Young
Interim studies can begin no earlier than August 7, 2018 and must conclude by November 7, 2018. Studies 36, 41 and 42 have been combined. In addition, I will be participating in the continuation of Adverse Childhood Experiences Interim Study from the previous past year. With the resignation of Senator Griffin, Senator Kay Floyd will be implementing the work of that study that culminated into the passing of Senate Bill 1517.
2
DIRECTOR’S HIGHLIGHTED ACTIVITIES Tulsa Post Adjudication Review Board: Mark James and I met with Commissioner Tera Snelson and others at the Tulsa County Juvenile Bureau on June 25th in order to learn about their PARB needs. After the meeting, Tulsa staff had some innovative suggestions for future Tulsa PARB work. Those ideas are being developed and hopefully will manifest in a new contract by September 1, 2018. Community Café’s for the State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect: I attended the café held at the Chickasaw Nation in Ada on June 27, 2018. They are participants from a variety of service organizations including OKDHS, the Pontotoc County Health Department, and more. Local media covered the event. Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness Staff did an excellent job of facilitating the meeting and a great deal of information was gathered for the State Plan. Freestanding Multidisciplinary Teams: In an effort to tighten business practices, including contracts, OCCY staff met with OKDHS’ Nena Newman on June 27th to better understand the accounting and reporting expectations for the MDTs. Based on the information learned during this meeting, OCCY will be drafting new language for future contracts. Child Abuse and Neglect Task Force: I have joined the CAN Task Force and attended my first meeting July 6. I understand that there may be times that I must recuse myself from certain discussions or votes due to OCCY conflicts regarding grant funding opportunities. OCCY Staff Retreat: The OCCY participated in an all‐day retreat on July 12th at Oklahoma’s Credit Union. Thanks go to Dr. Shannon Rios of OKDHS for presenting an overview about logic models. All departments left the morning with a draft. Thanks also go to Commissioner Sheryl Marseilles for presenting information on burn out. As part of her presentation about the need to create new neural pathways in the brain as a tool for preventing burnout, she arranged for staff to attend an instructional painting session at Paints N Cheers in the Plaza District. This activity was provided by donations from past employees Lisa Smith, Jack Chapman and OCCY Commissioners and was greatly appreciated. The paintings are hanging in the hallways of OCCY. Oklahoma's Early Childhood Integrated Data System Work: On July 24th, I attended the presentation by Elliot Regenstein and Jonathan Furr of Foresight Law+Policy sponsored by Oklahoma’s Partnership for School Readiness. Please see their attached report. Central Oklahoma Juvenile Center (COJC): On August 2, Mark James and I toured COJC in order to see the recent changes that they have made to the facility in anticipation of welcoming young women back to their campus. We also learned about revised practices to keep the young men and women separate as much as possible. We very much appreciated the time that Superintendent Todd Anderson he spent with us.
3
OCCY Program Overviews: Continuous Quality Improvement efforts for the departments and projects continue. We continue to work on creating routine procedures for 1) contracts, 2) invoicing, 3) logic model development, 4) data collection, outcomes, 5) appointments, and 6) reporting. Foster Care Children’s Bill of Rights: OCCY and OKDHS continue to work on implementing this project. The law goes into effect November 1, 2018. There are difficulties in getting the OCCY and OKDHS databases to interface, but we continue to explore options. In addition, no funding was provided for this project, so OCCY will have to use carry forward monies to cover IT development costs. OCCY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS Death and Near Death of Children with Disabilities Task Force (Annette Wisk Jacobi): The work of this task force continues as they review cases and consider systemic recommendations. The Task Force’s recommendations report is due by the end of the calendar year. Consideration is being made to contract with a technical writer for the drafting of the report. Office of Juvenile System Oversight (Mark James): During the months of June and July 2018, there were 615 open cases within OJSO. Of these 615, 56 were new cases and 63 cases were closed. During this timeframe there was one routine visit to the Lawton Boys Group Home and one complaint visit to a children’s facility. Juvenile Competency Program (Mark James):
# of Referrals Competent Not Competent Other
May 8 1 4 3 pending
June 2 2
July 0
Post Adjudication Review Board (Mark James): On July 1, 2018, Gregory Parks PhD, began as chair of the Stat Post Adjudication Review Advisory Board. He replaced Cindy Nocton who completed two, two‐year terms. On July 25, 2018, the Governor appointed Jonette Dunlap, Oklahoma City, to the board. The board’s next meeting is September 28, 2018. In June 2018, the Lincoln County Post Adjudication Review Board began operation. The board had been inactive in recent years. Mark James assisted the volunteer members and the local officials in getting the initial meeting arranged. Child Death Review Board (Lisa Rhoades):
Facilitated two review meetings (July 25 & July 26) including the joint meeting with the Domestic Fatality Review Board.
Met July 31, 2018 with two OSDH colleagues to discuss potential to apply to participate in the Children’s Safety Network’s Child Safety Learning Collaborative.
4
Attended August 9, 2018 project meeting for Preparing for a Lifetime‐Injury Prevention workgroup. Main focus was possibly creating resources for targeted Tulsa Area Period of PURPLE Crying Barber Shop Project.
Freestanding Multidisciplinary Teams (Jennifer Hardin): Annual Team Reviews are currently being conducted. Of the 36 existing Teams, the following County Team reviews have been completed: Logan, Kingfisher, Johnston, Pushmataha, Love, Marshall, Murray, Okmulgee, Creek, Okfuskee, Choctaw, Craig, and Mayes. Jackson is scheduled for August 14th and Okfuskee is scheduled for August 16th.
Trainings provided for Multidisciplinary Teams, PARB and other Professionals (Cherra Taylor): Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) Presenter: Melissa Middleton, Legal Director of Child and Family Services of the Choctaw Nation – Durant July 31, 2018: Tulsa Technology Center‐Riverside Campus in Tulsa Total number of participants: 23 The Psychology of Hope Presenter: Chan Hellman, PhD, professor of social work and director of The Hope Research Center at the University of Oklahoma – Tulsa 1) August 15, 2018: Cameron University in Lawton; and 2) August 22, 2018: Tulsa Technology Center‐Riverside Campus in Tulsa. The Link Between Parental Mental Health and Substance Abuse, and Child Maltreatment Presenter: Jason Beaman, DO, MS, MPH, FAPA, assistant clinical professor and chair of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences of Oklahoma State University – Center for Health Sciences in Tulsa 1) September 4, 2018: Northwest Technology Center in Fairview; and 2) September 25, 2018: Green Country Technology Center in Okmulgee. Taking Your Child Sexual, Physical and Abusive Head Trauma Case from Investigation to Courtroom Presenter: Lawrence Braunstein, Esq., trial attorney and litigation partner of Braunstein & Zuckerman, Attorneys at Law in White Plains, NY. 1) October 17, 2018: Oklahoma State University – Tulsa Campus’ Conference Center in Tulsa; and 2) October 18, 2018: University of Oklahoma Continuing Education Conference Center in Norman Interviewing Child Victims with Disabilities Presenter: Scott Modell, PhD, of Modell Consulting Group in Nashville, TN November 7, 2018: Rose State College – Community Learning Center in Midwest City ChildFirst Ex: Expanded Forensic Interview Process
5
Presenters: Maria Rosales‐Lambert, program director and bi‐lingual forensic interviewer; and Vicki Boan, forensic interviewer, Oklahoma Interviewing Services, Inc. 1) October 15‐16, 2018: Catholic Charities in Oklahoma City 2) January 30‐31, 2019: Child Abuse Network in Tulsa 3) July 15‐16, 2019: PC‐CARE, Inc. in McAlester MISCELLANEOUS On Monday, July 23rd, the OCCY office had to be closed due to air conditioning issues. When staff arrived that morning, the temperature in the offices varied from 85 – 90 degrees. We were notified that the problem had been fixed, but it would take most of the day for the temperature to arrive at a comfortable level. I notified Secretary Buck that our offices were too warm to utilize the computers/do work and he in turn notified OMES. I received prompt responses from Ramona Parker and Melissa Milburn from OMES’ Real Estate and Leasing Services regarding the air conditioning incident. As our leasing agent, they came out to inspect the property to assure the situation was rectified, but they also quickly sent a letter to our building manager about additional office deficiencies – most importantly the flooring. Because of the intervention, we now have scheduled monthly meetings with our Building Manager, Gary Hudlow and he has developed an action plan for repairs to present to ownership that includes phasing in new flooring. I would like to thank Ms. Parker, Ms. Milburn and Mr. Hudlow for working together towards improving our office space.
Elliot Regenstein with Jonathan Furr
August 10, 2018
Oklahoma Early Childhood Integrated Data System: Summary of Stakeholder Feedback and
Proposed Next Steps
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES 2
This document summarizes key themes gleaned from interviews with stakeholders engaged in Oklahoma’s state data systems work. The questions used as an interview protocol are included as an appendix; interviews did not strictly adhere to the protocol, but generally covered the issues raised by the questions. Interviews were conducted with:
Steve Buck, Office of Juvenile Affairs Natalie Burns, Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness Sharon Butler, Department of Health Ginger Elliott-Teague, Department of Education Kay Floyd, Head Start Collaboration Erik Friend, Department of Education Annette Jacobi, Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth Tracy Leeper, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Becki Moore, Office of Management and Enterprise Services Leea Mote, Office of Management and Enterprise Services Fred Oraene, Oklahoma Health Care Authority Sophia Pappas, George Kaiser Family Foundation Austin Ralstin, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Edd Rhoades, Department of Health Mark Sharp, Department of Education Dan Sterba, George Kaiser Family Foundation Paul Shinn, Department of Human Services
Interviewees were promised that quotes would not be attributed specifically to them in the final report. On July 24, 2018, the Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness hosted a forum to discuss a draft of this report with interested parties. The authors presented an overview of the report’s findings and recommendations, and took questions from the audience. Some of the points included in this report are drawn from that conversation. A list of attendees at that event is included as an appendix. The stakeholders we spoke with were universally enthusiastic about the importance of developing an early childhood integrated data system at the state level, but were also realistic about how much work remains ahead for the state to accomplish that goal. This report starts by discussing what impact interagency data linkages could have on Oklahoma’s early childhood programs, with the recognition that the value of those linkages requires substantial further definition. It then describes what work has already been done to link data across agencies, and the role of the Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness in the progress made so far. Finally, it makes recommendations for next steps that would allow Oklahoma to clarify its data use goals and speed the development of a system that helps achieve them.
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES 3
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES
Respondents widely acknowledged that while progress has been made, there is not a shared interagency goal. They agreed on the need for a clear message to the broader stakeholder community of why this work matters and what it could achieve. Without strong leadership and a clear vision, the sustainability of any work to improve data usage will be in constant jeopardy.
What will be the “elevator speech” for this work? In addition to a vision, respondents articulated the need for a roadmap on how that vision
would be achieved. What is the business plan or playbook? What are the next steps? How can the vision be articulated in terms that are broadly understood, with a focus on
outcomes for children and families, while also effectively protecting their privacy? Some respondents noted that some people involved in the work have a hard time getting out of
their tunnel and thinking holistically. Some advocacy groups do not believe in data sharing, and take the view that if it is not required
it should not be done. Longitudinal data sharing has been a hot-button political issue. One respondent noted that a legislative framework would be valuable to shaping this work.
There is no widely shared vision of what could be achieved with improved data sharing
I
When interagency linkages are successful, it is because the agencies involved feel like the benefit they receive from it is worth the time and energy the work requires. For several agencies – most notably the Department of Education – the benefits they stand to receive have not been articulated clearly enough to justify financial investment in a shared infrastructure. Articulating the key questions that agencies will be able to answer only with interagency linkages is an essential launching point for the process, and greater clarity regarding key questions is needed to move forward.
It is essential to understand that linking data across agencies is not an IT project – It is a change management project with an IT component. Being clear on what exactly the desired changes are is the critical starting point.
All of the agencies involved believe that it will be possible to achieve benefits and appear to be working in good faith to articulate it; respondents generally expressed appreciation for the fact that agencies are being very appropriate in looking out for their institutional best interest. Respondents acknowledged that where agencies were not seeing the value proposition of linked data it was not because those agencies were being obstructionist, it was because the value really had not been articulated for them.
Respondents were largely positive about the progress made with the Department of Education, while also realistic about the work yet ahead.
In addition to agencies buying into this work (individually and collectively), other stakeholders need to buy into it as well – including policymakers and parents.
Several respondents noted the need to articulate some use cases that help explain the value.
Agencies are still struggling to find the value proposition in the linkages work
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES 4
Once data is produced, greater analytic capacity is needed to make it meaningful. While some state agencies have meaningful capacity to analyze data, some do not; moreover, there is a widely understood need for analytic capacity that looks at critical problems in a cross-agency manner.
Even those agencies that already have meaningful analytic capacity believe they could be more effective if they had additional capacity.
In some agencies that have analytic capacity, that capacity may not be focused on broader cross-cutting questions so much as on pressing concerns related to specific programs.
There is a lack of capacity from non-governmental partners to provide data analysis, but potentially some interest in building that capacity – which would require philanthropic investment.
Some respondents articulated the need for the state to provide support to community-level efforts including by producing data in forms that make it easier to use.
Some respondents noted that while in theory the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) could play a role in providing analytic capacity, it does not appear that OMES will in fact do so.
There is a significant need for more capacity to use data
These included:
For some early childhood providers the opportunity to show long-term outcomes is a critical value that would be served by stronger longitudinal linkages. This includes K-12 and post-K-12 outcomes.
Even more specifically, it would be useful to study later outcomes (both positive and negative) and then back map those to previous experiences, to start looking for patterns that might inform how services are provided.
o For example, imagine two communities with similar demographics where one has a high rate of children going on to higher education and a low rate of children going on to juvenile justice or prison, and the other is the reverse. Can we analyze what factors led to that difference?
One overarching goal articulated is that this is about shared services – how are agencies developing shared solutions? Data systems are an essential component of that.
In a tight fiscal context at the state level, better data use could lead to more efficient services. Defining cross-cutting outcomes that multiple agencies would be responsible for helping to achieve.
While multiple respondents expressed enthusiasm for this idea -- and even noted efforts that could be built on in the process of developing cross-agency outcomes – there was acknowledgment that this kind of process is much easier with strong gubernatorial leadership, and that not all agencies are currently ready for this kind of conversation.
Developing distinct counts of children being served. Providing community-level data dashboards. Supporting infant-toddler services.
Several stakeholders identified value propositions that mattered to them
The lack of a positive vision is particularly problematic when stakeholders voice concerns about data privacy and security, which are deeply important issues. A positive vision is needed to help people understand why this work is needed in the first place, and then strong governance, training, and data management protocols are needed to reassure the public that personally identifiable data is safe.
There are real political challenges to data linkages
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES 5
Numerous respondents noted that while government cannot in all respects be run like a business, there are some ways in which it can – and that predictive analytics using aggregated data should be one of them. Respondents noted that businesses routinely use predictive analytics when making major decisions, and that government would benefit from being able to do the same.
Some respondents thought that the legislature was increasingly open to this notion, but would have to be persuaded that an up-front investment in predictive analytics capacity would lead to long-term payoff. Those respondents thought the business community might be useful in helping to make that case.
One respondent noted that there has been a lot of discussion about conducting performance audits of state agencies – but those audits will require a clear definition of success, and also the data necessary to analyze progress toward desired outcomes.
There is a strong interest in predictive analytics
Many interagency agreements in other states have focused on the ability to produce reports of aggregated data on a periodic basis, which are generally useful to inform policymaking and strategic decision making. Some of the respondents are more focused on getting “rapid-time” data designed to serve program operators on a daily or near-daily basis.
The difference between aggregated data and “rapid-time” data is significant to some stakeholders
In the current political environment agencies are keenly interested in the stories that data tells and want to influence that narrative. A key challenge for the state will be balancing that legitimate agency interest with the broader interest in following the story that the data tells, regardless of where it leads. The agencies’ desire to control the narrative may at times come into tension with the broader need to shape an ecosystem that meets the needs of children and families, particularly if agencies are placed into a defensive posture by external forces.
There are a lot of open questions about the impact of new data on the public at large, and how the public might be able to access easily new information.
How will data be contextualized? A deep understanding is necessary to explain data well to broader audiences.
Several respondents thought universities might be useful partners in providing broader data analyses that inform the larger public, as long as they could do so in a cost-efficient manner.
One respondent noted that the legislature may not want agencies to be in a strong position to make the case for themselves – and also that agencies may be afraid of what story the data tells.
Agencies are naturally concerned about who will provide the narrative
REALIZING THE BENEFITS OF INTERAGENCY LINKAGES 6
Some communities are working on building their data infrastructure – a pilot project in Little Dixie was referenced by multiple respondents – and it is not clear how that work will relate to statewide efforts. How will local pilots influence statewide system design, and how will statewide system design support local efforts?
Some respondents articulated the need for the state to provide support to community-level efforts including by producing data in forms that make it easier to use.
There are local efforts underway to share data between community providers (including Head Start) and local school districts. What can the state learn from those?
Tulsa is a pilot site for an initiative that just won a national innovation competition (and associated grant).
One respondent noted that local communities will always collect more data than the state, and that’s fine – the key is to ensure that efforts are harmonized to minimize duplication.
There is a need to connect state efforts to community-level work
Respondents understood that producing data is only a step toward understanding the story that the data tells – and that understanding the story the data tells is only a step toward using the data to drive policy changes that improve outcomes for children and families. There was widespread doubt that the state is poised to make meaningful changes in response to new data, as that would require major political will and significant change management capacity. One respondent noted that this would be a whole new way of working for agencies, which in many instances are not designed to do what data would allow them to do (or push them to do).
Here too there are deep concerns that agencies are too invested in the status quo to change even when the data says they should.
Actually using data to drive change is a whole different level, but is a goal the state needs to achieve
LINKING DATA ACROSS AGENCIES
In many states, the process of developing linked data systems has been led by a high-level executive branch leader with a vision for cross-agency work – and in many instances the struggle those states have had has been to sustain energy with program-level managers within individual agencies. But in Oklahoma the process has followed just the opposite approach: the agency staff deep in the work have come together because they see the need for linked data, even though agency leadership and the governor’s office have yet to embrace the issue.
This history has clearly impacted the strengths and weaknesses of the system as it has emerged to date. The lack of a holistic vision for the work is the kind of problem that is hard for agency staff to solve without high-level leadership buy-in.
The strength of the relationship among staff within agencies was cited as a positive by numerous respondents.
One respondent noted that the lack of high-level leadership may make it hard for agencies to put their true cards on the table.
Multiple respondents noted that ideally, high-level leaders would articulate the importance of this work and keep the pressure on to move it – but would leave key design and implementation decisions to experts in the field.
The process of developing linked data systems in Oklahoma has been atypically bottom-up
II
While there has been significant effort to build a Master Person Index for early childhood, that effort does not span many agencies. Respondents described a landscape in which there are numerous data-sharing efforts that are disconnected from each other, and that typically involve two agencies sharing data for a specific purpose. Respondents generally thought that these bilateral agreements were effective for their intended purposes, but that the work of those agreements was not coordinated across agreements.
Multiple respondents expressed a desire to see Oklahoma move to a more holistic system. This issue is also one that would benefit from higher-level leadership within the state
administration. As one stakeholder put it, “We do not have data systems, we have a lot of systems that have
data.” Some respondents talked about how far the state has to go to implement a governance
structure, while others seemed to think it was further along. This discrepancy may have come from a difference in focus – the Master Person Index is further along, whereas the idea of a holistic governance approach still has a ways to go. Even with regard to the MPI, however, there was some disagreement about the likely effectiveness of the existing governance structure.
Multiple respondents noted differing data standards across agencies, and identified the need for greater consistency to facilitate sharing.
At the stakeholder engagement forum one commenter noted that technology is changing far more rapidly than the state’s systems.
Some respondents also noted data sharing challenges within agencies; some agencies have a large number of systems that may not connect to each other, let alone other agencies’ systems.
In Oklahoma the landscape of data system linkages is still relatively decentralized
LINKING DATA ACROSS AGENCIES 8
A particular subset of the larger fragmentation is the disconnect between two efforts that in some states are more closely integrated. The effort to link data in early childhood has been driven by the state’s Health Department and agencies focused on health and social services; the Department of Education has been getting more actively involved in conversations, but the conversation has not been connected to discussions with any higher education or workforce agencies.
Multiple respondents expressed a desire to see these issues better connected, which is an issue that likely requires higher-level leadership to address.
While some states have worked to build a “P-20W” system that links from early childhood through higher education and the workforce, in Oklahoma
the early childhood work has been largely disconnected from higher education and workforce linkage efforts
The Health Department was widely acknowledged as a key driver of data linkage efforts, but in the last year the agency was rocked by a financial scandal that led to the resignations of the commissioner and other senior staff (including the senior official who had championed the data systems linkages work). The Department is now moving forward with a dramatically reduced budget and interim leadership, but those are difficult conditions in which to make headway on an initiative like linking data across agencies.
Turmoil at the Health Department has impacted the work
Respondents generally believed that the DISCUSS group represented a major positive step in that it brought together a group of agencies that had not previously worked together collectively. They generally thought the right conversations have been happening up until now, but are concerned about whether those conversations are advancing as they need to – there is a real worry that progress is hitting a plateau.
There is a strong sense that the relationships being forged through the DISCUSS process will serve the state well in the long term.
Many states are struggling to integrate Head Start data into broader state systems, and eventually Oklahoma will need to wrestle with this issue as well.
Different agencies have very different processes, and in Oklahoma agencies are relatively independent. This is a challenge to developing shared governance that is strong and sustainable.
The fact that the early childhood discussions are disconnected from the higher education and workforce discussions influences who is at the table. Ultimately high-level leadership should make a decision about the state’s approach, and whether these will continue to be two separate conversations.
A lot of agencies are at the table
LINKING DATA ACROSS AGENCIES 9
Respondents widely agree that when OMES was set up to consolidate IT functions across agencies there was not a strong consensus within the administration or legislature about exactly what its role would be, and that lack of role clarity has been an ongoing struggle for the agency writ large.
One anxiety some stakeholders have is about who will hold linked data, and OMES will likely need to be a part of that conversation. Multiple respondents originally thought OMES was going to end up being the central holder of all data (much like the South Carolina model for linked data that several respondents referenced), but that has not been the case.
Developing more consistent data standards is one role that was suggested for OMES. Some agencies have been frustrated with OMES, and there is clearly a disconnect in some
places between what OMES thinks its job is and what the agencies think its job is. One respondent expressed concern that OMES might not truly understand the early childhood
space, and that it simply might not be on their radar. This respondent said that OMES is not opposed to early childhood but just is not focused on it.
One respondent thought that the legislature is expressing concern about high costs relating to OMES, and that further legislative scrutiny could impact the agency’s future direction.
Another respondent described OMES as a middleman that is getting paid a lot for bad service.
The role of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) is unclear, and different stakeholders have different visions
of what it should be
Three agencies are working together on a Master Person Index that will allow those agencies to identify children consistently across agencies. Those agencies are enthusiastic about the possibilities of having this linked data.
Not all stakeholders are clear on what operational impact the MPI will have. Not all stakeholders are clear on how decisions will get made with regard to the MPI. It
appears that the governance structure contemplates the DISCUSS committee as the final word on decisions about data management and use; there is no single backbone entity that has decision-making authority, and there is some concern about how this might play out in practice.
The Master Person Index is a potentially exciting start
THE ROLE OF THE OKLAHOMA PARTNERSHIP FOR SCHOOL READINESS 10
THE ROLE OF THE OKLAHOMA PARTNERSHIP FOR SCHOOL READINESS
OPSR has done a good job of getting stakeholders to the table, and of influencing existing data sharing agreements. OPSR is seen as having a good concept of what it is working toward, and of actively pursuing its goals. It was also credited for ensuring that early childhood is on the table in the state’s larger data systems work, and for bringing important information to the table. OPSR is seen as the agency most likely to hold the bigger picture, and to keep stakeholders focused on that bigger picture.
The fact that OPSR will not provide data to a linked system is both a strength and a weakness; it places OPSR apart from the other agencies in ways that give it freedom, but that also may be seen as limiting the skin it has in the game.
OPSR was credited with playing a “glue function” and supporting the building of strong relationships.
Some respondents argued that OPSR should be the visible leader of the data systems linkages work, because of its role in focusing on the larger ecosystem and its unique cross-cutting vision. Other respondents believed that OPSR has succeeded so far largely by keeping this work and its role lower on the radar screen, and believed that strategy should be continued; there was concern that if OPSR’s role was more visible that it would cause a backlash. As one respondent asked, does OPSR want to risk its existence on this project?
There is general agreement that OPSR’s positioning is unique and should be leveraged, but not agreement about the best way for it to take advantage of its unique role.
OPSR has a legislative mandate to track the effectiveness of the system and make recommendations, and its role should be consistent with that legislative mandate.
The Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness (OPSR) is seen as a positive force in moving the data conversations
There is disagreement about what OPSR’s strategy should be going forward
OPSR has lost significant capacity in recent years that may impact its ability to be effective in this space. The staff OPSR has are generally well-regarded but respondents were unclear on how much capacity it would have for this work going forward.
There is concern about OPSR’s capacity
III
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE 11
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE
A fully realized early childhood integrated data system will include the following:
1. A vision of what can be accomplished with linked data, grounded in a key set of outcomes the data is meant to help achieve;
2. The capacity to build out a system that supports that vision; 3. The analytic capacity to make sense of the numbers the system produces; and 4. The capacity to make operational changes based on those analyses.
In all four areas the state has a great deal of work left ahead, but it has made some real progress on #2 and has some strengths to build on in #3 as well. The recommendations below are meant to address how the state can improve its position in all four of these areas, along with some overarching recommendations focused on the need for leadership in this initiative. All of the work will benefit from strong centralized leadership from the governor and legislature and deep engagement by all participating agencies; the Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness can also play a valuable leadership and facilitation role in many or all of these work strands. As discussed at the stakeholder engagement forum, Oklahoma can develop more specific timelines for this work that map onto other agency and administration timelines during the coming period of transition.
IV
High level leadership will be needed for this work to succeed. The state has made significant headway that can be built on – but strong leadership will be needed to carry the work forward, and to keep work flowing through multiple process steps.
In many states the push for linked data has come from governors; governors are responsible for the entire system, and frequently see the need for data that can only be produced through interagency linkages. If the new governor believes in this work and influences agency heads to keep it moving, it is poised to yield important fruit. If the next governor does not believe in this work, it runs a serious risk of dying on the vine.
At the stakeholder engagement forum numerous participants commented on the importance of direct outreach to gubernatorial candidates.
In some states a push for linked data has come from the legislature, which may have a similar curiosity regarding key systemic questions. One strategy to consider is whether to develop draft legislation solidifying the framework of an integrated data system.
At this time it is not entirely clear which of those strategies is more likely to be successful in Oklahoma, and the election results will likely impact that calculus.
At the stakeholder engagement forum one suggestion was to focus not on the development of a data system, but on the need to improve the early childhood system as a whole – with the development of a data system providing needed support for that developing system.
A. Overarching Issues
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE 12
A. Overarching Issues (continued)
A vision needs to be developed based on the needs of stakeholders. Some of that work is already underway with key state agencies at the table, but for a vision to be successful it will require higher-level leadership from within government -- either at the governor’s office or legislature – and broader stakeholder engagement. The staff currently working on data have recognized these needs and are supportive of efforts that would engage higher-level leaders and additional stakeholders.
The broader vision also needs to include some specific use cases that will be responsive to stakeholder needs (with the governor and legislators critical stakeholders in this definition), with the understanding that the prioritized use cases may evolve over time.
The use cases developed need to be realistic to help manage expectations and establish early wins. The initial outputs of any linked system are generally annual or semi-annual reports that inform policy analysis, and the work plans for this system should reflect that reality. A few realistic early wins should be identified and aggressively pursued.
Some of the agencies involved have already identified promising use cases that are motivating their work on an integrated data system.
The work of developing a vision should be include the voices of families, and the final product should reflect the needs of families.
One suggestion at the stakeholder engagement forum was to do a study analyzing the gap between Oklahoma’s current performance and the national average in certain key measures of child success. The study could also include recommendations for achieving the national average and estimated costs to achieve that goal.
Agency leadership and buy-in will also be critical. In addition to leadership at the gubernatorial and legislative level, there will also need to be active engagement from core agencies.
The instability at the Health Department has affected many issues, including this one. Ideally stronger gubernatorial and legislative leadership would reduce the need for the Health Department to spearhead this work, but high-level bandwidth from the Health Department will still be necessary for system development to move forward.
The full and enthusiastic participation of the Department of Education and State Board of Education is ultimately necessary for the system to succeed; there is value in an integrated data system with linkages that just cut across agencies serving children birth to five, but many of the biggest impacts of an integrated data system come from studying the long-term outcomes that require the Department of Education’s engagement. Identifying the use cases that resonate the most with ODE is a high priority.
The continued uncertainty over the role of OMES is a challenge. It is not clear that OMES’ role will be clarified in the immediate future, and a better definition of its role may not be entirely necessary to begin articulating a vision – and even to start building out some capacity. But in any potential ideal state for an operating integrated data system, OMES will have a clearly defined role and be providing ongoing support.
B. Developing a Vision
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE 13
“Building a system” is about much more than just a set of technical linkages. Indeed, the necessary steps to building a system include a mix of political, legal, and technical work:
Implementing a governance structure. While existing committees provide a useful forum for interagency staff coordination, there is no formal structure for agency leadership to administer a multi-agency data initiative. That formal structure is necessary for the agencies to run the system, and for outside parties to engage with the system.
o The manner in which different agencies collect data varies widely, which is a challenge for interagency linkages. Particularly if the state is going to move to a more holistic approach, it needs to work on implementing standards for data quality.
Implementing the multi-agency data sharing agreement. The existing data sharing agreement establishes a framework for interagency data sharing, but needs to be housed and administered within a governance structure. Moreover, to date data sharing has been limited to projects involving two agencies; it may be necessary to revisit existing agreements to determine whether they can effectively support multi-agency projects.
o Protecting personally identifiable information is a critical aspect of data sharing, and Oklahoma should ensure that it is using up-to-date best practices in this area.
Buildout of the Master Person Index. To maximize its effect the Master Person Index should involve all agencies involved in the governance structure.
The personnel capacity to produce data, both centralized and across agencies. o Managing the governance structure and data sharing agreements are centralized
functions, and in many states governance sits outside the individual participating agencies and is defined in a master data sharing agreement. The same is true of the capacity to manage the Master Person Index, which is technical capacity that can be separated from staffing the governance structure (although it can also be housed in the same place). One key role of the centralized capacity is to monitor the progress of implementing the use cases, and also to manage the ongoing process of updating the use cases.
o Each participating agency will also need the capacity to produce data for interagency file sharing, and then produce outputs for end users.
o In developing the data sharing framework for a system it is important to anticipate continued rapid change in the available technology – otherwise the system will be outdated before it is finished.
o These capacities are necessary just to produce data in the first place; the capacity to use data effectively is discussed further below.
C. Building a System That Supports the Vision
The governor and/or legislature should define the scope of the vision. A key threshold question that has not been definitively resolved is whether Oklahoma will pursue an early childhood integrated data system as its own project, or whether that will become part of a larger effort linked to K-12 education, postsecondary education, and the workforce. The new governor and legislature should be engaged in resolving this issue and putting in place the framework necessary to build out the system.
There are some advantages to working solely within an early childhood frame, as there are already groups in place working on those issues. This may also slightly reduce the technical challenges of the buildout work.
On the flip side, the overall value proposition of the work is dramatically reduced without the connection to later years – including for the early childhood providers themselves, who are interested in knowing the long-term outcomes of the children they serve.
B. Developing a Vision (continued)
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE 14
D. Developing Use Capacity
Realistically, the state is years away from being able to produce new data that would impact how state government and communities operate. But if the state is going to move toward having an integrated data system, it should start planning for the impact of the data the system will produce. There is no point in building an integrated data system only to keep doing the same things the state has always done; the goal of the data system is to change practice in ways that lead to better outcomes for children and families. Engaging political leaders about the importance of this issue is critical, and a strategy will be needed to help policymakers understand the value of an early childhood integrated data system.
E. The Political Will and Capacity to Make Operational Changes
Maximizing the impact of data linkages requires the capacity to analyze and synthesize newly-produced data. This includes several different dimensions:
Public reports and dashboards. At both the state and community level, new data should be made transparent to inform decision-making. The prioritized use cases should drive the content of the reports and dashboards. There are numerous examples of state and local level data reports and dashboards that could inform Oklahoma’s approach to making data public.
State-level analytic capacity. As noted above, some state agencies already have this in place while others do not. In addition to each individual agency building its capacity, the system as a whole would benefit from some centralized and independent capacity that could look across agencies with a big-picture view. There are a variety of ways to position that capacity, and the governor and/or legislature should be engaged in defining and locating that capacity.
Capacity outside state government. Building an advocacy community with independent capacity to inform public debate could add value to the system, but would require philanthropic investment.
Research capacity. In some instances a research design is needed to unlock the true power of data. Some states have placed an emphasis on having access to centralized research capacity, either at a university or another external provider.
Local analytic and research capacity. Many communities will not have sufficient resources to develop significant capacity on their own. That puts the onus on the state to develop a support infrastructure for communities that allows them to leverage newly available data.
APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL: DISTRIBUTED PRIOR TO INTERVIEWS 15
Appendix 1: Interview Protocol, Distributed Prior to Interviews Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness:
Interview Questions Regarding Data System Development
The following are questions that we expect to ask in interviews about the development of Oklahoma’s early childhood data system. We do not expect that all interviewees will be asked all of the questions, or that all interviewees will have answers to all of the questions. The goal is for interviewees to speak freely on the subjects they feel most comfortable discussing. Current Practices What state level resources are currently devoted to the development of a federated data
system? What actions and strategies were effective in working to develop this system? How is linked data currently being used by key stakeholders? What has been the role of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services? How have health agencies and the Department of Education interacted in this work? How have the agencies worked together on the mechanics of data generation (e.g. the
information request procedure)? How strong is the connection between the vision of agency leaders and the execution at the
program management level? What is the vision of agency leaders? What capacities exist inside and outside government to effectively utilize data once it is
produced? Specifically, what is the capacity for data use by: o Legislative staff o Agency staff o Providers o Research partners
What lessons can be drawn from past interagency data efforts, including the P-20 Council? How would you assess the importance and effectiveness of existing efforts for promoting
interagency data sharing and use? o The DISCUSS Committee o The CAR Workgroup o The Multi-agency Data Sharing Agreement o The Master Person Index project
How strong is the existing approach to data governance? Are there state legislative barriers to the disclosure of information? State agency
interpretations of state law that play a role here?
OPSR’s Role How has OPSR’s staff interfaced with state department staff on the development of a state
data system and what process indicators can Grantee report on the development of a data system? What role did the public-private partnership play in developing a statewide data system?
What regulatory or legislative opportunities exist that help efforts to build a statewide data system? How did OPSR help capitalize on these?
What legislative and regulatory barriers was OPSR able to help overcome in its effort to build a data system?
APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL: DISTRIBUTED PRIOR TO INTERVIEWS 16
Moving Forward How would you like to see data used? Do these potential use cases resonate?
o Establishing a distinct count across early childhood programs o Analyzing outcomes of children transitioning into the K-12 system o Providing “dashboard” data on early childhood service delivery to communities o Better understanding early childhood workforce characteristics and education
pathways For each agency – what are your key early childhood policy initiatives? How can integrated
data support your assessment of these policies? What plans are there to improve the use of data? Is there anybody else you’d recommend that I talk to?
APPENDIX 2: LIST OF ATTENDEES FOR PRESENTATION ON JULY 24 17
Appendix 2: Attendees at the July 24 Stakeholder Engagement Forum
List of Attendees: Melody Bays, Oklahoma City Community Foundation Lesli Blazer, Oklahoma Department of Human Services Natalie Burns, Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness Sharon Butler, Oklahoma State Department of Health John Delara, Oklahoma State Department of Health Luann Faulkner, Oklahoma Department of Human Services Kay Floyd, Head Start Collaboration Robert Harbison, Oklahoma Partnership for School Readiness Foundation Melissa Houston, Oklahoma Department of Labor Annette Jacobi, Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth Janice Keizer, American Institutes for Research Craig Knutson, Potts Family Foundation Tracy Leeper, Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Beth Martin, Oklahoma State Department of Health Lia Tepker-McHughes, Oklahoma Department of Labor Jennifer McKay, Oklahoma State Department of Education Cheryl McNair, Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs Gina McPherson, Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education Susan McVey, Oklahoma Department of Libraries Sharon Morgan, Oklahoma State Department of Education Rep. Monroe Nichols Fred Oraene, Oklahoma Health Care Authority Shelly Patterson, Oklahoma Health Care Authority Sumita Pokharel, Office of Management and Enterprise Services Pat Potts, Potts Family Foundation Ray Potts, Potts Family Foundation Mohsen Pourett, Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs Charles Pruett, Oklahoma Department of Human Services Edd Rhoades, Oklahoma State Department of Health Paul Shinn, Oklahoma Department of Human Services Persephone Starks, Oklahoma State Department of Health Wanda Threatt, Oklahoma Department of Human Services
APPENDIX 3: EARLY CHILDHOOD DATA GOVERNANCE CONCEPTUAL TECHNICAL ARCHITECTURE 18
Appendix 3: Early Childhood Data Governance Conceptual Technical Architecture The purpose of this technical architecture diagram is to demonstrate how the various component parts of the state’s early childhood data system can align as part of a coherent structure. This is intended as a starting point for stakeholder and interagency development of the system architecture and technical requirements for the desired “end-state” system. That end-state vision can then serve as a guide for identifying gaps and developing plans to address them.
Component Description
1 Data Governance Structure
Establishes the formal structure for agency leadership to administer a multi-agency data initiative
2 Master Person Index (MPI) System Expansion of current system to include all agencies in the governance structure
3 Secure Interagency Data Exchange
Both the MPI and Multi-agency DSA support the secure exchange of data to support end-user functions; other security aspects addressed through the governance structure
4 Program/Agency Analyst Portal
Agencies establish an integrated data set with analytic tools and authorization procedures that enable data queries and analytics by authorized users within a secure environment
5 Integrated Reporting Data
Agencies agree to secure integration of data from multiple agencies for public reporting and dashboards displaying summary aggregated data
6 Integrated Research Data
Agencies agree to secure integration of data to establish research ready, de-identified datasets for authorized researchers
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, Aug. 9, 2018 Contact: Michael Walsh Executive Assistant (405) 606-4913 [email protected]
Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth Welcomes New Commissioner
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK — Governor Mary Fallin has appointed new Commissioner, Lee Roland, to the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth (OCCY). Roland will fill the business and industry seat left vacant by Sid D. Brown in July. A former educator of 30 years, Roland now works as an education consultant and motivational speaker. He has given presentations across Oklahoma and the United States related to character education, working with children of poverty and teacher efficacy. Roland also serves as a pastor at The Parish located in the Plaza District and is the author of “Fantastic Voyage: A Story of School Turnaround and Achievement by Overcoming Poverty and Addressing Race.” He believes his involvement, passion and knowledge of community needs will help make a difference on the Commission by allowing him to cast a wider net to new audiences and policymakers. “I believe my experience as a consultant will prove twofold: I can share firsthand the formidable challenges that I have witnessed and or that have been shared with me by both schools and businesses, but equally important, I will be able to speak to how we have collaboratively problem solved or minimized the manifold issues that they encounter,” said Roland. OCCY works to improve services to children in the state of Oklahoma through coordination among public and private agencies, independent monitoring of the children and youth service system for compliance, and testing models and demonstration programs for effective services. Programs under OCCY include the Oklahoma Child Death Review Boards, the Post Adjudication Review Boards, and the Office of Juvenile System Oversight. OCCY was signed into law in 1982. For more than 35 years, OCCY has played a critical role in the protection of children by ensuring the services are following agency standards and policies and utilize best practices. “With his extensive background in education and his successful consulting operation, Mr. Roland will provide a ‘boots on the ground’ lens as well as a business professional’s perspective about how the broader community can address the needs of children and parents,” said Annette Wisk Jacobi, OCCY Executive Director. Commissioners meet to approve strategic plans, coordinate efforts between agencies and make recommendations to the Governor, Legislature, and child-focused agencies. They serve without compensation for up to four terms of two years each. The business and industry seat on the Commission aims to bring in novel strategies that would connect the business community with traditional social services.
“The Commission performs a very valuable role to our state by holding children service systems such as foster care, detention facilities and group homes accountable for providing safe, stable and nurturing environments for vulnerable children and youth. In addition, the Commission encourages supportive, prevention services be available to families before severe problems arise. The strength of the composition of the Commission is to bring to the table highly experienced people with varied areas of expertise related to the State’s interest in the wellbeing of all of Oklahoma’s children. We look forward to Mr. Roland’s contribution and are grateful for his willingness to serve,” said Jay Scott Brown, OCCY Chairman." To learn more about the Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, visit www.ok.gov/occy or for more information on Lee Roland, see www.leeroland.education.
