Productive Partnerships

Kristy Boggs,STARS Quality Coordinator

Quality Enhancement Initiative

Grace Saulsbury,Health Consultant

Child Care Health Consultation

Goals

• Strategies to successful partnerships

• Gain knowledge on resources related to health and safety practices

Gear shift!

• Become familiar with the Environment Rating Scales (ERS)

STARS Quality Coordinator, Quality Enhancement Initiative

STARS Quality Coordinators (SQC) deliver free technical assistance to child care providers seeking a STARS for KIDS NOW Quality Rating.

STARS for KIDS NOW

The STARS for KIDS NOW program is Kentucky's voluntary quality rating improvement system for Licensed Type I, Type II, and Certified Family Child Care Homes.  Programs are rated using a 1-4 STAR Level system.

Health Consultant,Child Care Health Consultation

The Child Care Health Consultants which include Registered Nurses, Registered Dietitians and Health Educators consult with child care providers and their families via telephone, email or on site to promote healthy, safe, and nurturing environments for optimal child development. 

Small Group Discussion

• Think of 5 different types of partnerships you are a part of

• Choose one member to report to the group

Partnerships, Partnerships, Partnerships!

• Parenthood• Marriage• Parent/School Officials• Business• Law• Interagency • Silent Partners

There are all kinds of partnerships!

Partner

“A person who shares or is associated with another in some action or endeavor; sharer; associate.”

-dictionary.com (2011)

Partnership

“The state or condition of being a partner; participation; association; joint interest.”

-dictionary.com (2011)

“A partnership is an arrangement where parties agree to cooperate to advance their mutual interests.”

-Wikipedia.org (2011)

What are our mutual/joint interest?

• Quality Childcare• Healthy Environments• Safe Environments• Staff Professional Development• Supply Current Information

A successful partnership has a shared interest!

Range of Partnerships

• Many will be more informal

• Sometimes more formal partnership is necessary– Defined rules of confidentiality– Legal obligations

Range of Partnerships

Continuum of intensity in the range of possible partnering relationships

Informal ---------------------------------------------------- Formal

Extent Of Contact Intermittent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Frequent

Purpose Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Comprehensive

Time Frame Short-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Long-term

Agreement Verbal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Written

Planning Designed By One Party . . . . . . . . . . .Collaborative Design

Maintaining Partnerships

1) Connection with purpose and people

2) Clarity of purpose

3) Congruency of mission, strategy, and values

4) Communication between partners

5) Continual learning

6) Commitment to the partnership

Maintaining Partnerships

• Benefits of long-term partnerships

• Understanding range of partnerships

• Maintain mutual goals

• Measuring outcomes

• Planning for future

Partnership Benefits

• Funding and in-kind contributions from partners• Technical expertise such as health, financial, legal, and

program expertise• Job creation and employment opportunities• Access to other networks and target groups• Program ideas• Ability to effect change in local, regional, and national policy

Benefits of Lasting Partnerships

• Better knowledge of partner’s strengths and weaknesses

• Become comfortable = stronger team

• Recognizable in community

• Greater influence on change

Partnership Challenges

• Costs-transportation, hosting space, budgets, etc.• “Turf” issues• Intolerance or lack of information about the values and goals

of other partners• One or more of the partners is weak• A history of conflict among potential partners • The environment is not conducive to partnering• “Playing” agencies against one another (ex. third party)

Confidentiality

Group Discussion:

What challenges do we face?

Snapshot!

Let’s examine the SQC/CCHC partnership…

STARS/CCHC Collaboration

A snapshot

- Provide an overview of STARS program to new CCHC’s

- Train CCHC on ERS

- Refer child care programs to CCHC

- Act as a resource; provide clarification

on the ERS; consult CCHC for expertise on health,

safety, and nutrition issues

- CCHC attends STARS Overview for childcare providers,

directors, and owners

CCHC/STARS Collaboration

A snapshot:

– Receive call from STARS Quality Coordinator (re: Personal Care Routines)

– CCHC goes to center to observe and consult on health and safety issues

– Connects with STARS after initial CCHC visit– Provide trainings and on-site technical assistance to help meet

regulations and increase STAR ratings (personal care routines)– Increased Quality Practices in Personal Care Routine, create safe

outdoor play spaces, etc.

Partnering with the classroom

• Requires commitment from: SQC, CCHC, Director, Staff• All parties must be aware of the goals to be achieved• All parties must work toward the goals set by the child care

program

• If a SQC makes initial contact with a program, he/she must alert the Health Consultant to the goals and vice versa. However, permission to consult with CCHC must be given by program.

Technical Assistance Plan/Partnership Plan

• Initial Contact– Building Trust

• Develop a Technical Assistance Plan– Establish objectives for technical assistance

• Map out roles and responsibilities

• Develop goals and timelines

• Periodically revisit Technical Assistance Plan

Providing Feedback from TA Plan

• Feedback is provided after each technical assistance visit with SQC or CCHC

• Strengths of the program are always included– Essential for self-esteem and program improvement!

• Feedback can include resources not being used– Ex. SQC observes negative teacher-child interactions– SQC would refer teacher to CCR&R for additional training, thus

creating an additional partnership

Measuring Outcomes

• Did the partnership evoke the change the program wanted to make?

• What were the intended results? Did the partnership help the program reach the intended goals?

• Should this partnership continue?

• Are all partners still needed?

• What changes did to be made for the future?

Group Activity!

• Work in groups or 4-5 to brainstorm the benefits, challenges, and risks of partnerships in your sector of the early care/education community.

• After brainstorming, discuss how you might use this information to develop partnerships to benefit the programs you work with.

• Choose a spokesperson to report back to the group.

Partnership Risks

• Blurring of roles among partner organizations

• Shifting of responsibility

• Overstepping boundaries

• One partner becomes overly dependent on other partners

Questions or concerns?

Environment Rating Scales

Standardized, research-based instruments used to assess and improve quality in early childhood programs.

http://www.fpg.unc.edu

Environment Rating Scales

The Environment Rating Scales were selected as the tool to be used in assessing the quality of classrooms located in

programs that choose to participate in the STARS for KIDS NOW program.

www.fgp.unc.edu

Background Information

Authors:Thelma Harms

Debby Cryer

Richard Clifford

Ellen Vineberg Jacobs

Donna Romano White

• “Our scales define environment in a broad sense and guide the observer.”

• “All of our scales have been developed in close collaboration with realistic field-based sites.”

www.fpg.unc.edu

Infant/Toddler Environment Rating Scale – Rev. Ed

(ITERS-R) Ages 0-2 ½

Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale- Rev. Ed

(ECERS-R) Ages 2 ½ -5

School Age Care Environment Rating Scale

(SACERS) Ages 5-12

Family Child Care Environment Rating Scale

FCCERS All Ages

Terms

• Subscales- the overarching areas of the scale that are assessed (ex. personal care routines). see p. 22

• Items- the specifics areas of the scale that are assessed (ex. health practices). see p. 30

• Indicators- requirements that indicate the level of quality (ex. “Adequate handwashing by staff…”). see. p. 30

Harms T., Cryer. D, and Clifford, R. (2005). Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale Revised Ed. New York, NY.

Scoring

• Scoring is listed as “Inadequate, Minimal, and Excellent.”

• The items are scored on a scale of 1-7.

• Indicators are listed in 1, 3, 5, and 7 sections.

• Scores of 2, 4, and 6 can be obtained.– Half or more to get the score!

Scoring

• Each item is then tallied (ex. Score of 4 in health practices).

• Each subscale is given a score (ex. Score of Personal Care Routines is 3.64).

• The scale receives an overall score (ex. Score of 3.5).

Snapshot!

Let’s examine how a day in our partnership

may look…

What we may see…

What we would like to see…

Feedback

“We could not have become the center we are today without the help of these organizations. They are always there to answer questions, provide resources, and help us think

"outside the box" to make our facility a safe and exciting place to learn.” -Erin, Child Care Facility Owner

Conclusion

• We all have the same goal: happy, healthy, quality environments for our children.

• Expectations for the partnership must be known by all members.

• It takes all members of the partnership to reach the goal.

• Partnerships must re-evaluate after each goal is reached.

• Successful partnerships are aware of the tools and practices used by each member.

Questions or Comments?

Thank you!