Our Children, Our Families Council 5-Year Plan

DRAFT
OCOF
5-YEAR
PLAN
April 2016
DRAFT
Our Children, Our Families Council
5-Year Plan
Prepared by the Our Children, Our Families Council Staff
April 2016
www.OurChildrenOurFamilies.org
©2016 Our Children, Our Families Council.
All rights reserved.
Photos courtesy of San Francisco Unified School District and artwork courtesy of Sirron Norris.
2
Contents
4
DRAFT
About the Our Children, Our Families Council
5
OCOF Council Members
6
5-Year Plan Work Group Members
7
Summary
8
Background
8
Outcomes Framework
10 Purpose of the Plan
11 Guiding Principles
12 Process to Develop Plan
13 OCOF Timeline
14 Recommendations for Action
15 Our Approach: Collect Impact Strategies
16 Work Structures
18 Implementation Strategies
23 Next Steps
25 Conclusion
26 Glossary
27 Appendix: Working Group Application
3
About the Our Children, Our Families Council
DRAFT
The Our Children, Our Families (OCOF) Council was created when
the voters of San Francisco passed Proposition C, the Children
and Families First Initiative, in November of 2014. The
proposition created the Council to align efforts across the City
and County, the School District, and the community to improve
outcomes for children, youth and families in San Francisco.
The Our Children, Our Families Council is a
42-member advisory body co-led by Mayor
Ed Lee and San Francisco Unified School
District (SFUSD) Superintendent Richard
Carranza. The Council is charged with
promoting coordination, increasing
accessibility, and enhancing the
effectiveness of programs and services for
children, youth, and families. The Council
focuses on helping all children, youth, and
families in San Francisco thrive, with an
emphasis on those with the greatest needs.
OCOF is charged with four major
deliverables:
1) An outcomes framework that articulates
the milestones we want all children,
youth, and families to reach;
2) A 5-Year plan with recommendations on
how to reach the outcomes outlined in
the framework;
3) Systematic data sharing between the
City and School District to inform
decision-making; and
4) A citywide inventory of publicly-funded
services for children, youth, and their
families.
This document, the 5-Year Plan, is the
second of our four deliverables. It outlines
our strategic approach to reaching the five
goals in our Outcomes Framework. It was
developed with guidance from the 5-Year
Plan Working Group and input from
stakeholders and partners.
For more information on the Our Children,
Our Families Council, please visit
www.OurChildrenOurFamilies.org, or
contact the OCOF staff at:
Sandra Naughton, Office of Mayor Lee,
City & County of San Francisco
Sandra.Naughton@sfgov.org
Jennifer Tran, Office of Mayor Lee,
City & County of San Francisco
jennifer.a.tran@sfgov.org
Dr. Laurie Scolari, San Francisco Unified
School District
ScolariL@sfusd.edu
4
DRAFT
OCOF Council Members
The Our Children, Our Families Council is an advisory body cochaired by Mayor Edwin Lee and Superintendent Richard
Carranza and includes the following individuals:
City Department members:
Allen Nance, Juvenile Probation Department
San Francisco Unified School District
members:
Barbara Carlson, Office of Early Care & Education
Abram Jimenez, Chief of Schools
Barbara Garcia, Department of Public Health
Carla Bryant, Chief of Early Education
Department
Edward Reiskin, Municipal Transportation
Authority
David Goldin, Chief Facilities Officer
Chief Greg Suhr, Police Department
Dr. Brent Stephens, Chief Academic Officer
John Rahaim, Planning Department
Dr. Elizabeth Blanco, Chief of Special Education
Services
Luis Herrera, Public Library
Maria Su, Department of Children, Youth, and
Their Families
Naomi Kelly, Office of the City Administrator
Olson Lee, Mayor's Office of Housing &
Community Development
Phil Ginsburg, Recreation and Parks Department
Todd Rufo, Mayor's Office of Economic &
Workforce Development
Trent Rhorer, Human Services Agency
Dr. Ritu Khanna, Chief of Research, Planning &
Assessment
Guadalupe Guerrero, Deputy Superintendent of
Instruction, Innovation, & Social Justice
Jill Hoogendyk, Chief of Strategic Initiatives
Kevin Truitt, Chief of Student, Family, Community
Support Services Department
Landon Dickey, Special Assistant to the
Superintendent for African American
Achievement & Leadership
Laura Moran, Chief of Strategy & Fund
Development
Melissa Dodd, Chief Technology officer
Myong Leigh, Deputy Superintendent of Policy &
Operations
Community members:
Abby Snay, Jewish Vocational Services
(Economic/Workforce Development)
Candace Wong, Low Income Investment Fund
(Office of Early Care & Education Citizen Advisory
Committee)
Egon Terplan, SPUR (Housing expert)
Jillian Wu, San Francisco Youth Commission
(Youth Commissioner)
Kentaro Iwasaki, ConnectEd (Parent, K-12)
Luisa Sicairos, The Mayor's Youth Employment
and Education Program (Transitional Age Youth)
Lyslynn Lacoste, City & County of San Francisco
(Public Education Enrichment Fund Citizen
Advisory Committee)
Masharika Prejean Maddison, Parents for Public
Schools of San Francisco (Parent, child under 5)
Michael Wald, Stanford University (DCYF
Oversight & Advisory Committee)
Philip Halperin, Silver Giving Foundation
(Philanthropy)
President Les Wong, San Francisco State
University (Higher education)
Sherilyn Adams, Larkin Street Youth Services
(Service provider)
Teresia Chen, SFUSD Student Advisory Council
(Student Advisory Council)
5
5-Year Plan Work Group Members
DRAFT
The Our Children, Our Families Council acknowledges the
following work group members for their guidance, leadership,
and commitment to children, youth, and families.
Ken Epstein, Department of Public Health (Co-Chair)
Myong Leigh, SFUSD (Co-Chair)
Barbara Carlson, Office of Early Care and Education
Candace Wong, Office of Early Care and Education Community Advisory Committee
Carla Bryant, SFUSD
Christy Estrovitz, Library
Jill Hoogendyk, SFUSD
Julia Sabory, Mayor's Office of Housing & Community Development
Katie Albright, Child Abuse Prevention Center
Kentaro Iwasaki, Parent seat on Council
Kevin Truitt, SFUSD
Kristy Wang, SPUR
Laurel Kloomok, First 5 San Francisco
Mia "Tu Mutch" Satya, Transitional Age Youth San Francisco
Michael Wald, DCYF OAC seat on Council
Ophelia Williams, The Center for Young Women’s Development
Phil Halperin, Silver Giving Foundation
Sarah Wan, Community Youth Center
Sheila Nickolopoulos, Planning Department
Susie Smith, Human Services Agency
Theo Miller, Mayor’s Office/HOPE SF
6
Summary
DRAFT
7
DRAFT
Background
Outcomes Framework
On January 28, 2016, the Our Children, Our Families Council
unanimously voted to approve an Outcomes Framework, a
document outlining the five major goals we want all children,
youth, and families in the City to reach:
A. Live in safe and
nurturing
environments
B. Attain economic
security and
housing stability
C. Are physically,
emotionally, and
mentally healthy
These goals represent our highest
aspirations for our children and families, and
aim to take more comprehensive approach
to measuring success at various life stages
and across different dimensions of
wellbeing. In order to gauge our progress
towards these goals, the Council will track 19
proxy measures outlined on the following
page.
D. Thrive in a 21st
Century learning
environment
E. Succeed in postsecondary and/or
career paths
The Council’s adoption of the Outcomes
Framework signifies a tremendous
commitment from our City’s leadership
across government, education, and the
community. And while the Framework allows
us to establish our collective priorities, align
our efforts, and use common measures of
success, it does not address how we reach
these milestones – which is the purpose of
this document, the 5-Year Plan.
8
Background
DRAFT
Outcomes Framework
9
Purpose of the Plan
DRAFT
The purpose of the San Francisco Children and Families Plan is to
identify strategies that align and coordinate the services to
children and families provided by City departments, SFUSD, and
community partners to achieve the measures in the Outcomes
Framework. This Plan will prioritize delivery of services to the
children and families with the most need.
This first five-year plan will focus more on
process strategies for improving
collaboration and alignment in the citywide
system of support. The first annual San
Francisco Children and Families First
Progress Report to be approved in May 2017
will include more specific content strategies
for the subsequent year. The Progress
Report will also include results from the first
two years of the OCOF initiative.
• Other collective impact or collaborative
efforts have not been as successful or
sustained their impact over time and this
plan reflects learning from the past and
from others.
• We believe that in order to improve
service delivery to our children, youth and
families, they need to be involved in the
design process.
We are being intentional in specifying a
process because:
• We believe that we cannot make progress
on the measures of the Outcomes
Framework without working differently as
partners.
This plan does include recommendations for
process strategies – called collective impact
strategies – that will be critical to making our
system more accessible to families and
providers. It calls for working groups heavily
represented by community members to
develop strategies and recommendations for
each of the five goals. This process will
attempt to resolve the root issues, build on
what is working, and ensure we are investing
in prevention.
The OCOF Outcomes Framework combined
with the Plan will provide a structure for
other departments, partners, SFUSD, and
initiatives to align. Many city departments
have already aligned their five-year plans
and resource allocations to the Outcomes
Framework.
10
Guiding Principles
DRAFT
We used a set of key guiding principles to develop the Plan:
» Improve outcomes for children, youth, and families
» Lead with equity
» Approach the system and our challenges as a whole
» Use a collaborative and accountability-based approach across agencies, systems, and
stakeholders
» Connect and leverage existing resources, initiatives, and programs
» Dynamic framework for action with room for flexibility and changing circumstances
over time
» Accessible language at all levels and user friendly to ensure buy-in
» Inspiring and empowering assets-based tone and content
11
DRAFT
Process to Develop Plan
The Plan was developed and informed by the 5-Year Plan
working group, background research, and stakeholder
engagement.
Oversight and advising:
• Five public meetings of the OCOF 5-Year
Plan Working Group, with individual input
and feedback from the 21 members and
their colleagues.
Impact of Stakeholder
engagement:
Research:
• Underscored the importance of building
our capacity to collaborate as a whole
community, aligning our many touchpoints into a single eco-system of
supports for children, youth, and families.
• Review of X Plans used by various
children, family, and youth efforts within
and outside San Francisco.
• Highlighted the need and opportunity to
pool and leverage resources to advance
shared outcomes.
Stakeholder engagement:
• Emphasized the desire of families to have
centralized and coordinated services and
supports.
“
• Two Partner Advisory input sessions in
April and May of 2016
You have 3 to 4 agencies trying
to help a family, and the
agencies don’t even know
[about the other agencies]. So
you see some families served in
triplicate, while others receive
nothing. How are you mindful of
those different pockets?
• Online survey in May 2016
-Stakeholder working at SFUSD
• Our Families, Our City community
engagement in 2013
• Interviews of 14 City and District
stakeholders in the spring of 2015
• Town hall meetings with DCYF and OECE
in the fall of 2015
12
DRAFT
OCOF Timeline
Below is the OCOF timeline of actual and proposed work group
activities and Council actions since Fall of 2015 out to June 2017.
Outcomes
Working Group
Oct-Jan: Develop
Outcomes Framework
5-Year Plan
Working Group
Oct-May: Develop Plan
Services
Inventory
Working Group
Launched Nov (ongoing): Meet to deliver on charter requirement; support the five Goal Working Groups to integrate coordinated
service delivery.
Data Working
Group
Launched Mar (ongoing): Meet to deliver on charter requirement; advise development of targets for
Outcomes Framework and OCOF data collection; support the five Goal Work Groups.
Goal Working
Groups
*Proposed
July-June: Five groups (one for each goal) will meet six times focused on
collective impact strategies with support from OCOF staff and other working
groups; support the development of setting targets
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
2015
OCOF Council
Apr-June:
Support
adjustments to
Plan and/or
progress report
Oct-Dec: Check
in on WG
progress
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
2016
First Council
meeting.
Approved bylaws.
Council approved
Outcomes
Framework.
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
2017
Council vote on 5Year Plan.
Fall 2016/Early 2017:
Approve targets for
Outcomes Framework.
*Proposed
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
Review
progress for
2016-17 and
approve
2017-18 plans.
13
DRAFT
“
Children, youth, and families as an
entity are completely aligned: they
go to school, after school, foster
care, etc. Families demand we have
an integrated plan.
-Stakeholder working in the City
14
Recommendations for Action
DRAFT
Our Approach: Collective Impact Strategies
The 5-Year Plan will build on the track record of programmatic success in San
Francisco, while acknowledging and responding to the bigger picture: we have
an urgent need to increase service coordination, create coherence between
programs, minimize duplication while maximizing service excellence, and
respond to the challenges facing our young people and their families. We aim to
create a more navigable, coherent user-friendly environment so that children
and youth can thrive. We can no longer work in silos.
In order to create more coherence while also
making progress towards our Outcomes
Framework, we propose making these five
strategies part of our everyday work
together:
organizations from different sectors agree to
solve a specific social problem using a
common agenda, aligning their efforts, and
using common measures of success.*
» Shared accountability
Our common agenda and measures of
success are included in the Outcomes
Framework. The Outcomes Framework
establishes shared outcomes we want to be
true for all children, youth and families.
» Coordinated service delivery to reduce
gaps and redundancies
» Targeted resources and coordinated
budgets
» Data sharing to improve practice
» Staff-training and capacity building
These strategies are based on emerging
research-based practices termed “collective
impact”. Collective impact is when
Collective Impact Strategies
We recognize that there need to be
resources and structures in place for these
strategies to take root. The OCOF staff will
provide much of the necessary infrastructure
in the form of administrative, organizational,
and technical and research support to the
Council, its outcomes framework, and the
necessary working groups. The staff will also
develop policy briefs and data analysis on
key issues relevant to implementation of the
Plan. The staff will serve as the “backbone
organization” defined in collective impact.
And now that these preconditions are in
place, we can begin the hard work of
behavior change by utilizing the five collect
impact strategies. City leaders, departments,
the San Francisco Unified School District
(“SFUSD”), and community partners must
come together to align practices; strengthen
access to services; coordinate across
agencies; and develop a unified strategy. We
believe that is what is necessary to make
progress on the measures in the Outcomes
Framework.
15
Recommendations for Action
DRAFT
Work Structures
San Francisco has so many rich collaborations, advisory bodies, and networks.
We propose developing working groups for each of the five goals in the
Outcomes Framework and the following work structures to build on existing
initiatives:
Objectives
The goal working groups will be responsible for a combination of planning,
recommending, and doing. They will:
1) Develop strategies based on shared data to move the City closer to achieving
the measurements for their respective goal.
2) Make recommendations about data targets and resource allocation to the
OCOF Council; and
3) May oversee the development and implementation of action plans to bring
those strategies to fruition.
Participants
One working group to represent each of the five goals.
• Groups will have equal representation by the community, City, and School
District and will be tri-chaired by leadership from each of the three groups.
• Groups will be kept intentionally small (less than 15 people) and supported by a
dedicated facilitator/coordinator.
• Existing collaboratives can apply to represent one of the five different goals.
Meeting Structure
• Goal Working Groups will meet monthly and stipends will be provided to
community members.
• The OCOF Council (supported by OCOF staff) will serve as the coordinating
body for all working groups.
• The Services Inventory and Data Working Groups will continue to meet and their
work will mutually inform the work of the Goal Working Groups.
• There will be opportunities to share information across existing initiatives.
Work Structures
16
Recommendations for Action
DRAFT
Work Structures (continued)
The meetings will intentionally focus on the collective impact strategies. There
will also be a component of ongoing focus on training and capacity building for
working group members. The intention is to build on what is working (review of
existing strategies, plans, initiatives, best practices, etc.) and review progress
towards the measures in the Outcomes Framework. We propose the following
meeting scope and sequence:
Meeting Topic
Description and Guiding Questions
Data Dive
• Deep dive on the measures for this goal
• Look at existing and planned data sources; discuss targets; and areas for
greater focus
Fiscal Mapping
• Look at how resources are spent as it relates to this goal and the measures
Service Delivery
• Review of services in this goal
• Discuss ways to close gaps and reduce redundancies
• Service inventory working group members bring a lens that spans across
goals
Staff Training
• What training exists and where could we collaborate?
• Where are the gaps given the measures?
Shared Accountability
• How can we hold ourselves accountable to deliver on these strategies and
measures?
Data Review and
Recommendations
• What are our key recommendations to the plan and progress report as it
relates to our goal?
• How have we done in making progress towards our measures and
collective impact practices this year?
Work Structures
17
DRAFT
Recommendations for Action
Implementation Strategies
These definitions describe the vision for how stakeholders and partners will
collaborate to provide services to children, youth and families in San Francisco.
Shared Accountability
» Partners hold each other accountable for
working together with best intentions.
Example: Hope SF
» Partners are aware of their individual and
collective role in achieving the measures
» Partners hold each other accountable for
their role in achieving the measures of the
Outcomes Framework
» The Council and its representative
departments make decisions about
programs/initiatives based on their
results; with equity measures
“
Success will be shared
goals, purpose,
accountability (but not
finger-pointing), which you
can trace through the
distribution of resources.
-Stakeholder working in the City
» Partners have developed trusting
individual and institutional relationships
Implementation Strategies
18
DRAFT
Recommendations for Action
Implementation Strategies (continued)
Coordinated Service Delivery
» Partners identify and implement new
strategies and activities to address gaps
or duplication
Example: Family Resource Centers,
Beacon Centers, and Child Advocacy
Center
» Services inventory becomes one-stop
shop for families/care givers as well as
service providers (we may need to explain
this in simpler terms)
» The number of providers or case
managers a family/child interacts with is
greatly reduced and there are shared care
plans in place
» The service is designed with families and
children/youth
» This may look different for each of the
five goals
Implementation Strategies
“
I work with the CBOs at
my campus and we match
students to services. For
example, I know my 9th
graders who are on the
early warning indicator list
will receive priority in the
city’s youth employment
agencies.
-High School Principal
19
DRAFT
Recommendations for Action
Implementation Strategies (continued)
Targeted Resources and Coordinated Budgets
» The equity lens drives resource allocation
decisions
Example: Office of Early Care and
Education and First 5
» Resources and contracts are allocated to
practices that have evidence or are
measuring results
» Budgets have a common OCOF template
aligning resources to goals
» RFP language ensures collaboration and
alignment to Outcomes Framework
» Budget timelines are aligned
» Efforts are coordinated to generate
additional funding and blended resources
are integrated into budget planning
Implementation Strategies
“
We have department heads
who have a tremendous
amount of power and
autonomy. They are not
forced to think about their
individual budgets relative
to budgets of other
agencies.
-Stakeholder working in the City
20
DRAFT
Recommendations for Action
Implementation Strategies (continued)
Data Sharing to Improve Practice
» Open access to aggregate data across
CBOS and city/school district with
common protocols and legal frameworks
in place
Example: First 5/Office of Early Care and
Education/SFUSD Early Childhood
» Decisions to improve practice are guided
by common data
» Data champions on senior leadership
teams exist across all partners
» Measures are adjusted over time to
ensure focus on the highest leverage
activities
“
I am receiving data and
technical assistance to
better understand which of
our families are not
succeeding. We work
together with multiple
partners to understand
why and develop a plan to
better support them.
-Family Resource Center manager
Implementation Strategies
21
DRAFT
Recommendations for Action
Implementation Strategies (continued)
Staff Training
» A common language exists across
partners
Example: Restorative Practices, Early
Childhood Training
» Training and curriculum aligned to the
Outcomes Framework is shared across
partner organizations; frameworks that
cut across goals/measures are utilized
» Training is differentiated based on need
and incorporated into daily practice
» The populations with greatest need
(utilizing the equity lens) receive priority
from all partner staff
“
There’s a tendency to
collaborate at the 30,000foot level, but collaboration
has to be at line level. If
you’re stuck at a high level,
people talk conceptually
about alignment, but that’s
coordination, not alignment.
-Stakeholder working in the City
Implementation Strategies
22
DRAFT
Next Steps
“
Success is an approach to
partnership that
transcends initiatives. It’s a
way the systems and the
people within those systems
interact with each other.
-Stakeholder working in the City
23
DRAFT
“
When we’re aligned, we’re not
bringing in the golden nugget from
outside San Francisco, but we’re
seeing what we have internally and
are able to implement that in ways
that are sustainable and don’t
require ongoing investments.
-Stakeholder working in the City
24
DRAFT
Conclusion
A Call to Action
•
•
•
Why San Francisco well-position to achieve true alignment
•
Consolidated City-County
•
Single District County
•
Low number/share of children
•
History of inclusion, racial/ethnic diversity, and progressive social policy
•
Shared citywide framework to align our efforts, measure our success, and hold
ourselves and one another accountable
•
San Francisco is already spending tremendous resources ($X) – opportunity to
leverage and allocate resources more effectively
What’s different about this effort
•
Leadership from Mayor and Superintendent
•
Charter-mandated
•
Longevity – will transcend administrations
Momentum is already building
•
Early signs of alignment from various departments and initiatives
“
We have fewer and fewer
poor families. We’re not
talking about a huge
number of people. We have
a lot of resources and many
good thinkers.
-Stakeholder working in the City
25
Glossary
DRAFT
Backbone organization
Collective Impact
Partners
26
Appendix
DRAFT
Working Group Application
Application for Goal Working Groups
27