gogsc counties strategic plan 2013-2016

Great Start Collaborative –Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties

2013-2016

Strategic Plan

Approved by GOGSC

September 2013

Strategic Plan (2013-2016) 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. 1

LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY................................................................................. 2

Why is a Great Start is so important?..................................................................... 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 10

PROFILE AND HISTORY ......................................................................................... 14

GOALS, OBJECTIVES, RELATED NEEDS, & INTERVENTIONS................................... 25

EARLY CHILDHOOD ACTION AGENDA................................................................... 30

FINANCING AND FUND DEVELOPMENT ............................................................... 57

APPENDIX A: Strategic Planning Process ............................................................. 60

APPENDIX B: Data Report & Priority Scoring Results........................................... 62

Appendix C: Fund Development Plan Assessment .............................................. 68

APPENDIX D: MSU Feedback Report .................................................................... 71

APPENDIX E: Operating Guidelines & Documents ............................................... 74

Appendix F: Early Childhood Acronyms............................................................... 86


LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY


Great Start Collaborative Members

Dear Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties Community Member:

The Great Start Collaborative of Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties recognizes that every child is

important. We are committed to research and evidence that shows that the first five years of life are

the building blocks to a child’s future. We work to ensure that our community is equipped with people,

resource, programs and strategies to reach this goal. The Great Start Collaborative has spent the past

year collecting and analyzing data. We have talked to community members and families to understand

the needs and priorities of young children in Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties. A strategic planning process

was completed during three planning meetings and additional team meetings. During each step of the

process, input from families with young children was incorporated. The resulting strategic priorities

position the Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties Great Start Collaborative and Parent Coalition to make a

difference in the lives of young children.

We pledge on behalf of the board and as supporters of the Early Childhood Action Agenda to

demonstrate our commitment to young children through action. Our actions will take use closer to the

shared vision of ensuring that every child in Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties is safe, healthy, and ready to

succeed in school and in life.


Great Start Parent Representatives(Parent Coalition, GSC Members, Workgroup Representatives)


Why is a Great Start is so important?

Creating Building Blocks for Learning! In the first 1000 days of life, an incredibly powerful

web of neurons is formed in a child’s brain. These neurons become the building blocks necessary for

learning. From infancy to age 6 the foundation for future development is established. The average

person lives more than 75 years. In the span of a lifetime, five years does not seem long. However for a

child, the first five years are an incredible period of fast paced learning. A child learns to think,

communicate, and develops social skills. The remainder of their life is spent adding to this foundation of

learning. Never again will a child develop at such a fast rate. Great Start initiatives across the state of

Michigan recognize that this amazing period of learning gives families and communities an amazing

opportunity to nurture learning.

The neurons and skills learned during the first five years

of life are the “Building Blocks” of a child’s future.

The Human Brain…

At Birth At 6 years old At 14 years old


GO-GSC Priorities

Pediatric & Family HealthPrenatal-age 8 healthcareSocial / Emotional Health

Knowledge of Indicators for Social-Emotional health

Support to service providers to promotesocial-emotional health.

Child Care & Early Education

Use of research based curriculum andassessment tools

Collaborating with programs onkindergarten expectations and increasingpreschool opportunities for students.

Family Support and Parenting Leadership

Increase family access to programs.

Transportation barriers

GSC will be responsive to parent needs

Studies show that a greatstart begins before birth.

Brain researchdemonstrates that thesynapse formation forlanguage and higher

cognitive functioning ishighly impacted during thefirst two years of life. Most

families do not evenconsider formal education

for their infant makingfamily members a child’s

“first” teachers.

Research has shown us when the brain grows, how the brain grows, and why the brain grows. From this

research we also know when important skill sets are optimally developed.

A comprehensive approach to providing services to children is critical. Research

shows that academic success is increased by meeting the all needs of the child and

families. Children need supportive conditions to succeed. Evidence of successful

programs led the Early Childhood Investment Corporation to establish five core areas.

These five “building blocks” provide the framework for Great Start Initiatives


Skill Set Optimal Learning Period Next Best

Emotional Intelligence 0 – 24 months 2 – 5 years

Motor Development 0 -24 months 2 – 5 years

Visual Recognition 0 – 24 months 2 – 5 years

Early Sound Recognition 4 – 8 months 8 months – 5 years

Music 0 – 36 months 8 months – 5 years

Additional research studies utilized brain scans to determine the impact of lack of supportive conditionsfor young children.

Brain Development1 and the effects of extreme stimulation neglectHealthy Child Neglected At Risk Child

1Source: H.T. Chugani, Wayne State University: Newsweek Special Edition, 1997


Future growth and prosperity of Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties rests with the quality of

early childhood experiences. Well-respected research on early brain and child development indicates

that these “early years” represent a once-in-a-lifetime building opportunity that our community cannot

afford to ignore. The need for investment in the youngest segment of our population remains a critical

need and the relevance of the plan will continue even as our economy rebuilds.

“When we invest wisely in children andfamilies, the next generation will pay thatback through a lifetime of productivity and

responsible citizenship.

When we fail to provide children with whatthey need to build a strong foundation forhealthy and productive lives, we put ourfuture prosperity and security at risk.”2

Ensuring a Bright and Prosperous Future for all Gogebic-Ontonagon counties children is the

focus of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties Great Start Collaborative. A wide variety of early childhood

services providers, community members, businesses, and families of young children are part of the

Great Start effort. Members set goals, plan programs, and coordinate work efforts to meet the early

childhood needs of all children and to fill gaps in services. This work began in 2008 as an extension of

existing early childhood collaborative efforts. With funding and assistance from the Early Childhood

Investment Corporation, the collaborative has produced results. Increased coordination of services,

shared resources, created early childhood resource kiosks, assessing early literacy skills of preschool

students, promoting social-emotional health, expanded parent participation in the parent coalition, and

increasing access to services are just some of the Collaborative’ s accomplishments. This plan is the

result of a year-long strategic planning process. The plan positions us to build on these

accomplishments, helping to ensure that all children in Gogebic-Ontonagon counties have the services

needed for a great start.

2“The Science of Early Childhood Development: Closing the Gap Between What we Know and What We Do,”

National Scientific Council’s Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, January 2007, p.1. Available

online at: www.developingchild.net.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Michigan Early Childhood Investment Corporation was established in February 2005and was responsible for the original formation of the Great Start System in Michigan. Then in2010 the Office of Great Start was established by Governor Snyder. The Office of Great Start islocated in the Michigan Department of Education is serving as the focal point in stategovernment for developing Michigan’s Great Start System. In 2008, the Gogebic-OntonagonGreat Start Collaborative (G-O GSC) was formed. The collaborative members represent a cross-section of professionals, community members and parents from both Gogebic and Ontonagoncounties in Michigan’s western Upper Peninsula. Members prepared a three year plan to guidethe collaborative’s work. From 2009-2012, G-O GSC focused on organizing teams around thefive core components- Pediatric & Family Health, Social-Emotional Health, Parent Leadership,Family Support, and Child Care and Early Education. The G-O GSC also has focused its workaround the Office of Great Start Priorities that 1) Children are born healthy, 2) Children arehealthy, thriving and developmentally on track birth to third grade, 3) Children aredevelopmentally ready to succeed school at their time of school entry, 4) Children are preparedto succeed in fourth grade and beyond by reading proficiently by the end of third grade.

In 2012, members began the strategic planning process and explored how they couldbuild on their past strategic plan and accomplishments. The process was led by a consultantallowing multiple opportunities over a six month planning process for input from collaborativemembers, families, and community leaders. The greatest impact in early childhood will resultwhen all segments of our community join the effort, embrace the plan, and make acommitment to sustain its effort. The planning process involved seven main steps:

Step 1: Data & Infrastructure ReviewStep 2: Establishment of priorities for Core Components and InfrastructureStep 3: Evaluation of 2009-2012 PlanStep 4: Goal DevelopmentStep 5: Development of the Action Agenda including objectives to measure progressStep 6: Review and Expansion of the current Fund Development PlanStep 7: Review and approval of Strategic Plan by the Great Start Collaborative Board

G-O GSC began by reviewing local data and conducting a community survey. The results ofthese activities were the focus of a day-long retreat held in December 2011. Retreatparticipants used this information to select priorities for the 2013-2016 strategic plan. Thisretreat was also used to reaffirm the organization’s vision and mission and establish a plan forfuture activities. Members also explored infrastructure needs and strategies for strengtheningthe G-O GSC operating structure. The Great Start Initiative is also characterized by an emphasison making long lasting system changes. The System change model includes changing mindsets,increasing impact of program components, increasing connections, improving policies andpractices, increasing the level and effective use of resources, and balancing power.3

3 Coffman, 2007; Foster-Fishman, et al., 2007


2013-2016

Strategic Plan

Vision: A Great Start for every child in Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties; safe, healthy and

eager to succeed in school and in life.

Mission: The Mission of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative is to provide a

Great Start for all children from prenatal through age eight by assuring a coordinated system of

community resources and supports to assist all families in Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties.

The Gogebic-OntonagonGreat Start Collaborative strategic plan is organized by

five core areas. These areas are critical to promoting healthydevelopment of young children.

Extensive review of research indicatesthat a child’s early brain development

and readiness for kindergarten aresignificantly impacted by five core areas.These areas are the basis for the Great

Start star and have served as a model forthe Gogebic-Ontonagon County 2013-

2016 strategic plan.

Two additional areas of focus related to the operation of theCollaborative are also included in the plan- Infrastructure and

Fund Development.

Priorities, Goals, and StrategiesReview of data4 pointed to many important needs of Gogebic-Ontonagon County children in

each of the core areas. Identified needs were prioritized based on the members’ perception of

“level of need” and “ability to impact” the issue. The following have been included as priorities

in the 2013-2016 Strategic Plan:

4Data report is included as Appendix B.


2013-2016

Strategic Plan

Pediatric & Family HealthPriority Issue: Prenatal-age 8 healthcare

Goal: Identify and implement evidence based practices to meet the highest health needs facing youngchildren prenatal through age 8 and determine if children are born healthy.Strategy 1: Review health data to determine highest health needs facing the prenatal-age 8 population.Strategy 2: Implement one-two health system changes based on strategy 1 findings.

Social / Emotional HealthPriority Issue: Knowledge of Indicators for Social-Emotional health

Goal: Early Childhood service providers, parents, and community will know indicators of social-emotional health, how to promote them and where to refer families.Strategy 1: Identify the social-emotional screening tools that are being utilized in early childhood programs.

Priority Issue: Provide support to service providers to promote social-emotional health.

Goal: Early Childhood service providers will have the knowledge and skills to meet the and social-emotional needs of young children.Strategy 1: Evaluate early childhood home visiting programs to identify gaps and perceived needs.Strategy 2: Increase awareness of social-emotional health.

Child Care & Early EducationPriority Issue: Use of research based curriculum and assessment tools

Goal: Increase effective use of research based curriculum/assessment by early childhood programs.Strategy 1: Promote the use of researched based curriculum and assessment.Strategy 2: Support early childhood programs that are using research based curriculum and assessment.

Priority Issue: Collaborating with programs on kindergarten expectations and increasing preschoolopportunities for students.

Goal: Children have access to high quality early learning and development programs and enterkindergarten prepared for success.Strategy 1: Raising awareness of MDE kindergarten entry assessment.Strategy 2: Increase preschool opportunities prioritizing at-risk children.Strategy 3: Communication across early childhood programs on kindergarten expectations.

Family Support and Parenting LeadershipPriority Issue: Increase family access to programs.

Goal: Families will have greater access to information about high-quality early learning anddevelopment programs.Strategy 1: Increase family access to program information.

Priority Issue: Transportation barriers

Goal: Awareness of transportation barriers to be accessing services will increase.Strategy 1: Include available transportation on GSC website.

Priority Issue: Families have the education and support they need to ensure children are healthy,thriving, and developmentally on track from birth through third grade.

Goal: Families have the education and support they need to prepare their children for success inkindergarten.Strategy 1: Provide leadership trainings to families.Strategy 2: Increase kindergarten readiness opportunities for young children and families.


2013-2016

Strategic Plan

InfrastructureBased on review of evaluation data prepared by the MSU Evaluation team, members discussedcrosscutting issues that impact all core areas. Three topics were identified resulting in threegoals and strategies.

Goal: One to three system changes will be in progress by September 2015.Strategy 1: Identify 3 system changes for consideration.

Priority Issue: System ChangeSystem changes are changes to the infrastructure of programs and services.(ie. Aligningassessments, tools/curriculums, changes policies, etc). System changes help to address barriersfaced by families and improve the continuum of services. Each child has unique needs across thecomponents for school readiness (pediatric/family health, social/emotional health, early care andeducation, parenting leadership, and family support). Identification, referral, and a streamlinedsystem of services are all key to ensuring that each child’s unique needs are met and that allchildren are ready for school success.

Goal: GSC/PC will be able to explain the benefits and welcome membership of communityand organization partnerships.Strategy 1: Explain benefits to members and welcome membership on GSC.

Priority Issue: Priority Issues: MembershipMany of the GSC membership benefits are not always obvious. Members who are more engaged areoften more likely to experience the benefits of membership and to value their involvement in GSCwork. We will increase our efforts to communicate benefits to members and to increase their levelof engagement. We also will provide opportunities for member engagement through events,trainings, and other networking activities.

Goal: Each team will have at least one objective that measures outcomes of children andfamilies.Strategy 1: Teams measure outcomes for children and families.

Priority Issue: Outcome Based ApproachesMany of the efforts of a collaborative are difficult to measure as outcomes for children. Many of ourgauges for success are based on process measure that have shown to be effective in improvingservices which would likely have an impact on children’s outcomes. Monitoring impact onchildren’s outcomes is important to maintain our members’ commitment to GSC work and forgrowth in relationship to community support and funders. By ensuring a process which includesoutcome measurements we plan to have data that can be used to communicate success and impacton children to decision makers, members, and the community.


2013-2016

Strategic Plan

PROFILE AND HISTORY

The Great Start Collaborative membership has a long-standing commitment in Gogebic-

Ontonagon counties to work together in order to meet the needs of some of our most

vulnerable citizens, children prenatal through age eight. Each member realizes that they play a

key role in part of each young child’s life in the community. Together the Great Start

Collaborative members have been committed to assuring that every child in Gogebic-

Ontonagon counties is safe, healthy, and eager to succeed in school and in life. The

collaborative members include representatives from the following community groups: early

childhood education, parents, public health, human services, community mental health

administrators, K-12 system representatives, faith-based leaders, child care providers,

charitable organizations, business leaders, and other community leaders. These partners

recognize the importance of establishing and maintaining an early childhood system for the

county as evidenced by their signatures in the opening letters of this Strategic Plan.

GSC members actively involved in Dec. 7, 2012 Strategic Planning Retreat with Kay Balcer


2010-2013

Accomplishments

The Gogebic-OntonagonCounties’ Great Start

Collaborative and GreatStart Parent Coalition work

closely together to meet theneeds of young children andtheir families. Over the pastthree years, members have

accomplished manyactivities set forth in the

first strategic plan.

"Being a part of the Parent

Coalition and the Great Start

Collaborative has been a great

experience. I have had the

opportunity to share my

thoughts and concerns

regarding child and parenting

concerns in our county. It's

also increased my awareness

of resources available for my

children and has created

another network for me to be

informed. It has also given me

opportunity for personal

growth, being involved in

committee work and attending

conferences as well as

coordinating an educational

program for parents in my

county."

Angie Foley, Parent Leader

Great Start Collaborative worked together as a team to set goals,

plan programs, and coordinate work efforts to meet the early

childhood needs of all children and to fill the gaps in services.

Established early childhood resource kiosks, which are laptops

located throughout the counties connected to the

www.gogreatstart.org website to ensure parents can find

information about early childhood programs and services for their

children.

Advocated for early childhood to State legislators and local officials:

coordinated “Sandbox Party Candidate Meet and Greets”, virtual

legislative summit on early childhood, attended Star Power an

advocacy event in Lansing, and met in one-on-one meetings.

Multiple class series of Creative Curriculum, Highscope, online COR,

and IGDIs Early Literacy assessment Trainings were held for

teachers and providers to encourage “best practices” in childcare

centers/homes and in public/private preschools .

Established 3 Early Childhood Resource Libraries with the Great

Start to Quality UP Resource Center to make resources available to

check-out at local libraries for early childhood books, CDs, puppets,

games, and resources.

May 2011, 2012, 2013- The Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties Great

Start Collaborative provided support for the Gogebic-Ontonagon

Counties Community Wide Welcome Newborn bags given to new

parents of newborns at local hospitals with baby supplies and

resource information.

May 2011, 2012, 2013- The Gogebic-Ontonagon Counties Great

Start Collaborative co-hosted Early Childhood Family Fun Days to

promote local resources, enhance family relationships, create

connections with families with preschool and other programs.

Collaborated with Great Start to Quality UP Resource Center to

develop Social-Emotional Health promotional materials to educate

parents and community on importance of social-emotional health.

Child care providers, teachers, and parents were also trained on

using a child development screening tool called ASQ-3 and ASQ-SE.

December 2011, 2012- Karen Ray Community-Wide Collaboration

Trainings were hosted to educate our GSC members and

community partners on what collaboration is and how to create a

collaborative environment.by working together.


2013-2016

Status Report

EARLY CHILDHOOD SYSTEM ASSESSMENT

Element 1: Data Collection, Analysis and ReportingData was collected through the Community Data from the Early Childhood InvestmentCorporation in order to determine the current status of children in Gogebic-OntonagonCounties. The data report was prepared by Ray Sharp, Manager of Community Planning andPreparedness, Western U.P. Health Department, with Assistance from Teresa Woods,Community Health Assessment Specialist. When the first GO-GSC data report and strategicplanning was conducted, the United States was beginning to feel the effects of the 2008financial crisis and the Great Recession of 2009. Predictions made then of future increases inunemployment and child poverty and reduced state tax revenues have by and large come topass, as this 2012 report demonstrates. More families with young children are in poverty.Health, education and social-support systems are over-burdened and under-funded. Challengesremain as we strive to create an environment where all children are healthy and ready to learn.Service providers continue to be called upon to continue to do more with less as they prioritizeservices to vulnerable populations. Demographic and economic data supports this conclusion:

Ten-year population decreases of 5.4 percent in Gogebic County and 13.3 percent inOntonagon County from 2000 to 2010, with most of the decreases among children andyoung adults. Senior citizens now make up about one-quarter of residents.

Among households with children under age 6, half of those in Gogebic County and one-third in Ontonagon County are headed by a single parent.

Unemployment rates rose steeply across the region in 2009 and crested at about 15percent in 2010-11.

About 30 percent of children in Gogebic County, and 24 percent of Ontonagon County’schildren, live in households with incomes below the poverty line.

Data for Medicaid, WIC and USDA school meal programs also indicate high percentagesof children from low-to-moderate income families.

IntroductionThe Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative utilized a needs based approach to identifytop concerns and prioritize the issues that would be addressed in the 2013-2016 strategic plan.The following data highlights the strengths (indicated by) and areas of need (indicated by )for Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties. Some data is not clearly a strength or area of need. Inaddition, certain statistics require additional information to determine meaning. For example,an increase in reported child abuse cases could mean an increase in children being abused ( ).The increase could also indicate that reporting awareness campaigns have been successful andthat cases unreported in the past are now being documented and children are being helped(). For statistics that have no clear interpretation, a appears before the statistic.


2013-2016

Status Report

Community ConditionsPrimary Indicators # of Children 0-5: 1,102 (2009) 1,046 (2007) Percentage K-12 Students receiving free & reduced lunch: 56% (2010-11), 49.5% (2008-09)

# Children in Poverty under age 8: 248, 28% (2005-09) 223, 20% (2000)Below 200% of Poverty: 53% 554 (2005-09)Single Parent Families under 18: 29% (2009) 18% (2000)


2013-2016

Status Report


2013-2016

Status Report

Pediatric & Family HealthPrimary Indicators

Births to women with less than adequate prenatal care: 24% (2009), 19% (2000) Local pregnant women access prenatal care at similar rates to statewide – a bit better in

Gogebic County, a bit worse in Ontonagon County. Percentage women smoking while pregnant: 32% staying the same

# children 19-35 months fully immunized: 75.3% (2009), 80.6% (2000) # children insured: 93.6% (2009), 90.9% (2000)

Immunization rates for toddlers have remained marginally better locally than statewide,notable because there have been recent local outbreaks of Pertussis and other vaccine-preventable diseases among school-aged children and adults.

Percent of Children0-18 Insured byMedicaid: 50.7%(2009), 41.9%(2000)


2013-2016

Status Report

Social / Emotional HealthPrimary Indicators(Note: Availability of Information regarding Social and Emotional Health is limited)

# Children 0-5 in Foster Care: 8 (2010), 16 (2007)

# of Children receiving public mental health services: 11 (2010), 2 (2006) all in Gogebic County

Rates and Numbers of Children Ages 0-5 In Foster CareSource: Michigan Department of Human Services via Kids Count

First number is rate (per 1,000 children ages 0-5)

Number of children in parentheses.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Baraga County 13.6 (7) * (0) 20.4 (11) 29.6 (16) 22.6 (12)

Gogebic County 7.9 (6) 19.4 (15) 28.4 (22) 10.1 (8) * (4)

Houghton County * (3) 3.5 (8) 2.6 (6) 2.5 (6) 6.5 (16)

Keweenaw County * (1) * (1) * (0) * (0) * (0)

OntonagonCounty * (1) * (1) * (1) * (2) * (0)

Michigan 8.2 (6,431) 8.6 (6,630) 9 (6,820) 7.9 (5,943) 8.1 (6,027)

Child Care & Early EducationPrimary Indicators

Percent of children, ages 0-2, served by Early On: 4.4% (2011) 5.2% (2006)# of Slots in GSRP: 51 (2010) 62 (2006-07)Percentage of 4 year olds served in GSRP: 28.7% (2010) 35% (2006-07)

Percent of Children Who Achieved Reading Proficiency in 3rd Grade: 77.2% (2011), 61.4 (2007)

Percent of Children Who Achieved Math Proficiency in 3rd Grade: 41.7% (2011), 31.9% (2007) Number of Children Ages 0-5 Who Are Participating in Special Education: 4.5% 53 (2011), 4.2%,

46 (2006) Number of Children Under 6 With All Parents in the Labor Force: 71.7% 772 (2006-10), 69.5%

923 (2000) Percent of Children Ages 0-2 Who Could Have A Developmental Delay: 5.2%


2013-2016

Status Report

Number of Child Care Centers: 10(2012) 14 (2007)Number of Child Care Centers Accepting infants: 3 (2011) 5 (2007)Number of Centers offering full day continuous care: 5 (2012) 7(2007)

Number of Group Homes (12 children): 7 (2012) 7 (2007)Number of Family Homes (6 children): 6 (2011) 9 (2007)There are 146 children (mostly 4-year-olds) in preschool programs in 2012-13, about 73percent of the two-county population of 4-year-olds.

Child Care Centers # GroupHomes(max 12children)

# FamilyHomes(max 6children)

Total#

# AcceptingInfants

# Offering FullDay Continuous

Care

Gogebic County 9 4 4 4 6

Ontonagon County 2 0 1 4 0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11

Percentage of All 4 Year OldsServed in GSRP

Source: Michigan Dept. of Education

Michigan Gogebic-Ontonagon


2013-2016

Status Report

Parenting LeadershipPrimary Indicators # Births to Teens: 19 (2010), 21( 2006) with 3 repeat births to teen moms (Gogebic County: 16,

17 and Ontonagon County: 3, 5) # Births to Moms without high school diploma: 20 (2010), 22 (2005)

Gogebic County had high rates for several risk factors among 2010 births: 17 percent of births were tomothers who had not completed high school and 52 percent of birth mothers were unmarried.

Family SupportPrimary Indicators Number of Births Paid for By Medicaid: 93 (2010) 99 (2006) Number of Children 0-5 Receiving Family Independence Program (FIP): 106 (2011) 146 (2006)

Number of Children 0-5 Receiving Food Assistance: 457 (2011) 375(2007)Number of Children Ages 0-5 Who Are Substantiated Victims of Abuse or Neglect: 47 (2011), 46 (2006)

Confirmed Victims of Abuse and/or Neglect, Ages 0-5Source: Michigan DHS (Rate per 1,000 children)

Gogebic County Ontonagon County Michigan

2006 19.3 14.0 11.4

2007 28.1 11.1 11.9

2008 19.6 20.9 12.0

2009 17.9 20.3 21.9

2010 18.6 50.5 22.4


Element 2: Strategic Services ReviewDuring Great Start Collaborative meetings, workgroup meetings, and parent coalition meetingsfrom November 2012 to March 2013, the priorities were reviewed and current level of servicesdiscussed. The following questions were considered for each of the priority areas: What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition?

What do we want to see change or happen by addressing this topic?

What is already in place to address this issue?

What are the gaps in services or barriers to services that need to be addressed?

Are there access issues related to this priority?

What system changes could help achieve the impact we desire?

The following goals resulted from the review of services and analysis.

Pediatric & Family HealthPriority Issue: Prenatal-age 8 healthcare Goal: Identify and implement evidence based practices to meet the highest health needs facing

young children prenatal through age 8 and determine if children are born healthy.

Social / Emotional HealthPriority Issue: Knowledge of Indicators for Social-Emotional health Goal: Early Childhood service providers, parents, and community will know indicators of social-

emotional health, how to promote them and where to refer families.Priority Issue: Support to service providers to promote social-emotional health. Goal: Early Childhood service providers will have the knowledge and skills to meet and social-

emotional needs of young children.

Child Care & Early EducationPriority Issue: Use of research based curriculum and assessment tools Goal: Increase effective use of research based curriculum/assessment by early childhood programs. Goal: Children have access to high quality early learning and development programs and enter

kindergarten prepared for success.

Family Support and Parenting LeadershipPriority Issue: Increase family access to programs. Goal: Families will have greater access to information about high-quality early learning and

development programs. Goal: Awareness of transportation barriers to be accessing services will increase. Goal: Families have the education and support they need to ensure children are healthy, thriving,

and developmentally on track from birth through third grade.


Element 3: The Early Childhood Infrastructure ReviewAlong with the five component areas of the Early Childhood System, the committees reviewed the GreatStart Collaborative and Great Start Parent Coalition infrastructure. The committees identified threepriorities for improving infrastructure based on the 2010 MSU Evaluation. When the 2012 report wasavailable in January 2013, the report was compared to the infrastructure priorities that were selectedearlier. The 2012 report showed a significant amount of progress and accomplishment regardinginfrastructure development from 2010 to 2012.

Infrastructure Summary of MSU Evaluation Report5

Areas of Strength Intentional Systems Change Actions Effective Partnerships Shared Goals

Areas of Opportunity Strong Relational Networks Root Cause Focus Parent Leadership and Voice Local Champions

Infrastructure: Based on review of evaluation data prepared by the MSU Evaluation team,members discussed crosscutting issues that impact all core areas.Priority Issue: System Change Related Needs: Strong Relational Networks

Goal: One to three system changes will be in progress by September 2015.

Priority Issue: Priority Issues: Membership Related Needs: Strong Relational Networks,Parent Leadership & Voice, Local Champions

Goal: GSC/PC will be able to explain the benefits and welcome membership of communityand organization partnerships.

Priority Issue: Outcome Based Approaches Related Needs: Root Cause Focus

Goal: Families of young children have input in the direction and activities of the MidlandCounty Great Start Collaborative.

NEXT STEPS: The next steps include continued strengthening of the collaborative and expandingefforts to address the priority issues in the strategic plan. Specifically, the Collaborative will:

Increase intentional system change being pursued by each team.

Expand membership and increasing relationships between agencies, parents, communitymembers, and businesses.

Increase the use of outcome measures and root cause analysis by Teams.

Assemble a Team to create a pediatric and family health plan.

Increase the use of research based curriculums.

Establish and promoting consistent kindergarten readiness skills.

Increase access to information about services.

Reduce Transportation barriers.

Increase responsiveness to parent needs.

Strengthen fund development activities.

5Summary report found in Appendix C.


GOALS, OBJECTIVES, RELATED NEEDS, & INTERVENTIONS

For the next three years, the work of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative will be

focus on mobilizing the community and providers around early childhood issues. Work will be

characterized by creating system change. System change components impacted by GSC work

will include a combination of changes in mindsets, program components, connections,

resources, policy/practice, and power balances.

Each of the action agenda items in the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative Strategic

Plan focuses on strategies that will strengthen networks and build relationships, identify and

attempt to impact root causes, increasing opportunities for parent leadership and voice, and

increasing the identification and use of local great start champions. The Early Childhood Action

Agenda was developed and will be revised as necessary based on best practice, current

research, changing trends and funding opportunities. The action agenda items are targeted for

completion by November 2016.

Pediatric & Family Health

Priority Issue: Prenatal-age 8 health care

Related Needs/Data:• Births to women with less than adequate prenatal care: 24% (2009), 19% (2000)• Local pregnant women access prenatal care at similar rates to statewide – a bit better inGogebic County, a bit worse in Ontonagon County.• Percentage women smoking while pregnant: 32%• # children 19-35 months fully immunized: 75.3% (2009), 80.6% (2000

Goal: Identify and implement evidence based practices to meet the highest healthneeds facing young children prenatal through age 8 and determine if children areborn healthy.Objective 1: A health team will be established to review the current status of health forchildren ages 0-8 years old. The team will determine the highest health needs and thenresearch evidenced based practice to address the needs. The team will also look at how manychildren will be impacted by the practice. Measure 1: # of meetings and # of organizations involved Measure 2: 1-2 health system changes implemented to impact prenatal-age 8 health.

Strategy 1: Review health data to determine highest health needs facing prenatal-age 8population.Strategy 2: Implement 1-2 health system changes.


Social / Emotional Health

Priority Issue: Knowledge of Indicators for Social-Emotional healthRelated Needs/Data:Many teachers cite behavioral issues as the greatest challenges they face in the Kindergarten classroom.However, data specific to social emotional school readiness is not available. There are several risk factorsthat have been identified for young children in our community.

15 % of Gogebic-Ontonagon births were to mothers who had not completed high school 29 % of Gogebic-Ontonagon birth mothers reported smoking while pregnant compared to the

Michigan rate of 18% 52 % of Gogebic birth mothers were unmarried; 10.6% of births in Gogebic-Ontonagon were to teen

parents compared to Michigan rate of 9.9%. 29% of children under 18 live in single parent families 11 % of Gogebic births were pre-term.

56% of children 0-5 were below 200% poverty in Gogebic/Ontonagon

Goal: Early Childhood service providers, parents, and community will know indicators ofsocial-emotional health, how to promote them and where to refer families.Objective 1: Professionals who work with children have increased access to information aboutsocial/emotional indicators. Measure: 50 professionals are educated through a variety of individual and group contacts

regarding social/emotional indicators, screening tools, and making referrals.

Strategy 1: Identify the social-emotional screening tools are being utilized in early childhoodprograms.

Priority Issue: Support to service providers to promote social-emotional health.Related Needs/Data:

Data related to the screening tools used by home visiting programs is not available which is thereason our first steps are assembling this information.

According to the MSU Evaluation Survey, The percent of local service providers indicating that they had adopted evidence-based programs

decreased from 18% in 2010 to 13% in 2012.

The 2012 rate of adopting evidence based programs in Gogebic-Ontonagon counties was only 13%compared to the state rate of 20%.

Goal: Early Childhood service providers will have the knowledge and skills to meet andsocial-emotional needs of young children.Objective 1: Increase the use of social emotional screening tools and research based curriculums inhome visiting programs. Measure: The number of home visiting programs using social-emotional screening tools

increases. (based determined in Strategy 1, Activity 1)Strategy 1: Evaluate early childhood home visiting programs to identify gaps and perceived needs.Strategy 2: Increase awareness of social-emotional health.


Child Care & Early EducationPriority Issue: Use of research based curriculum and assessment toolsRelated Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation Survey, The percent of local service providers indicating that they had adopted evidence-based programs

decreased from 18% in 2010 to 13% in 2012. The 2012 rate of adopting evidence based programs in Gogebic-Ontonagon counties was only 13%

compared to the state rate of 20%. Only 6% of Gogebic-Ontonagon providers indicated they had changed policies, practices, and

procedures compared to the Michigan rate of 26%.

Goal: Increase the effective use of research based curriculum and assessment by early childhoodprogramsObjective 1: 1. Early childhood providers are more likely to use research/evidence based materialsfollowing training. Measure: On a training evaluation, 75% of participants indicated that they are likely or very likely to

increase their use of research/evidenced based materials.Objective 2: There is an increase in early childhood providers who are using research/evidence basedcurriculums and assessments. Measure: According to a childcare provider survey or the GS2Q profiles, there is an increase the

percentage of providers using research based curriculums and the percentage in providers usingresearch based assessment tools to be determined with the GS2Q goals for our area.

Strategy 1: Promote the use of researched based curriculum and assessment.Strategy 2: Support early childhood programs that use research based curriculum and assessment.

Priority Issue: Collaborating with programs on kindergarten expectations and increasingpreschool opportunities for students.Related Needs/Data: Data regarding Kindergarten Readiness will be available with the development andimplementation of the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment. Current data is not available. Other data thatmay give an indication of kindergarten readiness: Approximately 73% of 4 year olds are enrolled in preschool. 77% of G-O 3rd grade children achieved reading proficiency compared to 62.4% of Michigan. 42% of G-O 3rd grade children achieved math proficiency compared to 36.3% of Michigan 27% of GO 1st graders are older than their cohort compared to only 20.4% of Michigan

Goal: Children have access to high quality early learning and development programs and enterkindergarten prepared for success.

Objective 1: Early childhood providers are more likely to use research/evidence based materialsfollowing training. Measure: 20 providers receive information about the Kindergarten Entry Assessment and

common expectations for Kindergarten Readiness.Objective 2: More students will have access to high quality preschool experience. Measure: 10 additional students attend GSRP

Objective 3: Families will have access to information about kindergarten readiness that isconsistent with the information they received from their childcare and preschool provider. Measure: Information about the Kindergarten Readiness Criteria is distributed to 150 families

and providers.Strategy 1: Raising awareness of MDE kindergarten entry assessment.Strategy 2: Increase preschool opportunities prioritizing at-risk children.Strategy 3: Communication across early childhood programs on kindergarten expectations.


Family Support & Parent LeadershipPriority Issues: Increase family access to programs.

Related Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has theseconditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal) 69% indicated that there was increased Access to Early Childhood Services, 60% indicated that parents had Easier Access to Services 50% indicated that parents were more Informed 52% indicated that thought Local Providers were More Responsive to Parent Concerns

Goal: Families will have greater access to information about high-quality early learning and developmentprograms.Objective 1: The Access to Services scores on the MSU Evaluation Survey Improve.

Measure: MSU Evaluation Report. Easier Access to Services 2012=60%; 2016 Target=65%Informed Parents 2012=50%; 2016 Target=55%Increased Access to Services 2012=69%; 2016 Target=75%

Strategy 1: Increase access for families to program information.

Priority Issue: Transportation barriersRelated Needs/Data: Percentage K-12 Students receiving free & reduced lunch: 56% (2010-11), 49.5% (2008-09) UP # Children in Poverty under age 8: 248, 28% (2005-09) 223, 20% (2000) Below 200% of Poverty: 53% 554 (2005-09) Single Parent Families under 18: 29% (2009) 18% (2000)

Goal: Awareness of transportation barriers to be accessing services will increase.Objective 1: Transportation gaps/barriers will be identified and awareness about transportation options will bemade available to families to access services.

Measure: MSU data- Organizational changes to policies, practices and procedures. (ie. How many agencieshave shifted where/when to provide services to meet the needs of families)

Strategy 1: Include available transportation on GSC website.

Priority Issue: GSC will be responsive to parent needs.Related Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has theseconditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal) 52% indicated that thought Local Providers were More Responsive to Parent Concerns Percent of children, ages 0-2, served by Early On: 4.4% (2011) 5.2% (2006) # of Slots in GSRP: 51 (2010) 62 (2006-07) Percentage of 4 year olds served in GSRP: 28.7% (2010) 35% (2006-07) Number of Child Care Centers: 10(2012) 14 (2007) Number of Child Care Centers Accepting infants: 3 (2011) 5 (2007) Number of Centers offering full day continuous care: 5 (2012) 7(2007) Number of Group Homes (12 children): 7 (2012) 7 (2007)

Number of Family Homes (6 children): 6 (2011) 9 (2007)

Goal: Families have the education and support they need to ensure children are healthy, thriving, anddevelopmentally on track from birth through third grade.Objective 1. Parents have the education they need to support their child’s school readiness skills.

Measure: Number of parents participating in the Parent Coalition and education opportunities aboutschool readiness.

Strategy 1: Provide leadership trainings to families.Strategy 2: Increase kindergarten readiness opportunities for young children and families.


InfrastructurePriority Issue: System Change

Related Needs/Data:According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has these conditions in placeQuite a Bit to a Great Deal) Strong Relational Networks : In 2010 was 30% and increased to 36% in 2012. Still one of the lowest scores

on the evaluation. Comprehensive Early Childhood System Improvements was at 76%.

Strengths on the MSU Evaluation that would indicate that organizations were ready to undertake system changeincluded: Readiness for Change in 2012 was 86% Interdependent Organizations scored at 84% Shared Goals ranked high at 93% Effective Partnerships was indicated by 97%

Goal: One to three system changes will be in progress by September 2015.Objective 1: Three system changes that will increase effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of services to childrenare in progress. Measure 1: By September 2015, work plans are in place and being implemented for three system changes.

Strategy 1: Identify 3 system changes for consideration.

Priority Issue: MembershipRelated Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC hasthese conditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal) Sustained and Expanded Public and Private Investment in Early Childhood in 2012 was 38% compared to the

state rate of 42%. Benefits of Participating in GSC/ GSPC for Parents was at 56% while the Michigan rate was 64%.

Goal: GSC/PC will be able to explain the benefits and welcome membership of community andorganization partnerships.Objective 1: Increase the level of member commitment, collaboration, and satisfaction. Measure: MSU Evaluation Report

Benefits of Participating in GSC/GSPC for Parents 2012=56%; 2016 Target=60%Benefits of Participating in GSC for Organizations 2012=74%; 2016 Target=80%

Measure: and development of the member involvement measure as part of the progress reporting system Measure: Membership Feedback Survey questions indicates that GSC members benefit from: 90%

networking, 80% sharing of early childhood announcements including trainings/events, 60% informationabout early childhood resources(programs and services available and news/emails).

Strategy 1: Explain benefits to members and welcome membership on GSC.

Priority Issue: Outcome Based ApproachesRelated Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC hasthese conditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal)

Only 45% of members rated Improved Outcomes for Children and Families as an accomplishment.

Goal: Each team will have at least one objective that measures outcomes of children and families.Objective 1: Teams each have at least one outcome based measure incorporated into their workplan.Measure 1: 5 outcome based measurements for young children that include baseline/ targets are established.

Strategy 1: Teams measure outcomes for children and families


2013-2016

Action Agenda

EARLY CHILDHOOD ACTION AGENDA

The Early Childhood Action Agenda details the Action Steps and Subtasks planned to reach the goals and objectives of this Strategic Plan.

Pediatric & Family HealthPriority Issue: Prenatal-age 8 health careGoal: Identify and implement evidence based practices to meet the highest health needs facing young children prenatal through age 8and determine if children are born healthy.Objective Measure

1. A health team will be established to review the current status of health for

children ages 0-8 years old and determine if children are born health. The team will

determine the highest health needs and then research evidenced based practice to

address the needs. The team will also look at how many children will be impacted

by the practice.

1. # of meetings and # of organizations involved2. 1-2 health system changes implemented to impact prenatal-age 8 health.

Related Needs/Data:

Births to women with less than adequate prenatal care: 24% (2009), 19% (2000)

Local pregnant women access prenatal care at similar rates to statewide – a bit better in Gogebic County, a bit worse in Ontonagon County.

Percentage women smoking while pregnant: 32%

# children 19-35 months fully immunized: 75.3% (2009), 80.6% (2000A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Health care needs in our community are wide and varied. At this point there is not a group

actively focused on the health needs of young children.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressing this topic? We want to see progress in implementation of evidenced based practices to meet thehighest health needs facing young children prenatal through age 8.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? WIC, MSUE, GOCAA Head Start, SNAP Ed., hospitals, LVD Head Start, GOISD

D. What are the gaps in services or barriers to services that need to beaddressed?

Education, tribal WIC, many national, state and local efforts

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by ourworkgroup related to this priority (i.e. rural communities, waitinglists, knowledge of services, available providers that take Medicaidor uninsured, demographic pockets of need)

Waiting lists, accessibility to preschool, transportation, Doctors not taking new patients, lackof pediatric providers, distance, times to see doctors, inconsistent health care optionsavailable within counties

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Agencies partnering and working together to address the highest health needs prenatalthrough age 8.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Strategy 1: Review health data to determine the highest health needs facing the prenatal-age 8 population.

Brief Description: We really need to do extensive data review to determine what are the highest needs facing young children. A data review will increase the healthteam’s knowledge of the major needs and give them a starting point for discussion on how to make impact to children.

Action Steps Subtasks PerformanceIndicator

Responsible party Timeframe Status

1. A Health Team will beestablished with a TeamLeader. This is afoundational team thatneeds to be established tostart addressing healthneeds of young children inour counties

1. Identify partners that would like to participate or have

input into the development of the pediatric healthteam. (food pantries, health department, DHS, dairy

council, MSU Extension, Hospital Dietary staff, Schoollunch programs, etc)

2. Set a date for the first meeting and send invitations.3. At meeting, establish a chairperson4. Those who attend first meeting discuss additional

participants and establish a meeting/work schedule.

1. A pediatrichealth team ismeeting everyother month.

GSC Director,Pediatric HealthTeam

March 2014

2. The Health Team will

gather and review health

data on children ages 0-8 in

Gogebic and Ontonagon

counties.

1. Gather and review health related data.2. Determine the highest health needs facing the prenatal-

age 8 population.

1. Data collectioncompleted.

2. Needsdetermined.

GSC Director,Pediatric HealthTeam

May 2014


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 2: Implement 1-2 health system changes.

Brief Description: Healthy children are critical to a healthy community. In order to make sure that the GSC is addressing the greatest needs in the counties we will createbuy-in by creating a team devoted to child health. Then after analyzing data about the health of children prenatal through age 8 we will determine 1-2 system changesto create positive outcomes to child’s health in our region.


Responsibleparty

Timeframe Status

1. Create a plan toimplement 1 or2 healthsystem changes.

1. Using the system components developed by ECIC/MSU,discuss the root system issues behind each of theidentified health needs (mindsets, program components,connections, resources, policy/practices, and power).

2. Based on the root cause analysis identify system changesthat may impact multiple needs or may have the greatestimpact on one of the health needs.

3. Identify evidence based practices or programs to addressneeds and root causes.

4. Select 1 or 2 strategies (programs, practices, etc) that canimpact system change components, develop a workplanfor each strategy and target numbers.

5. Implement and monitor activities.6. Review results on activities.

1. Root systemcauses areidentified.

2. List of currentactivities meettargetsestablishedduringdevelopment ofthe workplan.

GSC Director,PediatricHealth Team

1. July 20142. Annual list of

activities andprogresscheck list inSeptember2014,September2015, andSeptember2016.


2013-2016

Action AgendaSocial & Emotional HealthPriority Issue: Knowledge of Indicators for Social-Emotional healthGoal: Early Childhood service providers, parents, and community will know indicators of social-emotional health, how to promote them andwhere to refer families.Objective Measure

1. Professionals who work with children have increased access toinformation about social/emotional indicators.

1. 50 professionals are educated through a variety of individual and group contactsregarding social/emotional indicators, screening tools, and making referrals.

Related Needs/Data:Many teachers cite behavioral issues as the greatest challenges they face in the Kindergarten classroom. However, data specific to social emotional school readiness is notavailable. There are several risk factors that have been identified for young children in our community.

15 % of Gogebic-Ontonagon births were to mothers who had not completed high school

29 % of Gogebic-Ontonagon birth mothers reported smoking while pregnant compared to the Michigan rate of 18%

52 % of Gogebic birth mothers were unmarried; 10.6% of births in Gogebic-Ontonagon were to teen parents compared to Michigan rate of 9.9%.

29% of children under 18 live in single parent families

11 % of Gogebic births were pre-term.

56% of children 0-5 were below 200% poverty in Gogebic/Ontonagon

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Social-emotional health in reality is not a priority with many professionals.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressing this topic? Increased focus on screening and increase in referrals.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? ASQSE, DECA, Social-emotional based trainings, Great Start Quality UP Resource CenterPromotional Items (signs, billboards, etc)


Lack of awareness of what it is, funding, too many other priorities, lack of importance

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by our workgrouprelated to this priority (i.e. rural communities, waiting lists, knowledge ofservices, available providers that take Medicaid or uninsured,demographic pockets of need)

Enrollment/access issues, new focus, lack of providers

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Community collaboration to promote common social-emotional message to families.


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 1: Identify the social-emotional screening tools are being utilized in early childhood programs.

Brief Description: Children who are identified early as having social-emotional risk factors benefit from services and are more likely to be ready for kindergarten. Manyteachers cite behavioral issues as the greatest challenges they face in the Kindergarten classroom. Screening and referral service are key to identifying children that couldbenefit from social-emotional services and increasing their ability to be behaviorally ready for kindergarten.

Action Steps Subtasks Performance Indicator Responsibleparty

Timeframe Status

1. Createawareness ofsocialemotionalindicators andimportance tokindergartenreadiness.

1. Review social-emotional screening tools and research toidentify critical social-emotional indicators for KindergartenReadiness.

2. Review Kindergarten Entry Assessment for social-emotionalindicators and align with information discovered in #1.

3. Based on the information gained in #1, create packet ofmaterials to promote social-emotional indicator assessment foryoung children that includes easy to use “referral” fact sheet

4. Post materials on GSC website5. Provide awareness presentations to professionals and families

about the importance of social-emotional indicators.

1. List of social-emotional indicatorsfor KindergartenReadiness.

2. Review complete.3. Orientation packet

and “referral” factsheet are ready fordistribution.

4. Material posted5. Presentations for 20

people completed.

Social-EmotionalTeam

Sept.30, 2014

2. Identifyscreening andassessmenttools that arecurrently inuse byproviders.

1. Contact or survey early childhood programs to identify thesocial emotional screening tools currently being utilized (maybe jointly accomplished with Early Care and EducationCommittee survey regarding curriculum and assessment)

2. Create a matrix that lists the screening tools in use, research,base, which social-emotional kindergarten readiness indicators(identified in activity 1) are addressed, and providers using thetools.

1. List compiled

2. Matrix is completed.


Sept.30, 2014


2013-2016

Action Agenda

3. Outreach todoctors andstaff.

1. Identify screening tool that is user friendly in physician setting.2. Customize the social/emotional packet for physician offices

including the screening tool.3. Create a list of pediatricians and family practice physicians that

serve young children and assign members to outreach to thoseoffices using packet.

4. Visit physician offices to provide orientation packet, inquireabout desired training, and promote training opportunities.

1. Screening toolselected.

2. Packet is customized3. Outreach list complete4. 2 visits to medical

offices (only 2hospitals).


Sept. 30,2014

4. Outreach toother serviceproviders

1. Identify other service providers that could help identify youngchildren with social/emotional health needs such as WIC/Earlyhead start, SAS

2. Share screening tool matrix with each of the identified partnersand provide training or technical assistance to help themimplement the screening tool and make referrals.

1. Outreach list complete2. 2 visits with

professionals (only 2hospitals).


Sept. 30,2015

5. Trainings forProfessionals

1. Identify a partner that would be held in high regard by theprofessional community and able to assist with training CEs(University, Hospital, Medical Association, Social WorkerAssociation, etc)

2. Based on interest expressed identify trainings and obtainneeded resources.

3. Submit application for Continuing education4. Research the potential of offering a webinar that would also be

able to provide CE credits.5. Plan and promote training6. Hold Training for professional and when appropriate offer

companion program for families

1. 6 partners identified2. 2 trainings per year

identified3. Continuing education

approved.4. Webinar arrangement

made5. 2 trainings/ year held6. 50 professionals and

20 family membersattend training


Annually,training totalsachieved bySeptember30, 2016


2013-2016

Action AgendaPriority Issues: Support to service providers to promote social-emotional health.Goal: Early Childhood service providers will have the knowledge and skills to meet and social-emotional needs of young children.

Objective Measure

1. Increase the use of social emotional screening tools and research basedcurriculums in home visiting programs.

1. The number of home visiting programs using social-emotional screeningtools increases. (based determined in Strategy 1, Activity 1)

Related Needs/Data:

Data related to the screening tools used by home visiting programs is not available which is the reason our first steps are assembling this information.According to the MSU Evaluation Survey,

The percent of local service providers indicating that they had adopted evidence-based programs decreased from 18% in 2010 to 13% in 2012.

The 2012 rate of adopting evidence based programs in Gogebic-Ontonagon counties was only 13% compared to the state rate of 20%.

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Social-emotional concerns are low priority.

B. What do we want to see change or happen? Increased professional support to apply knowledge and skills.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? Social-emotional trainings, Early On screening team, MCHAT, Social-emotionalbillboard campaign, ASQ, newsletters


Funding, lack of awareness, lack of importance

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by our workgroup related tothis priority (i.e. rural communities, waiting lists, knowledge of services,available providers that take Medicaid or uninsured, demographic pockets ofneed)

Not accepting new referrals, lack of providers

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Community collaboration to promote common social-emotional message to families.

Strategy 1: Evaluate early childhood home visiting programs to identify gaps and perceived needs.

Brief Description: Home visiting programs are effective programs to reach families and provide intensive education on parenting skills and improve social/emotionalindicators. Use of research based curriculums designed to improve behavioral outcomes increases this effectiveness.

Action Steps Subtasks Performance Indicator Responsible party Timeframe Status

1. Identify current homevisiting programs

1. Contact or survey early childhood providers toidentify current home visiting programs, descriptionof services provided during home visits, # servedannually and if there is a waiting list, eligibilityguidelines or service area, screening tools used,curriculum being utilized and the social-emotionalindicators (identified in first priority) addressed.

2. Create a matrix with the above information.

1. Matrix iscompleted.

Social-Emotional Team Sept. 15,2015


2013-2016

Action Agenda2. Identify gaps and create a

plan for expanding/enhancing the inclusion ofsocial emotional indicatorsthrough home visitingprograms.

1. Based on the matrix above, create a list of homevisiting program needs/gaps

2. Develop a list of strategies to address identified gaps3. Create a workplan for each of the identified

strategies.

1. Gaps areidentified

2. Plan is created


3. Implement plan created inActivity 2

1. Obtain resources to implement plan2. Implement plan

1. Plan isimplemented


Strategy 2: Increase awareness of social-emotional health.

Brief Description: Increasing the understanding of families and the public as to the importance of social emotional readiness is important. Building on the above activitieswe will create an awareness campaign that with increase social emotional competence of children. We also will attempt to address stigma issues surroundingsocial/emotional health.


1. Develop a common social-emotional message.

1. Identify message and materials to support/promote

message.

2. Determine target audiences and ways to reach them

3. Obtain copies of free materials and determinequantities to print and funding available

4. Develop a copy ready sheet for agencies that arewilling to internally pick up copying costs

5. Identify locations and e-postings to distributematerials (GSC website, member websites, email,Facebook, libraries, medical offices, newborn packets,parenting classes, etc)

6. Log distribution sites & contact person/info (paper,copy ready version, and e-postings)

1. Messageidentified

2. Audiencesidentified

3. Materials obtained4. Copy ready sheet

distributed to 10organizations

5. Materials postedto 5 e-locations

6. 200 materialsdistributed


Annual;totaldistributiontarget bySeptember30, 2016.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Child Care & Early Education

Priority Issue: Use of research based curriculum and assessment toolsGoal: Increase the effective use of research based curriculum and assessment by early childhood programs.Objective Measure

1. Early childhood providers are more likely to use research/evidencebased materials following training.

2. There is an increase in early childhood providers who are usingresearch/evidence based curriculums and assessments.

1. On a training evaluation, 75% of participants indicated that they are likely or verylikely to increase their use of research/evidenced based materials.

2. According to a childcare provider survey or the GS2Q profiles, there is an increase thepercentage of providers using research based curriculums and the percentage inproviders using research based assessment tools to be determined with the GreatStart to Quality Resource Center goals for our area. (may be jointly accomplishedwith Social Emotional Committee survey regarding screenings)

Related Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation Survey,

The percent of local service providers indicating that they had adopted evidence-based programs decreased from 18% in 2010 to 13% in 2012.

The 2012 rate of adopting evidence based programs in Gogebic-Ontonagon counties was only 13% compared to the state rate of 20%.

Only 6% of Gogebic-Ontonagon providers indicated they had changed policies, practices, and procedures compared to the Michigan rate of 26%.

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Not all programs are using a research based curriculum. Not all programs are effectivelyusing their chosen curriculum.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressing thistopic?

Increase the effective use of research based curriculums and assessment tools.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? Public/ Head Start, preschool programs are using research based curriculum, privatepreschool- some are using research based curriculums.

D. What are the gaps in services or barriers to services that need tobe addressed?

Convenient locations, time to administer assessment tools, trainings specific tocurriculums, programs are part of the QRIS and awareness of research based curriculums.


Highscope trainings are made available but at an out of county location, trainings areoffered frequently or in convenient times/places

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Release time form classroom contact to administer assessment and record data. Time tolearn and implement the new curriculums.


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 1: Promote the use of researched based curriculum and assessment.

Brief Description: Encourage the use of research based curriculums by educating early childhood program providers and providing information on available research-evidence based curriculums and assessments..


Timeframe Status

1. Share a list ofresearch basedcurriculums,assessments andexamples.

1. Create a list of curriculums and assessments along withhow to obtain them, costs, local resources to purchase,and available or required training.

2. Create a webpage on gogreatstart.org website.3. Promote the list of curriculums and assessments.

1. List is on website2. List is promoted to

Gogebic-Ontonagoncounty providers.

Early Care andEducationTeam

9/30/2014ongoingpromotion ofwebinar &annualupdate of list

2. Provide trainings forearly childhoodproviders onselecting research-evidence basedcurriculums.

1. Develop materials for training2. Schedule and Promote Training3. Provide online/webinar curriculum overview training.4. Record the online/webinar training and provide a link

to replay the training.

1. materials developed2. promotional materials

distributed3. 20 people participate in

training4. Replay webinar available

Early Care andEd. Team andGreat Start toQualityResourceCenter

Sept. 30,2014,ongoingpromotion ofwebinar

3. Develop andimplement peerstudy sessions

1. Identify 3-5 ways to connect peers to learn from eachother regarding instructing young children.

2. Identify and obtain resources needed to implementstudy sessions

3. Hold study sessions4. Evaluation participation in study sessions and make

modifications if needed.

1. 3 options identified2. Resources obtained3. 30 people participate in

study sessions4. Evaluation &

Modificationscompleted

Early Care andEd. Team andGreat Start toQualityResourceCenter

Sept. 30,2016

Strategy 2: Support early childhood programs that are using research based curriculum and assessment.

Brief Description: Provide assistance to childcare providers in finding funding for research based curriculums and offer training. Advocate to providers and schools toallow teachers to participate in training programs related to research based programs.


Timeframe Status

1. Connectfunding/resourcematerials to earlychildhood programs.

1. Connect with Resource Center (GS2Q) to findfunding/resources.

2. Identify organizations that may have research basedcurriculums or license opportunities i.e. GSC has CreativeCurriculum copies, GSC could buy license for all providersand loan out.

1. List of funding/resources.

2. List of inkind/loanprograms for materials.

3. Costs and resources areincluded on list.

Early Care andEd. Team

Sept. 30,2015


2013-2016

Action Agenda3. On the list created in strategy 1, for each program

include cost and sources for free materials, libraries, thatcheck them out, etc.

2. Advocate to schooldistricts for release timefor teachers.

1. Contact school administrators to promote use ofresearch based materials and opportunities for supportand training.

2. Write into GSC budget funding of subs or obtainsupplemental funding to cover cost

3. Communicate to teachers to availability of sub support

1. 5 administrators arecontacted.

2. $1000 in funding isallocated or obtained

3. Communication toGogebic-OntonagonCounty early childhoodproviders/teachers.


Sept. 30,2015

3. Create opportunitiesfor peer observation.

1. Identify existing mentor programs and or develop a newprogram to mentor use of research based materials.

2. Collaborate with Head Start and other preschoolprograms.

1. List of mentor programs2. Peer observation/

mentor opportunitiesare used by 10providers.


Sept. 30,2016

4. Offer trainings forspecific curriculums andassessments.

1. Identify 3-5 curriculums/assessment for which to offertraining.

2. Connect with Wisconsin training and get informationdistributed.

3. Plan a variety of modes of delivering the training (in-person, online, etc.)

4. Identify and obtain resources needed for selectedtraining.

5. Identify instructors or a need for someone to attendtrain the trainer program and contract with curriculumtrainers.

6. Develop a schedule of convenient times and locationsfor training.

7. Provide Trainings

1. At least 3 curriculumtrainings are identified.

2. Wisconsin traininginformation isdistributed to Gogebic-Ont. County providers.

3. Needed funded isobtained.

4. Instructors’ contractsare in place.

5. Schedule is developed.6. 20 providers

participate in trainings(duplicated count)

Early Care andEducationTeam andGreat Start toQualityResourceCenter

Annualtraining; totaltrained bySeptember30, 2016


2013-2016

Action AgendaPriority Issue: Collaborating with programs on kindergarten expectations and increasing preschoolopportunities for students.Goal: Children have access to high quality early learning and development programs and enter kindergarten prepared for success.Objective Measure

1. Providers will have a common list of readiness expectations for children toenter kindergarten.

2. More students will access to high quality preschool experience.3. Families have access to information about kindergarten readiness with a

focus on reading proficiency that is consistent with the information theyreceived from their childcare and preschool provider.

1. 20 teachers/providers receive information about the KindergartenEntry Assessment and common expectations for KindergartenReadiness.

2. 10 additional students attend GSRP3. Information about the Kindergarten Readiness Criteria is distributed to

150 families and providers.

Related Needs/Data: Data regarding Kindergarten Readiness is not available with the development and implementation of the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment, theability to measure readiness upon enrollment will be increased. At present we only have anecdotal evidence about children who are not ready for kindergarten. Otherdata that may give an indication of kindergarten readiness:

Approximately 73% of 4 year olds are enrolled in preschool.

77% of G-O 3rd

grade children achieved reading proficiency compared to 62.4% of Michigan 3rd

graders.

42% of G-O 3rd

grade children achieved math proficiency compared to 36.3% of Michigan 3rd

graders.

27% of GO 1st

graders are older than their cohort compared to only 20.4% of Michigan 1st

graders

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? There is not a consistent list of expectations that early childhood and preschool programs areusing to prepare children and to communicate to parents. There are currently unused GSRPslots available from MDE that the GOISD can apply for if we have a viable plan on how toexpand our GSRP classrooms. We would like to increase communication about expectationsand utilize the Kindergarten Entry Assessment to establish consistent criteria/expectations.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressing this topic? By creating some clear kindergarten expectations there will not be a question of what skillsstudents need upon kindergarten entry. More students will have access to high qualitypreschool experience.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? GOCAA/GSC kindergarten transition team


School districts, preschool programs and parents all have varying views of what is needed.Sometimes it is difficult for programs to see the value in working together, they’d prefer tooperate in their own “silo.”

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by our workgrouprelated to this priority (i.e. rural communities, waiting lists,knowledge of services, demographic need)

There is also an issue with availability of preschool in Ontonagon county or students that donot qualify for Head-Start or GSRP that may not be able to attend private preschool. Waitinglists, transportation, classroom space, licensing.

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Expansion of high-quality preschool program, leveraging funds to increase availability ofpreschool for at-risk children.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Strategy 1: Raising awareness of MDE kindergarten entry assessment.

Brief Description: The MDE kindergarten assessment is a new program being phased in throughout the state of Michigan. Our teachers/providers and community havevery little information about the assessment and process for implementing it statewide.


1. Gain moreinformation on MDEkindergartenassessment and supportlocal schoolkindergarten withpiloting assessment.

1. Research online- MDE website2. Contact MDE directly3. Ask the early childhood list serve-

question4. Create a fact sheet that can be posted

on website and distributed by email andprinted if necessary.

1. List of Readiness Criteriaused for the EntryAssessment are obtained.

2. User friendly and easy toread fact sheet is availablefor providers and parents.

Early Care andEducation Teamand GSCCoordinator

Sept. 30, 2015

2. Share informationgained withkindergarten teachers,early childhoodprograms and Families.

1. Post Fact Sheet on Website2. Distribute the faction sheet by Email and

mail.3. Notify people of link to fact sheet via

Email, phone, word of mouth,newsletter, trainings, Facebook, etc.

1. Fact sheet is available onwebsite.

2. Fact sheets aredistributed to 150people.

3. Link is included in 2newsletters/Facebook.

Early Care andEducation Team

Sept. 30, 2015

Strategy 2: Increase preschool opportunities prioritizing at-risk children.

Brief Description: There are not enough preschool slots available to serve all at-risk preschool students. With the expansion of the GSRP grant there may be anopportunity to leverage unused GSRP slots to create new preschool classrooms or blend with existing classrooms.


1. Apply for additionalGSRP slots from MDE.

1. The GSRP Early Childhood Contact at theGOISD will use the CRNA to determineeligibility on how many additional slotsthe GOISD can apply for.

2. The GSRP advisory committee willapprove and apply for the additionalGSRP slots.

1. Additional GSRP slots areapplied for from MDE.

Early Care andEducation Team &GSRP advisorycommittee

Sept. 30, 2014


2013-2016

Action Agenda2. Create a plan for howadditional preschoolslots could be used toserve at-risk students ina quality preschoolprogram.

1. Identify possible classrooms to house apreschool.

2. Identify gaps and needs such as waitinglists, geography for transportationto/from the preschool program,licensing, teaching staff, etc.

3. Create a plan with multiple options onhow to distribute the slots to existing ornew preschool classrooms.

1. Preschool classroomoptions are explored.

2. Analysis is completedwith at least one strategyfor each gap.

3. Plan is created todistribute GSRP slots.


Sept. 30, 2015

3. Implement the planto increase GSRPpreschool slots to fillneed for preschool inour counties.

1. The committee will choose the plan thatwill best meet the needs of the students andthe schools.2. The committee will work to implement theplan in the schools.

1. Using the gap analysis,discussion, and needsanalysis the committeewill determine the bestoption to distribute theGSRP slots.

2. Additional students willbe able to attendpreschool.


Sept. 30, 2015

Strategy 3: Communication across early childhood programs on kindergarten expectations.

Brief Description: There is not a consistent list of expectations that early childhood and preschool programs are using to prepare children and to communicate toparents. We would like to increase communication about expectations and utilize the Kindergarten Entry Assessment to establish consistent criteria/expectations.


1. Identify ExistingCollaboration andcommunication

1. Create a list of possible groups, preschool,child care, schools, PTO’s etc that may besharing kindergarten expectationinformation.2. Contact groups to find out what messagesthey are sharing.

1. List of places that messagesabout kindergartenexpectations are delivered toparents is created.


Sept. 30, 2015

2. Identify and create aplan to fillcollaboration/communication gaps.

1. After reviewing the current kindergartenexpectations from the state, create a localmessage about kindergarten expectations.2. Create a plan for distributing this new

message to parents, teachers, providers, andthe community.

1. A common message aboutexpectations ofkindergartners is developed.

2. A plan to deliver this newmessage is created.

Early Care andEducation Team,GSRP advisorycommittee andParent Coalition

Sept. 30, 2015


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Family Support & Parent LeadershipPriority Issue: Increase family access to programs.Goal: Families will have greater access to information about high-quality early learning and development programs.Objective Measure

1. The Access to Services scores on the MSU EvaluationSurvey Improve.

1. MSU Evaluation Report.

Easier Access to Services 2012=60%; 2016 Target=65%

Informed Parents 2012=50%; 2016 Target=55%

Increased Access to Early Childhood Services 2012=69%; 2016 Target=75%

Related Needs/Data: According to the MSU Evaluation, (% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has these conditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal)

69% of those responding to the survey indicated that there was increased Access to Early Childhood Services,

60% of those responding to the survey indicated that parents had Easier Access to Services

50% of those responding to the survey indicated that parents were more Informed

52% of those responding to the survey indicated that thought Local Providers were More Responsive to Parent Concerns

A. What factors are causing and orcontributing to this condition?

Lack of internet access, lack of promotion, value of information being distributed, promotion of the website, lack ofunderstanding of the results they are getting from their efforts.

B. What do we want to see change orhappen by addressing this topic?

Value and buy-in of the importance of the event/information. Understanding/appreciation for the programs that areavailable. Reward for going to website, or attending PC/GSC mtgs.

C. What is already in place? Community resource brochures, family resource kiosks

D. What are the gaps in services orbarriers to services that need to beaddressed?

There is confusion regarding which agencies provide what services… and not knowing what those services are (example:what is the difference between Early Head Start and Early On? A lot of us know the answer, but families often areconfused). Community members not knowing what steps to take to be set up with available services. Otherpeople/agencies that are making referrals to these programs should be aware of this information as well.

E. Are there Access Issues that need to beaddressed by our workgroup related tothis priority (i.e. rural communities,waiting lists, knowledge of services,available providers that take Medicaidor uninsured, demographic pockets ofneed)

Knowledge of services available and eligibility requirementsWhat are the steps to take to obtain those services—our “first point” flow chart available for service providers could helpwith this issue (Example: when you receive a shut off notice, what is the first step to take? I’m out of food…. Where can Igo? How often can I go there? What information do I need to have with me?)We will need to identify the steps a family would take to receive services to help in different situations; including utilityhelp, evictions, what do I do if I think my child might have a delay, etc. We can’t cover everything, but we could create theflow chart for common problems families with young children may face. If all service providers can give more accurateinformation to families, services may be utilized more often and become more accessible.

F. What system changes could helpachieve the impact?

Increased Coordination and Collaboration across agencies. Strong relational networks and root cause focus.


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 1: Increase access for families to high-quality early learning and development program information.

Brief Description: Many families are not aware of the wide variety of services that are available to help their children. Increasing awareness is likely to increase the useof services and is important to the success and achievement of young children. Membership is a great way to learn about services.


1. Promote theGSC website andkiosks.

1. Ask member organizations to create a mutual linkto other organizations.

2. Produce quarterly PSA- newspaper articles3. Utilize Facebook/social media to promote local

events and activities.4. Develop and distribute a Window cling with a link

to the website with services available.

1. 6 additional links arecreated to the GO GSC.

2. 12 newspaper articles arepublished.

3. Events are posted toFacebook as they areoffered.

4. 50 Window clings aredistributed.

Family SupportTeam and ParentCoalition

Sept. 30, 2016

2. Begin andpromoteincentives toaccess thewebsite. (gascards) (literacymaterials asprizes—children’s books)

1. Post a monthly question using survey monkey anddrawing to reward people for going to the site, i.e.What is your favorite book to read to your child?Promote question on Facebook, but drive traffic towebsite and use as an opportunity to add parentsto email/distribution lists.

2. Update website with new information at leastmonthly.

3. Collect data on website hits and analyze if theexposure to services page has increased.

1. 100 people participate inmonthly questions/drawings

2. Information website isupdated.

3. The number of websitehits increases from 150 to300.


Sept. 30, 2016

3. Increase GSCmembership offamilies.

1. Develop a list of membership levels available tofamilies (i.e. information members, inputmembers, participating members, core members,Committee members, and GSC Board Members.

2. Establish talking points, use points in writtenpublications, Facebook, email, and website.

3. Provide awareness activities such aspresentations/communications, booths, anddisplays.

4. Add information to the welcome newborn bags.5. Update the current sign up form and distributed at

the above opportunities.

1. List is developed2. Talking points are

distributed to 100 people.3. Provide awareness

activities at 3 events.4. GSC Information is

incorporated into thewelcome newborn bags.

5. Member forms aredistributed to families.


Sept. 30, 2016


2013-2016

Action Agenda4. Increase localserviceproviders’knowledge ofresourcesavailable in ourcommunity.

1. Develop a plan on activities to complete “firstpoint” flow chart. (example questions: What will beincluded? Who do we need to contact? How will wefind the correct answers? How often will be itreviewed? Distribution?)

2. To enhance knowledge of services available andeligibility requirements for service providers aGreat Start “first point” flow chart will be created.(See Goal 1, E for description)

3. Trainings will be offered to service providers abouthow to use the Great Start “first point” flow chartwith families.

4. Great Start “First point” flow chart will bedistributed to service providers.

1. Update County resourceguides.

2. Plan is developed3. 8 agencies participate in

flow-chart informationgathering.

4. 15 service providers aretrained in Great Start “firstpoint flow chart”.

5. Great Start “first-point” isdistributed to 30 serviceproviders.


Sept. 30, 2014,Sept. 30 2015,and Sept. 30,2016

Priority Issue: Transportation barriersGoal: Awareness of transportation barriers to be accessing services will increase.Objective Measure

1. Transportation gaps/barriers will be identified and awarenessabout transportation options will be made available to families toaccess services.

1. Increase MSU data related to organizational changes to policies, practices andprocedures. (ie. How many agencies have shifted where/when to provide servicesto meet the needs of families)

Related Needs/Data: Most economic indicators would contribute to the lack of or need for transportation assistance.

Percentage K-12 Students receiving free & reduced lunch: 56% (2010-11), 49.5% (2008-09) UP m

# Children in Poverty under age 8: 248, 28% (2005-09) 223, 20% (2000)

Below 200% of Poverty: 53% 554 (2005-09)

Single Parent Families under 18: 29% (2009) 18% (2000) UP m

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to thiscondition?

Rural communities, large geographical areas with population spread outUnemployment

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressingthis topic?

Programs and services will become more sensitive to transportation needs and adjust accordingly

C. What is already in place to address this issue? Western UP Transportation website, On-tran/Blue bus, Jan Tucker, paper schedule (newspapers?),UPHP reimbursements for Medicaid

D. What are the gaps in services or barriers to services thatneed to be addressed?

Schedule of public transit, cost, locations, limited availability, plan to call ahead is needed


2013-2016

Action AgendaE. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by our

workgroup related to this priority (i.e. rural communities,waiting lists, knowledge of services, available providers thattake Medicaid or uninsured, demographic pockets of need)

Transportation is an issue in our area because we have a very large geographic area and many ruralcommunities. Many families with young children have to travel 30+ miles to receive health care,get to services, and attend programs. This is a barrier to participation for many of these familiesand if communities have programs or services, but families do not have access to transportation toget to the programs/services then they are not able to help them at all. Some programs providehome visits, which have helped with some of the travel barriers, but families still need to be able toget to the services in our communities. If agencies/programs could think very strategically aboutour service delivery, reduce the # of trips that families need to make, coordinate transportation,etc. we may be able to cut down on cost and increase access to services by alleviating this hugebarrier.

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Increased Coordination and Collaboration across agencies. Strong relational networks and rootcause focus.

Strategy 1: Include available transportation on GSC website.

Brief Description: System changes are changes to the infrastructure of programs and services.(ie. Aligning assessments, tools/curriculums, changes policies, etc)



1. Promote ExistingTransportationPrograms

1. Identify all transportation options including those listedabove, carpooling programs, and private transportation.2. Create a “Tips for Dealing with Transportation” problemsnews article- Maybe get ideas through a question contest forcreative ideas i.e. trade a day of babysitting for use of a friend’scar or Wash your friends car in trade for a ride to town.3. Distributed Tips and Transportation Options to families andagencies

1. List and tips aredeveloped

2. Distributed to200 people.

Family Support Team Sept. 30,2016

2. Increasesensitivity andresponse totransportation asa barrier

1. Develop a “Tips for Providers- Being Sensitive toTransportation Barriers”- i.e. ask the question- do you havea ride for your appointment, host events close to yourtarget population, provide bussing to an event at a smallcost, set up a carpooling program in response to “high gasprices”, etc...

2. Provide presentations to providers on the need to besensitive to transportation barriers.

3. Distribute Tips and Transportation Options to providers

1. List is developed2. Distributed to

200 people.3. Presentation for

50 people.

Family Support Sept. 30,2016


2013-2016

Action AgendaPriority Issue: GSC will be responsive to parent needs.Goal: Families have the education and support they need to ensure children are healthy, thriving, and developmentally on track from birththrough third grade.Objective Measure

1. Parents have the education they need to support their child’sschool readiness skills.

1. Number of parents participating in the Parent Coalition and educationopportunities about school readiness.


52% of those responding to the survey indicated that thought Local Providers were More Responsive to Parent Concerns

Percent of children, ages 0-2, served by Early On: 4.4% (2011) 5.2% (2006)

# of Slots in GSRP: 51 (2010) 62 (2006-07)

Percentage of 4 year olds served in GSRP: 28.7% (2010) 35% (2006-07)

Number of Child Care Centers: 10(2012) 14 (2007)

Number of Child Care Centers Accepting infants: 3 (2011) 5 (2007)

Number of Centers offering full day continuous care: 5 (2012) 7(2007)

Number of Group Homes (12 children): 7 (2012) 7 (2007)

Number of Family Homes (6 children): 6 (2011) 9 (2007)

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to thiscondition?

Working families do not have very much time. Some parents do not have very much education or areunsure of their skills. Single parent families have difficulties. Distance to programs is an issue.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressingthis topic?

Parents will encourage and support their young children to learn and be prepared for kindergarten.Parents will encourage and foster their children’s on-going learning & development to support theirreadiness for kindergarten.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? Parent Coalition, GSRP advisory groups, Head Start advisory groups, local libraries, GSC website, &kiosks

D. What are the gaps in services or barriers to services thatneed to be addressed?

Parents will feel less alienated, transportation, access to information, open minds, understanding thevalue of parent connections

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by ourworkgroup related to this priority (i.e. rural communities,waiting lists, knowledge of services, available providersthat take Medicaid or uninsured, demographic need)

Waiting lists for preschools, not enough slots for preschool, rural communities, internet access andinformation about programs/services (see priority 1)

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Increase parent leadership and voice. Buy-in and involvement from preschools, child care providers,local school districts, and other program providers to help educate and support families. Shifts inlocal policies/practices.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Strategy 1: Provide leadership trainings to families.



1. Identify which parentingeducation trainings areoccurring in the region.

1. Create a team.2. Make a list of all potential places that

parenting education is occurring.3. Create a survey monkey questionnaire

for providers.4. Compile results.

1. List is developed.2. Survey is sent to 10

agencies/program3. Results are shared with 20

GSC members and nextsteps are developed.

Family Supportteam and ParentCoalition

Sept. 30,2014

2. Research parent educationtrainings. (such as Love andLogic, Conscious Discipline,Parent Cafes, StrengtheningFamilies, Peer Mentortrainings, Family leadershiptraining, Parents as teachers)

1. Identify what are the needs of parentsthrough a parent survey.

2. Use the parent survey or conduct acontest to name the program. (parenteducation has come to mean “educationfor poor parents” in some communities

3. Conduct online research of potentialtrainings.

1. 50 parents completesurvey.

2. List of parent needs iscreated and a name ofprogram selected.


Sept. 30,2014

3. Make a decision as to thewhat trainings are neededfor families and whattrainings are available to thatmeet the goal of helpingparents support kindergartenreadiness.

1. Choose most relevant training topics foreach county.

2. Implement a training schedule.3. Promote trainings to parents.

1. Create list of 6 relevanttrainings

2. Create training schedule.3. 50 parents attend

trainings.


Annualschedulecreated


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 2: Increase opportunities to ensure children are developmentally ready to succeed in school at time of school entry.



1. Identify kindergartenreadiness opportunities areoccurring in the region.

1. Create a team or combine with existingteam (Kindergarten readiness/ Early Careand Education team.)

2. Make a list of all potential places thatkindergarten readiness activities areoccurring.

3. Compile results.

1. Team is created.2. List is created.3. Results are shared.


Sept. 30,2014

2. Research kindergartenreadiness skills.

1. Meet with the GSC/GOCAA Kindergartentransition team to find out what they aredoing.



Sept. 30,2014

3. Make a decision as to thekindergarten readinessskills/opportunities to adoptthat meets the goal ofhelping parents supportkindergarten readiness.

1. Create a list of kindergarten readinessskills/opportunities in the area.

2. Distribute to parents.



Sept. 30,2015

4. Promote kindergartenreadiness activities for parentthrough a variety ofhandouts, calendars,website, article, etc.

1. Collect useful materials to distribute tofamilies about kindergarten readiness.

2. Distribute on a monthly/regular basis.

1. Team is created.2. List is created.3. Results are shared with 50

parents.


Sept. 30,2016


2013-2016

Action AgendaInfrastructure

Priority Issue: System Change * Some system changes may be incorporated throughout team action agendas

Goal: One to three system changes will be in progress by September 2015.Objective Measure

2. Three system changes that will increase effectiveness, efficiency,and quality of services to children are in progress.

2. By September 2015, work plans are in place and being implemented for three systemchanges.


Strong Relational Networks : In 2010 was 30% and increased to 36% in 2012. Still one of the lowest scores on the evaluation.

Comprehensive Early Childhood System Improvements was at 76%.Strengths on the MSU Evaluation that would indicate that organizations were ready to undertake system change included:

Readiness for Change in 2012 was 86%

Interdependent Organizations scored at 84%

Shared Goals ranked high at 93%

Effective Partnerships was indicated by 97%

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Right now many programs are doing the same or similar services, duplicating services. And thenthere are other programs that are not doing enough to prepare children for school readiness.

B. What do we want to see change or happen by addressing thistopic?

Each child has unique needs across the components for school readiness (pediatric/family health,social/emotional health, early care and education, parenting leadership, and family support).Identification, referral, and a streamlined system of services are all key to ensuring that eachchild’s unique needs are met and that all children are ready for school success.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? IGDIs (Individual Growth and Development Indicators) early literacy assessment is completed by4 public preschool programs, Great Start to Quality UP Resource Center/Quality Rating System,GSRP Advisory Committee, GSC, Early On, Great Parents/Great Start, GOISD Special Ed, GOCAAHead Start, LVD Head Start, Parent Advisory Councils, Parent Coalition


Parents do not know about the Quality Rating System, agencies are do not understand thebenefits of being involved in system changes, time, staffing, funding, buy-in, stakeholders to makesystem-change a priority, policies of agencies

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by ourworkgroup related to this priority (i.e. rural communities, waitinglists, knowledge of services, available providers that takeMedicaid or uninsured, demographic pockets of need)

Rural communities, transportation, parents unaware of services available, agencies operate under“silo”, community buy-in for early childhood, funding, not enough preschool slots, no preschooloptions other than Head Start in Ontonagon county

F. What system changes could help achieve the impact? Identify strategies to increase effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of services to children.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Strategy 1: Identify 3 system changes for consideration.

Brief Description: System changes are changes to the infrastructure of programs and services.(ie. Aligning assessments, tools/curriculums, changes policies, etc).System changes help to address barriers faced by families and improve the continuum of services. Each child has unique needs across the components for schoolreadiness (pediatric/family health, social/emotional health, early care and education, parenting leadership, and family support). Identification, referral, and astreamlined system of services are all key to ensuring that each child’s unique needs are met and that all children are ready for school success.



1. Create a list ofpotential systemchange strategies.

1. Create a team to evaluate infrastructure issues.2. Review each of the committee workplans to identify any

already identified system change strategies beingundertaken by committees.

3. Based on review of committee workplans, identifyadditional system change strategies that are related tothe strategic plan priorities.

1. List of potentialsystem changestrategies areready to beevaluated.

ExecutiveCommittee

January 2014

2. Evaluate systemchanges and thefeasibility of change.

1. Create an evaluation matrix which illustrates each of thepotential system change strategies, evaluate for cost,level of interest and commitment of service providers,and impact on services/families (pros/cons).

2. Based on the evaluation select the three system changesthat are most feasible and will have the greatest impactfor pursuit (may be system changes already included incommittee workplans).

1. System Changeevaluationmatrixcompleted.

2. Three systemchanges forpursuit areselected.

ExecutiveCommittee

Team leaders

GSC Director

March 2014,

3. Create a plan of actionto pursue the changes.

1. Based on the results of subtask #2 under Activity 2, assignor create a committee to create and implement aworkplan for the system change (may already be done ifthe system change was already part of a committeeworkplan).

2. Create a workplan for each of the additional systemchange efforts (may already be done if the system changewas already part of a committee workplan).

1. A committee isin place for eachof the systemchangestrategies.

2. Workplans arein the processof beingimplemented.

ExecutiveCommittee

Team leaders

GSC Director

May 2014


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Priority Issues: MembershipGoal: GSC/PC will be able to explain the benefits and welcome membership of community and organization partnerships.Objective Measure

1. Increase the level of member commitment, collaboration, andsatisfaction.

1. MSU Evaluation Report

Benefits of Participating in GSC/GSPC for Parents 2012=56%; 2016 Target=60%

Benefits of Participating in GSC for Organizations 2012=74%; 2016 Target=80%2. and development of the member involvement measure as part of the progress reporting

system3. Membership Feedback Survey questions indicates that GSC members benefit from: 90%

networking, 80% sharing of early childhood announcements including trainings/events, 60%information about early childhood resources(programs and services available andnews/emails).


Sustained and Expanded Public and Private Investment in Early Childhood in 2012 was 38% compared to the state rate of 42%.

Benefits of Participating in GSC/ GSPC for Parents was at 56% while the Michigan rate was 64%.

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Due to the complicated nature of “systems building” work. It takes GSC members a while tobecome invested in the work and show commitment to the GSC. If the member cannot find aspecific reason for them to be a part of the GSC they leave.

B. What do we want to see change or happen? We would like to increase the level of member commitment, collaboration, and satisfaction.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? Annual GSC membership feedback survey, Wilder Factors Collaboration survey, Michigan StateUniversity GSC/PC membership evaluation survey


Staffing of agencies, buy-in from stakeholders, time/location of meetings, boards of agencies,Supervisor unable to understand the need for GSC

E. Are there Access Issues that need to be addressed by ourworkgroup related to this priority (i.e. rural communities, waitinglists, knowledge of services, available providers that takeMedicaid or uninsured, demographic pockets of need)

Large geographic area makes it difficult for members to travel, snowy/cold weather detersmembers from attending meetings, GSC members prefer to have team meetings and GSCmeetings on the same day

F. What system changes could help achieve impact discussed in B? Increase our efforts to communicate benefits to members and to increase their level ofengagement.


2013-2016

Action AgendaStrategy 1: Explain benefits to members and welcome membership on GSC.

Brief Description: Many of the GSC membership benefits are not always obvious. Members who are more engaged are often more likely to experience the benefits ofmembership and to value their involvement in GSC work. We will increase our efforts to communicate benefits to members and to increase their level of engagement.We also will provide opportunities for member engagement through events, trainings, and other networking activities.


1. Distribute benefitinformation in at least fourvenues (facebook, emails,brochures, new memberfolders, etc).

4. Develop a list of member benefits based on GSC andmember input.

5. Develop or incorporate into existing materials thebenefits of GSC new membership folder.

6. Distribute benefits information to GSC members and PCmembers.

7. Incorporate round table sharing (if networking has beenidentified as a benefit) with the introduction of “One ofthe benefits of coming together is the opportunity toshare lessons learned, state or regional issues ofconcern, promote upcoming activities, or share successstories.”

1. List of memberbenefits created

2. List is present innew membermaterials.

3. Distributebenefitsinformation.

GSC Director andExecutiveCommittee

Quarterlystarting afterJanuary 2014

2. At least bi-annually makecontact with each GSCmember about benefitsand appreciation for theirparticipation.

3. Create a membership matrix which identifies ways thata member can be involved in the GSC efforts.

4. Member involvement for each member is tracked andmonitored.

5. Each member will be contacted personally at some pointin the year to thank them for their involvement, educatethem about other opportunities for involvement, and todiscuss what they feel have been successes andchallenges related to their involvement in GSC work.

1. Membershipmatrix created

2. Memberinvolvementmarked onmatrix.

3. Each member willbe contactedpersonally

GSC Director,Parent Liaison,GSC Co-chairs

Bi-Annuallystarting afterJanuary 2014

3. Updating membershiplist annually.

1. Based on Matrix above, recruit members to be involvedin GSC committees and other efforts.

2. Update the list of member involvement annually.

1. Based on annualupdate, themembershipmatrix showsincreasedengagement.

GSC Director andParent Liaison

January 2014,2015, 2016


2013-2016

Action AgendaPriority Issues: Outcome Based Approaches * Incorporated throughout team action agendas

Goal: Each team will have at least one objective that measures outcomes of children and families and aligns with Office of Great Startpriorities.Objective Measure

1. Teams each have at least one outcome based measure incorporatedinto their work plan. Office of Great Start Priorities: Children bornhealthy; Children healthy, thriving, and developmentally ontrack from birth to third grade; Children developmentally readyto succeed in school at the time of school entry; Childrenprepared to succeed in fourth grade and beyond by readingproficiently by the end of third grade.

1. There are 5 outcome based measurements for young children for which baselineand targets are established.


Only 45% of members rated Improved Outcomes for Children and Families as an accomplishment.

A. What factors are causing and or contributing to this condition? Many of our gauges for success are based on process measure that have shown to beeffective in improving services which would likely have an impact on children’s outcomes

B. What do we want to see change or happen? By ensuring a process which includes outcome measurements we plan to have data that canbe used to communicate success and impact on children to decision makers, members, andthe community.

C. What is already in place to address this issue? The GSC already works to create outcomes for young children through commonassessments, data-collection, etc.


Not all agencies are focusing on outcomes of children and prefer to do what they already dorather than change.


Funding for the work of the GSC will be imperative. Knowledge of outcome-based modelswill be needed.

F. What system changes could help achieve impact discussed in B? Establish an outcome based measures for each team to ensure that there are specifictargets that are being met with the work that we are trying to accomplish to improve thelives of young children and families.


2013-2016

Action Agenda

Strategy 1: Teams measure outcomes for children and families.

Brief Description: Many of the efforts of a collaborative are difficult to measure as outcomes for children. Many of our gauges for success are based on processmeasure that have shown to be effective in improving services which would likely have an impact on children’s outcomes. Our goal of including some measures ofchildren’s outcomes are important to maintain our members’ commitment to GSC work and for growth in relationship to community support and funders. By ensuringa process which includes outcome measurements we plan to have data that can be used to communicate success and impact on children to decision makers, members,and the community.


Responsibleparty

Timeframe Status

1. Ensure that eachTeam has identifiedan outcome basedmeasure.

1. Review Team workplans for outcomes and measures.2. Create a list of the outcomes and measures.3. For Teams that do not have the outcomes and

measures, provide technical assistance to help themidentify an outcome based measure.

1. Outcomes listincludes one foreach team.

ExecutiveCommittee, GSCDirector

January 2014,

2. Provide support toteams in collectingbaseline measures,setting targets, andmonitoring progress.

1. Create a matrix for the outcome measures thatincludes a column for baseline measurement, target,outcome description/definition, source of data formeasurement, and if applicable evaluation tool.

2. Provide assistance to teams in completing the matrixfor their outcome measures.

3. Identify outcomes for which a measurement toolneeds to be created. Identify existing evaluation toolsthat may be applicable and adopt or modify the toolto meet the committee needs.

4. Provide evaluation training as needed to teams.

1. Matrix is created2. Matrix columns

are completed.3. Measurement

tools are in place.4. Teams have the

training neededto measureoutcomes.

GSC Director March 2014

3. Teams select andmonitor at least onecritical indicator foreach team.

1. Teams collect data according to a planned scheduled.2. Outcomes matrix is updated annually based on

information submitted by teams.3. Outcomes data is incorporated into communication

materials.

1. Outcomesmatrix is updatedannually.

GSC Director May 2014,2015, 2016


FINANCING AND FUND DEVELOPMENTResources in a rural community are often limited. In 2010 Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

members developed a comprehensive fund development plan. The Great Start Collaborative and its

members have identified innovative ways to share resources and provide inkind support. The Great

Start Collaborative and Parent Coalition are committed to utilizing the available resources to carry out

the strategic plan and where needed obtain additional resources. As members enhance and build upon

what has already been established in our community, it is their plan to improve the infrastructure that is

already in place. During the strategic planning process, three activities were completed:

1. Identify funding needs of strategic priorities

2. Review and Update Existing Fund Development Plan

3. Identify Action Steps that would strengthen the fund development potential of our collaborative.

As a result of planning, the following analysis of the strategic plan and funding needs:

Pediatric and Family Health

Early Childhood physical health services Funding Needs: Trainings ($2000), Curriculums, Parent Education/Nutrition classes (agencies);

inkind, Technical Assistance from existing efforts such as NAPSACC, and GSC budgetSocial-Emotional Health

Increasing awareness and knowledge of what it means to be socially-emotionally healthy

Provide support to service providers to promote social-emotional health Funding Needs: Promotional materials may be needed ($500), Minimal; inkind, GSC budget,

Early Care and Education

Utilization of research based curriculum and assessment tools

Collaborating with programs on kindergarten expectations Funding Needs: Trainings ($5000), Curriculum and assessment tools ($500/kit), Promotional

materials for kindergarten expectations ($1500), Technical Assistance from Resource Center,and GSC budget

Family Support and Parent Leadership

Increase family access to programs

Transportation barriers

Increase families that are linked to the GSC/PC

Responsiveness to Parent Needs

Parent Participation Funding Needs: Minimal; inkind, GSC budget; Gas cards, Co-location/information stations,

Promotion materials ($2000Minimal; inkind, GSC budgetInfrastructure

System Change* Incorporated throughout team action agendas

Membership

Outcome-Based Approach* Incorporated throughout team action agendas Funding Needs: Minimal; inkind, GSC budget


2013-2016

Fund Development Plan

Goal: Establish and sustain funding for identified strategic priorities.

Strategy: Funds will be raised to support projects related to the strategic plan.

Process Objective: Measure:

The fund development team will identify specific funding needs using the

identified strategic priorities and funding needs.

Financial targets are reached for each fund development activity (levelsto be established during year 1).

Action Steps Performance Indicator Responsible party Timeframe Status

1. Establish “What do we want to do?” Identify specificfunding needs for the GOGSC using priorities. (i.e. $500,$1000, $5000, etc)

Specific funding needs arecreated.

Fund DevelopmentTeam

December 31,2013

2. Identify “Who has the money?” by creating a databaseof possible funders in Gogebic/UP/statewide.

Database of possible funders iscreated.


March 31, 2014

3. Using #1&2 to create an annual fund development planwith calendar and budget for targeting fund developmentactivities related directly with priorities.

Annual fund development planis created and updatedannually


May 1, 2014,January 2015;January 2016

4. Implement the fund development plan. Funding is increased. Fund DevelopmentTeam

Ongoing

Goal: Funding policies will be formally incorporated into the Gogebic -Ontonagon GSC operating procedures.

Strategy: Formally incorporate fund receipt and distribution policies into operating procedures for the GSC.

Process Objective: Measure:

Create a system for receiving and distributing funds raised by the GSC. Funding policies are included in operating procedures by 5/1/14.


Identify policies of the Gogebic-Ontonagon ISD that arerelevant to the fund development activities of the GSC andincorporate into the GSC Operating Guidelines.

Policies are identified andincorporated into theOperating Procedures.

GSC Director May 1, 2014

Determine funds required or identified for funddevelopment and establish the required structure.

Policies are identified/developed and incorporatedinto the Operating Procedures.

GSC Director May 1, 2015


2013-2016

Fund Development Plan

Goal: Develop an Infrastructure that supports receiving and distributing funds through the GSC.

Strategy: Develop Committee to Manage Fund Development Activities

Process Objectives: i.e. Policies are in place for receiving funds. Measure (i.e. policies included in operatingguidelines)

1. * Fund development team is developed to guide the work of the fund development process.

2. * Fund development activities and project table are created.

3. * Funding activities are incorporated in GSC work plan to be submitted to the state.

4. * Policies are in place for receiving funds and tracking received funds.

Funding development infrastructure for the GSC isestablished.


1. Create a fund development team to work on implementationof plan.

A finance team is meetingregularly.

GSC Director, FundDevelopment Team

November 1,2013

2. Complete the fund development activities and project table. Activities are identified. GSC Director, FundDevelopment Team

September30, 2014

3. Identify how the GSC members can support the funddevelopment activities.

Opportunities for supportare shared with members.

GSC Director September30, 2014

4. Incorporate funding activities into the GSC work plan assubmitted to the state.

The work plan reflectsfunding priorities in thestrategic plan.

GSC Director Annually


APPENDIX A: Strategic Planning Process

STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS

Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative hired a professional consultant, Kay Balcer of Balcer

Consulting & Prevention Services, to prepare the Facilitate a one day retreat, coordinate conference

calls/meetings, and Provide Technical Assistance in drafting the plan.

The year-long process involved seven main steps:Step 1: Data & Infrastructure ReviewStep 2: Establishment of priorities for Core Components (Star Points) and infrastructureStep 3: Evaluation of 2009-2012 planStep 4: Goal developmentStep 5: Development of the Action Agenda including objectives to measure progressStep 6: Review and expansion of the current Fund Development PlanStep 7: Review and approval of the Strategic Plan by the Great Start Collaborative Board

Data was collected and compiled by Prepared by Western U.P. Health Department, Ray Sharp, Manager

of Community Planning and Preparedness with assistance from Teresa Woods, Community Health

Assessment Specialist. The Great Start Collaborative held one strategic planning meeting in December

2012. Additional planning and discussion was carried out through Team meetings and board meetings

in November 2012 and January through April 2013. Achievements during the planning process included:

The mission/vision was updated

Data was reviewed and priorities were set.

Teams reviewed priorities and held additional discussion.

The 2010 Action Agenda and compared it to the new priorities. The past action agenda items

were scored by their relationship to the new priorities and data, whether they should be

included in the new action agenda, or if they should be closed and no longer included.

With assistance from the consultant, the director and teams developed goals, strategies,

objectives/measures, and action steps.

Infrastructure goals and fund development plans were developed.


Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start CollaborativeStrategic Planning Timeline

Updated 11-21-2012August 29, 2012 Planning Conference Call

September Email/Calls Approve dates for retreat, check references, finalize contract

September 28, 2012 Data Presentation by Data Consultant; Approve Timeline & Proposal atGSC Board Meeting

October 2012 Convene a Planning Team to Review the Progress on the Current Plan (Rubricadded to dropbox)

November 16th, GSC Board Director Led Activities/ Potential Tele-Conference call at 1:15

Timeline (one slide)

Review of Mission/Vision (Slide) Review of Infrastructure Report and selection of Infrastructure

Priorities (Information in Dropbox) Preparation for retreat (Review the agenda for December 7th,

Brainstorm priorities based on needs data shared in September;complete online survey with ratings and comment for extrapossible priorities)

December 7 9:00 to 3:00 EST Board Members GSC Meeting- Strategic Planning SessionLed by Kay Balcer, Balcer Consulting & Prevention Services

9:00-9:45 Evolution of an organization and increasing impact Executive Committee Board Members Team Leaders Infrastructure Priorities

9:45-10:00 Prioritization Results and Discussion10:00-10:30 Writing of Goals for each priority (Given Samples)10:30-10:45 Break10:45-11:45 Draft of Action Agenda for 2013-2016 (Action Agenda

Worksheets)11:45-Noon Sharing of Action AgendasNoon-12:30 Lunch12:30-3:00 Fund Development, Sustainability, and how it relates to

the new Strategic Planning PrioritiesJanuary 2013 Committees review work to date and tweak objectives samples to measure

planned strategies/activities

February 2013 Board Review and ApprovalMarch-May 2013 Prepare, Revise, and Approve Written DocumentsJuly 2013 Send Documents to PrinterSeptember 2013 Presentation of Final Documents to GSC Board & Distribution in the

Community


APPENDIX B: Data Report & Priority Scoring Results


Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties Children and Families Data Reportfor the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

Prepared by Western U.P. Health DepartmentRay Sharp, Manager of Community Planning and PreparednessWith Assistance from Teresa Woods, Community Health Assessment Specialist

Executive Summary

When the first GO-GSC data report and strategic planning was conducted, the United States was

beginning to feel the effects of the 2008 financial crisis and the Great Recession of 2009. Predictions

made then of future increases in unemployment and child poverty and reduced state tax revenues have

by and large come to pass, as this 2012 report demonstrates. More families with young children are in

poverty. Health, education and social-support systems are over-burdened and under-funded. Challenges

remain as we strive to create an environment where all children are healthy and ready to learn. Service

providers will be called upon to continue to do more with less as they prioritize services to vulnerable

populations. Major assessment findings include:

Ten-year population decreases of 5.4 percent in Gogebic County and 13.3 percent in OntonagonCounty from 2000 to 2010, with most of the decreases among children and young adults. Seniorcitizens now make up about one-quarter of residents.

Among households with children under age 6, half of those in Gogebic County and one-third inOntonagon County are headed by a single parent.

Unemployment rates rose steeply across the region in 2009 and crested at about 15 percent in2010-11.

About 30 percent of children in Gogebic County, and 24 percent of Ontonagon County’schildren, live in households with incomes below the poverty line.

Data for Medicaid, WIC and USDA school meal programs also indicate high percentages ofchildren from low-to-moderate income families.

Local pregnant women access prenatal care at similar rates to statewide – a bit better inGogebic County, a bit worse in Ontonagon County.

Immunization rates for toddlers have remained marginally better locally than statewide, notablebecause there have been recent local outbreaks of Pertussis and other vaccine-preventablediseases among school-aged children and adults.

Gogebic County had high rates for several risk factors among 2010 births: 17 percent of birthswere to mothers who had not completed high school; 27 percent of birth mothers reportedsmoking while pregnant; 52 percent of birth mothers were unmarried; and 11 percent of birthswere pre-term.

There are 146 children (mostly 4-year-olds) in preschool programs in 2012-13, about 73 percentof the two-county population of 4-year-olds.


Data Analysis and Notes

The following notes serve as a guide to understanding the graphs in the 14 page attachment that

follows. The numbers and letters refer to the page numbers in the attachment, with “A” for the upper

slides and “B” for the lower slides.

1A: Title

1B: Population declines continued in Gogebic and Ontonagon counties over the last 10 years, as the

stagnant economy, loss of industrial jobs, and an increasing reliance on tourism to generate economic

activity led to emigration mostly by young and middle-aged adults seeking opportunity elsewhere, and

secondarily, to declining numbers of births due to the losses in residents of childbearing age.

2A: Consequently, G and O counties have more older-adults and less children by percentage than state

and national rates. This is especially pronounced in Ontonagon County, where 26 percent of residents

are age 65 or older, and less than 4 percent are under age 8, compared with 14 percent and 6 percent,

respectively, statewide.

2B: These data are presented for planning purposes. Some households have multiple children under 6,

so these numbers do not equal the total population of young children.

3A: Single-parent households as a percent of all households with children have increased locally and

nationwide over time, which translates to more children in poverty and more families needing child

care.

3B: There are about 1,000 children under age 8 in the two-county region, corresponding to roughly 200

births per year.

4A: Most local children are white, with some Native American children mainly near Watersmeet.

4B: Over the past 3 years, following the 2008-9 national financial crisis and recession, unemployment

consistently topped 15 percent in Ontonagon County and 12 percent in Gogebic County, with many

more people underemployed or not actively seeking work.

5A: The first chart represents estimates for children in poverty as a percentage of all children per county

(based on household income under 100 percent of poverty, or about $21,000 for a family of 4); the

second chart is the number of children in households with incomes less than 50% of poverty (ex: family

of 4, about $11,000 or less). Note that 30 percent of children age 0-17 in Gogebic County and about 24

percent in Ontonagon County are in poverty; and likely greater percentages among families with young

children.


5B: Local median household incomes lag about one-third behind state and national incomes.

6A: The percentages of children receiving free and or reduced lunches (below 185% of poverty) have

risen in recent years as unemployment and families in poverty have increased. Across the G-O ISD, the

rate stands at about 60 percent.

6B: Again, an indication of rising child poverty over the past few years.

7A: An indication of poverty among families with infants, rising steadily in Gogebic and fluctuating in

Ontonagon in recent years, both averaging higher than the state rate which has also increased.

7B: WIC enrollments in G-O are among the state’s highest as a percentage of all children 0-4, another

indication of low-to-moderate income and also of a strong system of outreach and referral for eligible

families.

8A: Slightly more pregnant women in Gogebic County received early prenatal care as recommended.

8B: Ontonagon and Gogebic counties, with 75 percent of toddlers receiving all scheduled

immunizations, did slightly better than the state as a whole.

9A: Note that more than half of births in Gogebic County in 2010 were to unmarried women, and that

between one-fifth and one-quarter of local pregnant women smoked while pregnant.

9B: The local percentages of births to teens (of all births, how many were to women under 20) hover

between 8-12 percent, generally a bit higher in Gogebic County than in Ontonagon County.

10A: Local infant death rates have been fairly low, statistically, when viewed over a long time span, but

even 5-year rates are affected quite a bit by a small number of adverse events, given the size of the

population.

10B: Providers in the region do a good job of providing blood-lead tests to young children, as

recommended by Medicaid and for families living in older (pre-1978 built) housing.

11A and B: Local rates exhibit much variability due to the small population size. There currently appear

to be sufficient numbers of foster families in Gogebic County.

12A and B: Licensed child care for infants and toddlers is always in short supply.

13A and B: The GOISD has a strong system of problem ID and referral to Early On and Special Education

services, allowing for early interventions and family support.

14A and B: An estimated 73 percent of 4-year-olds attend a structured preschool program.


Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Community Survey Results1. Are you answering this survey as a... 2. Are you answering this survey as a...

Answer Options % # Answer Options % #

Parent or Caregiver 19.2% 5 Gogebic County 34.6% 9Daycare or Preschool Employee 23.1% 6 Ontonagon County 23.1% 6Other Service Provider 34.6% 9 Both 42.3% 11Community Member 23.1% 6 Other (please specify) 1

Other (specify) Mental Health Worker, crisis pregnancy rep, Early Childhood Specialist BHK Early Childhood Specialist

Answer OptionsTotalscore V

ery

Imp

ort

ant

Mo

re

Imp

ort

ant

Ave

rage

Imp

ort

ance

Less

Imp

ort

ant

No

tat

all

Imp

ort

ant

ValueScore

Ve

ryH

igh

Ab

ility

to

Ch

ange

Hig

hA

bili

tyto

Ch

ange

Ave

rage

Ab

ility

toC

han

ge

Low

Ab

ility

toC

han

ge

Litt

leo

rN

o

Ab

ility

toC

han

ge ChangeScore

Social/Emotional HealthProvide support to providers to promote social/emotional health 8.75 16 6 1 1 0 4.54 11 8 4 1 0 4.21Increasing Awareness and Knowledge of what is being socially/emotionally healthy 8.63 14 8 2 0 0 4.50 9 10 4 1 0 4.13Home visits for families with newborns to offer services, assess how it’s going. 7.75 13 8 2 1 0 4.38 4 9 4 6 1 3.38Early identification of autism 7.56 7 14 3 0 0 4.17 2 10 7 3 1 3.39Child Care & Early EducationCollaborating with Head Start and Kindergarten readiness 8.54 16 7 1 0 0 4.63 7 9 6 0 1 3.91Parent education of childcare options/resources and quality programs 8.48 8 8 6 0 0 4.09 11 10 2 0 0 4.39Support for ECE teachers/staff on utilizing their programs approved curriculum 8.21 9 11 2 2 0 4.13 8 11 2 2 0 4.09Encourage/support/educate use of research based curriculum in child care programs 8.08 12 7 4 0 0 4.35 5 8 7 2 0 3.73Continue IGDIs, expand users 7.57 7 10 3 3 1 3.79 6 10 4 2 1 3.78

Family Support

Promoting children/family events 9.13 16 6 1 0 0 4.65 14 7 1 1 0 4.48Access to transportation/services 7.35 12 7 4 0 0 4.35 2 5 9 7 1 3.00How to get the best use out of the family kiosks 7.30 4 8 8 3 0 3.57 6 7 8 2 0 3.74Internet accessibility 6.26 6 3 13 1 0 3.61 0 3 11 7 2 2.65

Parent Leadership

Find out parent needs 9.13 19 5 0 0 0 4.79 13 8 1 2 0 4.33Work on barriers to parent involvement 8.83 19 5 0 0 0 4.79 8 10 5 1 0 4.04Expand parent coalition 8.25 11 9 2 2 0 4.21 10 5 7 1 0 4.04Being inclusive to fathers and grandfathers raising children 8.24 12 9 3 0 0 4.38 5 11 6 1 0 3.87Family structure support 7.81 9 14 1 0 0 4.33 3 8 9 3 0 3.48


Physical activity calendar to address obesity 8.73 13 5 5 1 0 4.25 14 7 1 1 0 4.48Increase/improve play spaces 7.77 12 7 4 1 0 4.25 5 6 8 4 0 3.52Nutrition shop with families 7.63 10 6 7 1 0 4.04 5 8 8 2 1 3.58Cavity free kids – dental access/care 7.47 10 11 1 2 0 4.21 3 5 12 1 2 3.26Allergies – resources for families/kids 7.44 7 9 7 1 0 3.92 4 7 9 3 0 3.52Access to health insurance and quality providers 7.43 17 4 2 0 0 4.65 1 4 10 5 3 2.78Nutrition – improve school lunches 7.04 9 7 7 0 0 4.09 2 7 5 6 3 2.96


Other Issues

Preparing mothers to be concerning preparations, Family support- improving access to early childhood programs and services, Parenting skills for Dad's &Mom's, Coping skills for grandparents raising kids, & Child Care and Early Education- implement a kindergarten readiness survey.

Priority IssueTotalscore

ValueScore

ChangeScore

Social/Emotional HealthProvide support to providers to promote social/emotional health 8.75 4.54 4.21Increasing Awareness and Knowledge of what is being socially/emotionally healthy 8.63 4.50 4.13Home visits for families with newborns to offer services, assess how it’s going. 7.75 4.38 3.38Early identification of autism 7.56 4.17 3.39Child Care & Early EducationCollaborating with Head Start and Kindergarten readiness 8.54 4.63 3.91Parent education of childcare options/resources and quality programs 8.48 4.09 4.39Support for ECE teachers/staff on utilizing their programs approved curriculum 8.21 4.13 4.09Encourage/support/educate use of research based curriculum in child care programs 8.08 4.35 3.73Continue IGDIs, expand users 7.57 3.79 3.78

Family Support

Promoting children/family events 9.13 4.65 4.48Access to transportation/services 7.35 4.35 3.00How to get the best use out of the family kiosks 7.30 3.57 3.74Internet accessibility 6.26 3.61 2.65

Parent Leadership

Find out parent needs 9.13 4.79 4.33Work on barriers to parent involvement 8.83 4.79 4.04Expand parent coalition 8.25 4.21 4.04Being inclusive to fathers and grandfathers raising children 8.24 4.38 3.87Family structure support 7.81 4.33 3.48


Physical activity calendar to address obesity 8.73 4.25 4.48Increase/improve play spaces 7.77 4.25 3.52Nutrition shop with families 7.63 4.04 3.58Cavity free kids – dental access/care 7.47 4.21 3.26Allergies – resources for families/kids 7.44 3.92 3.52Access to health insurance and quality providers 7.43 4.65 2.78Nutrition – improve school lunches 7.04 4.09 2.96


Appendix C: Fund Development Plan Assessment

Fund Development Plan- 2011Progress Report- February 2013

Fund Development Goals:1. Establish the infrastructure for Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative to expand fund development efforts.2. Enhance relationships with prospects and donors so that we can raise sustaining income after time.3. Increase sustainability of Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative.

Strategy: Establish a structure for fund development within the GSC.

ActivityStatus1

Relationship toPriorities2

Include Unchangedin next Plan3

Revise ordevelop extension Activity4

Do notInclude5

Create a finance Team to work onimplementation of plan. P Directly Related Yes No

Consider hiring a contractor tohelp with fund development. N Not Related No No X

Secure Buy-In from all members

NS Directly Related No

How will we do this? If we have support/trustof members already, do we need to make thisanother step? X (?)

Identify 501 c 3 organization to actas the fiscal agent for the GSC andestablish an agreement.

P Directly Related No

The GSC will contact the GOISD to see if theywould be willing to act as the fiduciary forpossible funding development of the GSC. Ifyes, then it will be brought to the GSC to bevoted on.

Create opportunities formembership to becomeambassadors of the GSC within thecommunity. NS Indirectly Related No

GSC members will be actively involved in thefund development activities for the GSC.Specific tasks/events/activities will be availablethroughout the year for member engagement.


Create a Case for Statementsummarizing- “Why wouldsomeone want to give us money?” NS Indirectly Related No

Discuss with GSC Executive Committee if wereally need this? Examples?

Create an annual funddevelopment calendar and budgetfor targeting fund developmentactivities.

P Directly Related No

The GSC will create a more formal plan forwhat we want to do each year related to funddevelopment. Fund development activities areincluded in our work plan, but we need to havemore activities, tasks, stakeholders, checklists,etc.

Complete and start implementingthe fund development plan. P Directly Related Yes

Strategy: Increase revenue sources by 25%. (This seems too high because we only need to show an increase.)

ActivityStatus1




Do notInclude5

Train members, volunteers, andstaff in fundraising andambassadorship.

NS Indirectly Related No

We need to decide if this is actually needed? Isthere a possibility that members would beasking for funds for us? Or will we pursue otherfunding avenues- grants, in-kind, local fundingopportunities, etc?

Develop processes for trackingdonors including donor name,amounts, type of donation,acknowledgement, and follow up(leverage chart) NS Indirectly Related No

Right now we record the name in the leveragechart, mail a thank you, and the ISD businessdept. handles the accounting aspects. We don’thave very many donors (Resource Center,Aspirus, etc)

Seek sponsorships for events suchas play groups and park play time. P Directly Related No

Seek sponsorships for events, trainings,projects, playgroups, etc.

Volunteer Policies & VolunteerManual are created and includevolunteer functions, expensereimbursement, liability insurance,background checks, tracking hours,application & code of ethics, etc. NS Indirectly Related No

Are we going to use this or is it anotherformality? The ISD has policies aboutvolunteers that work with children. Should wejust use theirs?


Utilize funding scenario flow charts NS Indirectly Related No See below…

Implement policies created as partof the fund development plan.

NS Directly Related No

Review the current fund development policiesto determine which are needed for our currentwork plan. Create a process to implement thecurrent policies.

Strategy: Increase community support of Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

ActivityStatus1




Do notInclude5

Develop a list of target audiencesand possible outreach activities C Indirectly Related Yes

This should be linked to the CommunicationsPlan

Hold 2 events per year to increasevisibility of collaborative andinclude targeted methods ofambassadorship with the events. C Indirectly Related Yes


Submit stories about the success ofGogebic-Ontonagon Great StartCollaborative to local papers 2-3times each quarter. C Indirectly Related Yes


Institute an awards program with akeynote speaker and testimonials.Ideas included:

Business of the year

Parent volunteer of theyear

Advocate of the year C Indirectly Related YesThis should be linked to the CommunicationsPlan

Create a public relations/marketingplan for Gogebic-Ontonagon GreatStart Collaborative that aligns withthe Action Agenda. C Directly Related Yes


APPENDIX D: MSU Feedback Report


MSU Evaluation Report Summary: Gogebic-Ontonagon GSC

Stage: Based on the 2012 evaluation, the Gogebic-Ontonagon GSC/GSPC had the characteristics of a Group C (>stage4) GSC/GSPC. In 2010, Gogebic-Ontonagon was a Stage 3 GSC/GSPC.

2010: 24 surveys were sent out to a list of GSC/GSPC Members, Outside Community Members, and GSC WorkgroupMembers provided by the GSC Director and Parent Liaison. 18 surveys were returned for a response rate of 72%. TheGSC/GSPC response rate for your county was 79%.2012 : 39 surveys were sent out to a list of GSC/GSPC Members and Community Partners provided by the GSC Directorand Parent Liaison. Your GSC Response Rate was 87.1% and GSPC Response Rate was 81.8%. Overall, the responserate for members and non-members was 79.5%. Statewide, 3106 surveys were sent out, with an overall response rate of78%.

% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has theseconditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal GO GSC

2010GO GSC

2012Michigan Change

Differencefrom

MichiganAccomplishments:

Improved Outcomes for Children and Families 33% 45% 47% 12% -2%

Improved Early Childhood System

Increased Access to Early Childhood Services 39% 69% 55% 30% 14% Sustained and Expanded Public and Private Investment in

Early Childhood33% 38%

42% 5% -4%

Increased Coordination and Collaboration across Agencies 56% 79% 63% 23% 16% Expanded Array of Early Childhood Services 35% 71% 59% 36% 12%

More Responsive Community Context

Comprehensive Early Childhood System Improvements 33% 76% 61% 43% 15% Increased Community Support for Early Childhood Issues 50% 59% 53% 9% 6% Local Providers More Responsive to Parent Concerns 33% 52% 47% 19% 5% More Supportive Local Leaders and Elected Candidates 44% 52% 50% 8% 2%

Increased Parent Activity and Voice (Empowered Familiesas Change Agents)

44% 48%43% 4% 5%

Additional Outcomes:

Parents Needs are Met

Easier Access to Services 40% 60% 44% 20% 16%

Informed Parents 20% 50% 22% 30% 28%

Benefits of Participating in GSC/GSPC for Parents 25% 56% 64% 31% -8%Benefits of Participating in GSC for Organizations 20% 74% 40% 54% 34%

Red indicates items where the score was lower than the state score and decreased from 2010 to 2012 by at least 5% ORwhere change or difference from state was greater than 15%.Infrastructure Indicators

ChangeDifferenceMichigan

Benefits for Organizational members Increase Higher

Benefits for Parents Increase Lower

GSC Leadership Increase Higher

GSPC LeadershipSame-100%

Higher

Parents as Leaders NA Higher

GSC Support Parents Voice NA Higher

Continuous Learning Orientation NA Higher


Key Conditions Leveraging Change

Your Strongest Areas:« Intentional Systems Change Actions« Effective Partnerships« Shared Goals

Areas to Target for Improvement:« Strong Relational Networks« Root Cause Focus« Parent Leadership and Voice« Local Champions

% respondents reporting that your GSC/GSPC has theseconditions in place Quite a Bit to a Great Deal

GOGSC2010

GOGSC2012

Michigan ChangeDifference

fromMichigan

Equitable System PursuitsEquity Orientation: The needs of the most vulnerable and/orunderrepresented children and families in a local community areunderstood and addressed in a systemative and meaningful manner.Input of vulnerable constituents is valued and disparities in outcomesare targeted.

NA 76% 53% NA 23%

Root Cause Focus: Identifying the underlying causes of communityproblems is a prioirty and the complexity of these causes is recognized.Members understand that the coordinated effort of multipleorganizations/agencies is required to target these root causes.

NA 70% 70% NA 0%

Systems Change ClimateStrong Relational Networks: Strong relational networks easilyexchange referrals, coordinate services and share resources acrossvarious agencies in the community.

30% 36% NA 6% NA

Intentional Systems Change Actions: Active pursuit of systemchange efforts, such as shifting or adopting new policies, procedures, orprograms to reduce barriers and improve the early childhood system.

0% 100% 57% 100% 44%

Readiness for ChangeLocal Champions: The broader community understands the urgencyof the Great Start effort and member organizations are alignined theirown strategic plans with Great Start priorities. Community leaders,including those from the business and government sector, act insupport of the Great Start effort in the community

NA 72% 58% NA 15%

Interdependent Organizations: Member organizations see thevalue in the collaborative effort and support other partners at the table. 72% 86% 66% 14% 20%Readiness for Change: Individuals and organizations believe in theneed for change and have the capacityto pursue it.

70% 84% 78% 14% 6%

Authentic Leadership & VoiceParent Leadership & Voice: Parents are effective leaders andcompetent champions for early childhood and represent aknowledgeable, diverse, and visible parent constituency.

44% 72% 54% 28% 18%

Effective Partnerships: Strong, effective ties between the GSC andGSPC, and also with key outside organizations in the community. 73% 97% 79% 23% 18%

Engaged Constituents

Shared Goals: A unified vision shared with the GSC and GSPC,including an aligned understanding of, and agreement upon problems,possible solutions, and overall goals.

80% 93% 75% 13% 18%

Active Constituents: Active and involved members making valuablecontributions to the GSC/GSPC, including: speaking at meetings,holding an office, or advocating for early childhood in the community.

68% 75% 72% 8% 4%

Red indicates items that scored the lowest on the evaluation. Page 2 of 2


APPENDIX E: Operating Guidelines & Documents


Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

Operating Guidelines

I. Who We Are

The Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative (GOGSC) is the local planning anddecision-making body for the Great Start system – Michigan’s comprehensive early childhoodsystem. The Great Start system components are; Pediatric and Family Health, Social-EmotionalHealth, Family Support, Parenting Leadership, and Child Care and Early Education.

II. Vision

A Great Start for every child in Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties; safe, healthy andeager to succeed in school and in life.

III. Mission

The Mission of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative is to provide a GreatStart for all children from prenatal through age 8 by assuring a coordinated system of communityresources and supports to assist all families in Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties.

IV. Purpose

The purpose of the collaborative is to:

Provide a Great Start for all children from birth to age 8 by participating in the on-goingcoordinated system of community resources and supports to assist all Gogebic andOntonagon County families.

Assist the local Great Start Collaborative Coordinator in accomplishing early childhoodrelated tasks, goals and objectives to improve the local system of early childhood relatedprograms and services.

Assist in the development and implementation of a local early childhood and parentfocused strategic and action plan based on a local needs assessment.

Implement recommendations for local systems for on-going improvements. Encourage, facilitate and support parent engagement in participation and leadership roles. Assist in engaging philanthropic, faith-based, public, private and legislative support

including fund development, and advocacy.


V. Membership

A membership list has been developed as part of the grant proposal, and is based onrequirements developed by the ECIC as part of the grant approval process. Thecomposition of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start collaborative will represent thediversity of the two counties it serves. At a minimum, the GSC membership must includerepresentatives from the following groups, programs, and organizations. Organizationalrepresentatives must be able to make decisions on behalf of the organization.

1. Parents of children (aged 12 or younger) who represent the diversity of the county(ies)constitute at least 20% of the total membership

2. Business leaders, e.g. a president of a local chamber of commerce, a director ofworkforce development or economic development for the county or counties or amanufacturing association.

3. Philanthropic and/or charitable organizations, e.g. the United Way, a communityfoundation, a service organization

4. Faith-based organizations

5. Organizations that provide services on behalf of minority populations in the countyand/or counties.

6. Intermediate School District

7. Department of Public Health

8. Department of Human Services

9. Community Mental Health

10. Hospital, health care system and/or managed care plan serving the area represented by theGSC

11. Juvenile or family court judge

12. Early On

13. Representatives from home visitation and parenting education programs

14. Head Start/Early Head Start


15. Great Start Readiness Program that serves the county and/or counties

16. Licensed Child Care Center and/or Home or Group Home

17. Local school district superintendents and elementary principals

18. Elected governmental officials

19. The GSC should include other members as pertinent to the county or counties it serves.

B. Other membership requirements:

1. Parents (birth, adoptive, foster, non-custodial or legal guardian) must constituteat least 20 percent of the total membership, be reflective of the demographicmakeup of the community, and be parenting children aged 12 or younger.

2. Parent members are to receive within two weeks after the meeting, financialreimbursement for expenses incurred as a member, and access to professionaldevelopment and mentoring opportunities. Reimbursement is as follows:a. Child care costs @ $3.00 per hour for the first child and $2.00 for eachadditional childb. Mileage @ current IRS ratec. Honorarium for each meeting @ $25.00 per meeting

3. The members of the collaborative, with the exception of parents, must havesufficient authority to commit funds, staff and other resources on behalf of theirorganization.

4. The Great Start Collaborative may include other members of the community asdeemed necessary to achieve the goals of the Collaborative. Members areselected by an informal process of referral to the Collaborative, followed by abrief interview and orientation with the prospective member to insure they meetrequirements, and have sufficient understanding and commitment to the missionof the Collaborative. Referrals can be made by any Collaborative member, theProject Coordinator, or other interested parties. Once selected for membership,the new prospective member shall submit a letter of commitment to the ProjectCoordinator. Updated membership lists will be provided to members asnecessary at regularly scheduled meetings.

VI. Membership Responsibilities

It is crucial to the success of the GOGSC to have an active and engaged membership. TheGSC will meet a minimum of six times per year as a full body. When circumstancesprevent executive-level members from participation in all required GSC meetings, those


members may appoint a high level administrative or managerial staff person to deliberateand make decisions in their absence, as long as the appointing executive attends at leasttwo meetings per year. It is expected that high-level administrative or managerial staffwho are appointed to serve in the absence of the executive, will report to the executive onthe business of the GSC on a regular and ongoing basis. The membership provides overalldirection in the governance and operations of the collaborative, appoints committees toundertake specific functions of the collaborative, and assures accountability forcommitments made within the collaborative and the community.

Membership duties include but are not limited to:

A. A commitment to attend all meetings either in person, or via telephone or video-teleconferencing.

B. Appoint committees, and/or teams for specific tasks

C. Provide direction, resources and support for committees and teams.

D. Cooperate with providing necessary statistical and other needed information for thecompletion of the community needs assessment and strategic plan.

E. Review progress, and ensure coordination throughout the assessment and strategicplanning process.

F. Assure accountability for commitments made within the Collaborative and thecommunity.

G. Keep the Collaborative Coordinator informed of any changes in membership, contactinformation, or availability of time and resources.

H. Participate in and/or provide for professional development and mentoringopportunities.

I. Make a good faith effort to contribute toward fulfilling the mission and purposes ofthe Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative.


VII. Meetings

A. Members of the GOGSC, in corporation with the Collaborative Coordinator, willdetermine by majority the frequency, location and time of meetings for a minimumof 6 meetings per year.

B. Members will receive notification of meetings at least two weeks before thescheduled meeting via e-mail. Members without e-mail access will receive a copythrough the U.S. mail.

C. Participation in a meeting via teleconferencing or video-teleconferencing constitutespresence at a meeting.

D. Business decisions regarding the Collaborative will be made by majority vote of thosepresent at the Collaborative meeting.

E. In order to meet the attendance criteria, it is crucial that members attend scheduledmeetings. If a member is not available for a scheduled meeting, the member shallcontact the Collaborative Coordinator in advance and if possible arrange for anauthorized designee to attend the meeting.

F. To remain on the GOGSC a member or their designee must attend at least four (4)of the scheduled meetings within the year. The absence of any members for three(3) consecutive regularly scheduled meetings in the calendar year withoutjustification can be cause for removal from the GOGSC. Nothing in these guidelineswould prevent the GOGSC from reinstating an individual or agency/organizationmembership based upon a review and recommendation from the ExecutiveCommittee.

VIII. Executive Committee

A. Membership

The Executive Committee shall consist of the officers of its Collaborative and shallbe democratically elected by the members. The EC shall consist of the followingmembers:

1. Chair (Co-Chair)

2. Vice Chair (Co-Chair)

3. Recording Secretary


4. GSC Coordinator (ex officio)

5. Parent Liaison (ex officio)

The chair and the vice chair shall be representatives from different organizations.

B. Duties of the Officers

1. Chairperson

a. Preside over and prepare agendas in consultation with the GOGSC for allmonthly meetings

b. Follow by consensus simple parliamentary proceduresc. Provide a collaborative leadership styled. Recommend members to committees and workgroups as necessary

2. Vice-Chairperson

a. Preside over meetings in the absence of the Chairb. Fulfill the duties of the Chair in the event the Chair is unable to do so for

any reason.c. Serve out the term of the Chair in the event that he/she is unable to

complete the term of officed. Notify the Coordinator in advance in the event that neither the Chair or

Vice- Chair will be present and able to preside at a scheduled meeting

3. Recording Secretary

a. Attend all Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative meetings.b. Take detailed minutes of the meetingsc. Consult with and provide copies of minutes to the Coordinator within one

week following the meetingd. Appoint a designee if unable to attend a scheduled meeting, and notify the

Coordinator in advance

C. Participation

The Executive Committee will meet a minimum of six (6) times per year andmembers are required to attend four (4) of the scheduled meetings per year.Attendance may be in the form of participation through interactive television,conference calling, web conferencing or other technology method, when available.

D. Vacancies


If an officer has three (3) or more unexcused absences per year from meetings, theirmembership will be reviewed by the EC and they may be replaced by the generalmembership at the next meeting.

E. Committees

Committees shall be recommended by the Executive Committee.

F. Term

Officers and the Executive Committee members will serve for a one year term andwill be eligible to serve no more than three consecutive terms. The EC shall beelected by a majority of the Collaborative Board, and terms of office will beJanuary 1st to December 31st . Members will be asked whether they would like tocontinue in their position at the end of each year. If a member wishes to step-down aGOGSC member will be elected in their place.

IX. Standing Committees

The GOGSC will be undertaking specific tasks, and will accomplish the detailed work ofthese tasks and processes via the use of committees and teams. Meetings will be held asappropriate to complete needed tasks. The standing committees for the initial year of theproject are as follows:

A. Executive Committee: Responsible for administrative oversight of the GSC/PC.

B. Pediatric and Family Health Team: Responsible for updating, revising,and

implementing the Pediatric-Family Health of section of the Action Agenda. GOGSCwill choose annual priorities to focus the team’s efforts.

C. Child Care and Early Education Team: Responsible for updating,revising, and

implementing the Early Care and Education section of the Action Agenda.GOGSC will choose annual priorities to focus the team’s efforts.

D. Family Support Team: Responsible for updating, revising, andimplementing the Family Support and Parenting Leadership sections ofthe Action Agenda. GOGSC will choose annual priorities to focus the team’s efforts.


E. Social-Emotional Health Team: Responsible for updating, revising, andimplementing the Social-Emotional Health of section of the Action Agenda. GOGSC

will choose annual priorities to focus the team’s efforts.

Each standing committee will form a leadership structure parallel to the GOGSC, and makeverbal/written progress reports to the Collaborative at the regularly scheduled meetings.The GOGSC and/or standing committees may form other sub-committees and/orworkgroups as needed to fulfill specific tasks. The sub-committees and/or workgroups willmake written progress reports to the designated standing committee or to the GOGSC.

X. Voting

A. The preferred decision making process of the GOGSC shall be Consensus.Consensus is defined as: A decision which the majority (50%) of the presentmembers of the group can support even if the decision is not every member’spreference.If consensus cannot be obtained, the decision will be discussed at the next meeting.

B. For voting purposes, a quorum shall consist of a simple majority of those members orapproved designees in attendance including a minimum of one parent representative.Each member or designee shall have one vote. The voting will be reached by multiplemethods depending on the circumstances of the vote. Examples include, but are notlimited to: verbal, show of hands, and paper ballots.

C. The GOGSC will use the “one designated member, one vote” rule as a guideline forvoting purposes. Each required member for the GOGSC will receive a vote in thecapacity that they represent. A GOGSC member who is unable to attend may have anofficial designee as their representative by notifying the chairperson before the day ofthe meeting. Although GOGSC partners may have an agency guest attend meetings,it is only one designated person who is able to vote on their agencies behalf.

D. When roll call voting is required or requested, the names and votes of members anddesignees shall be recorded in the minutes.

E. Members or designees shall abstain from voting when the question to be voted ondirectly or indirectly provides the member’s organization with funding or servicesthrough a contractual relationship.

F. Members are expected to report any other issues that may constitute a conflict ofinterest. The membership will then determine through the rules above if a conflictdoes exist, and if so, the member will abstain from voting on the issue. Members willalso excuse themselves from discussion regarding issues with which the conflict ofinterest exists.


XI. Conflict Resolution

Communications between members of the GOGSC shall be mutually respectful reflectingthe shared vision and spirit of cooperation. In the event that a conflict should arise, it shallbe handled in a respectful and discreet manner.

A. Should a member have an issue or conflict that they are not able to address at ascheduled meeting, they may contact the Collaborative Coordinator for resolution orreferral to the Executive Committee.

B. In the event that a member has a conflict or issue regarding the CollaborativeCoordinator, they may contact the Executive Committee directly.

C. In the event that none of these procedures resolves the conflict or issue, the GOGSCExecutive Committee may authorize the use of an outside mediator.

XI. Procedures and Amendments

A. Amendments

These operational guidelines may be amended by a majority vote of the members ofthe GOGSC as appointed. At least one week prior to voting, GOGSC members willreceive written or e-mail notification of the proposed amendment and the meeting atwhich it will be considered.

B. Funding Decisions

1. A prioritized list of needs will be developed and used for future fundingdecisions. Members will vote on the priority list of needs to be addressed at aregularly rescheduled GOGSC meeting. The prioritized list will be reviewed atleast annually by the GOGSC through presentation by the ExecutiveCommittee.

2. Whenever possible, all members will be notified when grant funds are available.This could be accomplished via e-mail, faxing, special meetings and regularlyscheduled meetings.

3. When funds become available, the Executive Committee will meet to determineif the goals of the new funding fit with the GOGSC strategic plan. TheExecutive Committee will present their recommendations to the GOGSCmembership. The membership will vote on the recommendations at the nextscheduled meeting, or a special meeting will be called for this purpose.


Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start CollaborativeAgreement

I, and/or my organization, understand the purpose of the Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative (GOGSC) isto provide a Great Start for all children from prenatal through age 8 by assuring a coordinated system of communityresources and supports to assist all families in Gogebic and Ontonagon Counties. Resulting in all children beginningkindergarten safe, healthy, and ready to succeed in school and life.

GOGSC is a partnership of local stakeholders and parents building a comprehensive early childhood system for ourcommunities, looking at all the factors that influence a child’s readiness for school and life, including:

Pediatric and Family Health Social-Emotional Health Family Support Child Care and Early Education Parenting Leadership

This Collaborative Agreement between

_______________________________________________(Print Agency or Parent Name)

and the

Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

is an assurance, by the above named, to acknowledge and support systemic change through the partnership ofGogebic-Ontonagon early childhood resources.

Membership Responsibilities:It is crucial to the success of the GOGSC to have an active and engaged membership. We have a list of requiredmembers that need to attend meetings. The GSC will meet a minimum of four (4) times per year as a full body.When circumstances prevent executive-level members from participation in all required GSC meetings, thosemembers may appoint a high-level administrative or managerial staff person to deliberate and make decisions intheir absence. Please review the Operating Guidelines for other membership responsibilities.

_______________________________________________ ____________________(Signature) (Date)

_______________________________________________ ____________________GOGSC Representative (Signature) (Date)

Mail or Fax this Memorandum of Commitment to:Great Start Collaborative

Mail: P.O. Box 218, Bergland, MI 49910 Fax: (906)575-3373


Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start CollaborativeOrganizational Chart

Acronyms

Acronym Name0-3 Zero to ThreeASQ Ages & Stages QuestionnaireB-6 Birth to SixCDCMHCMCRC

Child DevelopmentCentral Resource CenterCommunity Mental Health for CentralMichigan

DAP Developmentally Appropriate PracticeDHS Department of Human ServicesEarly On Early On MichiganEBLC Early Beginnings Literacy CoalitionECE (or EC) Early Childhood EducationECIC Early Childhood Investment CorporationEHS Early Head StartELL or ESL

ESA

English Language Learners OR English as asecond languageMidland County Educational Service Agency

FAP Food Assistance ProgramFIP Family Independence ProgramGPGS Great Parents, Great StartGSC Great Start CollaborativeGSCPC Great Start Collaborative Parent CoalitionGSRP--competitive Great Start School Readiness Program--

CompetitiveGSRP--state aid Great Start Readiness Program -- State AidHS Head StartHV Home VisitISD Intermediate School District

EXECUTIVE

COMMITTEE

GREAT START

COLLABORATIVE

Teams:

Pediatric andFamily Health Team

Social-EmotionalHealth Team

Family SupportTeam

Child Care andEarly Education

1. CORE PROBLEMSOLVING GROUP:

2. TASK FORCES:

COMMUNITY

EVENTS AND

PARENT

COALITION

3. INPUT & FEEDBACK:

4. COMMUNICATIONS

& OUTREACH:

COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT

COMMUNITY

AWARENESS

WEBSITE

Executive Committee:

*Chair

*Vice-Chair

*Recording Secretary

*GSC Coordinator (ex officio)

Updated 3/2013


Appendix F: Early Childhood AcronymsAcronyms – used to abbreviate; “formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or

major parts of a compound term.” The use of acronyms is widely discouraged; however, it is incumbent upon

the audience to promote their elimination for the understanding and inclusion of all participants.

The following partial list of acronyms may be helpful:

ACMH - Association for Children’s Mental Health

AED - Academy for Educational Development

ASQ – Ages and Stages Questionnaire

AT - Assistive Technology

AYP - Adequate Yearly Progress

4C - Child Care Coordinating Council

CMH- Community Mental Health

CTF- Children’s Trust Fund

DHS - Department of Human Services

ECE - Early Care and Education

ECIC- Early Childhood Investment Corporation

EI - Early Intervention

EO - Early On

ISD- Intermediate School District

GOISD – Gogebic-Ontonagon Intermediate School District

GOCAA- Gogebic-Ontonagon Community Action Agency

GLCYD - Great Lakes Center for Youth Development

GPGS - Great Parents, Great Start

GSC/GOGSC- Great Start Collaborative/Gogebic-Ontonagon Great Start Collaborative

GSRP - Great Start Readiness Program (formerly MSRP)

GSTQUPRCC- Great Start to Quality UP Resource Center

HHS - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

HSCB- Human Services Collaborating Board

HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

IDEA - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act


IDEIA - Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

IFSP – Individualized Family Service Plan IEP – Individualized Education Program

LICC- Local Interagency Coordinating Council

LVD- Lac Vieux Desert

MDCH - Michigan Department of Community Health

MDE - Michigan Department of Education

MHSA - Michigan Head Start Association

MiAEYC - Michigan Association for the Education of Young Children

MSUE- Michigan State University Extension

NAEYC - National Association for the Education of Young Children

NCLB - No Child Left Behind

NICHY - National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities

OSE-EIS - Michigan Department of Education: Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Programs

OSEP - United States Department of Education: Office of Special Education Programs

PC- Parent Coalition

PL- Parent Liaison

PQA – Program Quality Assessment

QRIS – Quality Rating and Improvement System

R.E.A.D.Y. - Read, Educate And Develop Youth

REMC 1- Regional Education Media Center

RFP - Request for Proposals

SF/SC – Strong Families/Safe Children

T & TA - Training and Technical Assistance

TA & D - Technical Assistance and Dissemination

TANF – Temporary Assistance to Needy Families

UPECC- Upper Peninsula Early Childhood Conference

UPCC- Upper Peninsula Children’s Coalition

WIC- Women Infants Children: Food resource for families in need

gogsc counties strategic plan 2013-2016

Documents

strategic planapproved

strategic planning processwas

communitystrategic plan

appendix b

appendix c

appendix e

appendix d

appendix f