Reference Steps to Develop Our COP Outcomes Lessons Learned Maurine Ballard-Rosa, Ph.D., California State University, Sacramento; Gina Guarneri, M.A., UC Davis CEDD; Dillon Henry, M.A., Orange County Office of Education; Andrea Knowlton, M.A., Napa County Office of Education; Marie Poulsen, Ph.D., USC UCEDD; Cathy Mikitka, M.A., Sacramento County Office of Education/SEEDS Program; Diane Williams, M.A., Alta California Regional Center; Kelly Young, J.D., Warmline Family Resource Center California Early Start Network: A statewide videoconference community of practice • Problem solve • Focus on: "How do you take the assessment process and its information and develop family outcomes that are related to the assessment information?" has resulted in interagency collaboration with regional center and LEAs to develop training and ongoing implementation within the IFSP process, making sure that family outcomes are developed on a family interview and which results in family generated functional outcomes. • Pilot • First videoconference May 2011 • Invited participants • Gathered input to the process • Launch • Depended on word of mouth for new members • Contact person follows up with letter of invitation and phone call • Growth • May 2011: 7 counties • October 2013: 20 counties • Sustain • Each meeting includes • introductions and member updates • Send out notes with major topic • points, meeting reminder and • agenda • Evaluate each spring • Drop box established to house • resources • Phone conference only if needed • Met with Director of Special • Education to share knowledge Why a Community of Practice? • Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis. • Why develop the COP? • Opportunities to network, learn together • have diminished due to size/diversity of • CA and elimination of state agency • conferences • Policy clarification • Evaluation (19 responses) • Satisfaction with the Videoconference • 2013: 74% highly satisfied, 26% satisfied • 2012: 26% highly satisfies, 61% satisfied, 13% somewhat satisfied • We have established a supportive network: • 2013: 68% strongly agree, 32% agree • 2012: 91% yes, 9% no (noted tech or scheduling issues) • Evaluation Tied to Our Purpose • Share Knowledge • CES Network has helped us to understand how other counties do things or hear a state perspective that influences our practices and sparks discussion. • Share resources • Sample forms from other Counties are very helpful. Being able to get information about upcoming trainings and conferences is key • Relationships are key! • Use existing resources. • Facilitators are key. • Facilitators build culture of trust and • support. • Provide organizational structure. • Two are helpful! • COP builds over time, needs nurturing. • Encourage and support active • participation. • Evaluation leads to improvement in • process • Inquire: • Purpose: to use videoconferencing technology to establish a supportive network of early intervention programs to share knowledge, resources, problem solve • Community: Administrators/decision makers for Part C (CA Early Start) programs • Design: • Used existing videoconference system • Invited administrators we had relationship • with • Planning Group • Facilitators: UCEDDs and CSUS staff • Identified communication coordinator • Met with state agencies to ask for support for • policy questions Grow • Established trust • At first, we established agenda and • encouraged discussion • Now: group determines agenda, leads • discussion • Members request information from each • other • State agencies have joined us to • discuss policy • Cambridge, d., Kaplan, S. & Suter, V. (2005). Community of Practice Design Guide: A Step-by-Step Guide for Designing and Cultivating Communities of Practice in Higher Education. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NLI0531.pdf • Wenger,E., McDermott, R. and Synder, W.M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice – A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Harvard Business Review.