Summary Report, Good Start, Grow Smart, State Early Learning Guidelines Roundtable
From Blueprint to Reality: Early Learning Guidelines Implementation
Index: Preface, About The GSGS Initiative, Overview of the GSGS Roundtables, Summary of Key Points: Effective Collaboration; Infrastructure for Support; Dissemination of Information; Integration of ELGs into the Professional Development System; Assessment and Evaluation, Conclusion/Acknowledgements, Appendix: Agenda, Participant List, Work Group List | (This document is also available in 
PDF format.)
Summary of Key Points: Effective Collaboration
One of the key strategies States articulated for effective development and dissemination of ELGs is effective collaboration with a wide range of groups, both explicitly within the early childhood education community and with a variety of others who could offer aid and support. In particular, several States felt that long-lasting system change could be produced by bringing together representatives from several State agencies and other early care and education stakeholders around a common goal of developing ELGs applicable to all care settings. This is especially true if strong, positive, personal relationships among key people are cultivated as part of the collaborations. Key recommendations that emerged from State discussions include:
- Collaborate across all sectors of the early childhood community. States found strong allies in others in the field whose goals also relate to supporting young children’s school readiness. This collaboration proved to be an essential factor in most States’ ELG development and dissemination. A wide variety of agencies and groups worked together, including Head Start, State departments of education, child care resource and referral agencies (CCR&Rs), child care centers and programs, early childhood education programs at institutions of higher learning, public and private prekindergartens, private special interest organizations for young children, government child care credentialing and training offices, and other interested State and local officials.
States indicated that working with such a variety of partners had challenges. However, engaging a wide range of agencies and organizations in the ELG development and implementation effort led to a more inclusive process and resulted in a more effective set of guidelines that considered the varied perspectives (i.e., health, education, care) that impact young children’s development.
A Rhode Island Task Force was charged with creating standards that were based on current research and reflected the priorities of Rhode Island practitioners. The Task Force included representatives of early care and education programs, Head Start, the public schools, family child care homes, higher education, and parents.
Oklahoma and Rhode Island exemplify two approaches to collaboration. Oklahoma worked to involve all stakeholders by including representatives from tribal child care and tribal Head Start, as well as the agencies and organizations noted above. Oklahoma recognized the importance of including tribal child care to ensure that State ELGs are culturally relevant to Tribes. In Rhode Island, the Steering Committee felt it was very important to include those who directly deliver services in the process of defining the standards. Meetings were scheduled at convenient times for all attendees, and stipends were attached to compensate attendees for contributing their perspectives and time.
- Partner with members of the business community and legislature. States indicated that working with members of the legislature and the business community is essential. Specifically, legislators aim to maximize resources, stop duplication of effort, and build local coalitions. The business community is interested in children being ready to succeed in school and eventually contributing to the economic development of the community as productive, adult citizens. Thus, the legislature and the business community each can be a driving force in the development and dissemination of ELGs.
- Collaborate to build momentum toward the goal of implementation. In a time of limited funding and resources, it can be challenging to sustain efforts (in terms of both time and resources) from development through implementation of ELGs. States suggested that pooling resources and ideas across sectors of the early childhood community could serve to strengthen support when funding is limited. Members of partnerships identify barriers to implementation and address them collectively. Commonly, partners rotate expenditure of resources and/or leadership to resolve competing priorities in accordance with agreements negotiated among partners.
- Institutionalize partnerships. As partnerships matured, States observed that these relied less on the force of individual leadership and more on institutionalized practices of working together. What began as nascent partnerships to develop ELGs in more informal relationships between colleagues in separate sectors of the early childhood field evolved into institutionalized offices of early care and education or memoranda of understanding between State agencies. For example, Georgia established an Early Care and Learning Office, the purpose of which is to foster cooperation and collaboration among agencies with goals related to early childhood development. In Rhode Island, early care and education is being provided in a wide variety of settings and in programs governed by different regulations. Consequently, the Rhode Island Department of Education and Department of Human Services entered into an agreement to work in partnership to develop early learning standards for Rhode Island.
- Hold realistic expectations. States said they are working to make sure partners have a collective vision of goals and how long it might take to achieve them. States reiterated many times the need for perseverance, and the understanding that successful dissemination and implementation of ELGs in all sectors of the early care and education workforce will take a number of years.
A remaining challenge identified in the area of effective collaboration is:
- How can coordination and flexibility of Federal funding streams be improved, recognizing that specific statutory language governing different Federal agency initiatives and programs can be a barrier?