Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02062001 - SD.5 • R ,\ s� — VVVV v. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ''' - " CONTRA 14:� COSTA FROM: Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema ►�14z COUNTY Supervisor John Gioia DATE: February 6, 2001 SUBJECT: UPDATE OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RESOLUTION No. 2001142 ` RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. APPOINT Supervisor John Gioia as the Board's representative on the Bay Area Partnership Governing Board. 2. ESTABLISH an Alternate to the Board's seat on the San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee and REFER to the Transportation, Water & Infrastructure Committee the responsibility for making a recommendation to the Board on an appointment to the Alternate seat. 3. EXTEND the terms of the Association of Bay Area _Governments (ABAG) Executive Board appointments and alternates by one year to terms ending June 30, 2002. 4. INDICATE that this resolution and its attachments supercede in its entirety Resolution No. 2001/4 on appointments, which was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on January 9, 2001. BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATION(S): The mission of the Bay Area Partnership is to improve the economic well-being of children, families and neighborhoods throughout the region. The Partnership brings together leaders from local, state and federal governments, business and labor, education, philanthropy, community CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD Feb 6 2001 APPROVED A COMMENDED OTHER XX Following Board discussion, Supervisor Gioia moved staffs recommendations and suggested that Supervisor DeSaulnier be appointed the Board's alternate on the Bay Area Partnership Governing Board. Supervisor DeSaulnier seconded the motion. The Board then took the following action: APPROVED staffs recommendations as stated above; and APPOINTED Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier as alternate on the Bay Area Partnership Governing Board. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A XX UNANIMOUS(ABSENT — — — — — — — 1 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Julie Enea (925)335-1077 ATTESTED Febniary 6, 2001 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: Board of Supervisors Members County Administrator Staff to the TW&I Committee Bay Area Partnership(via CAO) Association of Bay Area Governments BY ,DEPUTY BACKGROUND/REASON(S) FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (CONT'D): organizations and neighborhoods. Contra Costa County has been involved with the Partnership since its inception. Contra Costa County has received some very tangible benefits from the Partnership, including: Analysis of the socioeconomic characteristics of neighborhoods throughout the Bay Area region with identification of North Richmond as one of the top ten for priority action by the Partnership. This identification was instrumental in focusing federal Region IX's attention on North Richmond and the consequent community-building efforts over the past several years. With the initiation of Welfare Reform, the Partnership conducted a Bay Area wide survey on the characteristics of welfare recipients, including essential barriers to welfare-to-work efforts. Contra Costa received County-specific data that supported the Employment and Human Services welfare reform organizational redesign. It was also one of the stimuli for the development of the Welfare Transportation Work Group (which in turn resulted in the development of a CalWORKs transportation plan and over $480,000 of grant funding).. Provided facilitation and strategic planning staff for the Workforce Advisory Panel, the predecessor to the Workforce Investment Board. The panel brought together, for the first time, the education and workforce partners needed for creation of a collaborative welfare-to-work effort. The Bay Area Partnership has developed a proposal for a new governance structure which increases the role and responsibilities of the counties for directing its work. Supervisor Gioia has been active in the development of this new governing structure. Three immediate priorities include: 1. Continued tracking of goals and success indicators on well-being of children, families and communities; 2. Expanding afterschool and nutrition opportunities for children and youth; and 3. Supporting the development of integrated, equitable inclusive workforce development. Please see the attached material from the Bay Area Partnership for more detail on their strategic objectives and accomplishments 1996-2000 and the background paper on the governance plan and 2001 objectives. We are recommending that an alternate seat to the Board representative to the San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee be established to insure the County's representation on this Committee. The Association of Bay Area Governments has notified the County that the terms for the County's ABAG appointments to the Executive Board are two-year terms ending June 30, 2002. It is recommended, therefore, that the terms of the County's appointments be extended to correspond to the ABAG seat terms. ATTACHMENT I Internal Committees: Board Member Term Expires Better Government Task Force Mark DeSaulnier 12/31/2001 California Identification System Gayle B. Uilkema 12/31/2001 Remote Access Network Board John Gioia, Alternate 12/31/2001 (Cal-ID RAN Board) Capital Facilities Planning Committee Gayle B. Uilkema, Chair 1.2/31/2001 John Gioia, Member 12/31/2001 Contra Costa Health Plan Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Joint Conference Committee Gayle B. Uilkema 12/31/2001 Central Contra Costa Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Solid Waste Authority Gayle B. Uilkema 12/31/2001 City-County Relations Committee Mark DeSaulnier 12/31/2001 Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 John Gioia, Alternate 12/31/2001 Criminal Justice Agency of Contra Costa Mark DeSaulnier 12/31/2001 Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 Dougherty Valley Oversight Committee Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 East Bay Public Safety Corridor Council John Gioia 12/31/2001 Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 12/31/2001 East Contra Costa Regional Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 Fee & Finance Authority Family & Human Services Committee Mark DeSaulnier, Chair 12/31/2001 Federal D. Glover, Member 12/31/2001 Finance Committee Federal D. Glover, Chair 12/31/2001 Donna Gerber, Member 12/31/2001 Hazardous Waste Management Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Capacity Allocation Committee Robin Bedell-Waite, Alternate 12/31/2001 Internal Operations Committee . John Gioia, Chair 12/31/2001 Mark DeSaulnier, Member 12/31/2001 Medical Services Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Joint Conference Committee Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 Open Space/Parks & EBRPD Gayle B. Uilkema, Chair 12/31/2001 Liaison Committee Mark DeSaulnier 12/31/2001 Pleasant Hill BART Steering Committee Mark DeSaulnier, Chair 12/31/2001 Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Proposition 10 Commission Alternate Member John Gioia 12/31/2001 State Route 4 Bypass Authority Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 SWAT Gayle B. Oilkema 12/31/2001 RESOLUTION NO. 2001/42 r - � r < . ,. � .. i 2001 BOARD COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS FEBRUARY 6, 2001 ATTACHMENT I (continued...) TRANSPAC Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Mark DeSaulnier, Alternate 12/31/2001 TRANSPLAN Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 Transportation, Water & Donna Gerber, Chair 12/31/2001 Infrastructure Committee John Gioia, Member 12/31/2001 Tri-Valley Transportation Council Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 Urban Counties Caucus John Gioia 12/31/2001 WCCTAC John Gloia 12/31/2001 Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 12/31/2001 West County Waste Management Authority John Gioia 12/31/2001 Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 12/31/2001 RESOLUTION NO. 2001/42 ATTACHMENT II Regional Committees Board Member Term Expires Bay Area Air Quality Management District Mark DeSaulnier 6/17/01 Gayle B. Uilkema 1/7/04 Central Contra Costa Transit Authority Gayle B. Uilkema 5/1/2001 Board of Directors Contra Costa Transportation Authority Federal D. Glover 1/31/2004 Donna Gerber 1/31/2002 John Gioia, Alternate 1/31/2004 Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 1/31/2002 Local Agency Formation Commission Gayle B. Uilkema 5/6/2002 Federal D. Glover 5/6/2002 Donna Gerber, Alternate 5/3/2004 Metropolitan Transportation Mark DeSaulnier 2/10/2003 Commission RESOLUTION NO. 2001/42 v ATTACHMENT III Special Restrictions Board Member Term Expires ABAG Executive Board John Gioia 6/30/2002 Mark DeSaulnier 6/30/2002 Federal Glover, Alternate 6/30/2002 Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 6/30/2002 ABAG General Assembly John Gioia Unspecified Donna Gerber Unspecified Bay Area Partnership Governing Board John Gioia 12/31/2001 Bay Conservation & John Gioia 12/31/2004 Development Commission Gayle B. Uilkema, Alternate 12/31/2004 CSAC Board of Directors Gayle B. Uilkema 11/28/2001 John Gioia, Alternate 11/28/2001 Delta Diablo Sanitation District Federal D. Glover 12/31/2001 Governing Board Delta Protection Commission Federal D. Glover 1/1/2003 Mark DeSaulnier, Alternate 1/1/2003 Law Library Board of Trustees Craig Anderson 12/31/2001 (in lieu of Chair of Board of Supervisors) Mental Health Commission Donna Gerber 12/31/2001 John Gioia, Alternate 12/31/2001 Proposition 10 Commission* Gayle B. Uilkema 12/31/2001 North Coast Shoreline J.P.A. Gayle B. Uilkema 12/31/2001 (District 1 & District 2) John Gioia 12/31/2001 San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee John Gioia Unspecified (Vacant), Alternate Unspecified *The Chair of the Board is appointed by Ordinance, and appoints the Alternate (Attachment 1). RESOLUTION NO. 2001/42 y r 1 • I� Qtr: � I� � . STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES ' AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS . ° 1996-2000. 1 c a • BAY AREA. PARTNERSHIP BUILCING H-_ALTHY AND SELF-SU FFICI ENT-CD!,AMUI•IITIES ` FOR ECQNOt41 IC P:ROSPE_•R ITY 1 7 _ .. ^ � � 1 �. �: � � , n O � � .. ' � e � '� .. , n � � , ' , ' ' � � ' O o � • A .. ' � � ' I ' w � . . _ � � w y 4 r B..n,ARE-.1 P:tl,TVF_1,'S177P: .BlTILDING ISE-_LLTHY:I.ND SELF-S UFFICIL\T T,\'ITIZ ti i:ok ECONOMIC PI:OSPERI71' Secretariat— Northern California Council for die COmnlunit\' • 50 California Strer-t, Suite 200 • 'San Francisco, CA 94 1 1 1-4696 • 415.772.4- 30 • Fax: 415.391.9929 January 17, 2001 The Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Contra Costa 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Chair and Board Members: On behalf of the Bay Area Partnership: Building healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities for Economic Prosperity, we are asking that your Board of Supervisors appoint one of your members as your representative to the Governing Board of the Bay Area Partnership. You may also wish to appoint another of your members as an alternate in case your representative is unable to attend a meeting. The mission of the Bay Area Partnership is to improve the economic well-being of children, families and neighborhoods throughout the region by maximizing the return on investment in human services. It is a public-private consortium involving leaders from local, state and federal governments, business and labor, education, philanthropy, community organizations and neighborhoods in ten counties. Over the last four years the Bay Area Partnership has been working to accomplish this by establishing new working relationships between government agencies and key stakeholders to facilitate systems change at the local level through community building and results-based accountability. It is unique in that it is the only regional collaborative cutting across so many professional disciplines and levels of government that is working to improve the way we invest public and private resources to promote increased levels of family and community health and well-being. Despite the overall economic vitality in the region, pockets of poverty persist and significant numbers of families and children are not thriving and have not yet been able to achieve self-sufficiency. The Bay Area Partnership has identified and targeted work in the most impoverished neighborhoods where the economic benefits have not kept up with the rest of the Bay Area. For example, the Bay Area Partnership has played a key role in the creation of 46 new after-school programs in these neighborhoods and in getting $5.5 million in after-school grants. It has also drafted enabling legislation to support the efforts of Bay Area counties to gain more flexibility from state rules and regulations in exchange for improved accountability for specific outcomes. To fully update you on the impact of our work, enclosed is a recent publication on the Strategic Objectives and Accomplishments of the Bay Area Partners/tip. The Bay Area Partnership now has a critical opportunity to build upon these successes and to have greater impact. Our role as elected officials is pivotal. Letter to Board of Supervisors January 17. 2001 Page 2 The Bay Area Partnership offers a "win- vin" for the Bay ,Area and for each county. Your representative will find the Bay Area Partnership to be a remarkable network of support, information, and advocacy on behalf of counties and the most impacted neighborhoods and families. It was originally established with the support of the senior federal regional representatives in Region IX, particularly from the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Labor, Agriculture and Housing and Urban Development. The current federal regional representatives will remain advisors to the Bay Area Partnership during the transition period. We expect that when the new administration's representatives are in place we will have an active, flourishing program for them to support. Since September, we have served on the Ad Hoc Committee that has been addressing the governance of the Bay Area Partnership and'its future Work Plan (see enclosed). Out of our work has come a realization that the active involvement of county policy-makers will greatly enhance the effectiveness and impact of the Bay Area Partnership in facilitating systems change at the local level. We invite you to take an increased leadership role in the Bay Area Partnership by appointing a member of your Board of Supervisors to the Governing Body for the following principal reasons: • Local elected officials must be involved to insure that the Bay Area Partnership work remains on course and is closely coordinated with the ongoing efforts of the counties. • The success of the first several years has increased the visibility and credibility of the Bay Area Partnership as well as increasing the complexity of the work and the demands for its involvement in related efforts throughout the region. These positive accomplishments and new opportunities make the involvement of county elected officials more critical to the future successes. • The Bay Area Partnership will be launching one or two new signature projects that build upon the past accomplishments. We want to be certain that these signature initiatives reflect the priorities of all Bay Area counties and involve broad-based representation and participation. • We have drafted legislation consistent with the mission and purpose of the Bay Area Partnership that supports counties in securing expanded flexibility from state regulation in exchange for increased focus on outcomes for families and children. It is critical that local elected officials be involved in leading this effort and negotiating with the state officials. • During the transition in the federal administration it is important that local elected officials assume more leadership in establishing policy for and directing the Bay Area Partnership. As you may know, Board members from throughout the region have been involved in the Partnership's work from the beginning. Mark DeSaulnier has participated along with Supervisor Gioia, who is a member of the Partnership's Ad Hoc Governance Committee and one of the signers of this letter. Claude Van Marter was the original Contra Costa staff liaison to the Partnership at its inception. Sara Hoffman now serves in that capacity. John Cullen has been an active contributor and, along with Joe Ovick and Chuck Spence. County Superintendent of Schools and Chancellor of the Contra Costa County Community College District, has participated in the Partnerships technical assistance program. Letter to Board of Supervisors January 17, 2001 Page 3 We plan to have orientation and get acquainted visits with each of the newly appointed members beginning in the middle of February 2001. Therefore, it would be helpful if your Board could forward the name of your representative to the above address by the end of January. In case your representative is unable to attend a meeting, please also list an alternate. We expect the Governing Body to meet 2-3 times each year. With Board of Supervisor leadership from each Bay Area county, the Bay Area Partnership is in a unique position to build upon past accomplishments to support and enhance your efforts locally and to make a difference for the region as a whole. We look forward to working with Contra Costa County to improve the well-being of families and children in the Bay Area. Sincerely, o Gail Steele Jo . Gioia Supervisor, 2nd District Supervisor, 1" District County of Alameda County of Contra Costa J s T. Beall, Jr. Duane Kromm Su ervisor, 4`h District Supervisor, 3`d District County of Santa Clara County of Solano Enclosures: Governance Plan Summary Work Plan Summary State Assembly Resolution Strategic Objectives and Accomplishments 1996-2000 B.1a' RE t PARI T:RSIIII': BUILDING I1£1LTH1'1LND SEI.I---SurFiciE-ArT C,0iNL%f UNITIES F0.P. ECONOMIC PROSPERITY Secretariat- Northern California Council for the Community • 50 California Street, Suite 200 • San Francisco, C,1 94111-4696 • 415.772.4430 • l=ax: 415.391.9929 • GOVERNANCE PLAN SUMMARY The Ad Hoc Committee on Governance, based on the initial recommendations of the Conveners and the discussion on 9/8/00, developed a governance plan highlighted as follows: 1. The Institutional Partners as the Governing Body. Federal, State, Private, County, Schools and other partners at.the highest appropriate level and other organizations. Serves as decisionmaker for mission and work plan and for major policy and strategic directions. Meets twice a year (perhaps more often in the first year). 2. An Executive Committee to address critical issues, work plan and oversight challenges on a more regular basis. Selected by the Institutional Partners/Governing Body. Meets bimonthly. 3. Inclusion of Community/Neighborhood Expertise Body to provide Neighborhood input and expert counsel to the Governing Body and Executive Committee. Could meet as a separate body, as appropriate. 4. Committee and other Work Groups established to work on particular issues as determined by the Governing Body and the Executive Committee in the work plan. Members are determined by the Partners and those willing and committed to the work. 5. Quarterly and other special meetings and conferences used to get wide input on Partnership work and products and to offer networking and best practices and policies for adoption and dissemination throughout the Region. 6. The principle of openness, diversity and participation will be applied to the membership and work of all aspects of the governing system. If you have any questions, please contact Claude Van Marter at (925) 459=0179, <cvanrrlarter@astound.net>, Ed Schoenberger at (415) 772-4304, <ed.schoenberger@ncccsf.org>, or David Militzer at (415) 439-4253, <david.militzer(�7i ncccsf.org>. For copies of the full governance plan, please contact Jeanine Cutino at(415)772-4428, <jeanine.cutino@,,nccesf.org>. .N I'M:RVI[R`•.N(.:('('`.11:1P mrm itce'%Ad Ilrrc G)n erncrncc•,Nhtermisl I'I:rn Surnmar-doc BAY ARI_-:,l PART,\TERSHIP: BUILDING HF_,LLTm, .wL) SELF-SUFFICIENT COMMUNTITIES 1 012 ECONOMIC PP.OS13ER.ITY Secretariat—Northern California Council for the Community 50 California Street, Suite 200 • San Francisco, CA 94111-4696 • 41.5.772.4430 • Fax: 415.391.9929 BAY AREA PARTNERSHIP WORKPLAN SUMMARY January 2000 INTRODUCTION The Bay Area Partnership' is a public-private partnership of government, business,community,philanthropic and services leaders dedicated to improving the lives of children, families,and communities in the San Francisco Bay Area,especially in our most impoverished neighborhoods. We are committed to developing effective,outcomes based,community oriented, integrated ways to plan,fund and implement health,social,education,economic development and community development services in the region.This will require fundamental systems change. We believe that a region-wide initiative is needed that brings together the leadership committed to neighborhood investment and revitalization,family support,human services integration,and school reform initiatives along with the maintenance of the region's economic competitiveness. Our mission is to help publicize, facilitate and accelerate the needed systems changes necessary for success. SUMMARY WORKPLAN To carry out this mission,the Bay Area Partnership proposes a work plan of education,technical assistance and policy development summarized as follows: I. Build Region-wide Agreement On Goals and Success Indicators. By tracking a set of goals and success indicators over time, we will know if we are making progress in improving the conditions of children, families and communities. Systems Change Result: • Bay Area policymakers will have critical health and human service related indicator and trend data to inform local,county,and regional decisionmaking. II. Build Upon and Test Promising Strategies To Achieve These Goals Across Jurisdictions and Existing Service Systems. A. Expand after school and nutrition opportunities for children and youth By facilitating linkages among county,city, schools and community based organizations and by using the lessons and experiences of current efforts to improve federal,state and local funding,policy and program decision making,the Partnership will support the health,development,and ability of children and youth to succeed in school. Systems Change Result(Long Term): • All children in the region's 52 most impoverished neighborhoods will have access to quality after school and nutrition programs B. Support the development of an integrated,equitable,inclusive workforce development system. By providing a long-tern mechanism for sharing experiences and lessons of systems change work among county policymakers and practitioners from throughout the region,the Partnership will increase the region's capacity to assist those seeking employment, increase the skill levels of those who want to improve their positions, and provide employers with trained workers. For a moire complete hackeround on the kkork o��the Partnership and the pro[a>Sed�cnrkpl;in. hleasr-,cc Srraris;ic Objec Livers and lcLrn! By the Honorable Dion Louise.-ironer,14th Assembh'Distract;the Honorable Carole Migden, 13th Assembly District; the Honorable Helen Thomson, 8th Assembly District,the Honorable Don Perata,9th Senatorial District;and the Honorable john �'asconcellos,13th Senatorial District;Relative to commending the RZT , rFar1:T11prZ1n;4TJa WHEREAS,Alameda,Contra Costa,Marin,Napa,San Francisco,San Mateo,Santa Clara,Santa Cruz,Solano and Sonoma counties,in conjunction with the State of California,the federal government,the business community,the United Way of the Bay Area and other philanthropic organizations,and regional ponprofit organizations, formed the Bay Area Partnership in 1996 with the support of the Northern California Council on the Community, to build healthy, self-sufficient, and economically prosperous communities throughout the region;and WHEREAS,The Bay Area Partnership carries out its work based on principles of attention to outcomes;building on neighborhood and family assets;investment in communities and neighborhoods;comprehensive services; cultural competency; collaboration among policvmakers,funders,and agencies;system-wide change,and equitable economic development opportunities; and WHEREAS,Since 1996,the Bay Area Partnership has made great stades toward improving the communities of the region, through: creating profiles of the 52 most impoverished neighborhoods in the region,including demographic and poverty data, neighborhood resources and initiatives,need for services and potential for participation in economic and employment activities; obtaining$3 million in state and federal funds to align training and workforce development with employer needs; developing nutrition and after school campaigns that fostered the creation of 51 school breakfast programs and 46 new after school programs,and brought five million dollars to five Bay Area counties and nine impoverished neighborhoods;and assisting the Federal Regional Task, Force work which supported community efforts in North Richmond and Palo Alto;and WHEREAS,The Bay Area Partnership has established the Flourishing Families Partnexship among.county, state, and federal agencies,business,and community agencies to set common outcomes for the region's children and families,cut through the tangle of fragmented government programs,and create an integrated region-wide system of services to serve Bay Area families more effectively;now,therefore,be it . RESOLVED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER DION LOUISE ARONER,ASSEMBLYWOMAN CAROLE MIGDEN, ASSEMBLY MEMBER HELEN THOMSON AND SENATORS DON PERATA AND JOHN VASCONCELLOS,That they commend the Bay Area Partnership for its ongoing work in improving the lives of children, families, neighborhoods, and communities,and extend the appreciation and gratitude of the public. Members Resolution No.2502 Dated this 31st day of August,2000 r 0� 1 Honorable Dion Louise Aroner norable Car eMien 14th Assembly Disticr thAsseh Distnic Honorable Helen Thomson Flon sable Don i'erata F n able lohn "asconcellos `3th Assembly Distnct 9th S matonal District 3th Scnatonal District J ` J � 1 r1 J r .1 J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1996-2000 Leadership Summit A Dialogue on the Future of the Bay Area Partnership: Building Healthy and Self Sufficient Communities for Economic Prosperity September 8, 2000 Oakland, CA NORTHERN CALIFORNIA COUNCII. FOR THE COMMUMMr(NCCC) SECRETARIAT 90 CALIFORNIA STREET,SUM 200 SAN FRANCIsco,CA 94111 PHONE:419.772.4430 FAX:419.391.9929 For more information about the Bay Area Partnership or NCCC, please check our web site: www.ncccsf.org STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1996-2000 CONTENTS Introduction Page 1 rAcknowledgements Page 5 Strategic Objectives and Accomplishments Page 7 Appendices: Appendix A - Publications Page 27 Appendix B - Basic Facts about the Bay Area Partnership Questions and Answers Page 29 County Participation Page 31 Appendix C - Bay Area Partnership County Contact People Page 33 i 1 i GOALS FOR / HEALTHY AND I / SELF-SUFFICIENT i COMMUNITIES • All Children Succeed in School and Are Prepared for Lifelong Learning. Families of All Kinds Are Strengthened, Preserved and Flourish. People Acquire and Retain Jobs and Achieve � Economic Independence. ' The Cycle of Violence Is Ended. The Frail, Disabled and Chronically Ill Are Ensured Independence and Dignity. Discrimination and Inequality Are Eliminated. 1, People Achieve and Maintain Optimum Mental ` and Physical Health. Individuals and Neighborhoods Are Prepared — to Respond to Emergencies and Disasters. People Play an Active Role in Community Life. All People Have Access to Affordable and Safe Housing. All People Enjoy the Benefits of Clean Air, Clean Water and a Sustainable Environment. 1 INTRODUCTION "Moving from services to outcomes, dependence to self-sufficiency, and needs to assets" was the subtitle of the Bay Area Partnership's predecessor, The Bay Area Committee for Systems Redesign. Founded and convened by Bay Area Council CEO, Sunne Wright McPeak, and Grantland Johnson, at that time, Director, U.S. Department of Health and Human ' Services - Region IX, and currently California's Secretary for Health and Human Services, the committee set the tone, foundation and program some four years ago for the work to come. In fact, the Goals for Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities (see previous page) and the What Works! Principles (see pages 2 and 3) became the blueprint for agreement among a remarkably diverse set of public institutions — ten county governments, five federal departments and two state agencies — and many non-governmental philanthropic, business, nonprofit, community and neighborhood organizations. Literally, hundreds of The Bay Area public, neighborhood, nonprofit and philanthropic leaders, staff Partnership was members and activists have participated in Bay Area Partnership formed, in part, as meetings, workshops, conferences, technical assistance programs a positive response and materials development work. to the changes At the heart of this broad coalition were the following ideas: occurring in the relationship between • The continuing gap between our region's economic government — local, vitality and its poorest families and neighborhoods. state and federal and communities.. 1 • The necessity of finding ways to link and coordinate public investments in service, with business investments in growth, in order to close this gap. • The development of a new "contract" among federal, state and local governments — and the people they represent — based upon flexibility at the most local levels and achievement of agreed upon results throughout the region. • The importance of community leadership and infrastructure as an essential element of success. • The challenge of capitalizing on the existing number of promising initiatives that offer potentially successful solutions. • The region as an arena in which innovation, learning, experimentation and work. change can be pursued and made to support local or ' The purpose of this report is to summarize the work that has been accomplished in the last four years and to lay the groundwork for the future. r , A.TIME OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGE This is a time of very significant change — particularly for those working for the well being of children, families and neighborhoods. it is clear that whether from a philanthropic, public sector or business point of view our nation can do better than the highly categorical system we have been using to respond to the challenge of children, families, neighborhoods and communities in trouble. A strong consensus is emerging about what will work from among those who have taken a fresh look at what we have learned from a half century of social programs - particularly those of the 1960s and '70s. The elements of this consensus include familiar concepts and ideas. But, when applied as a whole at the local level, they promise significant and dramatic opportunity for success. The Bay Area Partnership adopted a set of basic principles underlying this new approach based upon research supported by the United Way of the Bay Area and reflected in work undertaken by local governments, numerous foundations, community organizations and neighborhood groups throughout the region. BAY AREA PARTNERSHIP WHAT WORKS! PRINCIPLES • Start with and Focus on Desired Outcomes-not Programs. • Build on Assets of Families, Neighborhoods and Individuals-not on Deficits. • Involve and Invest in Communities and Neighborhoods-not Just Services • Provide Comprehensive, Integrated Support for Families and Individuals-not Fragmented, Disconnected Services. • Promote Collaboration Between Funders and Policymakers-not Just Agencies. • Be Culturally Competent and Aware of the Community-not Administrators and Designers of Externally Determined Programs. • Rebuild Systems and Bring Promising Initiatives to Scale-not Just Pilots. Y g g i 2 1 LINKING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTHY FAMILIES, NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES The Bay Area Partnership has also developed the view that, without strong linkage to employment and economic development opportunities, this new focus on neighborhoods, community assets and collaboratively organized initiatives will not be enough to build the healthy families and communities we seek. Economic development, education, family support services �• and employment training are all working to benefit children, families and communities. There is an obvious PERCENTAGE CHANGE I interrelationship between neighborhoods, family IN ADJUSTED INCOME OVER THE LAST DECADE support programs, schools and the economy. FOR CALIFORNIANS: - Children need to be healthy and feel safe in + 9% for the wealthiest their neighborhoods so they are able to learn; - Parents need jobs in order to provide supportive -5% for the middle environments for their children; -10% for the poorest - The economy of the region requires a stable, competent workforce to be competitive. source:Economic Policy Institute. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities This suggests an additional principle: • Promote equitable region-wide economic development and make sure it is linked to local human service, education and local development resources and opportunities. MAKING THE BAY AREA ' MORE COMPETITIVE The strategic imperatives of the intersection between human services and the economy are: • Regional economic competitive advantages are the keys to job generation. • Neighborhood economic development is most likely to succeed if tied to a regional economic advantage strategy. • The challenge is to reach neighborhoods and communities that have not fully participated historically in the economy or achieved acceptable levels of self- sufficiency. • Education and work force preparation are keys. • New models of workplace preparation (education) and human services (family support, employment and training) are essential. ' • New models must embrace community and family assets, the value of self- sufficiency, and a learning environment. • Local collaboration, neighborhood involvement and public partnerships are ' the key to a new model of family assistance and human services. 3 STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES ' The Bay Area Partnership, capitalizing on the emerging consensus about What Works!, embraced several strategic objectives as it began work on its mission of facilitating and promoting the systems change agenda in the region. 1. Build region-wide agreement on goals and success indicators. 2. Create a flexible, regional outcomes-based service system. 3. Build neighborhood capacity. 4. Expand after school and nutrition opportunities for children and youth. 5. Create an integrated, equitable, inclusive workforce development system. 6. Increase the capacity of Bay Area Partnership members to implement the What Works! Principles. This report describes strategic objectives one through five and our progress to date. It outlines, as well, the critical next steps needed to continue working towards our goals into the 21st Century. Strategic objective number six does not have its own section in this report because all our work and accomplishments contribute to its achievement. J - r 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS All those seeking to get better outcomes for Bay Area children and families and neighborhoods: Throughout the region, policymakers, community residents, administrators and volunteers are all finding new and better ways to address the challenges of ensuring that we inhabit — and our children and their children will inhabit — a livable, equitable and prosperous Bay Area. Thus, particular appreciation needs to be expressed to all those embarked upon this challenging new work-building healthier children, families and neighborhoods for economic prosperity-and for their help in making the Bay Area Partnership a vehicle for sharing information, gaining mutual support, building public understanding and awareness, and for promoting approaches that work. United Way Leaders, Volunteers and Staff: To Dick Rosenberg, Doug Shorenstein and.Bruce Seaton, Chairs of the United Way of the Bay Area. We acknowledge their willingness to invest in the Northern California Council for the Community, their support for the work of the Bay Area Partnership and for their willingness to embrace these new challenging principles of change in the United Way itself. And to Tom Ruppanner, Sheila Hill-Fajors and Anne Wilson for confidence in our work and their ability to translate these ideas into action. County Boards of Supervisors, Administrators, Department Heads and Staff: To members of the Bay Area County Boards of Supervisors for being willing to act collectively and boldly to move in new directions and to the scores of staff at the county level who have labored to make the needed changes in their communities and their systems and who have helped to shape the work of the Bay Area Partnership. Special appreciation needs to be expressed to Grantland Johnson-currently head of the California Health and Human Services Agency-and Sunne Wright McPeak-President and CEO of the Bay Area Council-for their insight, leadership and vision for helping to found the Bay Area Partnership and, as well, to other federal conveners — Loni Hancock, Education; Allen Ng, Agriculture; John Phillips and Keith Axtell (representing Art Agnos) from Housing and Urban Development; Steve Roberti, Labor; and Catherine Dodd,.Health and Human Services — for joining and sustaining this effort to get better results for children, their families and the neighborhoods in which they live; and for their willingness to step forward to lead by example and to find ways to make this work with their state and local government partners. Northern California Council for the Community Staff Members: We are grateful in particular to Rayna Caplan, interning with the NCCC from the Harvard Graduate School of Public Health, for researching and compiling this report. Her energy, enthusiasm and insights help all of us to see more clearly the nature and value of the work accomplished over the past four years. Bay Area Partnership Coordinator David Militzer led and edited the project. NCCC President Edward Schoenberger wrote the introduction and acknowledgements. NCCC staff Larry Best and Mary Suloway assisted Sin writing and editing. Maureen Radcliffe George (mrgeorge@tanminds.com) provided graphic design. 5 � J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS Build region-wide agreement on goals and success indicators Create a flexible, outcomes-based service system Build neighborhood capacity i. Expand after school and nutrition opportunities for children and youth Create an integrated, equitable, inclusive workforce development system Increase capacity of Bay Area Partnership members to implement the What Works! Principles* The Bay Area Partnership employs multiple strategies for achieving the objectives that are listed above and described in greater detail in the sections that follow. These strategies include: influencing policy, conducting research, developing products, sponsoring education and training opportunities, and offering technical assistance and support. A regional nonprofit intermediary organization, the Northern California Council for the Community (NCCC) has served as Secretariat to the Bay Area Partnership since its ' inception. The NCCC assists the Bay Area Partnership in executing its work plan and strategies. This last strategic objective does not have its own section in this report because all our work and accomplishments contribute to its achievement. 7 1 rJ r J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: BUILD REGION-WIDE AGREEMENT ON GOALS AND SUCCESS INDICATORS I. Overview The first What Works! Principle of Community Building is to focus on desired outcomes - not programs. This means that policymakers, funders, program managers and community members must work together to analyze the resources, opportunities and obstacles to achieving community goals and to make explicit agreements about actions to take and resources to be invested in the outcomes being sought. They must also agree on the data or outcome indicators to be tracked as they evaluate their progress. To assist with this work in each county and the region, the Bay Area Partnership convened the Goals and Success Indicators Committee. The Committee was charged with the responsibility for identifying The outcome indicators for each of the Goals for Healthy and Self- Goals and Success Sufficient Communities. In addition to nonprofit and private Indicators report sector representatives, the Committee included public sector provided a valuable representatives from county health, social and/or economic tool for comprehensive development agencies in Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa community Cruz, and Sonoma counties and from the U.S. Departments of assessment Health and Human Services and Agriculture. The committee collaboratives in identified key indicators of success for each Goal and published six counties. baseline data in 1998. The Bay Area Partnership continues to refine, update and publish indicator data and encourages its use across the ' region to create positive changes for children, families and communities. II. Accomplishments and Outcomes ' 1998 • Published Goals and Success Indicators of Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities. The Goals and Success Indicators Committee selected indicators that best communicate the meaning of the Bay Area Partnership goals, and for which data are available at the county level. The Committee also provided input on the design of a system for collecting and disseminating indicator information. Engagement in this process by public sector representatives was as important as the publication of the report because it deepened and broadened support for the Goals, and increased the likelihood that the report would be used as a foundation for ongoing indicator and data collection activities in the region. This process and the report laid the groundwork for the collaborative community assessments produced in six counties in 1998 and 1999. ' 9 1998 - 1999 • The Collaborative Community Assessment Reports produced by NCCC in six counties featured the Goals and Success Indicators of the Bay Area Partnership. The Northern California Council for the Community, Secretariat to the Bay Area Partnership, worked with collaboratives in Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco and Solano counties to produce Community Assessment indicator reports for each county. United Way of the Bay Area and the Hospital Council of Northern and Central California underwrote the costs of the assessments. They also helped bring together many of the stakeholders concerned with the social, economic and physical health of our communities, including county health and social service departments, local foundations and advocacy organizations. By using the Goals and Success Indicators developed by the Bay Area Partnership, members of these county collaboratives were able to take a broader view of community health and consider how they could better work together to improve community outcomes. In several counties, the collaboratives used the indicator data to set targets and implement plans for community change. 1999-2000 County and Regional Collaboratives Take Action to Achieve Goals • Solano Coalition for Better Health: Solano County's community assessment process built upon an existing collaborative structure, the Solano Coalition for Better Health. According to Patrick Hughes, Ed.D., Director of Operations for the Coalition, "the data provided by the In Solano County, community assessment was a driving force in the Coalition's city teams are using decision making about its strategic goals." Of the four goals the community chosen by the Coalition, two goals directly resulted from the ' assessment information community assessment: 1) addressing disparities in health status to develop city- in communities of color (e.g., providing more culturally specific strategies. competent services); and 2) addressing the health and safety of children. A few months following the publication of the countywide , community assessment, individual reports for each city in Solano County were published. Drawing from the 1999 Collaborative Community Assessment data, the citywide reports presented data for local interests and city councils. City teams are using the information to develop city specific strategies. For example, Benicia Community Health strategies include, among other activities, a community leadership forum to improve communication with elected officials, establishing an intergenerational youth garden, organizing a second Benicia diversity fair and partnering with the Youth Substance Abuse Task Force. 10 , Building a Healthier San Francisco (BHSF): As part of its Community Assessment, BHSF identified 15 The BHSF i critical-issues that most required attention. The collaborative and its group also identified the programs that each of partners are working through the collaborative partners (United Way of the Bay elementary and middle schools Area, San Francisco hospitals, and the Public to increase the number of Health Department) had in place to address these children covered by health issues. Based on this information, BHSF adopted a care insurance. collaborative project to increase the number of children and families in San Francisco with health insurance through enrollment and outreach efforts with elementary and middle schools. C Healthy Marin Partnership: Based on the results of the community assessment, the Healthy Marin Partnership prioritized access to healthcare and youth wellness as its two key initiatives. The assessment also resulted in work to address immunization and asthma. III. Opportunities and Next Steps: • Continue to increase access to health, social and demographic indicator data for counties, cities and neighborhood groups, as well as nonprofit service and advocacy organizations, hospitals, foundations and United Way. • Continue to support and learn from "healthy community" coalitions that are using indicator data for planning, action and evaluation of results. 11 i 12 I I II I i J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: CREATE A FLEXIBLE OUTCOMES-BASED SERVICE SYSTEM I. Overview A cornerstone of the work of the Bay Area Partnership is the promotion of a The new federal-state-local contract that would provide communities with increased flexibility in designing and implementing social programs — Bay Area based on the What Works! Principles — in return for a commitment to Partnership has achieving specifically defined outcomes. From the beginning, members developed a model of the Bay Area Partnership have emphasized the importance of such for what a a shift to increase the return on investment for children, families, redesigned system and communities. would look like by focusing on a single Over the past three years, The Bay Area Partnership has developed a goal: Families of all model for what this vision of a redesigned system would look like by kinds are focusing on a single Partnership goal-Families of All Kinds are 1 strengthened, Strengthened, Preserved, and Flourish. The building blocks for this preserved and new approach were formed in the Waivers and Flexibility committee flourish. and the Systems Redesign Learning Circle, and have now culminated in The Flourishing Families Performance Partnership (FFPP) which is working to make this concept a reality in the region. II. Accomplishments and Outcomes 1997-1998 ' Developed a framework for a five-year regional initiative that would place fewer restrictions on how state and federal dollars are spent to achieve agreed upon outcomes. Key features of this framework include program design flexibility, reinvestment of resources for prevention and pooling of appropriate funding streams. Further articulation of these elements can be found in the Creating and Financing Results-Based Partnerships for Self- Sufficient Families and Communities concept paper published July 1998. 1998-1999 • Formed a "Learning Circle" to identify and measure indicators related to "Preparing Children 0-5 for Success in School" and to "Helping Families to Achieve Self-Sufficiency." (These outcomes were chosen because they helped to address a single partnership goal-Families of All Kinds are Strengthened, Preserved, and Flourish). In cooperation with the Foundation Consortium, the "Learning Circle" included representatives from seven counties, two federal departments, two state agencies and a variety of administrative health, social service, family support, education and related perspectives. ' 13 • Identified 21 indicators and produced trend data that provided the basis for system redesign efforts. This information was published in the November 1999 report Building Family Self-Sufficiency and Preparing Children Ages 0-5 For School: A Report on Regional Indicators. • Drafted six system redesign "working " proposals to better align federal, state, and local programs and/or funding streams. Proposals are focused in ,the areas of Child Care and Development, Workforce Development, and Supportive Services for Employment, Family Health Insurance Coverage Expansion, and Confidentiality. 2000 • Drafted proposed legislation to formalize a Flourishing Families Performance Partnership in the region. The proposed legislation 1) establishes the State of California's participation in the governing body of the Bay Area Partnership and its participation in the Flourishing Families Performance Partnership for a period of five years, and 2) offers the Learning Circle's six proposals as opportunities for piloting systems change in the region. Currently, five federal departments and nine county governments have agreed to participate. The Foundation Consortium and the California State Association of Counties (CSAC) provided advice to the Bay Area Partnership in drafting the proposed legislation. As a result of the consensus decision to look beyond individual county waivers, we are now one step closer to having a more flexible, regional, results-based system targeted at children and families most in need in the Bay Area. We have achieved the following: • Established a conceptual foundation for a new relationship between federal, state and local government. • Laid the groundwork for systems change by increasing our capacity to implement the What Works! Principles and to collect, track and publish county and regional health, social and demographic indicators for families and young children. • Drafted legislation to formalize these changes. III. Opportunities and Next Steps The next step is for all partners (Federal, State, County) to begin implementation of the Flourishing Families Performance Partnership. This includes the submission and passage of the legislation, and the identification of the appropriate Federal, State, and County representatives to design the implementation plans. 14 . of `o J o %70 ® Al//I lrL/ J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: BUILD NEIGHBORHOOD CAPACITY i v . Overview The strategic objective to Build Neighborhood Capacity follows directly from the What Works! Principle that emphasizes the importance of focusing on the assets of the individuals, families and neighborhoods we are trying to serve. Building on the assets of the residents of low-income communities is critical if we are to make progress toward achieving any of the Goals. Just as the leaders and staffs of public and private institutions are learning how to apply the What Works! Principles in their community building efforts, members of disenfranchised communities should have the opportunity to develop and use leadership and problem-solving skills that will serve them in both their personal and civic lives. Since its formation, the Bay Area Partnership has been committed to building the capacity of residents of low-income neighborhoods to target issues of their own concern and to work with government, business and philanthropy, as necessary, to achieve desired results. rII. Accomplishments and Outcomes 1997 • Published A Guide to the Bay Area's Most Impoverished Neighborhoods by County. This document, which initially included 46 neighborhoods in nine counties and has since been expanded to 52 neighborhoods in ten counties, created a foundation to increase understanding of conditions arising from persistent poverty and economic dependency. In addition, it identified The Program community assets on which to begin building additional capacity. on Community Capacity and Public . Published Promising Bay Area Community Building Initiatives: Policy, which works Profiles and Analysis that documented 24 promising multi-sector through the Bay Area initiatives operating in the Bay Area. These initiatives exemplified the Partnership on a What Works! Principles and provided a framework to explore similarities, number of projects, differences and conditions needed to bring innovative programs to scale. has identified "Initiative fatigue" and . Published Linking Neighborhoods to Government and Philanthropy: poorly coordinated Building Neighborhood and Institutional Capacity, which outlined public programs as key regional and local action plans aimed at building neighborhood capacity barriers to achieving and linking county government and other institutions to these efforts. results in low- income 1997 - 2000 neighborhoods. • Continue to partner with the Program on Community Capacity and Public Policy (PCCPP). With funding from California Wellness Foundation, PCCPP conducts research pertaining to community capacity building, and has developed a two track professional development series - one for leaders of low-income communities and the other for public sector administrators and 15 officials. These trainings focus on community infrastructure building, systems of government-community interface, community governance, and the challenges of devolution. 1998 • Published a map of the 52 most impoverished neighborhoods, which Include nearly 1/3 of all people living in poverty in the Bay Area. This map, which incorporates urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods, reinforced the message that in order to achieve healthy, safe and prosperous communities, more effective outcome-focused strategies must be developed that include and build upon the assets of our most distressed neighborhoods. 1998 • Hosted a Roundtable Discussion on Low Income Neighborhoods attended by more than 100 Bay Area Partnership members. The purpose of the discussion was to learn about and better understand the challenges and opportunities of neighborhood capacity-building work and to strengthen and deepen interest in, and commitment to, the pursuit of this work. • Published The Neighborhood Directory: A comprehensive ten-volume directory of grassroots and neighborhood-linked organizations in the Bay , Area's most impoverished neighborhoods. County departments, foundations, community-based organizations, and grassroots groups are using this guide for various networking and outreach activities. • Launched the four-year TEAMS Initiative to create ongoing, structured leadership teams in disenfranchised communities throughout the region. Neighborhood teams are already in operation in Contra Costa and Solano counties. The goal of the initiative is to mobilize grassroots leadership and promote civic engagement in low-income neighborhoods in each of the ten Bay Area counties. The leadership teams bridge the gap between low-income neighborhoods and institutions, including government agencies, nonprofits, schools, private corporations and others seeking meaningful, democratic resident participation in a wide variety of civic issues. The Bay Area Partnership is working with public and private leaders to develop funding resources for TEAMS and plans for sustainability. 2000 • Co-hosted with the Project on Community Capacity and Public Policy a ' forum entitled Strengthening Linkages between Systems and Communities: Effective Organizational Design for Community-Based Initiatives. This gathering, the first in a series aimed at local administrators and elected officials, focused on the relationship between the design of community-based initiatives and the success of community building efforts. i 16 • Published, North Richmond: A Community Indicator Report. This report tracks progress toward the achievement of the Bay Area Partnership goals in North Richmond and serves as a prototype for collecting/presenting data at the neighborhood level for all 52 Bay Area neighborhoods with a high ■ concentration of poverty. ' • Produced a notebook of resources for members of the North Richmond Task Force with information about the organizations, programs, and services available in North Richmond. The notebook is intended to help them identify service gaps and opportunities for greater coordination and action. III. Opportunities and Next Steps • Form an Of Counsel group of neighborhood representatives as part of expanded governance structure. • Secure long-term public and private commitment (resources and policy) to developing the leadership capacity and civic engagement of people in low- income neighborhoods through the TEAMS initiative. • Co-host Community Capacity and Public Administration conference with PCCPP and continue to support efforts to better align community building activities with public sector investments. ' 17 18 J � J � J 1 J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: EXPAND AFTER. SCHOOL AND NUTRITION OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH I. Overview The Bay Area Partnership adopted the strategic objective to Expand After School and Nutrition Opportunities for Children and Youth for two reasons. First, children who participate in structured after school activities with a nutrition component are more likely to have better academic outcomes than peers who do not have safe and healthy after school options. Second, parents who have safe and healthy after school care options for their children are better positioned to seek or keep jobs. This strategic objective also supports progress toward the education and employment .Goals for Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities. It challenges all of those involved to implement the What Works! Principles that call for collaboration among funders and policymakers and the development of comprehensive, integrated support services for families. Research shows that hungry children have trouble concentrating, It is estimated and that children and youth face increased risks to their safety that over 1/2 million and well being during non-school hours — particularly from 3 P.M. Bay Area children ' to 6 P.M., when many are unattended by adults. While new under the age of 13 public and private resources have become available for need after school or communities and schools to develop high quality after school child care programs. programs, the vast majority of children and youth are not afforded the type of after school options needed. Source:and Referral care Resource Network, 1999 ' There are many barriers to implementing after school programs. Many times, school personnel, under increasing pressures to improve in-school programs and classes, have little or no resources to devote to the development of after school programs. Also, community based organizations, with programs and expertise that could be of help to schools, often operate entirely separate from the school day and school culture. In an effort to reduce these and other barriers, the Bay Area Partnership offers research, technical assistance, and policy support to schools and community based organizations (primarily in low-income neighborhoods), foundations, and government agencies. We have achieved the following results: ' • We documented the gap between availability and need for school based after school programs in our low-income neighborhoods. ' • We successfully influenced after school and nutrition legislation at state and national levels. • We created avenues for the exchange of information and ideas among schools, community based organizations, foundations and government. 19 ' • We brokered resources to schools and community partnerships to create new after school and nutrition programs, particularly in the Bay Area's most impoverished neighborhoods. • We assisted 46 new after school programs to be developed in low-income neighborhoods in five Bay Area counties. II. Accomplishments and Outcomes 1997 ' • Convened a Regional Education and Nutrition Roundtable in April 1997 to address the impact of the "post-welfare reform" environment on schools and education. The summit brought together health, nutrition, human services and education leaders from around the Bay Area. This event launched our campaign to promote high quality after school and nutrition programs focused on the 52 lowest income neighborhoods in the Bay Area. The year following the roundtable, 13 new after school sites were opened. 1997-1998 • Launched the School Breakfast Campaign with key local, regional, state and federal partners which resulted in 51 new school breakfast programs in the Bay Area over the course of the year. • Influenced the expansion of the Federal Child Nutrition Act to include 12 to 18 year olds for subsidized school food programs and to simplify paper work requirements for schools implementing the After School Snack Program. In addition, the work of the Bay Area Partnership was used as a model for the Low -income Departments of Education and Agriculture to develop a formal agreement 12 Californiayear-olds to coordinate efforts on school-linked nutrition programs. in Cifand , across the country are Developed policy recommendations, with key partners, that now eligible for free led to critical changes to the California After School Learning and and reduced cost school Safe Neighborhoods Partnership Act. These amendments expanded lunch and other access to state After School grants for middle schools and some rural school-based and urban schools by changing key requirements that resulted in more nutrition flexibility in designing programs to meet local conditions. Because of programs. these changes, youth in middle schools have increased access to new after school programs. 1999 • Conducted a survey of extended school day program availability in public schools serving children in the 52 most impoverished Bay Area neighborhoods. This survey identified type and availability of before and after school programs, and has resulted in increased awareness of the gap , between children and youth's needs for after school care and current availability of programs. The Bay Area Partnership has also used the results to help direct resources and assistance to schools in need. Findings were widely 20 disseminated to policy makers and funders. Further information can be found in the publication Results of the Bay Area Partnership Extended School Day Survey. • Offered a series of resource workshops for local schools and communities. Workshops were hosted by congressional delegates from around the region and ' co-sponsored by the US Department of Education. • Held a Quarterly Meeting that focused on Extended School Day programs. ' The meeting highlighted the status of statewide training and technical assistance resources for after school programs and successful countywide efforts to support after school activities. It was also strategically scheduled to ' coincide with the Federal After School Fair. 2000 • Directed private resources to schools and collaboratives in low income neighborhoods that resulted in over $5.5 million being awarded in new Bay Area state and federal after school grants for 46 programs in five Bay Area counties - Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz. At the request of the Packard Foundation and the Foundation Consortium, the Bay Area Partnership connected eight local collaboratives with mentoring and technical The Bay Area assistance resources. With these supports, the eight Partnership helped collaboratives conducted planning and submitted tow-income ' applications for California After School Learning and Safe neighborhood schools Neighborhood Partnerships grants and 21st Century gain $5.5 million in Community Learning Center grants. state and federal grants for 46 after school • Co-sponsored two Northern California After School programs starting Roundtables with PASE (The Partnership for After School September Education), the US Department of Education, and the James 2000. Irvine Foundation. Identified after school program staff development needs and planned for building capacity in the after school movement. • Continue to convene discussions to address needed improvements in state and federal after school policies. The Bay Area Partnership is continuing to promote and to insure that the voices of rural, urban, and suburban low- income communities and schools are included in policy development. ' Recognized by The National Committee for Responsible Philanthropy. The Bay Area Partnership's work in after school and nutrition policy was profiled in the Spring 2000 report on California Non-Profits. In sum, the Bay Area Partnership is helping to build after school and nutrition policies and programs, based on the What Works! Principles, which address the health and safety needs of children and youth in after school hours and which improve their chances for success in school and in life. 21 III. Opportunities and Next Steps • Connect technical assistance resources and model program information to groups that are trying to build quality after school programs in all of our low- , income neighborhoods. • Continue to influence policy based on current program experiences and the What Works! Principles. • Continue to work with local, regional, state and national leaders to increase ' the availability and effectiveness of after school resources for all children and youth, with a priority focus on the region's most impoverished neighborhoods. i i 22 1 • r • O� �O O, O �O � rJ J STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE: CREATE AN EQUITABLE, INTEGRATED WORKFORCE ' DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM I. Overview It is critical that the Bay Area Partnership address the systems issues that prevent .individuals and families throughout the region from making progress toward the Goal ' of Acquiring and Maintaining Jobs and Achieving Economic Independence. The Bay Area Partnership adopted the strategic objective to Create an Equitable, Integrated Workforce Development System in the region to help public systems be more ' effective in preparing the untapped pool of potential workers for the jobs of today and tomorrow. Several of the What Works! Principles come into play as complex systems with federal-state-local elements begin to become more responsive and ' accountable to the needs of potential workers and employers. These systems-change The efforts call for a focus on outcomes, new collaborations and partnerships and Bay Area greater integration of services. Partnership To achieve the goal of economic independence, individuals and families must is working have the opportunity to gain the education and skills necessary to be with our local,' competitive in the region's prospering economy. For many families, particularly state and those living in our poorest communities, such opportunities may not exist. federal partners Furthermore, as the gap between the wealthy and impoverished grows, both in to link the income and in preparedness for the jobs of today and tomorrow, the ability of ' under-and Bay Area businesses to find workers with the necessary skills within the unemployed with regional labor pool becomes increasingly difficult. In fact, this "skills-gap" — inand the physical separation from jobs that many low-income families and educational and neighborhoods face — threatens the future prosperity of the region and creates training approaches barriers for achieving healthy families and communities. that address Fortunately, both at the state and federal levels, reforms have been initiated to the needs of provide opportunities for significant local and regional improvement. The the regional passage of California's Regional Workforce Preparation and Economic economy. Development Act (RWPEDA) and the Federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA) have provided a policy basis for change. Incentive funds to assist economic regions develop collaborative models for aligning economic development, education, training, and workforce development systems are improving our capacity to create better outcomes. In this environment, the Bay Area Partnership is providing technical assistance (consultation, facilitation, fund raising, etc.) to help workforce development partners on the local, county, and sub-regional levels build new collaborative relationships and more effectively bridge the skills-gap between potential workers and Bay Area businesses. ' 23 II. Accomplishments and Outcomes , 1997 • Disseminated The Road to Self-Sufficiency: A Regional Assessment of Aid- Dependency in a Critical Welfare Reform Environment [A Ten-County Bay Area Profile], developed by AT Kearney, the Bay Area Council and the Bay, Area Partnership. This report gave voiceto the perspectives of welfare recipients. It also became a tool for the region and for counties to use in analyzing budget allocations, redirecting resources for the implementation of welfare reform, and addressing regional employment barriers by creating cross ' county collaborative strategies. • Provided data, resources and other technical assistance— through Bay Area Works (BAW)— to the seven counties served by United Way of the Bay Area and private industry councils in the region. In addition, the Bay Area Partnership developed technical assistance plans for individual counties tailored to their specific needs. Two examples include assistance to the Contra Costa County Workforce Development Advisory Panel in developing a multi-faceted strategic plan for cross sector collaboration, and to Alameda County in facilitating the Workforce Development Analysis Project. 1998 • Convened a Workforce and Economic Development Summit in collaboration with Bay Area Works, at which the Bay Area Partnership brought together, for the first time, economic development organizations, private sector employers, community colleges, welfare to work administrators, and private industry councils in the region to begin collective engagement and priority setting. • Facilitated the development of the RWPEDA rant proposal for the EASTBAY P g P P Works collaboration and successfully secured over $2 million in funding for a three year period. These funds have expanded and deepened collaborative r workforce development relationships, and strengthened efforts of community colleges, school-to-career partnerships, and CaIWORKs providers in relation to the one-stop service delivery system of EASTBAY Works. EASTBAY Works, with assistance from the Bay Area Partnership, is involving low-income communities in designing direct service strategies that will build the capacity necessary to help those in need find and maintain employment. This work has also leveraged a number of other grants to EASTBAY Works partners and other regional workforce development efforts. i 1 24 1998-1999 • Researched and published Critical Issues in Workforce Development ' and Welfare Reform: A Review of the Efforts of Bay Area Partnership Counties. • Convened a group of interested partners to develop a plan for a regional skills/knowledge-gap consortium and to respond to the Department of Labor's regional consortia building proposal. 2000 ' • Sponsored with Bay Area Works, a survey prepared by AT Kearney of employer-sponsored welfare to work programs to examine program successes to date, identify key success factors and obstacles to participation in welfare-to-work, and outline future recommendations. • Participated in the successful $700,000 Department of Labor proposal for ' an eighteen-month project to develop a regional skills alliance with five Bay Area counties. This project links businesses - particularly high-tech - to the development of "just in time" curricula and training, and involves community colleges, one-stops, and business groups. It will be designed so that it can be expanded to any skill-gap job and career cluster area, business and training program. It includes a demonstration project that applies the ' community college curricula development work of the RWPDA EASTBAY Works grant to address the "digital divide" in coordination with the one-stop system. Working with North Bay and East Bay counties the Bay Area Partnership has helped leverage $2.7 million in state and federal resources to address the "skills gap." • Facilitating, through the RWPEDA grant, the planning and development of EASTBAY Works into in incorporated organization with balanced Board ' representation from all service systems (e.g., workforce investment boards, welfarq agencies,;community colleges, k-12 system and economic developmbnt;organizAtions). This grant will sustain the capability of EASTBAY Works to coordinate One-Stop services in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, as well as, allow EASTBAY Works to work within the regional economic environment. It will also provide a place for regional, cross sector strategies and solutions to be developed. ' 25 In sum, the Bay Area Partnership is beginning to emerge as a leading regional organization in developing new resources and tools for linking the unemployed and underemployed with the 21st century labor market. This work will continue to contribute to the achievement of greater economic independence for individuals and ' families living in our most impoverished neighborhoods, and will help future workers develop 21st century skills. M. Opportunities and Next Steps , • Create sustainability by assisting EASTBAY Works to develop an expanded and inclusive organizational framework, where workforce investment boards, , welfare agencies, community colleges, k-12 system and economic development organizations share equal representation and responsibility. • Continue to advocate and share information regarding the necessity of aligning education, training and workforce development resources to provide , the current and future workforce with the skills and knowledge necessary for 21st century jobs. 26 APPENDIX A . ' PUBLICATIONS 1996 IMoving from "Services to Outcomes, Dependence to Self-Sufficiency and Needs to Assets!" Concept Paper and Design for a Bay Area Demonstration Project, 1996 ' 1997 • Linking Neighborhoods to Government and Philanthropy: Building Neighborhood and Institutional Capacity, 1997 • A Community Approach to the Region's Future, 1997 • A Guide to the Bay Area's Most Impoverished Neighborhoods By County, 1997 • Map of the Bay Area's Most Impoverished Neighborhoods, 1997 • Promising Bay Area Community Building Initiatives: Profiles and Analysis, 1997 ' Summary of Bay Area Workforce Preparation Project Findings and Recommendations, July 1997 - ' The Road to Self-Sufficiency, 1997 (Bay Area Partnership/A.T. Kearney) • Bay Area Regional Training Directory, August 1997 • The Bay Area Economy: Its Relationship to Successful Welfare Reform, 1997 1998 I • Creating and Financing Results-Based Partnerships for Self-Sufficient Families and Communities, 1998 • Goals and Success Indicators of Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities, 1998 1999 • Critical Issues in Workforce Development and Welfare Reform: A Compendium of Bay Area Activities, 1999 • Critical Issues in Workforce Development and Welfare Reform: A Review of the Efforts of Bay Area Partnership Counties, Summary of Research Findings, 1999 • Neighborhood Directory - Grassroots and Neighborhood-Linked Organizations in the Bay Area's Most Impoverished Neighborhoods, 1999 • Results of the Bay Area Partnership Extended School Day Survey, 1999 • Flexibility and Systems Redesign Learning Circle Concept Paper, 1999 • Building Family Self Sufficiency and Preparing Children Ages 0-5 for School: A Report on Regional Indicators, 1999 • Northern California Council for the Community, Collaborative Community Assessments: Alameda, San Francisco, Contra Costa, Marin, Solano, Napa, 1999 2000 • Bay Area Partnership Status Report, 2000 • Strategic Objectives and Accomplishments 1996-2000, 2000 ' 27 APPENDIX B ' BASIC FACTS ABOUT THE BAY AREA PARTNERSHIP: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS What is the unique function and mission of the Bay Area Partnership? The Bay Area Partnership is the only regional collaboration working to improve the ' way we invest public and private resources in order to promote increased levels of family and community health and well-being. In recognition of the persistence of poverty and its effect on health and well being, the Bay Area Partnership emphasizes efforts that will affect the 52 most impoverished neighborhoods in the Bay Area. Committed to achieving the Goals for Healthy and Self Sufficient Communities by implementing the What Works! Principles for Community Building, the mission of the ' Bay Area Partnership is to maximize return on investments in children, families and neighborhoods. ' In 1998, Vice President Al Gore and the National Partnership for Re-inventing Government presented the Bay Area Partnership with the Hammer Award for breaking down barriers between government and communities. ' Who belongs to the Bay Area Partnership? The Bay Area Partnership includes elected officials and leaders from local, state and ' federal government, business and labor, education, philanthropy, non-profit organizations and neighborhoods in the ten Bay Area counties. ' Why was the Bay Area Partnership formed? The Bay Area Partnership was formed to address the challenges and opportunities summarized in the previous section by: ' • Integrating the What Works! Principles for Community Building into the policies and practices of the public and private institutions that are ' responsible for the physical, social and economic health of our communities, and • Increasing the capacity of individuals in low-income neighborhoods to participate with these institutions in identifying and achieving positive outcomes for their families and communities. What does the Bay Area Partnership do? Through the Bay Area Partnership, members share experiences and learn from each other, influence and develop policy, track social, health and demographic indicators, identify opportunities and secure resources for systems-change collaborations and promising initiatives, access technical assistance and engage in coordinated action to achieve strategic objectives. ' 29 • ' The strategic objectives of Bay Area Partnership follow from the Goals for Healthy and Self-Sufficient Communities and are implemented according to the What Works! Principles for Community Building. They include: • Building region-wide agreement on goals and indicators and implementing ' data-based systems for measuring success. • Creating a flexible, regional outcomes-based service system. ' • Building neighborhood capacity. • Expanding after school and nutrition opportunities for children and youth. • Creating an integrated, equitable, inclusive workforce development system for the Bay Area's 21st Century economy. • increasing the capacity of Bay Area Partnership members to implement the What Works! Principles by offering educational forums, producing relevant research and publications, and sponsoring opportunities for peer learning and support. ' How is the Bay Area Partnership supported? The Northern California Council for the Community, capitalized and supported by the United Way of the Bay Area, provides secretariat support to the Bay Area Partnership. Three member counties - Alameda, San Francisco, and Solana - and two private sector members — PGBE and Kaiser Permanente — have also made investments in support of the Bay Area Partnership infrastructure. The California Endowment, the California Wellness Foundation, the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, the Zellerbach Foundation, the Foundation Consortiuum, the East Bay Community Foundation, the U.S. Department of Labor and the California Regional Workforce Preparation and ' Economic Development Act State Partners have helped support specific Bay Area Partnership activities. Most important, however, are the efforts and participation of the members of the Bay Area Partnership. The efforts of the partner members throughout the ten county region have given the Bay Area Partnership its capacity, reach and impact. What'is going on in each county around the strategic objectives ' of the Bay Area Partnership? As the following chart illustrates, the Bay Area Partnership works both directly and indirectly with every county on activities related to the strategic objectives. The chart illustrates the types of involvement and activities, not the complete detailed picture. For detailed information about each county's work, please contact the Bay Area Partnership contact person in each county (see Appendix C), or members of the Bay Area Partnership's staff. t0 ' COUNTY PARTICIPATION IN STRATEGIC ACTIVITIES ' ON COMMITTEES, WORK AREAS, TASKS LEGEND C O U N T Y ' ✓ = Direct BAP/NCCC C involvement 0 ✓ = In development •4�d t��_ ' �d Ctd fi . `ro BAP/NCCC trackingos local work � o ' Collaborative: Community ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ / I I ✓ D • - • . - Assessment - - - Worked on ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ' . : A • . . Bay Area • _ Success Indicators • Participated in. Family Indicator ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1 Report Identified 52 Most Impacted ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ . Neighborhoods Directory of • Neighborhood ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Organizations • ' • PCCPP ✓ ✓ ✓ Work TEAMS 1 - • - Learning Circle ✓. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓. ✓` ✓ ✓ • ; • _ Involvement ' New After School */ �/ I I ✓ ✓ ✓ � � • • • Sites Policy ✓' ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ' • . . . - . Input . New ' Breakfast ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Programs 17 1998 Summit ril ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 100, ✓ • . • - Bay Area Works Ek DOL Grant ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ' • _ Awarded - • • - Pilot Prosect ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1 1 1 I ✓ ✓ and/or TA ' 31 APPENDIX C ' BAY AREA PARTNERSHIP , COUNTY CONTACTS The followingcount contacts were designated as "official contacts" b their Board ' Y � Y of Supervisors. In some cases an alternate has been added. , Alameda Santa Clara David Kears Yolanda Lenier Rinaldo Agency Director Director ' Alameda County Santa Clara County Social Services Health Care Services Agency Agency Rodger Lum Santa Cruz Agency Director Gail Groves Alameda County Senior Analyst ' Social Services Agency Santa Cruz Human Resources Agency Contra Costa Solano Sara Hoffman Donald Rowe ' Assistant County Administrator Director Contra Costa County Solano County Health and Social Services Department ' Marin Lauren Beal Sonoma Administrative Aide to Supervisor Dianne Edwards , Steve Kinsey Director Marin County Board of Supervisors Sonoma County Human Services Department ' Napa Terry Longoria Director Napa County Health and Human ' Services Agency San Francisco ' Deborah Alvarez-Rodriguez Director San Francisco Department of Children, Youth £t Their Families Will Lightbourne Executive Director ' San Francisco Department of Human Services San Mateo ' Maureen Borland Director San Mateo County Human Services , Agency t 3' ' F � � - a �.: w '• • � .. f � � _ � � \ � � .. .. i .• � . , . y 1� � . , ,. r a � � � • i • ' � , � a t •� • ' � t � � I /r � , � '' . � • � � I � . w � • � r � � a ., e. � ' ' - . . . � ;� ._ ,� ._ J . s v , , �. a . ry � Y � , �� .O �, � � � Y �� r � t � ' . . J � � � c + � , '�. P � _ '. o t � _ t �. � � .. � � � ' ' P ♦ Q .. •1 � + . � 4