• Expertise
• Projects
• Research and Evaluation
• Professional Development
• Store
• Free Resources

Creating New Governance Structures

Creating New Governance Structures
(Fall 1994 Networkshop)

Supporting Local Decisionmaking

Claudia Zundel suggested that state policymakers and agency staff can support local decisionmaking in seven ways.

1. Develop a framework for local decisionmaking. Colorado believes that the right approach to decision- making is for the state to develop a framework and guidelines and for local communities to make most of the operational decisions. This remains the state's philosophy, but implementers believe that the initial framework may not have provided enough guidance. The state is currently conducting a process evaluation that includes feedback from a state university's site visits regarding the dynamics and outcomes of Family Center decisionmaking processes.
   
   
2. Facilitate transitions. In Colorado, discontinuity between planning and implementation of Family Centers occurred because different groups were involved in each phase. A return to the "old way" of doing things characterized implementation at some sites. The state may need to be an agent for maintaining vision during the transition phase of local collaborative efforts.
   
   
3. Balance power. Some members of collaborating groups typically have less power than others. In one Family Center site, the president of the advisory board initially served as the center's fiscal agent. In another site, two elected officials who had authority over agencies' budgets served on the advisory board with representatives of those agencies. In both cases, the real or perceived imbalance of power undermined the development of open, trusting relationships. Based on these experiences, Zundel suggested that a state will want to use policies and procedures to encourage a balance in the local power structure. It may need in particular to foster the attitude that parents and service consumers are significant members of the governance structure.
   
   
4. Select sites by readiness. Due to the fact that local collaborations must be "so cross-cutting, risk-taking, and willing to do business in a different way," a state should consider initially selecting communities for program development based on prior experience working collaboratively. These initial implementations can then serve as guides for future sites. Sites that are not as far along the readiness continuum need assistance in developing leadership and collaborative relationships.
   
   
5. Select dedicated staff. Adding duties to already overly busy staff is unproductive. The task of developing community-based, integrated systems of service delivery requires commitment from staff to work within communities, and it requires direct and ongoing contact with the communities. Understanding why communities are doing what they do will lead to better technical support at the state level.
   
   
6. Develop networks. Colorado has brought leaders of family centers together to come up with solutions to common problems. Typically, a solution selected and pushed by local participants carries with it the commitment to implement, whereas the same solution might have been rejected outright if it had been initiated by the state. Also, local projects develop initiatives on their own that other community leaders can learn from.
   
   
7. Model collaboration at the state level. State-level collaborative efforts demonstrate commitment to the collaborative process and allow state agency personnel to understand and help communities in their efforts.