Welcome and Introductions
Cheryl welcomed the group and went over the agenda for today’s meeting. Introductions were made around the room.
Review Agenda and previous meeting summary
Cheryl reviewed the meeting summary from the August meeting.The meeting summary was approved to be posted to the website.
Updates: ACH Workgroups
• Data & Metrics Workgroup: Alaina Dall reported that the workgroup has been developing secondary indicators for each of the protective factors. After identifying secondary indicators for wellbeing and nutrition, the group is now considering secondary indicators for physical activity and healthy weight.
• Community Resident Engagement Workgroup(CREW): Elizabeth Bustos reported that the workgroup meets monthly on the second Thursday of each month and that all Collective Action Workgroup members have an open invitation to attend. The CREW workgroup’sdraft charter was presented to the SD ACH Stewardship Group, where a robust discussion about equity led to a request for further consideration and clarification by the workgroup.
• Sustainability and Wellness Fund: Kitty Bailey reported that the workgroup last met in July, at which time they discussed a budget for the backbone organization and using the POI to create a value case for potential funders.
• Stewardship Group: Kitty Bailey reported that at the August meeting, the group reviewed and adopted partnership guidelines for the Stewardship Group. This document will eventually be expanded to include partnership guidelines for all workgroups. The group also reviewed the CREW draft charter (see above).
Presentation: “Ideal” Portfolio of Interventions
Cheryl presented for discussion an example of an “ideal” portfolio of interventions (POI), which included possible interventions for all eight protective factors by ACH domain(see below). Questions/comments included:
• Are all interventions evidence-based?
• For clarification, include “Examples of”in the heading
• Include behavioral health services, which incorporate mental health and substance use disorder
• How will we visualize this document for the greatest impact?
• Consider programs that focus on prevention vs. intervention
• Focus on the need to provide resources to community residents, quality of life, and well being
• Consider the relationship between the interventions and identified primary and secondary indicators as one way to prioritize interventions
Presentation: SD ACH survey results
Cheryl reviewed the results of the community survey. Highlights include:
• After focused outreach by workgroup partners, 79 organizations reported on 109 programs, most from non-profit, community-based organizations.
• All regions are represented.
• Nearly all programs serve all races/ethnicities and genders; nearly half serve populations of low socio-economic status.
• Over half of programs serve all age groups; of those programs that serve a specific age group, most serve adults.
• Most programs utilize one or more evidence-based factor in program design.•In terms of data collected to demonstrate program impact, most programs collect process data (e.g., numbers of participants) or survey/evaluation data (e.g., pre-or post-tests, satisfaction surveys)vs. outcomes data (e.g., demonstrated changesin clinicalmeasuresor health behaviors).
• The majority of respondents indicated an interest in aligning their programs with others, both within and outside of their sectors, and adopting new shared measurement systems; nearly half are interested in sharing program outcomes data with SD ACH.
• Respondents indicated wanting to develop new partnerships with community-based and clinical organizations.
• Identified areas of support needed by respondents include new opportunities to build relationships with other organizations; resources about collective impact; and assistance with data collection, reporting, and sharing.
Presentation: POI Framework:
Cheryl and Kitty reviewed the framework and fourdimensionsof the portfolio of interventionsfor input:
• Balance across all domains, protective factors, regions, ages, populations, time to impact, etc.
• Mutual reinforcement including data sharing and progress toward identified indicators
•Strong, high quality programs that are strengthened by support, training, and technical assistance
• Accountable to the community
Discussion: Next Steps indeveloping the POI
Kitty reminded the group of the SD ACH’s dual approach, which includes both countywide and more focused regional approaches. She mentioned that three of the four dimensions (mutual reinforcement, strength of programs/capacity building, and community accountability) are focused at the county level, while balance may initially require a more focused approach. Cheryl proposed testing a model of achieving balance on a smaller scale by prioritizing one geographic region and protective factor, identifying gaps, and convening partners to develop and implement strategies. The group agreed to revisit and further discuss this concept at the October meeting.
The next meeting will be on October 4, 2:00-4:00 p.m.
Date and Time
September 06, 2018 02:00 pm
September 06, 2018 04:00 pm