Collaborative Policy Development
CADRE Dispute Resolution
Conference
Janice LaChance – Maine Parent Federation
Ann Nunery - Maine Administrators of Services
for Children with Disabilities
Michael J. Opuda - Northeast Regional
Resource Center
Welcome - Dispute Resolution
Stakeholders
Our charge:
Develop consensus for
consideration by the Dept. of Ed.
Issues for discussion:
 Mandatory
mediation
 Barring attorneys from mediations
 Label for Serious Emotional
Disturbance
Agenda
Welcome & Orientation
Review ground rules
Collaborative policy development
Consensus building
Policy Development Activity
Feedback / Reflections
Ice Breaker
Turn to the person next to you.
Identify the role you’ve been assigned
for this activity
Identify who you really are
Why are you here?
What do you want to learn today?
Report out
Purpose of this Stakeholders’
Meeting
To identify policy options
To identify significant issues of concern
to stakeholders
To develop consensus on policy
recommendations for the Department’s
consideration
Objectives
Improve understanding of diverse
perspectives regarding the issues
Open, honest discussion of the
issues
Identification of policy options
based upon group consensus
Have some fun
Ground Rules
Agree to commit to entire meeting
Work collaboratively to develop
consensus
Be respectful of diverse opinions
Express alternatives
Avoid side conversations
Others?
What is Collaborative Policy
Development?
A Consensus based decision-making
process
Collaboration among interested parties
Shared vision, goals, outcomes /
diverse interests
Alternative to traditional policy
development process
Typical Rulemaking Process
Development proposed rule
Notice of proposed rule
Public hearing
Public comment period
Review, summarize & respond to
comments
Final regulations adopted
Why do we have regulations?
Builds on federal law, federal
regulations and state law.
Recognizes the regime values of
Congress and the state legislature.
Clarifies legal obligations and terms.
Why do we have regulations?
Establishes state policy.
Sets standards for performance.
Provides fair notice of obligations.
Problems with Traditional
Policy Development
Accommodation / Compromise
Reactive process
Abstract policies
Top down decision making
Iron Triangles / Favored Voices
Collaborative Policy Development
Characteristics
All groups with a stake voluntarily
agree to participate
There is direct, face-to-face interaction
Decisions are made by consensus
The group determines process and
outcomes
Collaborative Policy Development Benefits
Focuses resources / sets priorities
Ensures policies reflective of
stakeholders
Fosters creativity
Facilitates regulatory process
Increases credibility, legitimacy, and
trust
Collaborative Policy Development Problems / Concerns
Contrary to traditional policy process
Stakeholders may decline to
participate
Process is time-consuming
Requires tough decisions be made
Consensus is not always achievable
Collaborative Policy Development Summary
Acknowledges & values differences
Provides context for decision-making
Cooperatively seeks common ground
Develops consensus
Welcomes diverse perspectives
Consensus
Unanimity based upon accepted
criteria, e.g. “something you could
live with.”
 Responsive
 Generates
 Time
to minority concerns
individual commitment
consuming
 Veto-able
Consensus Building Methods

Round robin - solicit opinions from
members

Thumbs up, down, or sideways

Five fingers method - fist = veto, 1
finger = highly unacceptable, 5
fingers = highly support
Reaching Consensus
Take easier issues first
Use active listening
Talk with each other
Park controversial issues
Identify acceptable alternatives
Decision Making
How will the group determine
consensus?
 Thumbs
up / down
What standard for consensus will
the group adopt?
 Acceptable
/ Live with it
What are the issues?
Should Attorneys be barred from
participating in Mediations?
Should mediation be required prior to
requesting a hearing?
Should the term “Serious Emotional
Disturbance” be changed to
“Emotional / Behavior Disorder?”
Topical Discussion Process
We will address one topic (mediation,
attorneys, or SED label).
Consensus on topic?
Individually – respond to the 3 questions for
the selected topic
Move to your color coded small group
Topical Discussion Process
Break into one of three / four subgroups

Select recorder, timekeeper, facilitator
Individually - share your responses to
the 3 questions w/ the small group
As small group – Discuss concerns /
issues and solutions
Report to large group on concerns,
solutions
Should Attorneys be Barred from
Participating in Mediations?
Will this benefit Children, Parents &
Schools?
Will this impose additional burdens
upon Children, Parents, & Schools?
Will this improve parent / school
relationships?
Should mediation be required
prior to requesting a hearing?
Will this benefit Children, Parents &
Schools?
Will this impose additional burdens
upon Children, Parents, & Schools?
Will this improve parent / school
relationships?
Change “Serious Emotional
Disturbance” to “Emotional / Behavior
Disorder?”
Will this benefit Children, Parents &
Schools?
Will this impose additional burdens
upon Children, Parents, & Schools?
Will this improve parent / school
relationships?
Barring Attorneys at
Mediations
Require mediation
Change category from SED to
E/BD
Reflections
What are the prerequisite
conditions for successful
collaboration?
Who should represent your
organization?
Unintended consequences?
Further Questions / Comments?