The Early Childhood Colorado Partnership
Collective Impact Charter
8.27.12
I. Shared Mission and Purpose
A. Mission: A partnership that works to advance the vision of the Early Childhood
Colorado Framework statewide.
II. Partnership Focus and Scope
A. Implementation: The Partnership is a statewide network of organizations and
agencies who are actively implementing strategies to “move the needle” on the most
important system-level outcomes within the Framework.
B. Communication: The Partnership fosters communication amongst partners, both
internally and externally.
i. Providing background information about programs/initiatives
ii. Sharing program updates and opportunities
iii. Ensuring communication between work groups
iv. Fostering communication with external partners
C. Learning and Innovation: The Partnership is a learning community that is
continually improving its practice.
i. Raise up issues for the whole Partnership to address
ii. Generating innovative ideas to address problems
iii. Learn from the best practices of others within the Partnership
iv. Maintaining relationships with the ECLC, ECCLA, and other governance and
leadership bodies
D. Monitoring Results: The Partnership identifies goals and monitors results to
promote a sense of ownership and mutual accountability among partners.
E. What it’s Not:
a. NOT a new regulatory body for early childhood
b. NOT meant to be a registry of all existing/conceivable EC efforts
c. NOT a home for new programs, initiatives, or other long-standing efforts. Ideas
may be generated, but ownership would be delegated/handed off to a
participating agency
Drafted: 5.2.12
Revised: 7.30.12
Broader Partnership
Work Groups
Steering Committee
Staffing
III. Partnership Organization: The overall structure of the Partnership follows the
general outline of the “Constellation Governance Model,”i a model of collaborative
governance developed to allow existing networks of partners to form self-organizing
work groups within a broader “ecosystem” of work within a field. It consists of the
following elements, adapted from the original model:
A. Broad Partnership – the full membership of individuals, organizations, and
institutions dedicated to the vision of the Early Childhood Colorado Framework.
B. Steering Committee – a coordinating body that has the following roles:
i. Works in between meetings to help steward the Partnership and work
groups
ii. Provides strategic leadership and stewardship to the overall partnership
1. Catalyzes work groups around issues important to the
Partnership
2. Notices duplications and seeks to reduce them
3. Links and connects existing initiatives
iii. Maintains relationships with ECCLA, ECLC, EC funders, local councils etc.
iv. Monitors the progress of the Framework In Action and/or the progress of the
work groups
v. Recommends decisions regarding staffing and secretariat functions
vi. Provides outreach functions: who is missing today and how do we get them
to our table?
vii. Ensures communications among/between work groups and Steering
Committee
C. Partnership Work Groups – small teams of individuals that come together to work on
a specific goal within the broader Partnership. Work Groups are guided by a
common set of parameters:
i. Emerge as needed to ensure goals are met—driven by real need to work
together
ii. Some will be long-standing, some short term.
iii. Visible to all partners
iv. Membership is clear, open, and structured
1. Each work group is open for anyone to join
Drafted: 5.2.12
Revised: 7.30.12
2. Work groups encourage intentional relationships—including family leaders
where appropriate
3. Work groups keep an official roster of who serves on that work group
v. Progress is measurable
vi. There is structure, but not rigidity
vii. To ensure connectivity with others working on the Framework, work groups
consider a range of questions as they form and as they monitor their own
progress:
1. Should we be connected to other entities? Who are we missing?
2. How should we function?
3. What types of policy can we help influence/be a part of?
4. How are we in alignment with ECLC or other groups?
5. How often do we need to report/interface with other groups?
D. Backbone Organization (Secretariat) – the staffing entity that provides the following
functions to the Partnership:
i. Oversees basic partnership function
ii. Provides leadership, facilitation, staffing, administration, data management
iii. Maintains technology to make visible to all what is happening in the various
Work Groups
Provides training for Work Groups
IV. Membership: Membership in the Partnership is open to anyone interested in the vision
of the Framework. To preserve the stability of the Partnership, membership entails an
intentional commitment to participate, at some level, in the work of the Partnership.
A. Open but Defined Open to any partner, but all members are asked to officially sign
on and be listed in contact directory
B. Reciprocal Expectations
i. “What you get” …
1. Safe place for peer connection & collaboration
2. Communication about the issues/the work being done
3. Structures for collaboration
4. Appreciative Inquiry
5. Expertise
6. Workgroup support
7. Contact list of Partnership network
ii. “What you give”
1. Sign up
2. Show up
3. Speak up
4. Follow up
5. Finish up
6. Drink up! (celebrate successes!)
C. Intentionally Inclusive Recruitment
i. Moving beyond a Denver-centric approach to include rural/frontier members;
there
ii. Identifying partners from SE/SW/NW/NE corners of Colorado
Drafted: 5.2.12
Revised: 7.30.12
iii. The Partnership will continue to monitor membership for appropriate and
purposeful partners, and will recognize when membership has gotten too broad
iv. “On-boarding” new partners will balance the need to ensure shared
understanding with the realities of busy schedules
V. Results-Based Accountability and Continuous Improvement: To ensure that the
positive momentum of Partnership meetings is not lost in between gatherings, Work
Groups will adopt a continuous improvement model that ensures follow through,
reflection, and resolution on the plans that are created.
A. Focus on Outcomes at Multiple Levels
i. Population-Based Results—defining what well-being will look like for children and
families
ii. Indicators of Success—Defining how we will measure progress toward results
iii. Measures of Performance—Ways of determining effectiveness at the program,
agency, or system of care level
iv. Milestones of Progress—Ways of measuring the improvement of the system
building efforts
B. Work Plans and Follow Through
i. Work groups use planning tools and frameworks to chart out their work
ii. Partnership meetings include follow up reports and communication strategies to
track progress
iii. Impact on Results and Milestones is measurable and tracked over time
C. Acknowledge Completion
i. Need to celebrate/appreciate accomplishments along the way
VI. Shared Measurement: At the heart of this approach lies the effective use of data. The
Partnership will develop and utilize a shared measurement system to set clear goals
and indicators of progress, gather data on those indicators, and review progress over
time. This process will require a series of intentional steps:
A. Determine Measureable Goals : Set clear goals and allow for different ways of
measuring progress at different levels (Results, Indicators, Performance Measures,
Milestones of Progress)
i. As percentages
ii. As categories of “meeting/not meeting” the goals
B. Determine Types of Measures and What Data to Collect
i. Child & Family measures: keeping the end goal in mind. Unified, prioritized (not
necessary comprehensive) dataset determined by the Partnership. Realistic
benchmarks identified.
ii. Needle-moving, intermediate measures: Systems strategies take time to
implement and while their impact on child/family measures may be felt, they
may not be measured until several years after implementation. Needle moving
measures may reflect efficiencies, cost savings etc.
iii. Systems-level changes: Measurement of changes that have occurred with regard
to partnerships, funding, policy, public engagement, shared accountability, and
generating education and leadership opportunities.
Drafted: 5.2.12
Revised: 7.30.12
iv. Qualitative measures: Anecdotal data on the work of the Partnership, stories
out-in-the-field, reasons for celebration, when a particular initiative is completed
and self-reflection of the process is desired
v. Process measures: Measures the impact of actual Partnership activities
(processes), effectiveness of meeting structure, etc. Supports ongoing quality
improvement.
Surman, Mark and Surman, Tonya. “Listening to the Stars: The Constellation Governance Model of Social
Change.” Social Spaces, 2008. Lien Centre for Social Innovation: Singapore Management University,
Singapore.
i
Drafted: 5.2.12
Revised: 7.30.12