Collaboration Models and Options
The following are a few commonly used approaches for collaboration.
Family Child Care and Head Start: The Head Start program contracts with a network of, or individual, licensed family child care home providers who remain independent rather than becoming Head Start employees. The family child care provider is considered the Head Start teacher and receives support from Head Start staff, including training, technical assistance, supplies and materials, and participation in a provider support group. Head Start staff provides comprehensive social and health services to enrolled families. The provider may receive total funding from the Head Start program or receive reimbursement from child care subsidies along with funding from the Head Start program.
Center-Based Child Care/Head Start:
Head Start provides the social service and health staff, while paying the early care and education center for some or all of the cost of child development services. One variation might be having social service and health staff work for the center, which operates under a contract with Head Start grantee as a delegate agency. Another option is to contract for classroom space in the child care facility and place Head Start teachers in the classroom. In this model, child care subsidy funds and Head Start funds can be braided to support the cost of child care.
Extended Day Head Start: Head Start programs can access child care subsidy funds to pay for non-Head Start hours. This allows Head Start programs to develop full day/full year services within a Head Start facility. In Illinois, Head Start programs can collaborate with Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&R) agencies and/or Site Administered child care agencies.
Pre-Kindergarten At-Risk and Head Start: Pre K At-risk programs and Head Start may share the responsibility of providing the early care and education services, with Head Start staff providing the social and health services for children and families.
Many programs and communities have designed innovative approaches to combining funding streams and programs to provide high quality “seamless” services to children and families. They have all overcome challenges through their efforts. Although communication, funding policies, and program requirements may initially pose a challenge to collaboration, models continue to grow and thrive.
Potential Barriers, Sand Traps & How To Overcome Them
All collaborations experience challenges. Some are inevitable, while others are dangerous sand traps that can be avoided by alert collaborative partners. Below are some common sand traps to avoid, or act upon if they appear.
Organizational:
- Deciding not to begin until all stakeholders are at the table;
- Failing to set clear ground rules;
- Losing sight of the partnership’s purpose and mission;
- Choosing unattainable goals;
- Trying to handle too many issues or actions at once;
- Inadequate resources for carrying out plans;
- Adverse community relations or media attention;
- Not stopping to evaluate, reflect, and celebrate;
- Not acknowledging or avoiding conflict.
Leadership:
- Trying to maintain control by resisting power-sharing or shared decision-making;
- Allowing political pressure or individual partner self-interests to drive the collaborative;
- Lack of shared leadership;
- Not involving consumers, direct service staff, and policy-makers in critical decisions;
- Becoming too dependent on one or two partners to keep the collaborative going;
- Unrealistic expectations or demands.
Membership:
- Attempting to act before partners establish a sense of trust and ownership in a shared vision;
- Frequent turnover in partners or membership organizations;
- Unequal distribution of work or recognition of members;
- Not taking the time to involve opponents, who could easily block the collaborative mission or goals;
- Failing to recognize an individual partner’s needs or self-interests; or
- Turf battles or power struggles among partners.
Adapted from Atelia Melaville and Martin Blank with Gelareh Asayesh, “Together We Can: A Guide for Crafting a Profamily System of Education and Human Services” (Washington, D.C.: US Dept. of Education and US Dept. of Heath and Human Services, 1993).
Barriers to collaboration:
- Time
- Absence of Community Vision
- Resources
- Conflicting Requirements
- Attitude
- Turf-ism
- Lack of Shared Information
- Lack of Awareness of Need and/or Opportunity
- Loss of Autonomy
- Lack of Leadership
- Ineffective Inter-Or Intra-Agency Structures or Systems
- Comfort with the Status Quo and/or Resistance to Change
Creating The Partnership
Lines are being redrawn in the early care and education field. Where there used to be walls, there are now windows of opportunity. Programs that were once self-sufficient are reaching out to build seamless networks of community support. The change in attitude is reflected by a change in language: We now work in collaboration with our partners, linking together in the name of children and families.
“Promising Partnerships” NHSA-1996
