In the absence of real coordination, we see redundant
assessments, multiple plans being developed, endless meetings, an inefficient
documentation process, divergent accountability systems, and mixed results.
Even with the good intentions underlying the frequent use of
the word, “coordinate” and its derivatives in the Senate bill, I fear that not
much will change because of the silos and politics at the local level. "Coordinate" is a vague term. Youcould do almost anything to comply –
send an email, make a phone call, or include somebody in a meeting. Of course,
if those involved in serving at risk and vulnerable children took the
coordination provisions in ECAA seriously, they could devise ways to save time
and money, reduce stress on parents and staff, and accomplish more. Although
the U.S. Secretary of Education may opt to regulate on the term, I would
recommend other options – with discretionary funds in ECAA, (1) establish
websites where people can share effective approaches to coordination and (2)
support one-stop shop demonstrations, where grantees have maximum flexibility
as they experiment with family-friendly coordination.
Do these two ideas require amendments to ECAA when it
reaches the Senate floor? No. But, amendments laying out how they would happen
would make them more likely.
Thank you.
Common Grounder
thanks all. GBU :)
ReplyDeletebr,
pobrkj