No result found
My Brother's Keeper Sacramento;
This guide identifies steps toward improving opportunities for boys and men of color in Sacramento, and highlights policy and systems reform opportunities within four impact areas: Healthy Development, Education, Workforce Development and Justice Systems.
California HealthCare Foundation;
Since the last round of this study in 2011-2012, the Sacramento economy has largely rallied from its long post-recession slump. While the health care sector has remained mostly stable overall, it has grappled with capacity constraints and access challenges stemming largely from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance coverage expansions. In addition, the competitive standing among the four major hospital systems in this region-- Dignity Health; Kaiser Permanente; Sutter Health; and University of California, David-- has shifted somewhat over the past few years.
American Institutes for Research;
The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)—funded by Proposition 63—supports five unique components: (1) Community Services and Supports, (2) Prevention and Early Intervention, (3) Workforce Education and Training, (4) Capital Facilities and Technology, and (5) Innovative Programs. In September 2010, the Sacramento County Division of Behavioral Health Services (DBHS) initiated a community planning process to develop Sacramento's first Innovation Project. DBHS convened an Innovation Workgroup that developed the Innovation Plan and the Respite Partnership Collaborative (RPC) Innovation Project.Through a competitive selection process, Sacramento County DBHS awarded Sierra Health Foundation: Center for Health Program Management (the Center) a contract to administer the RPC Innovation Project. The RPC Innovation Project is a public-private partnership of the Sacramento County DBHS and the Center. The Center uses MHSA Innovation funding to support the RPC, whose members are from the community at large. RPC members make recommendations for respite service grants to community organizations. The RPC's goal is to increase local mental health respite service options to offer alternatives to hospitalization for community members experiencing a crisis in Sacramento County.American Institutes for Research (AIR) conducted an evaluation of the RPC Innovation Project from April 2013 through March 2016. Evaluation objectives were to assess the extent to which the RPC Innovation Project achieved the following:1. Promoted successful collaboration between public and private organizations (i.e., DBHS and the Center) in Sacramento County2. Demonstrated a community-driven process3. Improved the quality and outcomes of respite services in Sacramento County This report presents findings from evaluation activities, which included stakeholder interviews, RPC member surveys, and document reviews.This report emphasizes data collected in the third year of the evaluation after June 2015. The report begins with a brief history of the RPC Innovation Project. Next we describe evaluation objectives and methods for conducting the evaluation. Finally, we present findings, organized by evaluation objective.
Cottage Housing Incorporated;
Poverty is a well-documented risk factor for family involvement with child protective services and other elements of the child welfare system.Recent studies show that homeless families have higher rates of being involved in the child welfare system than the general population.However, there is little known about how supportive housing programs for homeless families can affect their long-term outcomes.This report describes the outcome evaluation of Cottage Housing Incorporated's Serna Village program in Sacramento, California. Serna Village is a supportive housing program serving homeless families. Outcomes from the program illustrate that it is possible to end recidivism into the child welfare system for homeless families by providing them with permanent housing and comprehensive support services. Although homeless and marginally housed families have high support and case management services can prevent these disenfranchised families from re-entering the foster care system.The intervention of supportive housing -- housing and services focused on the unique needs of adults and their children exiting homelessness -- may break the cycle of abuse and neglect among these families.Conducted in 2011, this study involved a sample of 293 children and youth from approximately 150 families who lived with one or more parents in Cottage Housing Incorporated's Serna Village between 2002 and 2009, thefirst seven years of the program.The findings from this study indicate that comprehensive supportive housing programs following a best-practice model can provide homeless parents and their children with stable living for a significant period of time. Supportive housing programs also may give homeless parents an opportunity to find and maintain employment, work on their education, save a substantial amount of money for move-out costs, learn daily living skills, experience a real-world living situation and prevent re-entry into the child welfare system. The outcomes from this study may help inform policymakers and child welfare administrators with recommendations to better assist marginalized families and save valuable funding dollars.
American Institutes for Research;
The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)—funded by Proposition 63—was enacted in California in November 2004. MHSA funding supports five unique components: (1) Community Services and Supports, (2) Prevention and Early Intervention, (3) Workforce Education and Training, (4) Capital Facilities and Technology, and (5) Innovative Programs. Innovative programs contribute to learning by testing new approaches to inform current and future practices.In September 2010, the Sacramento County Division of Behavioral Health Services (DBHS) initiated a community planning process to develop Sacramento County's first Innovation Project. Through community input, the Respite Partnership Collaborative (RPC) Innovation Project was created with the goal to create alternatives to hospitalization by increasing local mental health respite service options for community members experiencing a mental health crisis in Sacramento County. The project seeks to: (1) create learning opportunities on how the project is developed and administered, (2) integrate community feedback into program development and implementation, and (3) expedite the release of funds of respite services to community organizations. The RPC Innovation Project is administered by the Sierra Health Foundation: The Center for Health Program Management (the Center).As part of the Innovation Project, an evaluation contract was awarded to American Institutes for Research (AIR) to evaluate the 5-year RPC Innovation Project. The main evaluation objectives are to assess the extent to which the RPC Innovation Project does the following:Promotes successful collaboration between public and private entities (i.e., DBHS and the Center) in Sacramento County.Demonstrates a community-driven process. Improves the quality and outcomes of respite services in Sacramento County.The purpose of this annual report is to present early findings from evaluation activities conducted from June 2013 through June 2014. Evaluation methods employed include interviews, surveys, and document review.
American Institutes for Research;
The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)—funded by Proposition 63—supports five unique components: (1) Community Services and Supports, (2) Prevention and Early Intervention, (3) Workforce Education and Training, (4) Capital Facilities and Technology, and (5) Innovative Programs. In September 2010, the Sacramento County Division of Behavioral Health Services (DBHS) initiated a community planning process to develop Sacramento's first Innovation Project. DBHS convened an Innovation Workgroup that developed the Innovation Plan and the Respite Partnership Collaborative (RPC) Innovation Project. American Institutes for Research (AIR) is conducting an evaluation of the RPC Innovation Project. Evaluation objectives are to assess the extent to which the RPC Innovation Project does the following:Promote successful collaboration between public and private organizations (i.e., DBHS and the Sierra Health Foundation: The Center for Health Program Management [the Center]) in Sacramento CountyDemonstrate a community-driven processImprove the quality and outcomes of respite services in Sacramento CountyTo address the evaluation objectives; the evaluation includes interviews, an RPC survey, a community survey, and a document review. This report presents findings from evaluation activities conducted from June 2014 to April 2015 to DBHS, RPC members, and the Center.
Center for Community Health and Evaluation;
Sierra Health Foundation (Sierra Health) launched the Clinic Capacity Building Program in 2013 as part of the Sacramento Region Health Care Partnership. The goal of the Clinic Capacity Building Program was to respond to the anticipated growth in demand (i.e., number of patients) created by the implementation of the Affordable Care Act by strengthening community health centers' administrative and operational capacity. The program aimed to improve clinic leadership, care quality and financial sustainability, thereby increasing the number of high performing Federally Qualified Health Centers in the region.In July 2014, Sierra Health contracted with the Center for Community Health and Evaluation (CCHE) to evaluate the effectiveness of its Clinic Capacity Building Program. The goal of the evaluation was to assess the effectiveness of the Clinic Capacity Building program and contribution of the program to changes in capacity among the five grantees. This is the Executive Summary of the final evaluation report, which was submitted to Sierra Health in December 2015.
This paper shares information and lessons learned from sites that are attempting to transform their teacher preparation systems toward practice-based approaches that feature high-quality feedback for teacher candidates. The paper is based on qualitative data collected from 2016 through 2018 in 11 sites where partnerships between California State University (CSU) teacher preparation programs and local school districts are working to improve how they prepare new teachers. Each partnership received a grant from the New Generation of Educators Initiative (NGEI).
California State University System;
The focus of the New Generation of Educators Initiative (NGEI) was to answer the question "What would it take to transform teacher education?" From 2016 to 2019, with support from the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, teacher education programs at 10 California State University (CSU) campuses partnered with local school districts to design and demonstrate innovative practices that could transform teacher preparation. This report documents the learnings from multiple participants in this transformative work, including Foundation program staff and representatives from partnerships between universities and school districts.
Imagine a school district administrator in the fctional California district of "Rosewood," who is concerned about her 5th grade students' profciency in math. Fifth grade math achievement scores have been static in the district and teachers say that many 5th graders are struggling with multiplication, even though it was supposed to be introduced in 3rd grade through the California Common Core State Standards: Mathematics (CCSS-M). Rosewood's district math team has tried to address principals' and teachers' concerns with multiplication, but those efforts don't seem to be moving the needle for students. The Rosewood administrator is ready to dedicate more resources toward improving 5th grade student math learning, and wants to be effcient in seeking technical assistance (TA) to help solve this district challenge. How might this administrator go about identifying and obtaining relevant and appropriate technical assistance?Under California's funding structures, districts have autonomy to purchase technical assistance in prioritized need areas.1 That freedom can be both a blessing and curse, as there are thousands of consultants, nonprofts, and resources available in the multimillion-dollar technical assistance marketplace -- almost all of which promise to help districts solve their problems, but very few of which have been vetted by any authority.The 10 districts in the Math in Common (MiC) community of practice regularly faced the kind of scenario unfolding in Rosewood. That is, they often needed to seek out TA to help them address issues related to implementing the CCSS-M -- ranging from improving the alignment of their textbooks' lessons, to supporting better standards-aligned instruction for English learners, to reconfguring teacher professional learning communities (PLCs) to help teachers effectively implement the standards. But unlike most California school districts, MiC participants received signifcant support on making TA decisions through MiC's community of practice. Their experience highlights a major issue in standards implementation across the state: Districts need to be thoughtful, and well supported, in identifying and accessing TA that will help them bring standards to life in their local contexts and ultimately improve student achievement.As MiC's evaluator, WestEd examined districts' experiences with standards implementation in a comprehensive series of formative and summative evaluation reports spanning 2013–2019. This brief summarizes our learning from these reports on the successes and challenges that districts encountered.