How can I ensure renewed commitment to understand, value and implement strong governing policies and procedures...?
- review key information written by the Father of Head Start, Dr. Edward Zigler in the book Project Head Start: A Legacy of the War on Poverty
- assure that the three partners are
effectively performing their unique and complementary roles in the
shared governance structure.
- reflect on the knowledge that parents have a critical
role in the lives of their children and the power of shared
decision-making.
- understand the ongoing and evolving dynamic among all participants.
- an effective governance structure
considers the whole not individual items and issues.
- remember that Head Start is "too big,
too complex and too important to be managed by only one or two key
staff at each grantee."
- learn from experiences of programs
that have relinquished their grant or that has been terminated
- be aware of common concerns that have been expressed by parents across the country
Want more? Here is additional information
HEAD START PROGRAM GOVERNANCE
National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast
September 17, 2004, 1:30 - 3:30 PM EDT
Program Content Included:
- Expectations for use of Program Governance
funding
- Opportunity to hear from local program
leaders
- Resources and ideas to support effective shared governance
Transcript
The text from the September 17, 2004 Head Start Program Governance National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast.
Panelists:
Windy M. Hill, Associate Commissioner, Head Start Bureau
Ann Linehan, Director, Program Support Division, Head Start Bureau
Craig Turner, Director, Program Management Division, Head Start Bureau
Frankie Gibson, Senior Parent Involvement Specialist, Head Start Bureau
Nila Rinehart, Project Director, National Interim Grantee Project
Kathy Channell, Head Start Director
John Morton, Governing Board Member
Iweogu Okechukwu, Policy Council Chairperson
Kimberly Pillow, Policy Council Chairperson
Segment 1:
- Welcome and Overview, Ann Linehan, Director, Program Support Division,
Head Start Bureau
- Effective Program Governance - Ensuring the Success of Head Start's Children,
Windy M. Hill, Associate Commissioner, Head Start Bureau
- Shared Decision-Making as Required in The Program Performance Standards, Frankie Gibson, Senior Parent Involvement Specialist, Head Start Bureau
Ann Linehan: Good afternoon, and good morning to those of you joining us from the West Coast.
We welcome you to this special satellite broadcast and simultaneous Web cast on Head Start program governance, and we also welcome our Spanish-speaking audience joining us via Web cast.
Damos la bienvenida a nuestra audiencia de habla hispana.
My name is Ann Linehan. I'm Director of the Division of Program Support in the Head Start Bureau.
We have thousands of folks joining us today. In addition to executive directors, Head Start directors and other grantee staff, we extend a special welcome to the many governing bodies and Policy Council members who are joining us today.
Additionally, we welcome all parents, state collaboration offices, state partners and federal staff from regional offices across the country and in Washington, D.C. We are very pleased that you have taken the time from your busy schedules to be with us today.
We'd also like to extend a special thanks to our panel participants, whom you will meet later. We believe that their experiences in local Head Start programs will greatly enrich our agenda today.
We have developed an agenda that will revisit and renew our commitment to ensure that Head Start programs understand, value and implement strong governing policies and procedures. At the close, Windy Hill will offer some important Head Start updates. The two-hour broadcast is divided into four segments. You will have an opportunity to ask questions after the second segment.
We invite your questions and comments via telephone, fax, and e-mail during the question and answer segment. Whether you phone, fax, or e-mail, please tell us your first name, title, and state. We would also like to remind everyone that we welcome your questions in Spanish as well.
Recordamos que pueden hacer sus preguntas en su español.
Contact information will be posted throughout the afternoon at the bottom of your screen. We will not get to every question today. However, after this broadcast, you will be able to continue sending your e-mails through 6:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time today.
Representative questions and answers will be posted on the Web site address you now see on the bottom of your screen.
My role today is to serve as moderator. I promise to keep us within the allotted time for each segment. The full script of each presentation during the program will be posted at the Web address shown on your screen now, as well as any presentation slides.
Let's begin. Windy Hill, Associate Commissioner of the Head Start Bureau, and Frankie Gibson, Senior Program Specialist for Parent Involvement, will join us for the first segment on effective program governance, and the requirements and intent of shared decision making. Windy...
Windy Hill: Thank you, Ann. It is my pleasure to be with you today, and to be a part of this important broadcast. Important because of the very critical role program governance plays in serving our children in the highest quality, most comprehensive early care and education environment available to low income children and families.
As you know, we have had other broadcasts this year in order to keep you well informed—as some might say, straight from the horse's mouth—about the progress we're making on the National Reporting System and other initiatives within the bureau.
I know that is a subject—the National Reporting System—that Head Start board members, Policy Councils, and other parents are very familiar with now.
We gather today to speak briefly and directly about governance in Head Start programs and about program requirements for effective shared decision making. You will hear us describe the critical nature of the roles and responsibilities between your local public and private non-profit agency and Policy Council, or Policy Committee and Parent Committee, as well as the support of executive and management staff.
But will what you hear or be asked to do be something new or something different? Well, this is one of those questions answered decades ago, this time by the nationally renowned father of Head Start, Dr. Edward Zigler.
- In 1979, the Free Press published a book that I daresay many consider a must-read for advocates of the Head Start Program. The book, entitled Project Head Start: A Legacy of the War on Poverty, was edited by Dr. Zigler and Jeanette Valentine. Few would argue that the book, Project Head Start, as its editor and author described, is "the only comprehensive history and analysis of the operation and evolution of this unique, complex and often misunderstood social experiment."
- In chapter 22 of the book, Project Head Start, one is provided a critique of the theory and practice relating to this much-loved federal program. In writing in 1979 about the continuing problems in program operation of Head Start, these long-time advocates of children and families and Project Head Start said that
after nearly 15 years of operation, two issues have been raised time and time again, and are yet to be resolved. One of these problems has been with the Head Start program from early on and continues to be a salient problem today, and that is quality control.
- A bit later in this chapter, the authors say, "Quality control issues have emerged in three major areas. One: setting and meeting program performance standards. Two: accountability. And three: staffing needs." They write that the first two aspects of quality control are interrelated, and that program performance standards for Head Start are set in Washington and each program must meet these basic requirements.
- Just a bit further, as they brought chapter 22 to a close, the authors of the book, Project Head Start, put into words more than 20 years ago still, the best reason for our renewed efforts today, and targeted and more focused attention to governance and shared decision making. They wrote,
The original planners of Head Start recognized that children's development of a sense of control over their own lives is important, and that it requires adult models who believe they can influence their own destiny." Parent and local community involvement in decision making roles was designed to provide opportunity for the poor to exercise power to influence their own and their children's lives.
The challenges we face in this area are not new to Head Start, yet effective program governance remains a keystone in a solid foundation for building positive outcomes for children and families.
During this broadcast, you will hear about the three primary partners in shared governance.
- Management, which is made up of your local
executive or your Head Start director and administrative staff,
- The grantee agency, called "the Board,"
and
- The Policy Council or Policy Committee.
Each of these partners has a unique and complimentary role to play in effective shared governance.
Broadly, management has a responsibility to support shared decision-making by facilitating communication and information-sharing between the two groups and through its responsibility for implementing decisions and policies established and approved by these two bodies.
In accepting the federal Head Start grant, the board has a responsibility to carry out the requirements of shared decision making as outlined in the Head Start program performance standards. This is true of every Head Start grantee, whether the board members represent a public school, a community action agency or some other nonprofit or for-profit organization. You will also hear more about your board's legal and fiduciary responsibilities for the Head Start program.
Every grantee must understand and appreciate the responsibilities of both the board and the Policy Council in shared governance. Programs that deny its board members or its parents their full role in program governance not only shortchange the children and families they serve, and the community which supports and depends on these vital resources, and the taxpayers who provide the money to fund the Head Start Program, but these are programs that are deficient.
As we move forward with this broadcast today, I can't help but share one more quote from Dr. Zigler's book, Project Head Start. It is this:
In sum, Head Start has struggled and continues to struggle with important issues of quality control—program performance standards, accountability and staffing. These are problematic primarily because Head Start emphasizes that it is a local program serving local communities and hence, encourages flexibility and responsiveness to local needs. This paradox is not an easy one to resolve, yet these issues are important for the continuing vitality of the program.
Thanks. Over to you, Frankie.
Frankie Gibson:
Thank you, Windy. I'd like to start by restating, in bit of a
different way for all of us, that from Head Start's inception, the
creators demonstrated an understanding of the critical role that
parents have in the lives of their children and the power of shared
decision-making. This is an important reminder today for
everyone—those who have a long history in Head Start and those new
to the program.
- The original legislation in 1964 required
the first summer programs in 1965 to provide for direct
participation of the parents in the development, conduct and
overall program direction at the local level.
- Then, in August of 1970, the Head Start
policy manual "70.2, The Parents," was published. This mandated a
local formal structure to empower and require parents' involvement
in policy making and program operation through Parent Committees,
Policy Committees and Policy Councils.
- The first Program
Performance Standards, finalized in June of 1975, also
emphasized that parents are to be recognized as contributors to
the Head Start program and to their communities and to be afforded
opportunities for direct involvement in program planning
operation. The "Parents, 70.2" was incorporated into this document
in its entirety.
- The revised performance standards that
took effect January 1, 1998 , incorporate all of 70.2 into the
section now called "Program Governance."
So, the values that formed Head Start in 1970
continue to the present by requiring that each agency has an
effective system of program governance. All Head Start programs must
embrace shared decision-making. That includes participation of every
interested parent as well as program and community individuals.
Positive leadership provided by the governing
body, the policy group, which is a Policy Council for a grantee, or
a Policy Committee for a delegate agency and key management staff is
essential. The steps to attain successful and productive
relationships among these groups are complex and dynamic. These
relationships change annually with the formulation of each newly
elected policy group. Each program has a responsibility to create a
climate that fosters and builds meaningful and informed involvement
and positive working relationships.
Like any regulation or law, meeting the
"letter of the law" is sometimes far easier than insuring that the
spirit and intent of the regulation is met. This is certainly true
in Head Start and, in particular, in the regulations defining
program governance. Governance works best when programs believe that
meaningful involvement of parents is linked to positive child
outcomes. When the intent and spirit of this shared governance is
carried out, it's also one of the best examples of democracy and
action our country has to offer.
Today, we are focusing on some aspects of
program governance. Section 1304.50 is a narrative iteration of
appendix A, which restates the responsibilities and outlines the
interactions of the governing body, policy group and management
staff. But I want to caution you, please don't take any regulation,
or part of one, in isolation without considering the whole. Programs
must see the whole, not individual items and issues, in order for
governance to effectively function to support a quality program.
Another way to think about this interaction
of program leadership is to look at the circular picture at the
beginning of 1304.51. There is an ongoing and evolving dynamic among
all of the participants.
Black Elk, of the Oglala Sioux, talked about
"everything the power of the world does is done in a circle—the
earth, the sun, the moon, even the seasons form a circle from
childhood to childhood. Our tepees were round like the nests of
birds, and these were always set in circles. The nations hoop a nest
of many nests where the Great Spirit meant for us to hatch our
children."
Our task, as adults, to care about Head
Start children and families is to establish a safe and nurturing
environment, just as we do in our own biological families, to grow
and learn and yes, sometimes disagree together.
I want to bring us back to the Head Start
guidebook, the program performance standards, and briefly review the
definitions of responsibility as identified by an "A," "B," "C" and
"D" in the 1304.50 appendix A, which is titled "Governance and
Management Responsibilities Chart."
- When you see an "A" on the chart, we're
looking at general responsibility. And the definition of general
responsibility is, "The group with legal and fiscal responsibility
that guides and oversees the carrying out of the functions
described through the individual or group given operating
responsibility." For example, it might be a community action
board, a tribal council, a board of county or city commissioners,
a school board, a for-profit or non-profit agency in a community.
- When you see "B" on the chart, we're
talking about operating responsibility, so the individual or group
that is directly responsible for carrying out or performing the
functions consistent with the general guidance and oversight from
the group holding general responsibility. We're talking about
senior staff. We're talking about the executive director. We're
talking about the Head Start director, Early Head Start director,
and other staff that they delegate to carry out the day-to-day
functions.
- A "C" on the chart talks about "must
approve or disapprove." So this is the group—a group, not an
individual—that must be involved in the decision-making process
prior to the point of seeking approval. If it does not approve, a
proposal cannot be adopted or the proposed action taken until
agreement is reached between the disagreeing groups. So here,
we're thinking about the written procedures that must be in place
for a resolving of a conflict, if it occurs. We sometimes refer to
that as an impasse. So if there's a disagreement, we have to look
at it carefully and resolve it.
- When you see "D" on the chart, the
definition is for "determined locally." We're talking about
management staff functions that are determined by the local
governing body and in accordance with all Head Start regulations.
So that allows you flexibility to make decisions on how to best
administer your program locally, but you always must do it within
the context of the regulations that oversee Head Start.
Let's look at a few specific program
performance standards. And remember that policy groups must work in
partnership with the governing body and key management staff to
develop, review and approve or disapprove, so no rubber stamping.
The other part of this is that these are yearly tasks. Remember
that, as a new policy group is formulated, they must have the
opportunity to fulfill and work with the governing body on all of
the tasks that are identified. We're going to talk about another
A-B-C in the chart that I'm sure all of you are familiar with, and
it divides up the functions.
- The first function is referred to as
planning functions, under "A." I'm just going to give you a few
examples of what we're talking about. These are the things around
grant and budget application—there must be shared decision making.
Change in site locations: A site is no longer viable, a new site
must be identified as something that requires shared decision
making, joint approval. Adding or changing a delegate agency at
the grantee level is another area where that must happen.
- Now, let's look at "B," and we refer to
"B" as general procedures. I've a few examples, but you need to
look at all of them. This is just a few of the things that are
dealt with.
- The procedure for shared
decision-making: So, the policy group and the governing body
must decide on how they will proceed in shared decision-making
and have that jointly agreed upon in the collaboration on that.
- Written internal dispute resolution
procedure: Again, something I have mentioned before, but it's
critical that the two groups are working together on that. So
hopefully they'll never have to use it. But, it's in place if
they do have a disagreement.
- And then working with community issues:
Taking leadership within the agency to deal with issues that
identify new programs that may identify problems that need to be
addressed.
- When we look toward "C," we're talking
about human resources management. Two very important examples are
the review of personnel policies and procedures. That doesn't mean
that every year it has to be rewritten, but it must be reviewed
and looked at to see if there are changes that should be made,
adjustments to that document to fit the program as you're now
identifying it. Another large area, of course, is the hiring and
termination decisions for your Head Start director, Early Head
Start director. That is something that two groups must be working
on jointly. Other staff—there are decisions that local programs
can make around this in a flexible way.
So evidence of regular communication between
the governing body and the policy group and supported by management
staff must permeate the organization's functioning. Again, just a
few examples for you to think about in your particular agency:
- What does your program's organizational
chart look like? Does it truly reflect how you're doing business?
And if it does, does it need changed? If it doesn't, then how are
we going to change it?
- Meeting minutes: For all of your formal
minutes, you need to have a record, so that people can remember
and be accountable for the decisions made and the follow-up tasks
that need to happen.
- Subcommittee structures: So that lots of
work is done in preparation for your governing body meetings, your
policy groups.
- Joint executive committee collaboration:
The officers from the governing body and policy group meeting on a
regular basis to discuss issues.
- Community partnerships and outreach: How
are you providing leadership in your two groups for that?
And then, there needs to be evidence of
knowledgeable articulation of your grantee or delegate agency goals
by all those involved—not just the governing body and the policy
group, but every parent, every staff, your community, interested
parties. Back to you, Ann.
Ann Linehan:
Thanks, Windy and Frankie. During our second segment, Frankie will
be joined by Craig Turner, Director of the Division of Program
Management at the Head Start Bureau, and Nila Reinhart, Project
Director for the National Interim Grantee Contract. Frankie, Craig
and Nila will discuss how data informs us and contributes to
continued improvement efforts in the area of governance.
Now as we go to a break, we have an excerpt
of the video "Linking Our Voices," a training-based program used by
many governing bodies, parents and policy groups for orientation
over the past several years. We will continue in a few
moments.
Clip from Linking Our Voices "What is a Policy
Council?"
Male Voiceover :
I saw all these people. My first impression was like, what am I
getting into here?
Female
Voiceover: I couldn't understand some of what was being
discussed. It was a little, intimidating I think, is a good word to
say, at the beginning.
Male Voiceover:
I didn't know what Policy Council was anyway. When I got there, bam,
they had all this information and stuff going on with Head
Start—telling you about parent involvement and parenting classes.
Female
Voiceover: It's a process. And as time goes on, you start
learning how to do business, how to associate with people, how to
make issues become reality and put into force.
Narrator: A Head
Start Policy Council is basically a group of parents and other
people from the community working together to make decisions about
the overall design and operation of a Head Start program's services.
Doing this means joining with the governing body and Head Start
staff to form a partnership that encourages openness and trust.
Woman at
meeting: The Parent Resource Center wants to encourage
low-income parents to come in.
Narrator: The
Policy Council is a way to make sure parents are heard.
Terry White
(Chairperson, Policy Council): One thing about Policy Council,
it teaches parents what they should know all the time—that the
parent is the primary educator of his children. And there's nobody
that has a better connection of teaching their children than the
parent, himself.
Denota Watson
(Parent Involvement Coordinator): It's also an opportunity for
parents, that they know that things are going to happen in the
program is because they had a say in it, a partnership role in it.
And it's not something that you drop your kids off today and we
don't need you anymore—that they're an intricate part that makes
this program successful and work.
Segment 2
- Craig Turner, Director, Program
Management Division, Head Start Bureau
- Nila Rinehart, Project Director, National
Interim Grantee Project
- Frankie Gibson, Senior Parent Involvement
Specialist, Head Start Bureau
Ann Linehan:
Welcome back. You have just heard from Windy and Frankie about the
importance of effective governance. We cannot stress enough that
programs faced with instability, fiscal woes and personnel conflicts
commonly have inadequate governance. Conversely, programs focused on
positive child outcomes for children, with sound management
practices, have strong governance.
This segment will focus on how data informs
us and contributes to the continuous improvement efforts in the area
of program governance.
At the end of the segment, we invite your
questions and comments via telephone, fax and e-mail during the
question and answer segment. Welcome, Craig.
Craig Turner:
Thanks, Ann. Good afternoon, my name is Craig Turner. I'm the
Director of the Program Management Division of the Head Start
Bureau. This division, among its other duties, is responsible for
the Head Start monitoring system. In a few minutes, I want to share
with you a few of the findings from the fiscal year 2004 monitoring
year, as it relates to program governance. Prior to doing that, I
wanted to speak briefly with you about Head Start in 2004.
There are today 1,670 Head Start grantees
across the United States. These 1,670 grantees received nearly $6.5
billion, served more than 900,000 children and employ 200,000 staff.
The average Head Start grantee is funded for $4 million, serves more
than 500 children and employs 120 staff. Head Start, in short, has
become big business. In fact, if we were a company, we would rank
number 281 on the Fortune 500 list of the largest American
companies, barely below Campbell's Soup and, in fact, bigger than
both Apple Computer and Southwest Airlines. And, if we were a
company, we would rank as the 18th largest employer in the United
States. We cannot operate and manage Head Start the way we did 25
years ago. It is too big, too complex and too important to be
managed by only one or two key staff at each grantee.
Every grantee must have a governing board.
This board must recognize itself as the entity responsible for the
Head Start grant, including fiduciary responsibility. Boards must
regularly engage themselves in the business of understanding the
Head Start program for which they have responsibility. We have all
seen the consequences in corporate America when an ineffective and
out of touch board cedes control of a company to one executive or a
small group of employees. The situation is no different with Head
Start. Board members must be committed to the regular exercise of
their responsibilities. When members find they can no longer do
this, it is in their and everyone else's interest for them to step
aside. There are hundreds of former board members that, in
hindsight, have realized that they might have been able to save
their Head Start program if they had been more engaged. I have no
doubt that all of them would do things differently given another
chance.
Every grantee must also, of course, have a
Policy Council. The Policy Council must, like the board, be more
than just a name. It also must be a fully functioning organization,
exercising the responsibility it has been given. The Policy Council
is in place to support the board and senior grantee staff make the
right decisions in areas such as personnel and budget. While Policy
Council should say yes whenever reasonable, they should say no
whenever necessary. Please, do not let anyone, be it a board chair,
executive director, or even a Policy Council chair, deny you the
vital role you need to play in assuring the successful
administration of your Head Start grant.
And finally, every grantee must have senior
management staff to carry out the day to day operation of the Head
Start program. These staff must share with their colleagues on the
board and Policy Council, must allow all concerned parties to be
fully informed and aware. We are better together than individually.
We can all make mistakes in judgment when we have no one questioning
us.
Head Start grantees are only as good as the
sum of their components. Yes, many grantees can go on for years and
years with ineffective governance, but too many times something
eventually gives and we find ourselves with the grantee in crisis.
The grantee with poor governance may do many things well, but, for
many such grantees, it is only a matter of time before something
goes irrevocably wrong and the grant is in jeopardy. A grantee with
good governance, one which shares and talks and considers together,
is almost never a grantee that will be looking at the prospect of
losing its grant. A grantee with poor governance will, at some
point, run into real problems. Consider, for example, that in fiscal
year 2004 more than 60% of the grantees which were identified as
being deficient were deficient in governance. More than 35% of the
grantees with noncompliance findings have findings in
governance.
As Nila will discuss shortly, 20 grantees
lost their grants in the last year. And virtually every one of these
was, in large part, attributable to issues related to inadequate
governance. These are grantees with boards that didn't recognize the
grantee was spending more money than it had, grantees with Policy
Councils that did not engage regularly and, too often, did not ask
questions that needed asking, or grantees with an executive director
that, for too long, had run the program with no accountability. A
three-tiered governance structure will almost always be better than
a one or two-tiered structure. Each of you needs to take full
advantage of the talent and skills of your community and design Head
Start programs that are as good as they can and should be. Thank
you. Nila...
Nila Reinhart:
Thank you, Craig. I am the Project Director for the National Interim
Grantee Project. And from this perspective, I've had a unique
viewpoint that comes after taking responsibility for Head Start and
Early Head Start programs when local grantees have either
relinquished or been terminated from operating the program. As the
national interim grantee contractor for the federal Head Start
Bureau, Community Development Institute has served over 50 Head
Start and Early Head Start programs in 11 federal Head Start regions
across the country.
The National Interim Grantee Contract
provides the framework necessary to stabilize, strengthen, and
operate the programs anywhere in the country. We work closely with
the national Head Start Bureau, their regional offices, and the Head
Start training system to address program issues and assure quality
and continuous Head Start services. I would like to discuss some of
our experiences.
Most boards of directors are committed to
the mission and purpose of a community service agency. However,
commitment and good intentions alone cannot provide the backbone for
being a responsible and accountable organization that is secure in
its stewardship over the Head Start program.
When we enter a program after a
relinquishment or termination, there are many issues to contend
with:
- The community's trust in the program has
been shaken.
- The parent's reliance on the program is
uncertain.
- In some cases, serious program changes
must occur to bring the program back into compliance with Head
Start performance standards.
- The staff are confused and upset, and
often feel abandoned.
- A well-meaning board of directors, often
leaders in the community, lose the confidence of their community.
- And the internal affairs of the
organization become quickly exposed by an inquiring public media.
In short, the integrity of the Head Start
program, the staff, and the board of directors are seriously
undermined.
In observing grantees that have either
relinquished or been terminated from operating the Head Start
program, there are some common characteristics.
- The selection, support, and performance
review of the executive director, Head Start director, controller
and finance officers have often been inadequate.
- A cycle of effective evaluation, planning
and improvement strategy implementation is not present.
- The performance of the governing body has
not been addressed.
- There is usually a long history of
program management, financial management, and governance red flags
in on-site review reports that have gone unanswered.
- Appropriate internal controls are not
established and implemented to safeguard the organization's
assets.
- In many cases, the program has
overextended its financial and human resources.
- Staff have not been held to account for
their responsibilities. Communication systems between the
governing board, Policy Council and management staffs are
ineffective.
- The program has isolated itself from
helping partners that could provide support and guidance.
- Oftentimes, agencies wait too long to put
into place essential systems and fixes at a time when the agency
is already at its most vulnerable.
The governing body has the responsibility
for overseeing the management systems that support program
functions. What can boards do to uphold this stewardship role?
- The first step a governing body must take
to assess the performance of the organization is to evaluate its
own performance in fulfilling its responsibilities.
- It must analyze its achievements and
reach consensus on the areas that need improvement.
- It must thoroughly examine and determine
new services and develop procedures for overseeing the
organization's management systems.
- It must insist on periodic and verifiable
reports to board of directors, Policy Councils, and constituents
about the agency's progress.
- Boards must be engaged, informed and
faithful fiduciaries, protecting the long-term interests of
community's trust.
- Board members have a duty of ethical
practices, acting in the best interests of their charter, and free
from conflict with personal, financial or other interests.
- Boards have the duty of care and
responsibility, making decisions on an informed basis, with
oversight of risk and management.
Boards must ask themselves:
- Is there a board self-evaluation process
in place?
- How effective is the board as a group and
as individual members?
- Are optimum board roles and structures in
place?
- Does your nominating and selection
process ensure the necessary board expertise, experience, and
commitment of time?
- Is there adequate ongoing education for
board members?
- Is there clear accountability between the
board and the executive director and/or Head Start director and
his/her management team?
Above all, governing boards are stewards. As
elected or appointed representatives of the community, governing
body members must uphold this trust by enacting their
responsibilities so that children, families, and the community can
receive the best quality Head Start and Early Head Start program.
Thank you. And over to you, Frankie.
Frankie Gibson:
Thank you, Nila. Craig and Nila have shared with you some of the
facts about what happens when shared decision-making breaks down or
simply isn't occurring. Fortunately, most of the situations are
resolved at the local level, and that's what we want and expect to
happen. When Policy Council members begin to contact the regional
office or central office, we must begin to provide support to that
local program to assist them in working out what's going wrong.
Over the years, I must say I've spoken to
many parents who feel their input was not valued.
I want to share with you a few examples of
common concerns that parents have expressed.
- The first one is a new grantee has been
selected for an existing program in a community and the agency is
unfamiliar with Head Start regulations and culture.
- Another, a longstanding local program
hires a new executive director or Head Start director and this
person begins to make changes, excluding the governing body and
policy group.
- And third, parents are asked to quickly
approve a budget or policy without any input, discussion or
review.
You know, all types of grantee agencies are
represented in the above examples. The common denominator missing
seems to be that most often there is a lack of regular, respectful
and thoughtful two-way communication. I'm wondering, does this sound
familiar to anyone in the audience? While we want to continue by
focusing on what works, it's also necessary to understand why things
don't go well. Our hope today is for each of you to be able to take
away something that will enhance shared governance in your program.
Questions and
Answers
- Craig Turner, Director, Program
Management Division, Head Start Bureau
- Nila Rinehart, Project Director, National
Interim Grantee Project
- Frankie Gibson, Senior Parent Involvement
Specialist, Head Start Bureau
Q1: Can you
clarify the composition of the Policy Council and what is the role
of the community rep?
Frankie Gibson:
Policy Councils or Policy Committees must be made up of a minimum of
51% parents who have children currently enrolled in the program. The
rest of the membership can be community representatives. The number
of parents could be higher than 51%, but it cannot be lower. But we
certainly encourage a large representation from community people,
and in a broad base, whether it's through the faith based community,
business community, or just a number of places. The community
representatives are there as equal partners with the parents and
they also are there really sometimes in a mentoring role to be
assisting new parents as they learn the job of being an effective
Policy Council member.
Q2: Could you
explain what role of oversight the Policy Council has over the
fiscal department? Should the Policy Council, at all, require the
controller to attend the Policy Council meetings?
Craig Turner:
There is a narrow technical answer and then there is a broader
philosophical answer. The narrow answer is that the Policy Council
must approve or disapprove any budgets submitted by the Head Start
grantee to its regional office. However, philosophically we would
suggest that the Policy Council be part of the conversation from the
beginning, as grantees are developing budgets, and as grantees are
discussing issues related to fiscal governance. This is a much more
effective strategy. It's much better to have the Policy Council
starting with you, understanding the issues, talking them through
and reaching consensus up front, than to have a Policy Council that
does not understand the budget and perhaps may not approve the
budget. The latter situation may jeopardize the Head Start grant and
underscores the need to engage the Policy Council during the entire
process of Head Start budget formulation and fiscal issues.
Q3: We are an
Early Head Start grantee and a delegate Head Start program. And
we're not really sure -- should we have one or two Policy Councils?
Frankie Gibson:
Your agency has one governing body. You have one policy group. You
must have a Policy Council. You also will have some business that
you will be conducting as a Policy Committee, but it's important
that you have one body that is looking at all of the programs for
your agency in a broader scope, and not just focusing in on one
aspect of the program.
Q4: We hear the
term, Policy Council and board liaisons. I don't see, in the
performance standards, any mention of liaisons. Can you tell me what
they're supposed to be about?
Nila Reinhart:
Board liaisons can be very useful in terms of the communication
structure and the sharing of information that has to occur between
the Policy Council and also the governing boards. In my tenure as
the Head Start Director, one of the things that we did was to use
the board liaison to interact between both memberships, to share
information, to pass on viewpoints and to really serve as a
communication link.
Q5: Who at the
local level addresses the performance of the governing board? Who
holds the board accountable?
Frankie Gibson:
Number one, a board is accountable to itself, as the overseer of
that particular agency, and certainly the community, I think. We'd
expect that the board fulfill all of the responsibilities in
protecting and overseeing the federal dollars that are coming into
the agency.
Craig Turner:
The board holds itself responsible. I think it's important to
emphasize, that the board is the entity that we are funding. The
board represents the agency. Board members are responsible for the
effective oversight of Head Start dollars, and if there are
situations where grantees find themselves in fiscal duress, then the
board is ultimately responsible for resolution. We have found too
many cases of late where grantees have gotten themselves into fiscal
problems. They've spent down their grants before the budget year was
out. They've spent money on inappropriate charges. The board will
ultimately be held accountable by the federal government for the
effective expenditure of Head Start grant funds.
Nila Reinhart:
The thing that I wanted to add is that it's better that the board of
directors hold itself accountable to their organization and their
stewardship, rather than having the public media and their
constituents later have to suffer the aspects that can put a board
into trouble. Because it's really not a good picture when a board
has to have its internal business exposed by the public media, once
they've already gone down that path.
Q6: If your
program is experiencing difficulties between the Policy Council and
the program director, how can the governance specialist get either
side to comply? What do you do when the Policy Council and program
director don't get along or agree?
Frankie Gibson:
Basically the Policy Council is important. This underscores the
importance of their having an ongoing comprehensive and productive
relationship with the governing body. So, certainly the governing
body and the executive director, if there is one, would be the
person who is responsible for the conduct of the Head Start
director. But the beauty of shared decision-making is that it isn't
any one person's responsibility, or even one of the groups, to
resolve a situation like this. So, I would think that the Policy
Council officers and the governing body officers need to strategize
on next steps, depending on the situation because there could be a
lot of reasons why something like that was occurring.
Q7: Please,
explain the Policy Council term limits.
Frankie Gibson:
Well, Policy Council term limits are three one-year terms for parent
representatives as well as community representatives. The rationale
for that is that we want to have as many parents as possible have
the opportunity to participate while their children are in the
program. And we want to cast a net as wide as possible, encourage
that local program to bring in resources from their local community
as community reps. Now a parent, if they have only served two years
on the Policy Council and are still interested, could be selected to
come back a third year as a community rep as well. But we encourage
that local programs look to many, many places in the community to
pull in support from their community representatives. They can be
wonderful advocates and mentors and supporters for the program and
for the total Policy Council.
Q8: Can you
offer some training strategies for the Policy Council and the board?
Nila Reinhart:
One of the most critical roles of the grantee is to provide ongoing
training and assistance to allow the policy group and the governing
board to function as it's designed to function. And one of the
things that we must think about is that our governing board members
and Policy Council members come and go. And so our thoughts, in
terms of designing a training plan, should be built around what sort
of experience or expertise do our Policy Council members and
governing board members need? And what sort of individuals are they?
What kinds of concerns does your particular Head Start program have
in terms of its program operations? And designing the training plan
around those needs, as well as around the basic performance
standards, so that each governing board member and Policy Council
member fully understands its role and responsibility in overseeing
the Head Start program.
Frankie Gibson:
I would just like to add that it's a wonderful opportunity for the
current Policy Council to welcome and support a newly elected Policy
Council in beginning some of that transition, by sharing the
knowledge and passing that training on. There's also a role for a
parent to possibly come back if they have served their three terms
and still want to be active to be a resource for training as well,
for both groups.
Q9: Does the
national interim grantee project assume responsibility for every
grantee relinquishment and termination?
Craig Turner: Almost every grantee. Prior to funding CDI,
the Head Start Bureau acted as a national interim grantee. Often
regional offices would seek neighboring grantees to come in. That
was problematic for a lot of grantees. We were moving into an area
where there were problems, generally, and there was difficulty in
having relationships in communities that were not perceived to be
part of your service area. Sometimes when grantees came in to act on
a temporary basis, there were concerns about whether or not that was
a prelude to giving them the grant on a permanent basis. We just
felt it made much more sense to bring in one institution who would,
in all cases, act as the interim grantee. There have been a few
carefully considered exceptions to this, when there were reasons to
have a neighboring grantee come in. But those, just to be clear, are
certainly the exceptions. We're very happy with the job that CDI,
that Nila and her colleagues have done, and we believe this allows
us to effect a transition from a grantee relinquishment or
termination to putting in place a new grantee in an orderly fashion.
It's provided CDI with expertise that they can carry to other
grantees in the future. We frankly believe it's the most effective
way to do this.
Q10: About PC
approval of hiring and terminations of the Head Start director, I
thought I heard you say that programs had options regarding the
termination and hiring of other employees.
Frankie Gibson:
What I was referring to is that the term "primarily" works for Head
Start in the standard, which gives you some flexibility with staff
beyond the Head Start director or Early Head Start director. But
it's still very important that the Policy Council be involved with
all of those staff who have primary responsibility for working with
their children in the Head Start program. The term must be
identified and defined locally, but everyone needs to be a part of
what that means because we, in no way, weakened that standard or any
of the other standards in the revision, which took place January
1st, 1998. So, there isn't anything that is lessened in the intent
of parents' participation in making decisions about staff hiring, as
well as termination, when it comes to that.
Craig Turner: As
Frankie said, "primarily" is a subjective term. We all would,
perhaps, come to a different point. But I would like to provide an
example: Our largest grantee in the country is the Los Angeles
County Office of Education. We would not expect the superintendent
of Los Angeles County Schools to be in a position subject to Policy
Council approval. We're talking about people who are primarily
employees of the Head Start program, for whom most of their day is
spent dealing with efforts related to Head Start. If most of your
paycheck is coming from Head Start grant funds, the way we see it,
then that's certainly subject to Policy Council review and approval.
If you're working in a very tangential way with Head Start, even
though you are technically part of the program, such as a
superintendent of schools or some similar position, then we would
argue that's not the case in that particular situation.
Q11: This is a
follow-up to the question about liaisons -- are they allowed to vote
if they are a liaison only?
Frankie Gibson:
As you remember, there is nothing in the standards regarding
liaisons. We support the concept of a non-voting liaison who acts to
facilitate communication and collaboration between the governing
body and the policy group. Improving communication between the two
groups can be done several ways. Sometimes members of the governing
and policy groups take on the added task of ensuring the flow of
information between groups. Other organizations simply identify a
non-member to function as a liaison.
Q12: What is
Head Start doing to include more fathers to participate in Policy
Councils and in the program?
Frankie Gibson:
I am hoping that many of you in our viewing audience participated,
attended the Dallas Fatherhood Institute that the Bureau sponsored
in June. We had almost 3,800 participants and many, many of the
individuals there were fathers from your local programs, fathers who
are working in the program, fathers who have children there. We're
seeing more and more fathers locally. We're seeing more fathers in
every aspect of the program. So getting fathers on the Policy
Council, I think sometimes we could take some leadership from
possibly our migrant programs who often have a large percentage of
men in that role. But it's a matter of one father's active
recruiting and reaching out to other fathers and building gradually
that capacity locally. But certainly, your Policy Council taking
leadership and deciding that's something that they want to take on
and make successful will be incredibly helpful in your local
program. There are a lot of resources people need to find out about.
Q13: Can a
Policy Council president be a member of the grantee board of
directors?
Frankie Gibson:
Yes. If you have a structure that allows a representative from the
Policy Council to serve on the governing body, then certainly if
that's what the Policy Council decides, that person could be the
Policy Council chair or the president. There's nothing in the
standards that would prohibit that.
Q14: Who decides
how the training money is spent within an organization?
Craig Turner:
Let's assume we are talking about the training money which is part
of the funds that go out to every Head Start grantee every year..
Later I'll speak in more detail about the governance training, the
$4,000 that was made available to each of you. This is joint
decision making. This is an executive director and a Head Start
director making plans about how to use the money in concert with a
Policy Council and in concert with a grantee board. I keep going
back to the notion of a triad of government. It seems to me the
training money is no different than the rest of the program money in
the annual funding application and the annual grant award. These
funds are part of what makes Head Start work in that community.
Q15: On the
one-year terms for Policy Council members, may we, each grantee,
define the term in its bylaws?
Nila Reinhart:
Policy Councils and grantees have the responsibility of assisting
the Policy Council in developing bylaws and the one-year terms can
be addressed in those bylaws. And we should always be careful to
make sure we're following the heart of the performance standards and
being careful that we don't exceed the maximum three-year limits
that are imposed by the performance standards.
Q16: How can we
improve governance when the current governing body is dysfunctional?
Nila Reinhart:
One of the important things that we have to think about is that
oftentimes it's really easy to get caught in a situation where we're
blaming one another for problems that exist. And whether you're a
staff member or a Policy Council or community member that is
interacting with a governing board that you feel is "dysfunctional,"
I think, as a constituent and a person of the community, that you
have the ability to say what you know is true, and to help
facilitate and sponsor the governing board to realize that change is
necessary. And so, I would hope that if an individual feels this way
that they begin interacting and getting support, because there are
people out there either within the Head Start Bureau or within the
training systems throughout the country, people who are willing and
able to assist in helping boards get back onto keel. And one thing
that I have experienced with the national interim grantee contract
is that sometimes governing boards wait too long to implement change
and that had solutions or new changes been sponsored into the
organization sooner, it could prevent a disastrous impact. And so, I
would hope that people would take it on themselves and interact
responsibly and encourage and sponsor this change to occur.
Frankie Gibson:
I'd like to reiterate something that I mentioned earlier. That,
certainly, we expect these kinds of things to be able to be resolved
locally and that's the ideal. If that doesn't happen though, we feel
that anyone within a local program who is unhappy with what's going
on should have access to the regional office. There's certainly a
program specialist that's assigned to your particular grant and that
would be your first line of contact. But there are people at that
regional office as well as the central office and we need to be
available to support you in any way that we can.
Q17: Is the
maximum three years that a parent can serve on Policy Council just
within that state or is it national? If a parent moves from
Louisiana to Ohio to Virginia is that counted, or just counted
within that state?
Frankie Gibson:
We really do define that as a lifetime limit of three one-year
terms. But, obviously, it's an honor system and it's not anything
that we oversee or look at. We just ask that people buy into the
rationale and the explanation and in the spirit of that and look to
other ways to be active and involved if they're still interested and
still want to be a part of Head Start. There are so many other ways
beyond that particular role that people can provide meaningful
support for the program, wherever they move or wherever they're
located.
Q18: What role
should parents have, if any, in interviewing, screening of Head
Start staff?
Frankie Gibson:
To underscore things that Craig has mentioned about other planning,
other decisions of the program, you have a personnel committee just
as you would have a budget committee. We would encourage this so
that parents learn the role of interviewing and selecting, maybe
even developing job descriptions, and there are just so many ways
that parents can be a part of that process. And it can work in any
kind of a grantee or delegate situation. You just have to believe
that it's possible and then support people in moving in that
direction.
Q19: My question
is related to a point made earlier about getting reports that are
verifiable. I just am wondering what suggestions you might have:
what kind of reports we should be looking for, how to make the best
use of our limited time. We're volunteers, many of us from the
community, who are working on boards, as well as parents on policy
groups that are also volunteering their time. How to make the best
use of our time -- what sorts of things do we look for in those
reports so that we really can make informed decisions?
Nila Reinhart:
One of the things that a governing board can do, first of all, is
really think about what kind of expertise do we need represented on
the board level? And finances and fiduciary responsibilities are
absolutely critical to whether or not an organization can maintain
its health and vitality. And so, I would begin by making sure that
you have people on the board who have that kind of expertise, who
can wade through the financial reports and really fully understand
the implications of an audit and who can coach and mentor the rest
of the board members to be able to understand those issues.
Secondly, the grantee really needs to take responsibility for
ongoing training and education. If folks are not understanding the
financial reports or have questions, then you have the
responsibility to insist that ongoing training occurs. Thirdly, in
terms of how you choose the auditor that you have selected for your
organization -- are they such that they really know and understand
performance standards and the rules around federal grants
management? And lastly, my comment is just an observation; it's just
so critical in terms of who you hire for your controller position.
The expertise that they bring, the integrity and stewardship they
have over keeping the board members well informed and educated about
financial circumstances is really critical.
Craig Turner:
Clearly, the whole fiduciary responsibility for board members is
extremely important and there are reports that are not terribly
difficult to understand. For example, you should simply ask your
executive director to give you what we call "payment management
system cash draw down". How much money are they drawing down at any
given point? Remember, our grantees get funded for a one-year budget
period. Roughly 1/12th of the money each month should be deemed
"drawn down." And if you're seeing peculiar draw down patterns you
should ask that executive director why. But I also want to remind
you that your oversight responsibility, at least in my judgment,
goes beyond just fiduciary. I think you've got a responsibility to
ensure we're delivering quality services to the children and
families in that program. So a few of the things I would ask the
board members to look at -- We have an annual report called the
Program Information Report (PIR) that all programs submit to the
federal government. It's got lots of information about the services
that were provided the previous year. Board members ought to be
looking at that and assessing areas where the grantee is not
delivering all of the services that it is required to. Once every
three years we go on site to do a triennial monitoring review, and
the review report is mailed from the regional office to the board
chair. I would certainly encourage all board members to carefully
read the report which shares what the results of that one-week
on-site review entailed, including what problems (areas of
noncompliance with regulation) were found in that grantee. This is
an opportunity for you to stay on top of quality as well as the
fiduciary area. Parents can ensure not only that the grantee is
fiscally sound, but in fact it's delivering the high-quality
services we expect of all programs.
Frankie Gibson:
Two other quick reminders. The annual self-assessment, I think,
would be very key in this, and also the board responsibility to
supervise and evaluate the executive director.
Q20: Would it
not be a conflict of interest if the governing board chair is also
the council policy chair?
Craig Turner:
That would not be a healthy arrangement for the grantee. It seems to
be self-evident that we're talking about this. Again, I go back to
the triad governance here and my earlier comments where I suggested
that three of us are better than one of us or two of us. I think we
need to maintain discreet units here. We can certainly collaborate
and coordinate, but I don't think we should just do away with any
one of those three. So no, I don't think that is an arrangement that
we want to encourage at all.
Frankie Gibson:
Nothing is in the standard that says you absolutely couldn't. But
when you're looking at common sense and some best practice, you very
clearly would want to question that. The same thing the standards do
not say that a parent must be the Policy Council chair, but we would
want you to look at that very carefully because the intent of the
Policy Council is to allow parents to learn skills and confidence to
go on beyond their experience.
Q21: Can two
family members be on a Policy Council and on a board from the same
family?
Frankie Gibson:
I think it fits into the same category in many ways as the last
question. As far as I know there's nothing in the standards, but it
does set up a high question about conflict of interest. And I think
if you have bylaws and are working on things, you want to think
through some of these issues. What are the ramifications for
allowing that kind of thing to occur in your program? It's up to
local programs to decide and avoid those kinds of pitfalls.
Nila Reinhart:
In some small communities you don't have a choice. There are a lot
of relationships that go throughout the community. But I think
Frankie's point about why, keeping our sense about this and the rich
decision-making process that we want to encourage is one that is
well-rounded in terms of representation and viewpoints and wrestling
with some of the disagreements in order to come to a better
common-ground place that can really move the program forward. So in
terms of membership, I think the more diverse the better.
Clip from Linking Our Voices: "A Policy Council in
Action"
Amanda Bradley
(Parent Representative, Policy Council: Benjamin is
people-oriented. He loves to go, go, go, go. And what I found is
that Head Start gave him a balance to where he can have that
interaction with other children. He has learned so many different
things. And I've got a great relationship with his teacher. So I
understand what he's learning and I can carry that on into the home.
Because I'm a parent, it's important to me that the people who are
interacting with my child are the people that I would like to be
interacting with my child.
Narrator: As
part of their responsibilities, Policy Council members like Amanda
Bradley play an important role in making decisions and developing
policies on staff hiring that will affect their children and the
community.
Amanda Bradley
(Interviewing teacher candidate): OK, I'm a parent and I'm
coming into your classrooms, a 3 or 4-year-old room, how would you
make me feel comfortable?
Teacher
Candidate: I'll ask if you have any questions about us or the
classroom.
Sandra Owle (Parent
Involvement Coordinator): The more involved the parents have
become in the process of interviewing and doing more than just
looking at paper applications and the more committed they've become
and eventually see they're valuable.
Narrator:
Amanda's interest led her to serve on the Policy Council's personnel
subcommittee. In developing hiring policies, they work together with
their grantee agency, the tribal council. But, at times, there are
challenges.
Policy Council
Member (reading from letter): As of today, all tribal programs
should discontinue interviewing for vacant positions in their
department. Recommendations from the directors will be taken into
consideration but the tribal committee should make the final
decision.
Amanda Bradley:
I had some suggestions that I was bringing to this meeting and now I
can't tell you the suggestions because they're going to change the
policy and the way we're doing things. I feel cheated.
Woman: They told
me that we were supposed to submit everything to them and I said,
well, that seems like you're circumventing personnel policy.
Woman: One of
the federal regs is: the Policy Council must approve all hiring and
firing. So, once they're made aware of that, then you know, all the
rest, I think, will fall into place.
Amanda Bradley:
The idea of the Policy Council roles and responsibilities is a
constant struggle. Policy Council cannot independently hire or fire
anyone. Staff cannot independently hire or fire anyone. It has to be
a partnership between the grantee agency, program staff, Policy
Council. No one group can function independently of the others.
Man: How're you
doing?
Woman: I'm doing
fine. Good to see you.
Narrator: Later
that day the subcommittee brought their concerns to the Policy
Council meeting where they met with other Policy Council members
from community and the tribal council.
Amanda Bradley:
When we received this memorandum today, one of the things that was
discussed was after all the time and procedures that we had been
going through and trying to put together, it was like it was taken
away from us and we won't have the opportunity now to continue on
with what we're doing.
Sandra Owle: I
didn't have to do much to get the parents involved. Once they're
allowed to be involved, they are. Information is power. So once you
provide them with all the types of information that they should have
to make an informed decision, then they begin to question.
Amanda Bradley:
We've spoken in our meeting today. We don't want a conflict. We just
want them to understand what we're doing. I, as a parent, feel very
part of what's going on with my child by being involved.
Man: I'll be
more than happy to address this with the chairman of the personnel
committee and it's just because of a lack of knowledge on this. I'll
be the one that fights the battle with it.
Woman: What I
found with Policy Council, it puts the parent in the leadership
position. It opens up the situation to where the parent says, yes, I
could have control of some of what's happening to my life, my
community, my children, my family.
Man: Sometimes
the director can view the Policy Council as being a threat. That's
an issue that directors have to really look at—recognize they have
the ability to help me design a program that truly meets the needs
of their own children. It's been a truly wonderful partnership.
Narrator:
Through team work and shared decision-making, Policy Council members
make an important difference in the lives of the children and their
community.
Segment 3:
Roundtable Discussion: Illustrations from Three
Local Programs
- Frankie Gibson, Senior Parent Involvement
Specialist, Head Start Bureau
- Kimberly Pillow, Policy Council
Chairperson
- John Morton, Governing Board Member
- Kathy Channell, Head Start Director
- Iweogu Okechukwu, Policy Council
Chairperson
Ann Linehan:
Welcome back to this segment of our broadcast featuring Frankie
Gibson, John Morton, a governing body member, Kimberly Pillow, a
Policy Council chair, Kathy Channell, a Head Start director, and
Iweogu Okechukwu (Chuck), a Policy Council chair. Frankie...
Frankie Gibson:
Thank you, Ann. Kathy, we're going to start with you. As a Head
Start director working in a program where the grantee is a school
system, can you explain to us how program governance is working well
where you are?
Kathy Channell:
Sure. I think that it's important that no matter whether your
grantee is a school division or another type of grantee, that they
recognize that as they accept the Head Start funds and the grants,
that they accept the terms and conditions of that grant, and so they
have the roles and responsibilities in carrying out the plan to make
sure that that happens. When shared decision making really works and
policy councils and governing boards come together and are really
making that happen, then we can ensure high quality programming for
our children and families. And that's what we're really all about.
In our school division, let me just talk
about them for a few minutes. We have a governing board, which is
our school board, and we have an executive director, who's our
superintendent, and they have always felt the importance of parent
involvement and parents as decision-makers. They've made that very
clear in developing their strategic plan, and within that strategic
plan they talk about developing and maintaining school/home
partnerships and school and community partnerships and developing
ways that families and communities can be involved in the
decision-making process. I think that parents are valued within our
school division, and I believe that parent involvement is a
cornerstone of Head Start, so it's such a wonderful match for us.
And Frankie, I know that you were talking
earlier about communication and shared decision-making and sharing
information and planning. All of those are such critical pieces.
When all of the stakeholders have the information that they need,
have training that they need, then they can make informed decisions
for the children and families in their community.
Frankie Gibson:
Kimberly, you're the Policy Council chair for the program where
Kathy is the director. Tell us how Policy Council members are
supported and valued. Kathy referred to that. Explain to us how that
works.
Kimberly Pillow:
I think the most basic thing in our program is that the Policy
Council members are given a great deal of respect by the grantee
agency as well as by the Head Start staff. We're given all the tools
that we need to do our job. Each Policy Council member is given a
tote bag in the beginning of the year that has all the tools we need
to perform during Policy Council meetings. Just office supplies,
calculators, things like that, that we might need to work on the
budget. In addition to that, we each receive a program calendar that
has all of our program's Head Start activities for the coming year.
We are also given the opportunity to do all the training that other
school division employees would be given the opportunity to do. So
we do have access to training opportunities and I think the other
very important piece is that we're always given the time to make
thoughtful decisions.
Frankie Gibson:
So the things you were hearing earlier play out, do you feel like?
Kimberly Pillow:
Absolutely. We're treated as professionals.
Frankie Gibson:
That's great. Chuck, you were also a Policy Council chair person in
an urban community action agency program. So the things you've heard
already, how does that fit with your program? What's different? What
would you like to add? What is the same in your program?
Iweogu
Okechukwu: It's not much different from what Kimberly said
because it's all lined up with one design: to bring parents in, and
for more parents come in to be a member or join a particular
program. And these parents come together to form a body. And out of
this body is a neutral election and they're being sent to the
council. And when they receive this key, the time is taken out for a
formal training because these parents as Policy Councils or Policy
Committees will now be making some decisions and rethinking design
policies to disapprove or approve issues rising out of the governing
body. Also, they look into the governing body and how they're
managing the fiscal affairs of each program. It is a very great
thing for parents to come in and be trained out of nowhere to
understand governance and performance standards.
Frankie Gibson:
John, you are a long-time community organizer and volunteer in your
community. You've served on boards and you're hearing some things
that are happening right now. What could you add about the things
that are important, from a board perspective, when everything is
working well?
John Morton: One
of the issues that I'd like to talk about is describing the upward
mobility philosophy of my former agency. How we made a great effort
to deal with both our staff and the parents to upgrade their
education and job opportunities. And I was so fortunate to be very
close with a Head Start graduate, Seton Hall graduate and a former
president of the board of our local school district. That's all
because of our efforts to increase the ability, to increase the
opportunity for all of our participants. I'm very, very pleased
about that. Thank you.
Frankie Gibson:
Anyone else have something to add to this whole aspect of upward
mobility and the importance of that and how that plays out in your
program?
Iweogu
Okechukwu: Yes, Frankie. The upward mobility comes about when
community representatives, community activists come and join the
parents. It's very good to formalize this whole aspect of the
committee of the Policy Council. The issue here is for parents to be
prepared. It takes a wholesome mind to raise a child. And when
parents see their active role in this child rearing and the
partnership that forms with particular agencies it brings a new
dynamic and a new aspect to life. And that's what John, I think, as
a member of the board of directors, is trying to point out here.
Frankie Gibson:
Kimberly, I think you had something you'd like to add.
Kimberly Pillow:
Yes. In our program we find that it's important to empower parents.
I think each of us in each of our programs needs to remember and be
sensitive of the population that we serve. We're all dealing with
the mindset of poverty and that can be something that's damaging to
the person's self-esteem, to the parents. We may be dealing with
cultural issues or with language barriers. Even the difference of
whether your program is in a rural community or an inner city
program will change the way you can most effectively communicate
with your parents. It's important to empower the parents in our
program. We have the parents training the parents, we have parents
that mentor other parents to get them involved into the program each
program year. We begin at parent orientation and we go on from there
to increase the parent involvement in the program. I think it's
important for us to let all the parents know that in Head Start
their voice is heard and their vote counts.
Frankie Gibson:
I am wondering if you have some advice that you'd like to share with
the board members in our audience. Either one of you as Policy
Council chairs, what are those most important tasks to get that
message across to Policy Council members? Chuck, you can start.
Iweogu
Okechukwu: A Policy Council chair which I've held for quite a
time now.
Frankie Gibson:
This is your second year?
Iweogu
Okechukwu: This is my second year. My advice is for them not to
get complacent in their role as directors because their main rule is
to see the total success of each program because they are
responsible for the governance and they are responsible for sharing
judgments that they will carry out. So if the money and the funds
from the fed is the wheel, and if it's not being taken care of, or
it's not being accounted for, or not being directed to that right
aspect of what it's meant to do, that's going to be laxity. And when
you have laxity, you have a fallout and there's where the issues
begin to crumble.
Frankie Gibson:
Kimberly, do you want to add something?
Kimberly Pillow:
In our program, again, I think that success can be achieved by
having a mutual relationship of respect and support and a great deal
of communication between the grantee agency and the Head Start
staff, the program director and the Policy Council, which involves
the parents as well as the community representatives. It needs to be
