5/12 Affiliate Minutes

May 17th (9:00 – 10:00 am)

 

CBB Updates

CHF Survey Question Revisions

Lisa asked if #13 could be put under #8

Jean said no because TV is a passive activity vs #8 activities which are interactive

Sharon – agreed these are different thought processes

Judy suggested moving it up under #8 so it’s not at the end

Ida said if it was with #8 we might get a more honest answer but Jean still said it made more sense not to combine it

Ida said #12 is a hard one to ask especially for babies – Marion said this question will be deleted

Jean said she would also like to add a question or two about language development and the number of words at 1 or 2; Judy suggested looking at the Hippy/PAT scale, Ruth said to go back to the old survey questions and Nina suggested the ASQ

Lisa asked if the Medicaid questions at the end need to be asked – it’s especially strange for them since they’re a Medicaid application site

Jean said they’re useful to know the number of families who fall within the low income category – but Marion said this info is on the YCC form; Becky said the insurance status may have changed for some families since the visit – but the consensus was to take out these questions

Marion said they got good feedback from several experts in the community on the nutrition questions (Livewell, Children’s Hospital, Temple Hoyne Buell, Colorado Health Foundation);  She went over the potential changes to the questions and said the only two they’re waiting on are #10 and #11 – since it’s been difficult to find consistent recommendations for fruit and vegetable servings for one and two year olds; Ruth said the Eating Smart Being Active curriculum recommends for ages 2 – 13 – 1–2 ½ cups of vegetables and 1–1 ½ cups of fruit

YCC Form Updates

Amy (Grand Junction) asked if the contact in future question could be revised to take out the survey wording – but Marion said it needs to be there to get consent to contact for survey

Sharon said to remember to change the revision date

Lisa asked if the date assigned and date of visit could be flipped?  Judy asked what date assigned is for and asked if she needed to use it.  Marion said this is really only for Colorado Springs – other affiliates only should use it if it’s beneficial

Brenda said date of birth of the mother is hard to capture.  They get age and end up putting 1/1 of the birth year; Maria said the birthdate is important to distinguish families with the same name

Welcome to Amy Farnan – Development Director

Amy said she’s a Denver native with a long history of fundraising.  She has worked for the University of Denver, a local private school, and most recently the Colorado I Have a Dream Foundation for the past 8 years; she said she loves CBB’s mission and is excited to help tell our story

Daniels Fund Update

Amy thanked everyone for their program updates for the Daniels Fund and said visit numbers look great; Jean, Marion and Amy recently met with Noah (Daniels Program Officer) and CBB will be applying at the end of June; Amy said she is also working on a proposal for the Colorado Health Foundation and has a meeting with the CHF program officer next week.  If you’re interested in volunteering for the upcoming golf tournament let Amy know

CBB Website/Referral Postcard Update

Marion said the website and postcards will be ready at the end of June; Marion has received the order numbers and is currently working with the printer on quotes for the postcards

Program Delivery Bags

Marion thanked everyone for their feedback on the bags; A proposal has gone to Jean to pass on to Shepard and the Board; Jean said she’s been reviewing projected revenue and is hopeful we won’t have to take money out of reserves to purchase statewide bags

Discussion Topic – What agencies could we partner with statewide to be a stronger force? (i.e. Nurse Family Partnership, Parents As Teachers, Early Childhood Councils)

Jean said everyone works with a variety of agencies and asked if there is one agency we all work with that is the same; Which partnerships exist that we could build into stronger partnership to share/exchange data?

– Ida said it would be nice to have a formal agreement statewide but it’s so community dependent and people dependent; She said she’s a strong member of their local Council but that’s not the case for all areas; Top down support might be helpful – but it’s hard to say

– Ruth agreed that it’s relationship dependent;  She said some top down with the Councils may be helpful;  NFP is supposed to have a collaborative relationship with CBB – but there’s a lack of understanding of how BB enhances NFP; also, there is no NFP in their north 6 counties

– Jean said NFP is interesting since it’s truly an evidence based model and we could share data across program visits to help elevate what we do; she asked what about PAT?

– Ida said they have a PAT program within their agency and said statewide support could possible strengthen the relationship but each PAT program is its own entity and if CBB becomes something they have to do there may not be the same engagement

– Ruth added that in their 8 county region only 1 county has a PAT program; Ida agreed that there are only 40 programs throughout the state

– Sharon said PAT is part of the menu at Newborn Network;  all PAT families receive a BB visit – but agreed this is not consistent for all affiliates

– Sharon asked what CBB is looking for with a partnership and Jean said to align partnerships to grow our visit numbers and continuity

– Sharon said the Routt County Early Childhood Council acts as an advisory council for Newborn Network and the Council members know BB and send referrals

– Ida recommended doing a survey monkey to find out what relationships each affiliate has with other statewide entities

– Jean asked if we should look at agencies who can help share data

– Ida said yes but some of the other programs don’t get the value of BB and may not see the value of a partnership.  She said at Catholic Charities 50% of the PAT families come through BB; We are the entry point; But unfortunately other agencies see us as a competitor for funding

– Jean asked if CBB would be considered a competitor if our programs became evidence based and Ida said it would require extensive marketing to get people to believe we were evidence based

– Jean asked if CBB is perceived as “fluff” because we only do one visit

– Amy S. said we’re not seen as fluff because of the number of visits – it’s how our materials have been presented in the past;  In Metro Denver they have worked hard to elevate the value of the materials and change the perception

– Judy said in Alamosa social services would like CBB to do more teaching and see parents more often to teach parenting skills; Ruth said of course because this would help make their job easier

– Ruth agreed that we can raise the value of our program materials but said the perception of others in the community is that the # of visits we offer is too limited; she said she remembered the first meeting at the Children’s Trust Fund when someone said CBB only does one visit – what difference can you make?  And the answer was you have to start somewhere.  She said there’s a huge value to see as many families as we’re seeing;  We need to start talking about the referral network

– Judy and Jennifer agreed that CBB does offer an amazing value in the community

– Ida said we’re missing the boat on the economic impact as well; everyone needs this info not just high risk low income families; but funders only want to fund high risk population; they’re missing the value of getting information to families that won’t qualify for other services

– Jean asked if there’s one consistent way to build partnerships and Ruth said there’s not a specific roadmap – it’s individual for each community; Jean said it’s positive and negative the differences between regions – funders are looking for a triage model of how we can solidify partnerships

– Ruth suggested Jean meet with Invest in Kids and Jean said she had already met with Lisa Merlino; Ruth also suggested a meeting with Sandy Swanson

– Ida asked if the Home Visitation Coalition had met recently and Ruth said not for a long time – maybe that’s the next step to get everyone together to talk; Ruth will email Melissa Kelly

– Ida said more collaboration at the state level could help – but it’s a long road

 Additional News, Questions

Molly announced she’s getting married and has been accepted into the Masters of Speech Pathology program at CU Boulder!  Because of this she will be drastically cutting her hours at FIRC and will not be the BB coordinator after the summer

Jennifer said there have been some Program A GYCBB English books with misprints (the table of contents is in the wrong page and there are missing pages).  Marion asked Jennifer to send one of the books and said she’ll look into it.

 

Unable to Attend:   Region 10