兰德-The-Big-Lift-Implementation-Study_-Final-Report_70页_552kb

The Big Lift Implementation Study Summary

Core Content

The Big Lift is a preschool to third grade collective impact initiative in San Mateo County, California, launched in 2012 to improve third grade reading proficiency. It is a partnership between the Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF), the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE), and the County of San Mateo, with support from dozens of community organizations and school districts. The initiative focuses on four key "pillars": high-quality preschool, summer learning, school attendance, and family engagement. The first year of implementation was 2015–2016, with four school districts participating, and a second year, 2016–2017, added three more districts.

The RAND Corporation conducted a multiphase evaluation of the initiative, including an implementation study that aimed to understand how the collective impact framework was being used and how the four pillars were implemented. The study used two waves of data collection (2015–2016 and 2016–2017) and employed key informant interviews, Wilder Collaboration Factors Survey, and focus groups as data sources.

Main Research Questions

1. To what extent are community members engaging in collective impact?

   • 1.1. To what extent and how are the five domains of collective impact being established at the county and local school district level?
   • 1.2. What is the level of collaboration among members of the collective impact collaborative?
   • 1.3. To what extent are changes underway in the county and local school districts as a result of the collective impact collaboratives?
   • 1.4. What are the successes and challenges of implementing a community-wide initiative?
   • 1.5. To what extent are systems and resources aligned with the collective impact collaboratives’ short- and long-term goals?
   • 1.6. What successes and challenges have the county and local collective impact collaboratives had in meeting the Big Lift goals?

2. How are the Big Lift pillar strategies being implemented?

   • 2.1. To what extent are the needed resources available and being used for programs associated with the pillars?
   • 2.2. To what extent are personnel in preschools and school districts aware of the Big Lift and its goals?
   • 2.3. What is the planning and implementation process for program activities that are part of the Big Lift?
   • 2.4. What is the perceived quality of the activities?
   • 2.5. How do the participating school districts differ in implementation? How are they similar?
   • 2.6. What are the perceived successes and challenges of acquiring the resources and designing the activities that are part of the Big Lift?

Key Informant Interviews

• Conducted with county leadership, local collaborative leaders, and community partners.
• In Wave 1, 33 individuals participated; in Wave 2, 30.
• Topics included collective impact, implementation strategies, and challenges and successes.
• Findings indicated a shared vision, supportive environment, and necessary organizations in place.
• Challenges included communication issues, workforce retention, and financial sustainability.
• Local partners appreciated data support from community leaders.

Wilder Collaboration Factors Survey

• A 40-question survey measuring six factors of collaboration: environment, member characteristics, collaborative process, collaborative communication, collaborative purpose, and resources.
• Administered in Wave 1 (Dec 2015–Jan 2016) and Wave 2 (Mar 2017).
• High response rates among county leadership and local collaborative leaders, but low response rates among Big Lift Collaborative members.
• Lower response rates likely due to inclusivity of all members, including those with limited engagement.

Focus Groups

• Conducted with BLIS teachers, BLIS Program Partner Leads (PPLs), preschool teachers, and preschool directors.
• In Wave 1, 2 focus groups with 16 participants; in Wave 2, 11 focus groups with 76 participants.
• Aimed to gather contextual insights on the implementation of the pillars and collaborative conditions.
• Focus groups provided specific insights on curricula, professional development, budgeting, and family engagement.

Main Findings

• Common Vision: Big Lift stakeholders shared a common vision and purpose.
• Supportive Environment: The community environment was deemed supportive for collective impact.
• Collaborative Structures: Necessary organizations and partners were in place to support the initiative.
• Challenges:
  • Communication between stakeholders was a challenge.
  • Attracting and retaining quality staff was a concern.
  • High workload due to increased data collection.
  • Financial sustainability was the most frequently cited concern.
• Opportunities:
  • Engaging local businesses and legislators for additional funding.
  • Data support from community leaders was appreciated.
  • Shared measurement and continuous communication were strengths in the collaborative process.

Recommendations

• Strengthen communication among stakeholders.
• Enhance workforce development to attract and retain quality staff.
• Develop financial sustainability strategies, such as engaging local businesses and involving legislators.
• Improve data collection systems to reduce workload.
• Refine the shared measurement system for better tracking of progress.

Conclusion

The Big Lift initiative represents a collective impact approach aimed at improving early reading proficiency. While the collaborative framework was generally well-established, challenges in communication, staffing, and financial sustainability were noted. The implementation study provided insights into the status of the initiative and recommendations for improvement, which can be useful for other early learning initiatives and collective impact efforts across the United States.