Facilitation for Results A Case Study: KANGO

1. by Nance Munderloh Facilitation for Results A Case Study: KANGO

2. Partners Colby Community College Norton Correctional Facility Colby Adult Education Kansas Works

3. The Project • Raise skill sets of inmates for higher level employment and/ or post secondary entry. • Assist in obtaining WORKReady certificates. • Providing opportunity for inmates to enroll in and complete a college certificate program. • Provide assistance in reintegrating into individuals into the job market.

4. Purpose for Meeting • Dialogue concerning the KANGO grant. • Determine the current status. • Discuss opportunities to solidify and improve programming. • Improve communication between agencies. • Recognize requirements for each agency.

5. Issues in the Margins • Previous relationships • Communication • Feeling left out of the loop • What’s in it for me? • Do we get credit? • Rules and regulations.

6. Key Stakeholder: Colby Community College • President: Dr. Kreider • Outreach Coordinator: Troy Beilser • Outreach Instructor: Criquet Cole • Desire to grow CCC programming in the Norton Facility • Connectivity with partners • Insight into inmate needs • Need successful students • Continued programming • Implementation of new courses • Current status, positive and negative • Need successful students • Future employment

7. Key Stakeholder: CAE • Director: Nance Munderloh • Instructor: Dian Organ • Instructor: Jesse Vincent • Permanent education classes for inmates • Curriculum meeting the needs and challenges of the men • Continued interest and funding opportunities at NCF • Outcomes

8. Key Stakeholder: Kansas Works • Offender Workforce Development Specialist: Cindy Villerreal • WIA eligible • Career Opportunities • Aptitude • Release Plans • WorkReady Certification • Follow Up

9. Key Stakeholder: NCF • Staff • Inmates • Less recidivism • Better preparation • More resources • Breaking the cycle of incarceration

10. Facilitator: Nance Munderloh Selection Effectiveness • Knowledgeable concerning the grant • Acquainted with all agencies • Concern for all parties to be included and active participants • Responsible for reporting • By default • Professional meeting • Covered agenda • Time used effectively • All voices heard • New information gathered • No dominance • Remained neutral • Did not dominate, asked for input

11. Pre-planning • Determine time and location of meeting (scheduled the meeting after an event all were attending related to the grant) • Scheduled with NCF • Invited key stakeholders: Sent out an agenda and a copy of the grant for all to review prior to the meeting

12. Invitation and Agenda Memo To: Dr. Lynn Kreider, Troy Beilser, Criquet Cole, Cindy Villerreal, Jay Shelton, Hazel Petersen, Matthew Woodyard and Dian Organ From: Nance Munderloh, CCC Adult Education Director, and KANGO Coordinator Date: January 23, 2010 (following the first KANGO graduation in the reentry building) Re: Planning and Review Meeting for the KANGO Project Partnership Message: Hello Everyone The KANGO grant was an enormous undertaking in a short amount of time but the work we put into the planning and execution is paying off! We are seeing the results of our efforts in many areas including 25 WORKReady certificates achieved, a class of nine completing the college certificate class, and scores increasing in skill and academic areas. The men involved in the project as well as those hoping to be included are excited and see new hope and opportunity because of this initiative. With one session under our belts, it is time to re-evaluate and review. I would like for all of you to plan to meet after the graduation. Please take time to review the grant and reflect upon how the partnership is working and if your expectations have been met. There have been many questions concerning who is doing what and why. For this meeting, plan to share your agency’s focus. It will be a time to educate others on your specific roles in the community and with the grant. The more we know about each other, the better we can partner and assist one another in meeting the required criteria of each agency. To attempt to increase productivity and to be sure all involved have a voice, this meeting will be facilitate. Attached you will find a basic agenda, plan for the meeting to last about an hour and a half. Another meeting will be set to follow up the next session, and a final meeting at the conclusion of the grant. I look forward to seeing all of you at the ceremony and hope you will be able to stay for the meeting. Please feel free to include additional stakeholders that I have overlooked. January 26, 2010 Meeting in re-entry building following graduation ceremony Agenda Review of the meeting purpose. Set ground rules. Introductions. Discussion Topic 1: KANGO at NCF Define KANGO goals What is your agency’s function? Topic 2: Current Status Positives Negatives Barriers and issues Change or delete Topic 3: Future College Adult Education Work Force NCF 5. Recap

13. Room Set Up A circle of chairs provided eye contact and easy communication for participants.

14. Ground Rules • No side bars, let everyone hear all discussion • Stay focuses on the • Opportunity for all to be heard • Listen first, speak after digesting information • Be considerate of time constraints • Ask, don’t assume • Be sure the recorder is able to write the meaning of your comments, be prepared to recap and/or summarize

15. Facilitation Process • Emphasis on hearing and clarifying each participant’s response • Around the circle participation used to be sure all are heard process with the option to pass • Responses from individuals who were quiet • Questions were asked in open ended format • No conflict, interested and cooperative learning and collaboration

16. Participate Please • Expert • Sponsor • Clarify • Visioning • Concerns • Devil’s Advocate • Share Knowledge • What is required • Request more information • Picture how it will look • Look at drawbacks • Bring out perspectives

17. Key Points of Discussion Topic 1 • Assist in changing individuals so they • won’t return to prison • Be sure needs are assessed and • appropriate education is provided • Instill a less victimized thinking and • become more focused on positive moves • for the future • Instruct individuals in gaining the skills • (academic, social, and personal) needed • for successful employment and • contented lives. • Outcomes, outcomes, outcomes. • Hope and opportunity. • Continuevisioning for the remainder of the grant What see do you see as the major purpose of the grant project?

18. Key Points of Discussion Topic 1 What do you see your agency or institution’s part in the grant? • Guidance and direction. • Safety and foundational rules and regulations (NCF). • Assistance in building skills. • Assistance in preparing for college courses. • High level skills. • A certificate program for higher paying jobs. • Provision of curriculum and materials. • Provision of required equipment. • Instructional power. • Pre and post counseling and career/job assistance. • Emphasis on constructive steps while incarcerated to assist on the outside. • Opportunity to take aptitude tests to assist in career choices. • Assuring the requirements of the grant are met. • Tracking and administering the grant. • Communicating with all partners

19. Key Points of Discussion Topic 2 Current Status – Positive • “I got a lot out of all of the classes. My self esteem was boosted, I found I was able to focus and apply myself. My skills have improved in many areas including how I act in and out of class, my basic math, reading and writing, and of course the focus area of business and technology.” • Many inmates are benefiting: the work and life skill classes have been bolstered with more content, materials and extended time to work on more skill sets. • Inmates involved with the grant are talking and sharing the positive changes in their life with others. This is becoming a desired course. It means changes in daily behavior and attitudes as the inmates strive to become a part of the program. • Most of the participants have finished courses. Only one has been unable to complete the college course, and for the most part, those leaving work and life skills classes are due to unavoidable court dates. • Collaborative efforts to serve specific individuals before release. • Setting a higher standard for life. • Changes the limitations inmates had because of their lack of tool set needed for a vocation. • Interest’s individuals in furthering their education; these trickles down to family. • Has individuals leaving with WORKReady giving them a step up. • Beginning to reorient the inmate and the community through collaborative efforts and positive news and information shared outside the fence.

20. Topic 2 Key Points of Discussion Current Status: Barriers, Negatives, Change or Delete? • Not a hard and fast determination of who is to be accepted in college courses. Suggest setting a good baseline of expectations for future groups and vetting names through all partners to determine best candidates based on the requirements outlined. • Learners in college course are not as receptive unless they have already gone through the work and life skills course. Obvious difference in the first group. Suggest requiring it as a prerequisite. • Not enough available, some are attending both work and life and college concurrently. Suggest doing a study to determine how students compare if they a) took work and life skills then the college course, b) took the course concurrently or c) had never taken the course at all. • Large barrier we are currently overcoming has been misunderstanding of who was responsible for what and when. This problem didn’t appear for a while, but when it did it merely showed a lack of communication. This meeting is an excellent “right step” in solving the problem. • Trying to fulfill the requirements of all agencies. This will be easier now that we have shared what is required by all. • Having inmates move or go to segregation. • Lack of internet. • Not knowing release dates. • Provide more in depth curriculum for WorkReady specific instruction. • More collaboration for resumes, cover letters and interviewing.

21. Topic 3 Key Points of Discussion The Future • Possible follow up and tracking after release. • Consider manufacturing skill set. • Concrete application process for college classes. • Only offering half the certificate without cost so more men can take advantage of the grant and also start a trend for continuing classes. • Possible exceptions from the college concerning fees or tuition. • What other grants are possible? • Who might apply for them? • Have Jess Randal go through volunteer training so he is able to work on the technology. • Change the process for entering in Kansas Works. Go through Colby office to lessen work load for Hays. • Meeting to identify WIA eligible. • Review LSIR. • “Remember this is a gift through stimulus, what makes it successful is high expectations for staff and inmates.” • Prepare inmates for reality, to be ready for re-entry, not a watered down idea of what awaits them. • Have collaborative re-entry plans for inmates designed with the assistance of the inmate so it is real and viable. • Add more college credit classes. • Have more specific classes leveled according to assessments. • Year - long schedule to be used so courses can be identified and administered at the most optimum time for inmates. • Follow up, follow up, and follow up. • Look for continued financial support.

22. Key Points of Discussion Objectives Projected current status WorkReady 25 Enter College Course 20 Complete College Course 9 Enter the workforce ? • WorkReady 30 • Enter College Course 20 • Complete College Course 10 • Enter the workforce ? **** Plan to test 30 additional in WorkReady and potentially have 20 more entering college courses. Difficult to determine job entry because of incomplete follow up information.

23. Outcomes of the Meeting • Solid understanding of the project • All agencies on the “same page” • Clarification of all agency contributions • Awareness of partner requirements • Cooperative efforts • Collaborative mindset • Vision for the future

24. Future Plans • Meet again following second session • Final meeting after grant completion • Explore collaborative projects • Investigate continued funding

25. Evaluation • Facilitation makes the difference between a time wasting and ineffective meeting and a well organized, efficient and productive meeting allowing for the voices of all and the coming together of many ideas and backgrounds.