Think Tank and Incubator

At the beginning of the project, the CHIRP team brought together two advisory bodies.

The national Think Tank (known affectionately as "bird brains") examined the issues of collaboration around transition of young people with disabilities from their different perspectives and made recommendations on curriculum, training materials, marketing, and provided feedback on materials and activities throughout the project. 

The Think Tank  included experts in the fields of training and technical assistance, transition, vocational rehabilitation, education and independent living. Representatives from the other RSA-funded Rehabilitation Training and Technical Assistance (TACE) Centers (then known as the RRCEPs) participated in the Think Tank, as well as representatives of the IL NET, the joint venture by The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research (TIRR), the National Council on Independent Living and RSA providing training and technical assistance to CILs and SILCs. 

The National Youth Leadership Network (NYLN), Kids as Self Advocates and Arkansas People First provided consumer representation and input into the development and evaluation of training and technical assistance materials. The Association of Rural Programs for Independent Living (APRIL) provided expertise on outreach and services to consumers from rural settings and a link to their CIL to CIL peer mentoring program.

At the state level, the Texas Incubator  (known as the "egg heads") served a similar function and included members of the Texas Association of Centers for Independent Living, the state education agency, the Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services (DARS), the Statewide Council on Independent Living, the Texas Council on Developmental Disabilities and the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

In addition to assisting with the planning and development of the project and providing feedback as part of the evaluation plan, the Think Tank and Incubator provided a structure for dissemination and replication.

The Incubator also provided a forum for obtaining buy-in from the state agencies and organizations. By obtaining the support and commitment of the state leadership, we hoped to make it easier for the local counselors, CIL staff and other state agency personnel to participate in the CHIRP collaboratives. This was successful in some cases, but not in others. We learned that buy-in and support at the top did not always trickle down as far as the regional or local level.  In some regions, the VRregional director was very supportive and encouraged staff to participate. In other regions, the regional director made it clear that this project was not a priority.

Even with some Centers for Independent Living (CILs), the enthusiasm and support of the director did not necessarily invoke the same reaction and commitment from the staff. In other cases, CIL staff were excited about the project but were not supported by mid- and top-level management.

Overcoming the Past

For many years, the culture in the Texas vocational rehabilitation (VR) agency and the advocacy orientation of the Centers for Independent Living (CILs) led to animosity and an adversarial relationship between the CILs and the state agency.  In recent years, the leadership and culture within the VR agency has changed, and the CILs have become more sophisticated in their business practices, advocacy strategies and community partnerships. In many communities, the CIL and the VR agency have been able to find common ground and move forward together to improve opportunities for people with disabilities. The CHIRP groups in these communities were able to set and achieve ambitious goals working together.

In other communities, however,  the past wounds are still fresh and the CIL and VR have not been able to establish a trusting relationship. In these communities, it was a challenge to get VR staff and CIL staff in the same room, much less working together. We found that holding on to past prejudices was not limited to just CILs or just VR. In one community, the VR representatives were disrespectful to the willing CIL representatives. In another area, the CIL representatives refused to work with the willing VR representatives.

Some of the CHIRP groups in these communities, although they had a rocky start, were able to take some small steps forward and collaborate on short-term projects that produced tangible products, such as a youth training PowerPoint presentation or outreach event. Although not as spectacular as some of the projects completed by other CHIRP groups, in some ways these small steps were more important and meaningful in working toward the possibility of long-term collaboration.

A Trusted Sponsor and On-Going Support

CHIRP participants noted that having the University of Arkansas CURRENTS as a neutral sponsor with resources to bring all of the parties to the table was an important factor in the project's success. UA CURRENTS has built a trusting  relationship with both the IL and VR communities in Texas. Because of that trust, both communities were willing to work with CURRENTS and CHIRP, even in places where IL and VR did not trust each other. Having project resources available to provide a meeting in a safe, comfortable and nurturing environment was also a factor. Serving refreshments and meals demonstrated our interest in the participants' physical well-being and may have contributed to people's willingness to attend. "If you feed them, they will come," was a refrain we heard often.

Delivering the CHIRP training in phases (Round 1, Round 2 and RMOG) provided a structure for maintaining communication and contact with the CHIRP collaboratives. The CHIRP groups knew that they were not just left on their own, that CHIRP staff would be checking in with them and would be returning to provide additional training and support. The CHIRP project also used a collaborative software package, SharePoint, to post information to the Internet in order to share resources and benefit from the experience of the other groups. Each CHIRP group could post training and publicity materials, pose questions to other CHIRP groups, and review materials posted by other groups. The SharePoint site, this wiki and the CHIRP Facebook page will continue to provide opportunities for the CHIRP groups to communicate and maintain contact with each other when the project has ended.  

Changing Personnel and Maintaining Relationships

Perhaps the greatest challenge the CHIRP groups faced was staff turnover and changing personnel. In some groups, there were different representatives of one organization or another at every meeting. Staff members would leave the agency or take on new assignments; responsibilities and job descriptions would be shifted. It was difficult to build a trusting and collaborative relationship when every month brought a new contact person.

We learned that relationships are key and that relationship-building is never over.  It is wonderful to have long-standing relationships with trusted colleagues, but we do not always have that luxury. Relationship-building takes time and effort, and supervisors and funders do not always see the benefit of putting that time and energy into that effort. Successful CHIRP groups were willing to put the time and energy into building relationships, resolving conflicts and understanding different perspectives. That is hard to do. As the Tom Hanks character said in A League of Their Own, "If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great."

While relationships might seem like an intangible result to supervisors and funders, the CHIRP groups were able to produce tangible outcomes such as summer jobs for young people with disabilities because they were willing to do the hard work of building and maintaining relationships.