Partners would review and refine evaluations. The partners would have discussed ideas and collaborate on how to proceed with the program.
Share Resources- The program was given a grant, which supported the program financially as it related to the staff, program expenses, evaluations staff and evaluation-related expenses. Training was provided on the lead peace curriculum. Community agencies worked with staff to refine Lead Peace programming.
Expertise and Credibility- All partners provided expertise and credibility to the study. MPS was the reason the study was able to be implemented. Community agencies contributed to the social work, youth development and community organizing.
Sufficient Time to Develop and Maintain Relationship- In School A there was time to build a relationship with the program facilitators and their community agencies. They had worked together for two years which allowed the school to have a smooth transition and implementation of the program, as well as the school was experiencing a turnover of staff and administration. In School B there was no relationship developed prior between community and school facilitators which had an effect on the first year of the study was being …show more content…
“School leaders should allocate sufficient time to get to know organizations before inviting them to begin partnerships, learn more about an organization’s goals and time commitment” (Bonnie etl., 2009). This is the same for groups looking to partner with schools. An organization should not just show up for program implementation, that is not a good way for the schools and the families to get to know the organization and learn what they are about and their reasoning behind partnering up with the school. “collaborative partnership do not, in themselves, reduce risks for adolescent violence and school failure, positive youth outcomes are more likely to be achieved when partnerships are equipped for developing and managing” (Bonnie etl.,