Lessons Learned in State-Community CollaborationLessons from Third Sector's Work on Mixed Delivery Early Childhood Education Systems with Minnesota’s Department of Education
Collaboration between state agencies and local communities is critical in building a sustainable and equitable early childhood education mixed delivery system. A mixed delivery system recognizes that one size “does not fit all” and offers an individualized approach. Families are thus provided with access to early childhood education through a variety of providers, including public schools, private child care centers, Head Start programs, and family child care homes. This approach ensures flexibility and choice, with the goal of equitable access across settings.
Over the past year, Third Sector worked closely to support Minnesota’s Department of Education alongside SRI International and the Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement (CAREI) to design and execute mixed delivery action labs for seven communities throughout Minnesota. During this work, we observed key successes and challenges in these efforts, providing invaluable lessons for future work. Below, we explore what has worked well and areas needing further alignment.
Engaging Local Communities to Strengthen Early Childhood Care and Education Across Minnesota
What Worked Well
1. Improved Understanding of Mixed-Delivery Benefits and Resources: As mixed-delivery ECE systems gain traction in many communities across the country, some localities may have the infrastructure, funding, and support to implement them effectively, while others need time to build trust and understand the potential benefits. Building trust begins with bringing a wide range of stakeholders to the table to help communities recognize how mixed-delivery models can expand access, improve flexibility for families, and create more comprehensive early childhood offerings. In Minnesota, our collaborative efforts with the mixed-delivery action labs helped to establish trust among providers and between communities and the state.
For example, in one community that had long struggled to engage family child care providers, the action lab process created space for meaningful dialogue and relationship-building. A participant shared, “We were missing the connection with family child care providers. We have now established a strong, and hopefully lasting, connection with them. I believe that this will be a springboard for additional productive work.” This type of progress illustrates how mixed-delivery efforts, when grounded in trust and local leadership, can open new pathways to collaboration and equity in early childhood systems.
2. Strengthened Relationships Between State and Local Communities: One of the most significant achievements to emerge was strengthening the relationships between the state and individual communities. The mixed delivery labs were intentionally designed to include representation from state staff, community leaders, and stakeholders. This led to more open communication, increased transparency, and instilled a greater sense of shared responsibility in decisionmaking for communities that have been historically disconnected from state-level policymaking.
For example, state staff provided participating communities with data from systems like the Early Childhood Longitudinal Data System (ECLDS), helping local providers better understand families’ demographics and program participation in their area. In turn, state leaders gained an “on-the-ground view” of community-level challenges, which one agency noted was “positively changing the way their larger state agency team works together.” This mutual exchange of knowledge and trust-building helped align priorities and empowered local providers to more confidently advocate for policy and funding decisions that reflect their specific needs.
3. Longevity in Leadership Structures: A key lesson in collaboration is that the longevity of success depends not just on having local leaders in place but on building both the capacity and the structure needed to keep efforts moving, even when state involvement, funding, or key roles change. This means having clear roles, shared leadership, and the ability to coordinate across programs. In Minnesota, local leadership teams served as a critical bridge between the community and state policymakers through structures like the action labs. These spaces allowed communities to drive change based on their own priorities.
For example, one community created a shared leadership model across child care, the school district, and a nonprofit. This helped to ensure the work wasn’t tied to just one person or organization. When possible, investing in strong, sustainable leadership structures like these can ensure early childhood efforts don’t fade once a grant ends. These teams also give the state timely insights into what’s working and where adjustments are needed, keeping the feedback loop strong.
Areas for Greater Alignment
1. Balancing State Priorities with Local Needs: One of the biggest challenges is ensuring that state-driven priorities align with the very diverse needs of individual communities. Often, state initiatives are designed with extremely ambiguous goals, which do not always align with the diverse needs of the various communities. For example, while one state or community might prioritize universal pre-K expansion, some communities may have a more emergent need for increased infant and toddler care. In Minnesota, we navigated these differences with ongoing dialogue and flexibility in implementation strategies, prioritizing community voice, and reviewing data and trends to determine what might be most advantageous at the time.
2. Barriers to Participation: It is no secret that state and community leaders juggle multiple roles, making it challenging to find meeting times and modalities that work for everyone. Additionally, rural communities often face additional barriers such as long travel distances, limited internet access, and fewer staff to engage in statewide discussions. Addressing these logistical nuances requires innovative solutions. In Minnesota, we offered hybrid and evening meeting times and stipends for participation, simplified the modes of communication, and ensured that engagement opportunities were always structured to maximize inclusivity without overburdening individuals who might already be over-extended.
3. Competition over Collaboration: Despite the shared goal of improving early childhood education, it should come as no surprise that limited resources and funding can create a bit of tension among providers. Public pre-K programs, private child care centers, and family child care providers often find themselves competing for resource deficits instead of collaborating for collective gains. In Minnesota, we dealt with this challenge by including state, county, and community presence at the table to increase transparency in funding allocation and facilitate cross-sector partnerships. The ability to establish straightforward and equitable guidelines for resource-sharing opens the door for well-coordinated ECE mixed delivery that can simultaneously strengthen collaboration.
The Path Forward
The Minnesota action labs lessons learned from state-community collaboration efforts highlight the importance of authentic relationship-building, local leadership, and flexible implementation strategies. While areas of alignment remain present, a continued commitment to shared goals and open dialogue can help bridge gaps and create a more responsive and inclusive mixed delivery system for all.
