John Toole (3:59)

Robin, that's an impressive resume and certainly we've come to know as partners with you about how all that experience has informed our work together and certainly your points of emphasis in your current work. And really that does take us to right at the heart of our relationship at this point. We are in a Transformation in Youth justice initiative. We call it the Denison Mondoro Project. While we've been affiliated prior to that project, Robin, this has really brought us a special relationship on supporting, providing for and creating opportunities for innovation and change and system reform. Why has your career brought you to the place where there is such a special emphasis on implementation science and change management?

Robin Jenkins (4:44)

I've learned over the years that through my own experiences and in fact many of my own mistakes as an executive leader in organizations that so much from the field in terms of research and evidence supported practice never really reaches those who could benefit from it the most. We know from implementation science that maybe only as much as 15% research and evidence based innovations actually reach organizations and become scalable. In other words, that become available to the populations those innovations are designed to serve. That bothers me. There's billions of dollars in research around how to help children, youth, families and communities out there, not only in this country, but around the world. And we can do so much better at achieving better public safety and developmental outcomes for young people and their families if we just did better implementation. And I learned that through my own practice as a juvenile justice executive. And then in the last five years at UNC Chapel Hill, I've been able to be part of this amazing work group that has contracts across the country in behavioral health and juvenile justice, child welfare and the like to really see the benefits when organizations take on a willingness to learn effective Implementation practice and make their systems more serviceable and effective in meeting their outcomes for the populations they serve. Implementation science, when done well, really influences positive change.

John Toole (6:14)

Robin, I hope that among our managers and supervisors and directors and administrators in our courts and our juvenile justice system will continue to benefit from what you're going to share in this podcast. I think, you know, I couldn't agree with you more that we could be so much more effective if this group of leaders in our juvenile justice system would have a greater knowledge, a greater ability to implement the changes and the reforms that they hope to bring about as they oversee their juvenile justice systems. Hey Robin, let's just ask the question, what is implementation science? How does it support these human service agencies, implementation of the reforms, system reforms, and the programs and the policies?

Robin Jenkins (6:57)

I want to unpack a little bit in two parts. Implementation science itself is the study of methods to promote the adoption and integration, ongoing use of evidence based practices, interventions and policies into routine organizational activities. It's translating evidence into doing business every day in a, in an evidence informed way. But it's also the study of how that happens. What are the mechanisms that make that go well? How can you influence change better, more effectively and efficiently? The science of implementation does the research on that side and then brings the research to bear in the organizational system environment, to put it to use. The second part of the definition though is what about implementation practice, which is what we've been doing in the Mondoro project? Implementation practice really is sort of the tailored, facilitated use of implementation science, informed models, frameworks and strategies. And it's always customized to each organization so that they can adopt and apply evidence, create the readiness they need to do it well, and ensure that ongoing readiness. It also helps them create needed and ongoing capacities and outcomes by embedding effective implementation processes into their day to day activities. So implementation practices is doing implementation science well in a tailored, customized format for each organization's culture wherever they exist. It can be an organization of two or an organization of 2,000.

John Toole (8:32)

Robin, do you find, I mean your experience, and certainly we've got six sites that we've been working with over the last three plus years that the leadership that you're speaking to about implementation science and change management brings that understanding of the skill set necessary to drive that change, or do you find that those leaders are often devoid of some of the key core components of implementation science?

Robin Jenkins (8:55)

I don't want to come down hard on leaders in jj. There are some really amazing leaders in human services and juvenile justice around the world. So I don't want to come across as critical to that leadership. What I do want to say though, is that I was not trained. I learned a lot of my executive and leadership skills in complex organizations through experience. I've had extensive graduate school training. I've had extensive executive training in multiple formats. But I got no implementation science training until I got on the job and started learning as the science evolved. And it's only been around about 20 years or so, so I had to start learning on the job and then once I became an implementation practitioner, learning through other more formal channels. So I don't hold it against juvenile justice organizations. They don't know this stuff. I just would like organizations to acknowledge that there's an opportunity to learn implementation skills and competencies and capacities. Most organizations don't. They don't have a workforce development program or executive leadership program anywhere near approaching what it takes to understand implementation science. So part of our challenge, as you know, is that when we introduce it in the Mondoro world, not only are we introducing reforms, we're also introducing implementation science as a way to influence and manage those reforms. So they're learning multiple skills and trying to influence pathways of change in complex ways at the same time. So I get the challenge in front of the leaders in these organizations, but I also encourage them to be open to taking this on because the potential for benefit is significant.

John Toole (10:32)

Answered with your usual aplomb and grace and fitting of the kind of success you have in partnering with these leaders in the work that you do around the change management implementation science. Robin and certainly you know that we've learned that seeding this skill set, enhancing that understanding through training, coaching and mentoring is critical if we're going to have long term success. I think I comment among the site based leaders that we're working with. We're not interested in just helping them develop a momentary change, but perhaps actually developing a legacy of the work by creating the skill set and incorporating it into their organization. And you've certainly been at the forefront of helping that. Robin, can you comment on how this contributes to the sustainability of that change?

Robin Jenkins (11:17)

We know from implementation science practice and the research literature that when organizations do the work, when they do the work of creating the readiness, the capacity, and I know that we're going to talk about implementation drivers maybe in a few minutes, but, but when you attend to those sorts of things in a proactive way where you dedicate leadership and commitment to those concepts, you get far more effective implementation and far more sustainable change. We're dealing with human lives. We're dealing with the opportunity to significantly and early on impact the trajectory of young lives based on our decisions and the technologies and the competencies we have when young folk come into our juvenile justice worlds. And I think we both, ethically and even morally owe it to ourselves and our organizations to have the highest standard for evidence at our fingertips and the greatest competencies and capacities to deliver that evidence. Which means leaning on the implementation science and the research. That doesn't mean we have to be all geeky and academic about it. There are lots of really concrete, fairly understandable ways to make this real in organizations without making it so complicated. Part of the problem for most leaders is they see this is yet one more thing to learn. It's like learning a new language, Greek or something. But the reality is that learning the language and the functional skills and competencies of implementation science is really sort of reframing many of their already existing leadership skills and practices, but applying it in a more systematic, deliberate way. They're just much more likely to get improved outcomes and more sustainable, successful change.

John Toole (12:58)

Given that the jurisdictions that we've had the privilege of working with, Robin, have such passionate, committed and devoted leaders, I hope the continuation of this conversation, the information that you share in this podcast excites some of the leaders into accepting this challenge in the system reform that they lead. You and I know that we fundamentally agree that this can bring about that sustainable, measurable impactful change for the lives of the kids and families that we work with in the jurisdictions.

Robin Jenkins (13:31)

We have pretty rich data from implementation intervention research that measures what works well and how does it work well that show that when people do the readiness building and the intentional capacity building for effective implementation, it pays off. It saves money. They get better program outcomes, they get better population outcomes, they get more satisfaction in their workforce, they get more dedicated and committed leaders, and they have reduced turnover in their organizations. There are all kinds of findings and evidence that suggests that when you do the work, you get much higher functioning and better delivering organizations and capacities for those organizations. So I don't want to just say this as an opportunity to sell what we do. The research bears this out. This is, you know, Robin talking about coming to you with a, with a new idea for implementation reform. These are research findings that bear out that when you do the work, you really are likely to get much better results.

John Toole (14:31)

We stand by the research and the evidence as the strongest argument for accepting change and moving forward in juvenile justice reform. We also stand by the actual practical experiences. And you and I both know that through this work that we've been able to do together through our probation system reform and juvenile justice system enhancement projects. We have strong testimonials from leaders who have seen the results that confirm the evidence and the research that you're speaking to. Can you frame the key core components of implementation science that you believe lead to success?

Robin Jenkins (15:05)

Now, there's a lot to unpack here, so bear with me. Effective implementation always begins with what we call co creation or collaborating. Finding the right key champions, the right folks who can create the hospitable environment and the enabling environment for success. And in juvenile justice, that usually means judges, district attorneys, public defenders, community partners, behavioral health, child welfare, education partners. But it's those group of people or organizations that have a stake in the beneficial outcomes that come from whatever's being adopted. Because they're the one with on the ground experience with the systems that are going to need to influence managing the barriers that it takes to remove those barriers for change. So those co creation partners on the front end of designing effective implementation are a basic requirement to get it done well. Once that co creation process is in place, that helps create a vision for change and setting the context for what success looks like. People in organizations have to know what the goal line looks like. What does success mean if we do this well? What are the core components? What are the elements of what you're asking me to do that are concrete, tangible, that I know how to go out and create Policies and procedures for that we can measure and we can evaluate whether we're doing this well. So we have to define success well. We also have to have leaders who are willing to learn and lead through adaptive and inclusive values and principles, who are willing to risk changing their culture even if things don't go perfectly well, and who can create executive buy in and commitment to fully supporting what is being adopted. Leadership willingness to learn and to try on new competencies and skills is an essential foundational core component of effective implementation. Beyond that, there are known capacities, known drivers for success. For example, dedicating formal implementation team FTE resources. You have to dedicate people and staff to the work. You can't layer it on top of already busy, very complex job descriptions and expect it to go well. You have to figure out how to carve out time and maybe reallocate resources to other work or other places so that this can be formally dedicated to the implementation. And then there are known other capacities, things like developing effective workforce systems. We overly rely on training in juvenile justice. We think training is sort of the ointment for all of our ails. And we don't really create learning systems in which that training can be used to its fullest potential. We don't coach it up after we deliver it well. We don't provide professional development beyond a lot of performance supervision and administrative supervision. So those workforce development systems really matter. Creating continuous learning CQI systems that are not complex but are designed to formally assess what needs to be assessed relative to the intervention itself, whether it's a policy, program or practice, really essential. And then building the communication, the collaboration and feedback loops and the teaming structures between executive implementation and other teams that are going to be doing this work to ensure that every level of an organization is communicating well and playing their role and responsibility as designed by the executive team in the leadership group as they co created for the implementation itself.

John Toole (18:35)

Robin, you said there was a lot to unpack, but you've unpacked that in a wonderfully organized way. And in practice you're able to provide the kind of consultation and teaming to make it very practical. And once again, I would say we have jurisdictions who would attest to that and can see that practically in their own jurisdiction and can apply it. While I admit it's difficult, it's challenging, it's hard work to achieve all of that. We would both argue it's well worth it. And once again, practically we've seen that kind of organizational approach that you just laid out put into place that's benefited not only the system's performance, but obviously the youth at they serve really appreciate that. And I will get to the previously referenced kind of the difference between authority driven organizations and adaptively led organizations. I really want to hear your comments and I'm sure the audience would learn significantly from how you respond to that.

Robin Jenkins (19:28)

This is a favorite topic of ours in implementation science and is particularly useful for senior or senior leaders in juvenile justice organizations as well as managers. So understanding that leadership takes a unique set of skills around visioning and communicating and inspiring change and managing is about translating that into the work. Directing, guiding, influence the work on a day to day basis. Well, adaptive leaders use a broader set of skills that are a little bit more inclusive. They understand that they're not experts in everything. They understand that by using adaptive leadership strategies they can lift up potentially innovative, real practice based solutions to complex issues in their organizations. Adaptive leaders understand that some of the best solutions come from those that are closest to the work. So they invite direct care staff, allied health staff, allied practitioners, administrative staff. Why? Because they have a role in delivering the supportive infrastructure for what is being implemented. So it's not just about in, in traditional authority driven organizations, a leader says, here's what we're going to do, here's what we expected success is, and here's why we're doing it. It might be a mandate from a legislature or a chief justice or a clerk of court or somebody, and then the expectation is go do it. Well, of course we have to do that in, in the political environment that we work with. But there are ways to adaptively engage the natural or the learned leadership in your organization to do that differently. Authority driven organizations assign the work they develop like a project team or a task group, and they say, go forth and deliver the work. And they typically use tried and sometimes not always successful methods. You know, the old saw of if everything in your toolbox looks like a nail, then all you got to do is use a hammer, go after it. Implementation science and adaptive leadership really thinks about inviting diverse voices to the table and using those devices to say, what exactly is the problem we're dealing with? What are the implementation challenges we're facing? What are some solutions that maybe we haven't thought about? What are some ways that we can put some data systems in place where we can try some things on and find out whether they're working well or not? And how can we do small tests of change to begin to adjust our systems and processes along the way to get where we need to go? It's not a all or none solution here, but authority driven organizations often say, here's what we're going to do, here's what you have to do, now go do it and report back. So it's a much more limited, narrow set of resources and abilities and solutions that often fail because they don't take into account this practice based, this cultural, this historical set of experiences that can better define problems and find innovative solutions. Using adaptive leadership skills brings in the voice of this other group, but it also recognizes the leadership at these multiple levels in organizations and celebrates that leadership. It empowers people. It gives people an opportunity to grow in their either informal or informal leadership roles. It reduces workforce turnover. It gives people a career path beyond the traditional ones in performance development. I mean, there's so much about this I could go on and on about. But these strategies allow the more innovative use of leadership through practice based experience than authority driven organizations.

John Toole (23:08)

And Robin, those last set of outcomes you briefly summarized are those that we would all want to achieve. All of the leaders that are driving system reform or just driving the management of ongoing operations and the success of the various components of their juvenile justice system. These are things we wish to achieve and do contribute to the sustainability of the positive the reforms that we implement. Certainly you and I both know that we could highlight a couple of examples within the Mondoro project, and I'll mention Lancaster County, Nebraska, and I'll mention Green Greene County, Missouri, who certainly embraced this approach to bring about the change and the reform. But there are many others that you're certainly familiar with. But once again, for the audience, and if this sounds thick to you guys, it's well organized, it's well orchestrated, it does provide a systemic opportunity to bring about sustainable, positive change. And we've seen the evidence. So Robin, simple question. At what point in the process of reform does implementation science begin?

Robin Jenkins (24:07)

The simple answer is at the very beginning, when you have an idea for adopting a new policy, program or practice. Traditionally, people think of implementation as something that comes down the line, that you're going to develop a strategic plan, then you're going to develop a work group or a project plan or a task group, and then you're going to think about what it takes to implement that idea or that innovation or policy that is wrong, that's wrongheaded, and that's what the evidence has taught us not to do. When you design for change, when you build implementation strategy and thinking and frameworks into the the way that you're beginning to think about what it's going to take to successfully support your idea, then you're going to start planning for who are the co creation partners you need? What are the design elements in the system that we need to consider that will ensure success? What are the upfront barriers we're going to have to negotiate to overcome? What are the resources and abilities that we already have in place that can lend success to our effort? And what's missing? What do we need to build toward to ensure a more fuller level of success? And then how do we apply a set of framework and strategies, create the teaming structures we need, build the workforce development processes in place, the competency skills, knowledge and abilities, the coaching to support all that? How do we create the CQI process to figure out whether what we're doing is going to be meaningfully applied and is ensuring the change that we hope to see? And then how are we going to build the communication and feedback loops to understand did we get it right? Are we doing this the way we designed it? So if you don't think about that stuff on the front end, you're kind of making it up as you go along, not Only are you going to stress out your implementation in your project teams because you're going to say, oh yes, we forgot to think about that. Now we got to go back and redo this. You're going to layer work after work after work on already overburdened people. So if you slow down and do this right and design for it, which is an effective principle in change management, then yes, it's going to take longer on the front end because you're going to be much more thorough about it. But just think of the success you're going to achieve on the back end. You've planned for it, you've got procedures for it, everybody knows about it and has buy in about what's going to happen and you've got solutions in place for when challenges come up. So it always begins on the front end.

John Toole (26:36)

As you're answering that question, I'm thinking of the, the many leaders in juvenile justice, whether local or at the state level, who would offer. Yeah, but I have the everyday crisis that I have to manage. I have so many new programs I have to look at. I have so many different interests and pressures that I have to face. And yet I think you've answered that question by saying, well, we'll start to efficiently reduce those if we carefully, thoughtfully plan for the change that you're going to drive forward. How do you react to that?

Robin Jenkins (27:07)

I love that you raised that because that is perhaps one of the most common things we hear when we go out and practice in the field. I've said this about maybe 10 million times. I'm not exaggerating. Every human service organization is constantly under resourced and overburdened. Human service systems in our country are not designed to do the work that they're asked to do today based on what comes into their systems. They are really overtasked with complex problems that engage multiple systems, multiple organizations and multiple stakeholders. Yet their budgets and their strategic plans aren't resource in a way to handle that complexity. And so I get that kind of response. I completely acknowledge it. I've, I've been in it. And at the same time, what I want to say is what you lifted up, we have clear evidence that it. When organizations take time to study what they're doing and whether it's really working or not, they often go back and say, maybe we shouldn't be doing this. Maybe we should stop doing so much of this. Maybe we can combine and do this differently. For example, we're doing some work in Nebraska where the leadership out there, they heard loud and clear when we started talking about continuous quality improvement, one of the first things out of their leadership, their, their chiefs and the folks out in the field was, I'm so glad you raised this issue. Because we get so much data, so much information coming at us that A, we don't really ask for, B, it doesn't always apply to our work and we have to sit down and go through all these emails and these reports and it doesn't really help us do our work. That's a classic example of how systems sort of generate work without really applying it to the implementation goals and outcomes that work is designed to solve. So when implementation leaders slow down and align and plan the work they need to do and then figure out how it's going to impact the work already going on, then the conversation comes up, what can we de implement? What can we stop doing? What can we do more efficiently? How can we restructure our work and our teaming structures to ensure that this goes better? And how can we get feedback and measurement to know whether this is actually working well or not? It's a whole new set of skills. It's a whole new way of thinking. But organizations that take this on and do this well, they breathe a sigh of relief because they understand and see the results much more successfully and better than when people don't take this perspective.

John Toole (29:34)

On when this is applied. Do you see success?

Robin Jenkins (29:39)

Definitively, a hundred percent. The answer is yes. It takes a committed leader who's willing to sort of work through the, the rainstorms and the rainbows. But when they, when they do that, they breathe. They go, oh yeah, now I see why we're talking about this. It often takes two to three years. It often takes a while to see the benefit. The fruits of this labor come to come to pass. People have to acknowledge that you have to live through it. It's one of these things that you have to live through it. And then they go, oh, yeah, now I see why we talked about that. Now I see why we did it that way. Because until they get that lived practice experience, they think this is all sort of an academic conversation, something that doesn't really apply to them. But I can tell you 100% of the time, whether it's a small organization or a huge organization, when they live through it and they see how it really works out, they go, oh, yes, now I see why we did that and I see why it makes sense.

John Toole (30:38)

And I think, Robin, that certainly from our shared experience in this work, we could provide numerous mentors to the listeners that would reinforce all those aspects that you just laid out. Yes, it's a challenge. Yes, it may be a time before we experience the long term success we're seeking. But there is success when this is applied systematically in an organized way to not only find effectiveness, but also efficiency through the dedication that we put into this work.

Robin Jenkins (31:07)

Yes, no. And let me just say, to keep from discouraging our listeners, you don't have to wait two or three years to see that success. You can find immediate success when you start working with your leadership groups in a different way. There's a new level of excitement, there's a new level of engagement. Think about what happens when innovation comes into your environment and how people sort of re engage. They feel valued, they feel listened to. There's new energy at the leadership table, new ideas for success. Then you start trying things on and you find small wins and you lift that up and you celebrate. And then you see short. We do what we call short tests of change, plan do, study act cycles or other ways of examining whether things are working in the short term. And when those data are good. People love to feel part of something new that's exciting and successful. So you can get a lot of early implementation change happening within the first year or two without seeing the long term benefits, but still enough to feel like you're really doing the work that's going to make your organization change in the way that you hope it's that that happens.

John Toole (32:18)

Yeah. So just a slight off ramp here from the direct conversation we're having right now. But Robin, do you see kinds of organizational structures, types of structures and probation departments that seem to promote the highest quality results for the youth and families they serve?

Robin Jenkins (32:35)

I do, and I'll tell you that they're unfortunately kind of rare. And, and the reason that I say that is that many, if not most of the juvenile justice systems that I've had the privilege of working with, and it is a privilege, are legacy environments where there's this holdover of. See, juvenile justice and adult criminal justice systems come from a long history of European tradition of paramilitary control, where there's a command and control structure and authority structure and you know, you do what you're told and, and there's not a, there's not a lot of innovation. These systems are not designed for innovation. They're designed for policy implementation. And what we've learned from developmental science, trauma science, human service and change management, and a whole bunch of other things that inform implementation science is that because we're dealing with human beings in complex systems, that authority Driven structure helps to influence the public safety part of the equation. Like what do you have to do when you really have to get your hands around a young person who really needs to be dealt with from a public safety perspective? They need to be kept safe, they need to show up for court, they need to be out of an environment where they can hurt themselves or others. Those public safety functions need that authority decision making to ensure that goes well. But the developmental application of treatment, restorative justice, trauma informed care, engaging communities using evidence based screening tools, risk needs, responsivity theory, the things that we're applying, evidence based case management, those things that we're using in the Mondoro project, all require new ways of leading organizations that don't do well in purely authority driven structures. So the teaming that gets set up needs to take that into account. So we've seen that happen in a couple of sites where leaders have said, come to the table, executive leadership teams, my chiefs, my chief probation officers, my administrative staff, my field experts in certain content areas. And they've invited those teams to say what kind of teaming structures would it take for us to do this work? Well, and they've modified their teaming structures so they, they become, for example, the leadership in Nebraska has just created what she is calling a systemic leadership team, which is inviting, basically she's flattening the organization, removing some of the authority driven sort of history out of that organization and inviting that field based leadership from the chiefs and the assistant chiefs to the table to think about strategy. That's often unheard of in criminal and juvenile justice organizations because strategy is usually the purview of the executive leadership, those that are appointed or elected to be leaders in those organizations. But by reframing leadership as shared practice based evidence, you can create these teaming structures that then do this adaptive intent based leadership that bring stronger, more engaged, more effective results. And we've seen that happen in a couple of sites.

John Toole (35:41)

You could obviously, with your expertise, continue to speak for hours about all of these elements and then insert your experience in partnering with these jurisdictions that speak about both the challenges and the failures and the wonderful successes that have been realized. For many of our audience, they may be hearing these concepts for the first time. Robin, it's not something that they have brought as a skill set into their new leadership position. In fact, we all know, I think all our listeners know, that we're often promoted because we were good at the job we did before in the same system, not necessarily because this is a part of our skill set. What advice would you give to our youth justice stakeholders and listeners who are hearing this information really for the first time and are struggling perhaps with implementing change or implementing just simple reforms on behalf of the youth and families they serve.

Robin Jenkins (36:31)

I often go back to my own role when I was the Deputy Secretary of North Carolina. I really wish I had a coach, an implementation coach, somebody with this foundational knowledge and practice based experience that could guide me as a leader because I made tons of mistakes in that role and it's informed my practice today. I think what I would invite leaders in the juvenile and criminal justice world to think about is to acknowledge that, you know, it's okay to not have this, this skill base. It's okay to be open to, to learning these new ideas. It doesn't make you any less of a leader. In fact, it makes you a stronger leader. I would encourage you to reach out to. There are shops around the country now, universities, that are branching out and doing certificate programs and implementation practice. We have some training going on at UNC through the National Implementation Research Network and through our work group where people can get support if they want to learn more about implementation science. Implementation science practice. There are really great resources on the web. For example, nern, the National Implementation Research Network, has an active implementation hub full of resources that helps people understand their approach. They have five frameworks for implementation and wonderful tools that outline how organizations can begin to think about it. I reluctantly recommend that sort of resource to people who don't have practice based evidence because I don't really wish for people to go out and grab tools without understanding the best way to use those tools. But those tools are out there. I also want people to reach out to other leaders who have this experience. Where can they get some peer coaching that the collaborative thinking? Where can they get some experience around what work? Well, what different. I'll tell you that I just had a conversation with a, with a state leader who said she had been to a national conference and was sharing what was going on in her state around implementation science. And one of her peers said, well, you know, we tried that in our state and it didn't go well. We're not doing that anymore. And I said, well, you know, how did you respond to that? And she said, well, I wanted to know more about what worked well and what didn't. Well, that concept in implementation science is called self regulation, where organizations and leaders take the time to step back and evaluate what are we doing well, what is the reflective practice we're using to understand what's working well and what we need to get better at in our system, how can we really slow down and unpack how effective our leadership is? When I come to your organization and I ask what is your vision for public safety? If your judges or your legislature ask you, are you making the public safer? Have you ever defined that? How do you know that what you're doing in your day to day work is A making the public safer and B building more developmentally appropriate youth and families, healthier kids and families who have a greater likelihood of success down the road. So for those who are interested in learning about implementation science tied to that way of thinking, building developmentally healthier youth and families, stronger communities and stronger systems, there are tools on the web, There are practitioners out there who are willing to talk to you. There are shops around the country that are beginning to engage in certificate programs and training resources for you. And I would also just commit yourself to learning, ongoing learning. Read all you can, do what you can for professional development.

Jody Martin (40:05)

You.

John Toole (40:05)

You were taking me in the direction. I know this word comes up for me quite frequently, but I would just encourage to cap your statement, all of our leaders to be curious. Yes, as leaders, and this will come closest to my editorial opinion in this conversation. But as leaders, we simply can't be satisfied with usually, maybe, and sometimes we achieve the desired outcome. This work, Robin, in my humble estimation, contributes to a much more routinized opportunity for the system to respond fairly, equally, equitably and positively to achieve the outcomes routinely for the youth and families we work with. This is a skill that I would hope all of our leaders, as they listen or learn through this podcast or through other means, that they take on a curiosity to learn more about how they can drive this work in their jurisdiction. Robin, I've really appreciated the conversation. Let me stop. You want to make a comment? I.

Robin Jenkins (41:03)

Well, I just wanted to reinforce. Thank you. The fact that you brought up the term equity. Implementation science is now centered on equity and diversity. And I'm not just talking about racial diversity. I'm talking about all forms of development, social, economic, race, gender, any issue that confronts a youth or family that could create disparities in inequity. Implementation science is now centered on that. So by adopting an implementation science mindset, you can, and you should bring that conversation of those principles directly into your leadership strategies in your organization. So I really appreciate you raising that in this conversation.

John Toole (41:43)

Yeah, let me jump up a little bit, maybe to a higher level in this conversation and simply ask as we come to the close of our conversation, Robin, based on your experience, your Vast experience. If you could change one thing about youth justice and the youth justice system, what would that be?

Robin Jenkins (42:02)

I have thought long and hard about this question because there, there are lots of opportunities for change in juvenile justice. I want to give credit though. There of the thousands and thousands of people out there really working hard to make a difference in young people's lives. But I also want to, I want to say with candidness and I've created some of these data I'm getting ready to cite. It is statistically true that once a young person enters our system, the deeper they go. Statistically, it's more likely that their long term outcomes are going to be less optimal, they're going to be poorer than if they don't go deep into our systems. I'm not saying our systems are making them hurting them. I'm just saying statistically, the more any child goes into behavioral and human service systems, partly because of the risk and the problems they bring in to the system, and partly because of the challenges that the system create in trying to handle those problems, the more limited or maybe less effective outcomes those children and families might achieve. Knowing that, what I would change is I would really put much more emphasis on and resources in prevention. I really think the juvenile justice systems can play a really effective role in going out into communities and building relationships with communities to prevent young people from even entering those systems. And when they have to, then engaging with communities in culturally, historically resource appropriate ways that give them what they need, where they need it in those communities first, so that we don't rely on overly harsh, ineffective means to try to deal with children, which is often what happens in our current system. So I would really emphasize prevention.

John Toole (43:49)

Well, it's just another example, Robin, of why we are so compatible in the partnership that we share to conduct the work that we have in the Mondoro Project and in other jurisdictions. I would simply attest for our listeners that Robin's work has brought a synergy of opportunity in challenging jurisdictions such as Seattle and King County, Washington, in Minneapolis and Hennepin County, Minnesota, and certainly among others of our Mondoro Project sites that we've been focusing on the last three years where there's measurable results and those kinds of mentors that we talked about in leadership roles that would be available to our listeners to discuss the impact of implementation science. In Lancaster County, Nebraska, in Greene County, Missouri, in Fairfax County, Virginia, in Clark County, Las Vegas, in Nevada, in Dutchess county, in New York. All of these jurisdictions have realized benefits from engaging in this work and having the kind of courageous leadership that unpacks with you. All these elements are bringing about more effective implementation science and change management skills in their jurisdictions. Robin, if there was a last message that you left with the audience, what might that be?

Robin Jenkins (44:59)

I really thank you for having me here and listening to what we had to say about implementation science and practice. I hope we haven't made it sound too complex and challenging. I hope we've invited people to explore and learn more, because we I can assure listeners that if you open your heart and your mind to what change management and implementation science is bringing from all of these diverse fields into the world of juvenile and criminal justice, you can and will achieve better outcomes. It is not intimidating so much as it is intentional. We don't have to live with the current outcomes we're achieving. We don't have to live with the limitations of the current system. We don't have to exist in this dualism of do we hold kids accountable or do we offer them treatment and restorative justice? We can do both. We can safely hold children accountable in ways that former administrator listen to me used to say, which are rare, fair and beneficial because we really don't want systems to harm children. But we also can give them the highest quality of evidence and do it in the earliest ways that our systems can enhance developmentally appropriate outcomes. So we don't have to take sides. We don't have to choose sides. Implementation science and implementation practice can help us achieve both of those outcomes.

John Toole (46:23)

Robin, it's been a great privilege speaking with you. It continues to be a privilege working with you and your colleagues for today's podcast conversation. Just a sincere thank you.

Jody Martin (46:31)

Thanks for joining us today. To learn more about implementation science, head to our website rfknrcjj.org and click on Implementation Science for resources to support your transformation efforts. We would love to hear what you think about the podcast series and which topics you want us to present. All of your feedback is welcomed @RFKNRCJJ. To stay connected with us, follow on Twitter FK Youthjustice and our new LinkedIn page at RFK National Resource center for Juvenile Justice.