What level of accountability is considered more valuable than a mere count of partner organizations when assessing state partnerships?
Answer
Tracking whether joint goals, specifically those designed to improve outcomes for marginalized groups, are actually being met.
Practitioners should choose metrics that reward inclusive policy adoption; tracking shared accountability by measuring whether joint goals designed to improve outcomes for marginalized groups are met is more valuable than simply counting partners.
Related Questions
What is the core objective of workforce equity regarding employment and income gaps?How many pillars are suggested for redesigning an entire workforce development system to place equity as its guiding value?What is the proposed dedicated, future-proof funding mechanism intended to improve job quality and worker protections?What mechanism is mentioned as a powerful tool for standardizing quality and wages by involving employers, workers, and the public?Which element is NOT listed as a component of assessing job quality according to OECD frameworks for data accountability?What governance structure is advocated to replace the historic employer-majority model in workforce policy?What is a vital initial structural commitment for state leaders to signal sustained action toward equity goals?What essential function do Community-Based Organizations (CBOs) perform in tackling immediate barriers for job seekers?Which recruitment practice is suggested to counteract implicit bias by prioritizing demonstrated abilities over specific degree requirements?Why is basing new employee compensation on prior salary considered detrimental to equity in hiring?What financing method is suggested for the WETF, inspired by practices in other developed nations?What level of accountability is considered more valuable than a mere count of partner organizations when assessing state partnerships?