(Illustration by Melinda Beck)
Something remarkable was happening in evening Zoom sessions with parents and policy makers at the Connecticut Office of Early Childhood (OEC). Participants weren’t just strategizing about childcare. In their discussions, they were redesigning the work of making decisions through collaboration.
Realizing the Promise of a Truly Responsive Government
Deep misalignment exists between what the American people want from their government and what they believe they are getting from it. To address this problem and unlock the possibility that our government can be a true partner, truly responsive, and a more effective force for good in our lives, we must shift how entire government agencies do their work, and most importantly, what they understand their responsibility to the communities they serve to be. Sponsored by Third Sector
For nearly three years, the OEC, together with its Parent Cabinet, has been coleading an experiment many have tried but abandoned: moving at the speed of trust to integrate parents into central decision-making roles. What if agencies serving children, families, and our most vulnerable citizens could redefine their work as service providers to become community stewards, engaging people as cocreators of the policies that shape their lives? Trust deepens and meaningful outcomes are possible when communities hold power.
Why Meaningful Engagement Matters
Research by the Frameworks Institute shows that 70 percent of Americans believe the government is rigged. That is a staggering number, but it can point us toward an opportunity we have missed for too long.
What if all we need to do is return to the ancient wisdom we’ve abandoned (Indigenous healing circles, elders on the porch in Black communities, circles of trust, and mutual aid networks), wherein problems were addressed and opportunities created in community? Decades of superficial consulting and tokenism, especially with Black and Brown communities and other people furthest from opportunity, have reinforced skepticism and a profound sense of disconnect between communities and government.
In my work as a consultant, I have seen government officials endlessly discuss outcomes, which is indeed a starting point. My experience in the field, however, has shown me that improved metrics won’t rebuild trust if we’re still treating people as data points instead of decision makers. Achieving outcomes and real engagement means practicing trust through transparency, shared power, and continuous feedback. It means abandoning performative outreach and adopting a consistent practice of accountability and shared stewardship.
NGOs as Bridges
At Third Sector, my colleagues and I have the privilege of serving as a bridge between government agencies trying to solve problems and the communities that will live with the policy solutions. I came to Third Sector with a renewed sense of purpose following years of consulting at the local, national, and international levels on ways to improve outcomes for children and families. My consulting work had ebbs and flows. I often felt distressed about whether my colleagues and I were making a difference, especially in situations where community and government seemed most disconnected.
Then I went to Nepal.
A year after the Nepali government decentralized education, granting local authorities decision-making power in their communities, I found myself in a remote village visiting a school managed by parents, grandparents, and caregivers in partnership with regional education leaders. As the elders led me around, proudly showing off improvements, I witnessed how empowerment, trust, and love had converged to improve early childhood conditions in a local context. It was a beautiful reminder that responsive government and community decision-making can work, and it solidified my conviction about what responsive government looks like.
My experience wasn’t one of complete idealism but reminded me of my own schooling in Alabama, my time teaching in Washington, DC, and my work for an education nonprofit supporting Seattle Public Schools. In every case, it was the community collaborating with public institutions that yielded better results.
In California, we’re seeing the same principles at work through the iCARE program. When Sutter-Yuba Behavioral Health (SYBH) launched a new field-based initiative, it didn’t just ask clients what they thought of the program. Instead, SYBH handed them the pen. Participants weighed in on the learning framework, leading to a revised evaluation plan. SYBH consumers then created their own survey, articulating their own definitions of wellness, recovery, and participation. Third Sector served as partners, facilitating this community-led process and sharing tools and resources to amplify community expertise. As a result, SYBH is now integrating consumer-defined metrics into its behavioral health system, modeling meaningful approaches to defining outcomes, and leading the way for other California counties.
In early 2025, Third Sector partnered with the California Council on Criminal Justice and Behavioral Health to form the Superior Region Champions Council. In this work, we brought together advocates with experience in Northern California’s behavioral health and criminal legal systems. We paid participants for their expertise, moved at their pace instead of our own, and designed every detail from meeting times to food preferences to mitigate barriers to participation. Council members, for their part, had sufficient space to develop advocacy plans, advance their conflict-resolution skills, share their expertise and lived experience, and use the experience with both systems to help shape policies and practices.
Admittedly, the challenges were real. Community-based organizations and participating partners were skeptical of us and sometimes one another. Housing insecurity, job demands, and family emergencies meant that not everyone was always equally involved. But we stayed the course, leaning into the discomfort, listening and adjusting to human needs, and creating opportunities for participants to stay up to speed, easing their return to the table.
In our final Champions Council gathering, the group’s commitment was clear. As one participant put it: “I want CCJBH and Third Sector to know that the work you all are doing matters. Thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to overcoming and cocreating even with budget cuts, opposition, and adversity. We will rise!”
These examples come from different contexts, but the principles of transparency, accountability, and shifting power to communities remain the same. This is what rebuilding trust looks like. Rather than emphasizing metrics or methodologies, we worked through the messy middle, hearing from community members who will feel the greatest impact of policies and decisions.
What Government and Agencies Can Take Away
I’ll be honest: This work isn’t easy, and in my 18 years working in early childhood and education policy, I’ve often contemplated leaving the field, because facilitating these conversations can weigh on me. Governments and agencies wanting to improve community outcomes must be ready to rebuild trust, acknowledge the power they hold, and show a willingness to share it. That’s difficult for any institution, but after watching it work in Nepali villages, California conference rooms, and communities across the nation, I know it’s possible through applying a few essential practices:
- Reposition as stewards, not providers. Agencies must see their primary role as empowering communities rather than delivering top-down decisions and solutions. This shift is crucial, because government agencies are stewards of the community’s resources (i.e., tax dollars, public land, and collective well-being). The question isn’t “How do we deliver services?” but “How do we support communities in shaping their own future?”
- Consistently ask hard questions. Whose outcomes are we prioritizing and why? Are we genuinely consulting and heeding the voices of those most affected, or just the individuals easiest to reach? How do we ensure that changes stick instead of disappearing when leadership shifts?
- Compensate people for their expertise. Allocate budgets and resources to ensure that community participation is cultivated and recognized. As our CCJBH Champions Council project found, paying participants for their expertise conveys that their knowledge has real value and encourages meaningful involvement.
- Expect the messy middle. Prioritize long-term relationships over quick wins. This includes putting systems in place to navigate the often tense and challenging moments that accompany transparent information exchange and regular feedback. Trust emerges through consistent follow-through, not one-off workshops.
- Let communities define success. Integrating community-defined metrics of success helps. If you’re measuring outcomes that communities didn’t help identify, you’re measuring the wrong things.
Restoring Democracy
Parents and policy makers in Connecticut who invested their evenings in Zoom sessions show what’s possible with an ongoing commitment to community-designed solutions. After two years of trust-building and governance design, the Parent Cabinet is gearing up for the next stage: integrating parent leadership into agencies that help make important decisions affecting children and families. The essential work of bringing community voices into policymaking only happens once trust is firmly in place.
Moving from transactional services to steward-based relationships is more than mere policy reform. It restores what democracy was meant to be. Government by and for the people demands practice, investment, and an unwavering commitment to trust and community building. When the room filled at the final Champions Council meeting and people heard the declaration “We will rise!” it was an amplified call to action, a reminder that when we create the conditions for people to be heard and exercise real authority over decisions that affect their lives, something powerful awakens. The innovation we need to achieve meaningful outcomes lies within our grasp. We can find it in ancient wisdom circles, elders making decisions together, communities stewarding their own futures, and the recognition that the people closest to the problem are often closest to the solution.
Read more stories by Kesha Lee.