In such a vast, diverse, and populous state as California, it can only be expected that counties vary in their efforts to create and sustain CQI systems. Counties both large and small have differences in CQI methods, oftentimes struggling to effectively integrate qualitative and quantitative data points to inform and drive sustainable change. By relying too heavily on quantitative measures, counties may run the risk of creating a compliance-driven culture. On the other hand, by relying too heavily on qualitative measures, counties may risk losing sight of the north-star safety, permanency, and well-being metrics. The answer may lie in the elusive thin side of the coin: a culture of continuous quality improvement. This panel will compare and contrast two counties, Mendocino and Riverside, in respect to efforts made to find that thin side of the coin where qualitative and quantitative metrics meet. The panel will also discuss the engagement of clients on different platforms in a virtual world.

• Ashleigh Belding – UC Davis Human Services - Northern Academy Research and Evaluation Analyst

• Benjamin Slagter – Riverside County, Department of Public Social Services Regional Manager

• Bridgette Hernandez – Riverside County, Department of Public Social Services Deputy Director