The Three Ts of Mission Accountability for Improved SART Outcomes 
A Conversation Guide and Process Tool for SARTs to Move from Transactional to Transformational1  
1 Tool adapted from the work of Building the Field of Community Engagement.  
This section is meant to serve as a process evaluation tool to guide SARTs through exploratory, transformational conversation for improved interpersonal and systems outcomes. With this guided dialogue, the SART will build the capacity to sharpen its mission and shift habits of a transactional nature (i.e., checking off boxes) to practices of individual and systems transformation for improved outcomes.    
The dynamics of accountability within a multidisciplinary working environment, and in the community served by the SART, can be exciting, inspiring, and wearisome! Subtle and overt interagency dynamics among historically hierarchical and traditionally influential systems that have embedded structures and practices are undoubtedly at play within SART teams. Navigating these dynamics within a multidisciplinary setting can sometimes negatively impact the team’s overall vision and mission.  
Mission accountability for the purpose of improving outcomes for community-based groups can be divided into three, sometimes blurred, zones that exist on a continuum — transactional, transitional, and transformational — the three Ts of accountability for improved outcomes. A SART that practices transformation will reflect dynamics and practices that improve the response for individuals who have experienced sexual assault, secure sustainability of the SART, and ultimately create systems change for prevention of oppression for all persons. A SART may utilize the three Ts during the team’s development stages, and again as a continuous quality improvement tool to re-assess the status as the team experiences change. 
The three Ts of accountability for improved outcomes include three zones that can be categorized as — 
1. transactional habits (i.e., the group engages on the basis of statute requirements and engages in activity beyond disposition of reported or former cases/investigations),  

2. transitional positions (i.e., the majority of the group is engaging in collective movement from transactional habits toward a state of systems change for social justice), and  

3. transformational practices (i.e., the collective group is navigating powerful systematic dynamics resulting in equitable, catalytic collaboration as a practice).   


 
 
 
Recommendations for facilitation of this conversation guide include either — 
• a working group of three to five moderately active SART members who are willing and open to discussion about topics of intersectionality, social justice (i.e., race, gender, class) and systems-based oppressions engage in independently scheduled, small-group conversations based on the sections below; or   

• an independent mediator who is knowledgeable and skilled in the facilitation of topics of intersectionality, social justice (i.e., race, gender, class) and systems-based oppressions who will lead all SART members through independently scheduled group guided conversations based on the sections below. 


For example, the group could engage in a guided conversation about relationships within the SART using the designated questions within each section. One member should be designated to take detailed notes and be responsible for compiling the notes in a summary format for the larger SART report-back. As a matter of practice, the group should record issues for growth that come up during the conversations. During the conversation, the group could consider utilizing the companion tool to the Three Ts of Accountability for Improved Outcomes as a scoring assessment for establishing where the team currently stands and making note of areas where the team could continue to move toward transformational practice and systems change. 
 
Have a Conversation… …for each of the following areas, where on the “Three Ts” would you place your SART? 
 
Relationships within the SART: 
. Are relationships primarily transactional for the purpose of completing the meeting agenda? Or are relationships foundational and continually being built among one another, the group, and the community? 

. Are relationships not inclusive of all genders, racial, or cultural groups in the community? Or are relationships reflective of the diversity within the cooperating organizations, as well as the community you serve? 

. Are relationships limited to a few community members, providing influence to those with the loudest voices? Or are relationships built with current leaders and with people who are interested in being leaders? 

. Are relationships short-term (e.g., high turnover, or temporary) so members must rebuild on a continuous basis? Or are relationships transformational and long-term, so members can build capacity and effectively respond to issues as they come up?   


 
Shared mission and vision: 
. Is the SART coming together to accomplish a project or specific goal defined by statute or some organization-to-organization memorandum of understanding (MOU)? Or is the SART creating space for members to connect, raise concerns and build shared power, and problem-solve for improvement to the sexual assault response protocols and systems? 

. Does the SART continuously engage in approval seeking or buy-in from the community for something they have already planned? Or is the SART actively lifting up the assets of the community itself to ensure solutions are centered on those most impacted by sexual assault? 


 
Flow of feedback: 
. Does the SART generate the ideas for improvement that they believe the community they serve will support?  Or, does the voice of the community lead the generation of ideas for SART improvement? 

. Are solutions to perceived problems generated by the SART?  Or, is there a continuous self-reflection by the SART about how it reacts to, or integrates systems changes based on the ideas, feedback, strengths, and barriers to the work? 

. Are community voices heard through team members, surveys, focus groups, workshops, etc.?  Or, are community voices empowered through listening sessions, one-to-one meetings, SART leadership development, and other forms of community-building approaches? 

. Is information requested about a project after it has been planned?  Or, the planning completed with the community who is most impacted?  


 
Equity in decision-making: 
. Does SART members or partnering multidisciplinary organizations generate the ideas they believe will be accepted/supported by the general community? Or are SART members and partnering organizations supporting ideas generated by the community most impacted by sexual assault? 

. Is the practice of the SART to generate the solutions to problems they themselves have outlined? Or is the practice of the SART to engage in continuous reflection of its own practices and the quality of response by incorporating the ideas, feedback, strengths, and barriers of those most impacted by sexual assault? 


 
Conflict-resolution & power-sharing: 
. Is the SART culture reflective of a focus on obtaining specific short-term outcomes (i.e., each meeting is held mostly to process the recent cases through the prosecuting attorney; an increase in successful prosecution of sexual assault has become the goal, etc.)? Or is the SART culture reflective of a long-term visionary perspective, explicitly valuing promising practices, and adopting emerging approaches for long-term outcomes? 

. Does the SART operate within a dominant culture protocol or practice (e.g., agenda, Robert’s Rules, specific members speak more and often have positional authority in decision-making)?  Or does the SART offer a less hierarchical approach, offering a socio-culturally flexible space for all team members to engage with equitable ease? 

. Are implicit and/or explicit socially oppressive practices of the SART and/or its members overlooked or dealt with superficially (e.g., racism, sexism, classism, etc.)? Or does the SART culture support and engage in reflective understanding and dismantling socially oppressive structural and systemic practices that significantly affect the experience of individuals most impacted by sexual assault? 

. Does the SART unequivocally observe policies/practices driven by partner organizations? Or does the SART willingly revisit those organizational policies and practices so as to better meet the needs of the communities most impacted by sexual assault? 


 
 
 
 
 
 
© 2018 National Sexual Violence Resource Center.