Opening your page…
You can still use the navigation while it loads.
Opening your page…
You can still use the navigation while it loads.
Explore a decision and prepare notes for a conversation with the people responsible.
Choose an area to connect the example with your responsibilities. You can explore any area.
Start with the decision itself: what is changing, what can still be changed, and who can decide. A clear scope helps people contribute while their input can still matter.
All people, records, and events in this example are fictional. The consequences illustrate questions to consider; they are qualitative examples, not predictions of real outcomes.
A service team is considering replacing mailed appointment reminders with text messages. Alex Rivera works changing shifts and shares one phone with Elena, who helps manage appointments and prefers written information in Spanish. These are their stated circumstances, not assumptions based on their names. What should the team clarify first?
Fictional process comparison. A wording change and a review of the complete task answer different questions.
Clear wording can help. The number sent does not show whether people received, understood or could act on it.
Community briefs can help you ask more informed questions. They do not tell you what an individual believes, needs, or prefers. Confirm preferences with the person and involve affected communities in real decisions.
Keep your actual work separate from the fictional example. These notes support discussion; they are not an approval or a completed equity review.
The people responsible for the decision retain authority. A practice response cannot establish community agreement or replace direct engagement.
Use a general description of the work. Do not enter names, case details, or other confidential information. Keep any copy only in a location permitted for your work.
Your notes disappear when you leave or reload this page. Print or save your draft before leaving if you want to keep a copy.
Describe the decision, what can change, and who has authority. Name any requirement that still needs to be confirmed.
Note potential differences in experience, the evidence available, and whose perspective you still need. Avoid identifying individual clients.
Compare two or more approaches. Include possible benefits, burdens, adjustments, and uncertainties rather than predicting results.
Identify people to involve, participation supports, decisions they can influence, responsible staff, and how you will report back.
Name useful signals, their limits, a review date, responsible people, and a condition that would prompt another discussion.
Open resources at any time. You do not need to finish a lesson or practice activity.
The DHS equity policy and toolkit resource are available here without completing the learning stages. Follow DHS instructions for access to internal materials and any required review. This companion does not submit work to DHS or grant approval. DHS requirements should not be treated as requirements for every Minnesota agency.
Links to other parts of the program aren’t included in this shared view.