Partners
There are a number of people and agencies working in this area across Canada. Jean Rasmussen and Janet Shivley were at the March conference and could be consulted for recommendations. CCLOW may wish to approach these women to undertake contracts in this area.

Sue McCormack, president of the Family Resource Centers across Canada and working in the literacy field, should be consulted about further partnerships between CCLOW and family learning projects. She would also be good source as a contract person for such a project. There are also provincial and local literacy organizations working in this area. Literacy BC and Saskatchewan Literacy are examples of provincial coalitions with a body of work in this area. CCLOW board members should approach their provincial organizations to determine the level of work and interest within their province. This information can be pooled to create an initial contact list.

Funding Sources
The National Literacy Secretariat has supported work in this area in the past and seems a likely funding source for future work. SSHRC grants may also be available to support this work, particularly its research aspects. Provincial ministries are also likely funding sources, though this will vary from province to province.

Private foundations could be approached, particularly if the work is described as Family Learning rather than Family Literacy-which may tie it directly to government responsibilities.

Project Components

1. Determine the need for a paper outlining the theory and benefits of family learning and literacy , programs. Undertake secondary research and promote findings, as necessary.

Initial conversations between CCLOW and partners should begin. A draft list of contacts can be developed from provincial and local organizations. Individuals named above can further refine this list. These conversations should be focused on determining the need for research and promotion of findings and, therefore, serves as the basis for a project in this area.

2. Develop and promote best practice models.

Based on the findings from Recommendation 1, CCLOW should work with delivery partners in articulating and promoting a best practice model. Quantitative research may be required to provide a base on which to develop this model.

Conclusion
Some indications from the conference were that the articulation of best practice models, which create safe and supportive environments for women to learn (with or without other family members), would be a welcome contribution to the field. These models, grounded in theory and developed by practitioners, need to be promoted across the country. The network of women connected to CCLOW may provide a good base for the dissemination of this work.

CCLOW will need to determine what its particular contribution to this area of work can be. While there is a great deal of work to be accomplished in research and promotion of the delivery method, as well as articulation and promotion of a delivery model, much of this work is now being undertaken by individuals and provincial organizations. CCLOW may act most effectively as a national "home" for this work, thus broadening the impact of the work now being done. A national conference was held this spring, and the proceedings of this conference may assist CCLOW in further clarifying how it can best contribute.