 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Thank you for joining me today. I appreciate that many of you made adjustments to your schedules to be here and I want to thank all of you for your effort to be at one of the eight meeting sites across the state.
Fifteen months ago, I introduced the 2002-2005 Plan for Extension. Like most of you, I certainly did not imagine then that today our state would be facing a 4.5 billion dollar deficit. Nor did I imagine the difficult decisions facing every publicly funded agency, including Extension.
You have made tremendous strides in implementing the vision we announced in December of 2001. I deeply appreciate all of your efforts. The direction we set then remains the same today: specialized regional staff who deliver focused, high quality, research-based programs that address critical issues.
The factors that prompted Extension to change are still true today, and in fact have been amplified by the current budget realities.
For these reasons, we created regional positions that allow staff to be more focused and specialized. And, we are beginning to see the results of these changes. I have seen many examples of your innovations on the “Best Practices” website. Another example is the positive stakeholder reaction to the program showcases held in most parts of the state last winter. Commissioners and county Extension committee members are telling us they see the value of more focus, greater expertise and more access to a regional team of Extension experts.
The vision for 2002-2005 Extension plan still holds. But it is clear to me that we must now make adjustments in order to remain viable under the current federal, state and county financial situation.
Federal funding for Extension continues to be flat, as it has been for more than 10 years.
The University of Minnesota is preparing for a 15 percent budget cut and has asked Extension to prepare a 10 percent reduction in our state funding that comes through the university. At this time we cannot predict our budget challenges for the following year.
And, counties will be facing significant shortfalls in their budgets but especially in discretionary -- or non-mandated – sections of their budgets, which is where funding for Extension can be found in most counties.
In the dozens of conversations we have all had during the past months about these budget realities, one message has been perfectly clear: counties are asking for a new funding arrangement with Extension that allows them to choose the Extension services and programs their counties most want and can afford.
I have listened. We are clearly at a crossroad. We must have a proactive response to the state budget situation. If we do not, we could lose funding from several counties and compromise our ability to provide quality programming to all Minnesotans.
So, let me outline that response for you and then I will explain it in further detail. In a nutshell, phase two of the 2002-2005 Extension plan calls for a new program delivery model that maintains a statewide presence and provides counties with more choice, greater clarity and increased accountability. The two major elements of the model include:
These changes will bring sharper focus to our core mission. They help to ensure that we continue to offer effective, relevant programs to all counties at a level that the state, the counties, the university and the people of Minnesota can afford.
I know this is not the best time to make structural changes, just as all of us are settling into those made over the last year. I recognize that these changes will have significant impact on many of you in regard to your personal and professional lives. As we continue to design and implement this plan I am committed to working closely with you:
And,
While there will be challenges ahead, the changes we are introducing are essential to ensure a viable future for Extension. We are offering a proactive response that will provide university-based Extension programming to Minnesotans everywhere, regardless of their county’s financial contribution. This new model will allow Extension to provide critical programs to all Minnesota citizens, funded by Extension’s state and federal dollars. Counties and other community partners will then have the choice to contract with Extension for additional programs, services and positions according to their budgets and their priorities. This change marks a shift in the structure of our current University Extension–county partnership, but continues to offer opportunities to counties as essential collaborators in the work of Extension.
It is important to note at this point that Extension will be different. We will not be able to deliver the same level of programs and services with fewer dollars. We must set clear expectations with our various partners including county government. I believe we have the opportunity to do this better now than we have in the past based on the clarity and choice offered in our new plan.
Before I discuss some aspects of our plan in more detail, I want to review the implementation timeline.
The timeline for implementing these changes looks like this:
Now, let me fill in some of the details about the key points of this plan.
As you can imagine, determining the location of the 18 to 22 regional Extension centers will be of great interest to our partners, our funders, our customers and to you as well.
It is critical that before we discuss the locations, we must first determine criteria that will guide the decision-making. To do that, I am naming a task force of external partners to make recommendations about the criteria. Members of the task force include county commissioners, county administrators, a university technology specialist, members of the citizens advisory committee and others.
I mentioned earlier that one of our principles is to provide opportunities for Extension staff to offer ideas and input before decisions are made. Identifying the criteria for deciding regional center locations is the first such opportunity. In addition to getting recommendations from the task force, we will ask all Extension staff to provide their ideas about decision-making criteria for determining these centers using a web-based tool. The question and directions on providing input will be sent to all staff via email next week.
Following review and recommendations from the Extension leadership council, the dean’s cabinet will make final decisions about the criteria in June. Next we will begin negotiations to determine potential sites, which will be finalized in July. This is a fast-paced timeline, but one that is critical to maintain as so many of the decisions the organization, counties and our individual staff need to make in the coming months, will depend on those center locations.
Now, let me explain a little more about the regional positions. Each regional center will house between 5-10 regional Extension educators and a regional Extension director.
The regional Extension educators will provide educational programs according to the critical issues that are identified by county Extension committees and other institutions and people in the regions. The regional educators will continue to deliver programs through our five capacity areas: agriculture, food and environment; youth development; family development; natural resources and environment; and community vitality. Extension educational programs and staffing may vary by region according to the greatest needs and issues facing that region of the state. For example, one region may be more interested in issues relating to an aging population while another region may want more programming related to new populations in their communities.
Position descriptions for the regional educators and regional directors will be finalized in June. This is another area where we will be working with current regional educators and county Extension directors to gather their input and ideas before we finalize these positions.
All current regional educators and county directors will have an opportunity in July to express their interests in both the new regional educator and regional director positions before reassignment offers are made in August.
Let me clarify. This regional programming is not dependent on the current Extension-county memorandum of agreement and county funding. It will happen regardless of county contributions. Now, let me tell you more about the choices that counties and other community partners have for local/customized programs.
Under the new programming model, counties and other partners will have the clear choice to augment Extension’s regional programming with specific programs, services and positions within Extension’s mission that they want and can afford.
This may include education, technical advising, or program coordination. We currently provide all of these services. The new delivery model will provide greater clarity for when and where these specific services are provided.
Criteria and pricing guidelines will be finalized in early June so that negotiations for local, customized programs and services can occur in the summer months.
As we have talked with county leaders over the last months, they have consistently asked for more choice in the funding of 4-H programming. At the same time, we have an obligation to make sure 4-H is available to youth even in counties that do not choose to fund Extension. Under the new regional center delivery model, 4-H will be available throughout Minnesota. We are committed to providing 4-H youth development opportunities to all Minnesota youth. However, it will not be the same as it is today unless counties choose to fund 4-H program coordinator positions. 4-H, as it exists today, is not being done and cannot be done with state and federal dollars alone. There has to be local funding in order to keep the current levels of quality local 4-H programs. Historically counties have invested more money into 4-H programming than other Extension programming. We are confident that many will invest savings from this plan into critical 4-H program coordinator positions and other opportunities to keep 4-H strong.
Under the new regional delivery system, all 4-H registration, enrollment and newsletters will be transferred to the regional center staff. In addition, regional center staff will provide educational support to each county. The nature of this support will depend on local 4-H program priorities determined in each county.
Counties who choose to augment the regional services with a 4-H program coordinator will have more local opportunities to meet their youth’s needs. For those counties there will be:
During the next weeks, youth development capacity area members will be working on the options from which counties can choose.
The plan I have outlined today has many implications. I understand that you will have many questions about how these changes impact you and your work and I recognize that this uncertainty is very uncomfortable. I also know that you have done incredible work in the past year to deliver quality programs and to ensure that counties are getting a great value for their investment. Yet, all of us who are in public service are facing the need to do our work differently.
I want to take a moment to address the impact of this plan on county support staff. One reason for going to regional centers is to reduce the cost of doing business. This means that with only federal and state dollars supporting those centers we will have less support staff. Some of you may find opportunities in those regional offices, and others may find opportunities in local/customized Extension investments by counties.
But, it is true that at this time we cannot assure an Extension office in every county. Counties too are facing difficult decisions about downsizing, so I don’t want to gloss over the fact that this is a difficult part of this plan. Support staff have always played a very important role in Extension’s success and I know that this past year especially, you have been tremendous contributions. We have asked a lot of you and you have always come through. I am asking district directors and our county Extension directors to help make this as smooth a transition for support staff as we can possibly make it.
I have just shared a great deal of information with you about our response to the current state budget situation. Our proactive plan gives counties the flexibility and choice to augment regional programming by contracting with Extension for specific programs, services and positions they want and can afford. Using state and federal funds for a regional network of educators who are housed in new regional centers across the state allows Extension to deliver educational programs to all Minnesotans, regardless of their county’s financial contribution. This plan allows us to have a connection with all counties through those regional centers and we certainly hope that they will contract for 4-H coordination and other Extension programs, services and positions in satellite offices.
In summary,
And,
In the following weeks and months I ask you to:
Now I am sure that you have questions at this point. In a few minutes, you will have an opportunity to ask those of the Extension Leadership Council members who are at your meeting site. Before that, I would like to address a few of the key questions that you may have.
This is a pretty bold change for Extension. You may be wondering what kind of support and buy-in we can anticipate from our stakeholders.
I wanted to be sure all of you, as Extension faculty and staff, heard about this plan before it became public. This is a bold but necessary move and of course I wanted to get a sense of how it will be received. I have met with selected University and external leaders to make sure we are on track. Every one of those meetings -- with U of M administrators, regents, legislators, commissioners, and others -- reinforced to me that we are wise to take these steps. Many, like me, wish these changes were not necessary, but they recognize we have done our homework and we have to do this. I believe our stakeholders know that while the decisions on this plan are mine, I have made them based on a good deal of input. This plan keeps us on the course with new fiscal resolve and in the process it gives our county partners exactly the kind of choice they have been asking for.
Another question I assume many of you are wondering about is when will we know more about the layoffs as a result of these changes?
The savings from recent cuts in Extension administration, support units, collegiate budgets, and savings from anticipated voluntary retirements and reserves from last year’s layoffs put us in a position to balance our budget for this year and build a cushion for the changes ahead. Based on the estimates of what the legislative outcome will be, we won’t be doing layoffs of regional Extension educators or county Extension directors at this time. I can’t say however, that there will be no further staff reductions. We can only plan for the level of staffing affordable with our known state and federal resources. Beyond that, our ability to retain and add staff will depend on how well we do in generating revenue through the local/customized options and in the future levels of our federal and state funding.
We are committed to helping counties and other local partners support the programming and people they can afford and all of you will be asked to help with that commitment. By the end of this year we will know what support there will be for the local/customized part of the delivery model and that will determine if further layoffs will be necessary.
Earlier I said that this Phase II calls for a new program delivery model.
I talked a great deal about the impact on field staff but didn’t say much
about the campus part of Extension. You may be wondering how this will affect
campus faculty and staff?
First I want to be clear that I see campus faculty and staff as partners with field staff in making up the program delivery model. Strengthening the campus-field connection was a main goal of the 2002-2005 plan and I think the move toward regional centers will help that goal. In many ways the changes will have more immediate impact on the lives of our field staff but I also want to note that we have recently made deep cuts in the campus operation of Extension to make it possible to move forward with the changes announced today. The changes we are talking about are being made for the future viability of the entire Extension system and therefore everyone will share in the impact of those changes.
Another way this plan might impact our campus faculty is the acceleration of Extension’s use of technology. Moving to regional centers will demand creative development and use of technology enhanced learning and educational services. This will be one way to expand our reach to citizens and to assure access to university resources.
Another key question at this time is, how do these changes impact the
Nutrition Education Program?
We are working closely with Beth Sandell, director of the federally funded Nutrition Education Program, to make sure that nutrition education programs continue to be an important part of Extension’s statewide programs. Beth will be meeting in the coming weeks with nutrition education assistants and district program coordinators to discuss this further. The Family Development capacity area will be addressing issues such as nutrition education program supervision, location and funding match with the usual planning steps, including a conference call with regional nutrition education coordinators on May 20.
And finally, you may be wondering just how all of this will be communicated
with our partners and the public.
We are sending letters outlining the change to legislators, commissioners, Extension committee members and other key stakeholders today. A news release will be sent to all statewide media today as well. Later in the meetings you will be given some guidelines about responding to the public about this plan. And, district directors will be meeting with staff during the next week to develop local communication plans.
At this point, I want to thank you again for making the time to be at one of the presentation sites today. I wish I did not have to ask so much of you, but I know we’re not alone in this. Last week, as the House Higher Ed omnibus bill was finalized, the newspaper quoted Representative Doug Stang, chair of the House Higher Ed division, who said “This bill is difficult. We cannot afford to keep doing business as usual.”
Extension cannot afford to keep doing its business as usual. That is why I came here today to ask for your help once again…. to ask you to work with me on making this plan a reality. And I am optimistic that together we will do this successfully!
Now, I encourage you to take the next hour or so to discuss your questions and comments with the members of the Extension leadership council who are at your meeting site.
URL: http://www.extension.umn.edu This page changes frequently.
Be sure to reload to receive the current version.
Online Privacy Statement. Contact Information.
University of Minnesota Extension is an equal opportunity
educator and employer.
Copyright © Regents of the University of
Minnesota. All rights reserved.