Organization
The University of Illinois Cooperative Extension System should be organized into a seamless structure that allows Illinois citizens to access information at the most appropriate level. This may mean a local focus for youth, nutrition, or gardening; regional organization for integrated pest management, fertilizer application, family financial management, and child-care providers; or a campus focus for precision agriculture, livestock production, and community and economic development. Programs must be developed and personnel positioned to answer questions and deliver unbiased information responsively, efficiently, and accurately.
To be statewide, customer-oriented, and capable of delivering cutting-edge information on demand requires a system that is highly sophisticated and flexible. U of I Extension must employ personnel who can produce cutting-edge research-based programs, have effective applied problem-solving skills, can integrate information across multiple disciplines, and communicate with culturally and geographically diverse audiences. Programs need state and national vision, with a focus on local needs and priorities. The incredible expansion in information and the complexity of societal problems makes this task formidable.
Recent advances in communication technologies are both a benefit and a liability to a public institution in the information business. Advanced communication technology allows access to information and people, with fewer restrictions due to time and distance. However, this new technology is expensive and requires continuous training for both providers and users. Estimates by universities indicate the need to commit 5 percent of annual resources to operational costs of maintaining and upgrading modern communication systems. This is a new and permanent cost of doing business.
• Extension Personnel
U of I Extension should review job descriptions and titles for all positions. Core staffing should be built around Extension Educators and subject matter experts.
Extension Educators have primary responsibility for assessing local needs and program delivery and are located at local Extension offices. Extension Educators should have a master's degree in one of the core program areas, with skills in educational methods and needs assessment.
Extension subject matter experts have responsibility for applied research, integration of information, development of educational materials, and delivery of information and programs directly to clientele. Subject matter experts should have Ph.D. or master's degrees with subject matter expertise in a core program area.
• Local Presence and Local Ownership
The historical strength of the land-grant university system has been its ability to extend education and research information to the people. U of I Extension must maintain this traditional strong local presence while evolving to meet the information needs of the future. Extension must maintain a strong local partnership with citizens to understand the needs of the people and to maintain public trust and support.
This minimum presence means that each local Extension office ensures delivery of each of the four program areas in its geographical area with exact emphasis determined by local Councils.
The minimum staffing at a local Extension office should be two Extension Educators, a secretary, and support worker. Local offices should not rely solely on community workers or volunteers for youth programs. In each local Extension office, one Educator will be appointed director or chair by the Regional Director, based on the recommendation of the local Council. The director or chair will have a 25 percent administrative appointment for management of the budget for the local office, coordination of programs, and work with the local Council. The director or chair appointment provides an appropriate administrative stipend and is reviewed annually by the Regional Director and local Council. The title Unit Leader should be discontinued. For hiring of Educators, the Extension administration should provide a list of qualified candidates and the local Council should make the final recommendation to the Regional Director.
The local partnership of Extension should be provided through joint priority setting, budget planning, staff hiring recommendations, and program and personnel evaluations provided by local Councils, local Extension personnel, and the Regional Director. The local Extension Council is critical to the partnership and ultimate success of the Extension system. Council membership should be determined through a nomination process with extensive local involvement yielding a broad community representation. Council appointments are made by the Dean of the College of ACES. Local Councils should have 15 to 25 members. Chairs of the local Councils should be elected by the members. The local Council Chair should serve on a Regional Advisory Board that works with the Regional Director for setting priorities and overseeing Extension programs within that region of the state. There should be an annual statewide meeting of local Councils. Local Councils and volunteers must be provided ongoing opportunities for professional and leadership development.
Extension Educators have general program responsibilities within their local area plus specialized program responsibilities across their Region. Other personnel titles, including community workers, program assistants, and paraprofessionals, are available to local Extension offices based on program needs and availability of local funds. It is recommended that these titles and the minimum qualifications be reviewed, with possible changes considered.
Given the unequal local resources and population bases, the Commission encourages the development of multi-county Extension offices. The Commission recognizes the increased cost of operation and problems of access associated with multi-county offices.
• Statewide Organization
Administration of University of Illinois Extension is based in the College of ACES. For administration of the large and diverse statewide system, we recommend organizing of the field system within five regions, with a Regional Director responsible for programs, personnel, budgets, and facilities within each region. These regions should be developed with consideration for geographical and population issues. Each of the five regions would contain an average of 16 local offices with more than 200 employees and 300 to 350 council members. These regions will work with more than 3,000 4-H volunteers and serve more than 25,000 youth in 4-H programs.
Regional offices should function as education centers of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the College of ACES, with strong links to campus departments as well as administrative sites for Extension. The purpose of regional offices is to coordinate professional development for field staff and local Councils, to provide programmatic leadership within the region, and to work with subject matter experts in program development and priority setting. Regional offices should be combined with regional research facilities wherever possible. Resources of the Regional offices are available to all people in the region, regardless of county involvement with a local Extension office. Regional Directors should be placed in charge of all Extension programs in a region with administrative responsibility for local and regional Extension offices, including budgets, personnel, and programs.
The foundation of U of I Extension lies in the research and information resources of the campus. This foundation has been eroded during the past decade associated with reductions in support by the federal partner and reallocations of campus resources driven by changes in State funding for higher education resulting in nearly 45 percent reduction in campus subject matter experts. Based on current analysis of state needs and the CES 2000 Blueprint for the 21st century, the Commission recommends a minimum of 176 subject matter experts (see Table 1).
Department Heads and Regional Directors should have a shared responsibility for oversight of Extension programs and their evaluation (the quality of the content, program delivery, and relevance) and for the performance review of subject matter experts. Department Heads should provide the primary focus for the quality of the subject matter and for subject matter leadership, and Regional Directors should provide the primary focus on delivery and timeliness; both should be concerned about relevance, usefulness, and responsiveness -- doing the right thing and doing things right are both important.