Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jack-chapman |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 2 times |
University of Georgia Cooperative Extension2010
Review of County Delivery
Input from County Officials
Delivered to Steering Committee for Review of County Operations
August 16, 2010
BACKGROUND
• County official input solicited via e-mailed invitation from ACCG Executive Director Ross King
• Invitation sent to 1000 county officials (commissioners, clerks, managers/administrators)
• 244 completed surveys (response rate > 24%)• Respondents represented 125 unique counties
(ranged from 1 response per county [N=58] to 12 responses per county [N=1])
• 9 respondents did not identify their county
Demographics of Responding Officials
Official Type• 59.5% (138) Elected Officials• 40.5% (94) Appointed Officials• 12 respondents did not identify
themselves
County Population• 15.0% (35) “small” [ < 10,000]• 59.2% (138) “medium” [10,000 –
50,000]• 25.7% (60) “large” [ > 50,000]• 11 respondents did not identify
themselves
SURVEY QUESTIONS (41)
• Value of Extension program/service types (18)
• Value of Extension program/service delivery methods (12)
• Return on Investment made in Extension (1)• Extension staffing models (3)• Potential collaboration with other counties (2)• Extension funding strategies (1)• Other (1)• Demographics (3)
Life Skills Citizenship and Youth Leadership
Youth in Agriculture Science, Engineering, and Technology (SET)
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
53.5%51.0%
42.1%
37.2%
82.7% 83.9%
78.9%75.6%
Rated 10Rated 8-10
Value of Extension program/service types: 4-H Youth
Value of Extension program/service types: FACS
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
35.7%32.9%
30.3% 29.9%26.3%
22.3%
73.4%71.6%
67.2% 65.6% 67.0%
59.1%
Rated 10
Rated 8-10
Value of Extension program/service types: A&NR
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
36.1% 34.9%32.1%
28.0% 27.6% 27.0%
20.2% 18.5%
74.7% 74.4%71.7%
69.4%65.2% 63.5%
56.9%53.0%
Rated 10
Rated 8-10
Return on Investment (by county size)
1 St
rong
ly D
isa.
.. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
Importance of Full-time CEC (by county size)
1 St
rong
ly D
isa.
.. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
1 St
rong
ly D
isag
ree 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
10
20
30
40
50
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
Paraprofessionals in lieu of Agents (by county size)
1 St
rong
ly D
isa.
.. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
5
10
15
20
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
Willingness to collaborate in support of CEA’s (by county size)
1 St
rong
ly D
isagr
ee 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
5
10
15
20
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
Willingness to collaborate in support of CEC’s (by county size)
1 St
rong
ly D
isagr
ee 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 S
trong
ly A
gree
0
5
10
15
20
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
If Extension office were to be closed, which funding strategies would you consider? (by county size)
Increase amount of local county funding 20-30%
Maintain current funding but collaborate with a neighboring county to fund Extension per-
sonnel
Support a property tax levy exclusively designated for Ex-
tension
Increase user fees for Exten-sion programs and/or services
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
more than 100,000 50,000 - 100,000 25,000 - 50,000 10,000 - 25,000 0 - 10,000
“The service ____ County receives for the dollars spent on our Extension Service is amazing. They manage to do so much with so little. It is an incredibly popular agency in our community and the thought that their head is always on the "chopping block" when UGA officials look for cost savings makes no sense to me. This is the one agency in almost every county in Georgia that represents a presence of UGA locally. I certainly hope there is a way to save the Extension Service. It is the one local agency that is all positive government in the eyes of the public.”
[ OPEN-ENDED: POSITIVE ]
“In my opinion the extension service can be much more viable entity if the county residents were educated on the advantages and the services offered.”
[ OPEN-ENDED: SUGGESTIVE ]
“I have constituents telling me all the time, ‘the Extension Service is no longer needed with the internet. 4-H should be funded by the school system, not county government.’ ”
[ OPEN-ENDED: NEGATIVE ]
QUESTIONS ?
SUGGESTIONS ?
THANK YOU!