proposal to develop a national urban extension system

Proposal to Develop a National Urban Extension System:

A Vision of the Future for Cooperative ExtensionPresented at the National Urban Extension Conference in

Atlanta, Georgia

Christopher C. Obropta, Ph.D., P.E.obropta@envsci.rutgers.edu

www.water.rutgers.edu

May 5, 2015

249,157,649 people

URBAN EXTENSIONB R I D G E S T H E G A P B E T W E E N L A N D - G R A N T U N I V E R S I T I E S

A N D U R B A N C O M M U N I T I E S A C R O S S T H E C O U N T R Y

Urban Extension Version 1.0

“A vision of the future of U.S. Urban Extension programs as well as a suggested framework within which the vision can be realized.”

“The Extension System urgently needs to build and expand programs for urban audiences”

The 1996‘Call to Action’

• Develop effective partnerships withother educational, service, and business organizations

• Increase communication between urban Extension and urban communities

• Build capacity by creating greater linkages through networks of Extension professionals working in urban environments

• USDA and the Cooperative Extension System must continue to recognize and support the fact that Extension's mission includes urban and metropolitan audiences

The 1996 Call to Action• Financial support for metropolitan work must

increase through collaboration with Congress and other federal agencies. In addition, more funding sources should be identified in state, county, and city governments.

or

What was missing besides the money?

What is the structure/function? Who are the responsible parties? Where do you look for leadership?

The National Water Program• Operated from 2001-2013• Funded by USDA Section 406 of the

Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998

• Committee for Shared Leadership• Built on EPA’s 10 Regions• Promoted national collaboration• Annual conferences

Goals for CSL• Foster a national program through a regional network

of NIFA research, education, and extension professionals• Elevate the visibility of the USDA NIFA network• Be responsive and proactive in decisions and actions that

integrate research, education and extension activities• Create, manage, and foster institutional change through

visioning and leadership• Practice effective communication and dialog to ensure

cooperation and collaboration of integrated programs• Pursue new opportunities in a coordinated fashion• Market the value of internally and externally funded/leveraged

activities• Establish partnerships and work to meet common goals.

CSL Takeaways

• national program • regional network • visibility• decisions and actions• visioning and leadership• communication • opportunities • value• partnerships and work to meet

common goals.

Benefits of CSL

• Strong leaders (the movers and shakers)• Great communicators• Common vision

Regions• Great Lakes• Heartland• Mid-Atlantic• Northeast &

Caribbean Islands

• Northern Plains & Mountains

• Pacific Northwest

• Southern• Southwest &

Pacific Islands

National Themes

• Animal Waste Management• Drinking Water and Human Health• Environmental Restoration• Nutrient and Pesticide Management• Pollution Assessment and Prevention• Watershed Management• Water Conservation and Agricultural Water

Management• Water Policy and Economics

Information Sharing Framework

Cost = $12.4 million per year

Regional Water Quality Coordination, 48%

National Water Resources, 7%

Extension-Education, 5%

Conservation Effect Assessment, 6%

Integrated Research, Extension, & Education, 34%

Why did it end?

• USDA wanted to consolidate funding under one NIFA budget line item

• APLU stopped fighting for 406 budget line item

• We did a great job, good structure, good leadership, good leveraging, and high impact – no crisis with water

Model for National Urban Extension System

Possible Themes

Protect the Environment

Feed our Future

Enrich the Youth

Improve our Health

Strengthen Communities

Structure Leadership/responsible parties Function

Now we have the missing pieces

The Structure

National Urban Extension Network

Regional Centers

State Urban Extension Programs

National Steering Committee

Regional Directors

State Urban Extension Coordinators

The Leadership/Responsible Parties

The Function

National Urban Extension Network

• Sets national agenda• Collects national impacts• Solicits funding for

national network• Provides national

networking opportunities

Regional Centers

• Develops regional focus areas• Facilities collaboration among the

state programs within the region • Collects regional impacts• Provides professional development

opportunities

The Function

• Conducts needs assessment of local stakeholders to identify problems

• Assembles the best available science to address these problems

• Develops and delivers educational and outreach programs to provide solutions to stakeholders

• Works with local stakeholders to implement the necessary solutions

• Measures impacts and adapt programs to enhance impacts

State Urban Extension Programs

The Function

NATIONAL URBAN EXTENSION SYSTEM

NATIONAL URBAN EXTENSION SYSTEM

NATIONAL URBAN EXTENSION SYSTEM

The Complete System

Potential Federal Partners

• US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development

• US Environmental Protection Agency

• US Dept. of Energy

Other Possible Partners?

Other Possible Partners?

Cost for Pilot Program

• $6 million per year for five years • Funding going to four regional centers• Center support several states• Engage in one or two focus areas

Cost for Full Program

• $150 million per year • Regional centers and Land-grant

universities would receive funding through a competitive proposal process on a four-year cycle

• Hope is that all the states and territories would participate as some level

Questions?

Christopher C. Obropta, Ph.D., P.E.obropta@envsci.rutgers.edu

www.water.rutgers.edu