Workgroup coordinating conference chairs statewide program directors meeting
Download
1 / 60

Sept 26 PowerPoint presentations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 166 Views
  • Uploaded on

Workgroup / Coordinating Conference Chairs & Statewide Program Directors Meeting. September 26, 2006 Holiday Inn, Sacramento. Plan for the Day. Review Resource Allocation Process Discuss Roles of Workgroups / CCs and SPs in the Process Small Group Discussions Review Workgroup Purpose

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Sept 26 PowerPoint presentations' - LionelDale


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Workgroup coordinating conference chairs statewide program directors meeting l.jpg

Workgroup / Coordinating Conference Chairs & Statewide Program Directors Meeting

September 26, 2006

Holiday Inn, Sacramento


Plan for the day l.jpg
Plan for the Day Program Directors Meeting

  • Review Resource Allocation Process

  • Discuss Roles of Workgroups / CCs and SPs in the Process

  • Small Group Discussions

  • Review Workgroup Purpose

  • Discuss Administrative Issues related to workgroups and statewide programs

  • Review the Statewide Program 5 year review process


Desired outcomes l.jpg
Desired Outcomes Program Directors Meeting

  • Understand the ANR Resource Allocation Process

  • Understand role of workgroups / CCs / SPs in resource allocation process and identify next steps

  • Clarify administrative issues including funding and expenditures

  • Identify elements of good workgroup annual reports

  • Understand the statewide program 5 year review process


Anr resource allocation process rick standiford associate vp anr l.jpg

ANR Resource Allocation Process Program Directors Meeting

Rick Standiford

Associate VP - ANR


Desired outcomes5 l.jpg
Desired Outcomes Program Directors Meeting

  • Understanding of the ANR resource allocation process

  • Understanding of the roles of ANR members, units, administrators in the resource allocation process

  • Understanding of ANR funding sources


Uc anr systemwide permanent budget l.jpg
UC ANR Systemwide Permanent Budget Program Directors Meeting


Federal support l.jpg
Federal Support Program Directors Meeting

  • Research

    • Hatch Formula Funds

    • McIntire-Stennis Formula Funds

    • Animal Health & Disease

    • National Research Initiative

  • Cooperative Extension

    • Smith-Lever 3b & c

    • Smith-Lever 3(d)

    • Other


Framework for anr resource allocation l.jpg
Framework for ANR Resource Allocation Program Directors Meeting

  • The ANR resource allocation process is designed to

    • support high priority issues

    • encourage collaboration and teamwork to address those issues,

    • maintain essential activities

    • build upon existing preeminence in the Division


Anr resource allocation principles l.jpg
ANR Resource Allocation Principles Program Directors Meeting

  • The resource allocation process should

    • Be open and participatory with input from all ANR stakeholders

    • Be transparent to all stakeholders

    • Include statewide perspective: local, regional, or broader are assessed from a statewide perspective


Development of proposals l.jpg
Development of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • ANR counties, departments, other units develop budget proposals

  • Regional Directors, Program Leaders, Associate Deans, other administrators submit consolidated prioritized proposals to Asst VP

  • Program Council reviews proposals and makes recommendations to Associate VP

  • Associate VP, Asst VP make final recommendations to VP


Development of proposals11 l.jpg
Development of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • Position proposals should be shared early and often with all ANR partners

  • The process should be ongoing, open and inclusive and encourage input from all levels

  • ANR statewide issues and perspectives should be considered throughout this process

  • Accessing campus planning information to link specialist needs is critical.

  • Program Leaders will work to develop programmatic plans for specific program areas to help guide local and regional discussions

  • The process should link statewide ANR program priorities to county priorities and funding support structures.


Program council role l.jpg
Program Council Role Program Directors Meeting

  • Broad input

  • Non parochial

  • Statewide integrative perspective

  • Promote the continuum

    • County—Campus

    • Research—Outreach

    • AES—Extension

  • Look for emerging needs

  • Celebrate transparency


Proposal evaluation criteria l.jpg
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Program Directors Meeting

The proposal

  • Is consistent with ANR Strategic Directions and Core Issues

  • Has likelihood of making a significant impact.

  • Builds on the strength of ANR.

  • Develops ANR’s capability to address high priority programmatic areas or critical programmatic goals in emerging areas.

  • Strengthens the research-extension continuum

  • Demonstrates input from stakeholders


Fy 2007 2008 ce advisor positions l.jpg
FY 2007-2008 CE Advisor Positions Program Directors Meeting

Sept 12 Program Leaders (PLs)/Regional Directors (RDs) begin sharing lists of proposed advisor positions

Sept 26 Wkgrp/statewide program directors meeting. PLs discuss role/mechanisms for program planning

Oct 15 PLs/RDs receive input on positions from ANR members

Nov 7 PLs/RDs coordinate position lists

Jan 15 Unit budget proposals submitted to Asst VP

Feb 6 Program Council (PC) budget presentations

Feb-March PC rates positions/budget requests

April 10 PC makes recommendations to Assoc VP

June Final budget decisions by AVP, VP, pending final budget approval


Next steps l.jpg
Next Steps Program Directors Meeting

How can workgroups, coordinating conferences and statewide programs be involved?


Anr resource allocation process tim paine pl ag policy and pest management l.jpg

ANR Resource Allocation Process Program Directors Meeting

Tim Paine

PL- Ag Policy and Pest Management


Next steps17 l.jpg
Next Steps Program Directors Meeting

How can workgroups, coordinating conferences and statewide programs be involved?


Desired outcomes18 l.jpg
Desired Outcomes Program Directors Meeting

  • Understand Workgroup /Coordinating Conferences and Statewide Programs roles in the resource allocation process

  • Understand process of engagement in resource allocation process

  • Understand process of feedback on resource allocation issues


Engagement development of proposals l.jpg
Engagement: Development of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • ANR counties, departments, other units develop budget proposals

  • Regional Directors, Program Leaders, Associate Deans, other administrators submit consolidated prioritized proposals to Asst VP

  • Program Council reviews proposals and makes recommendations to Associate VP

  • Associate VP, Asst VP make final recommendations to VP


Engagement development of proposals20 l.jpg
Engagement: Development of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • Other units now expanded to include Workgroups and Statewide Programs

  • Asking these units to evaluate the needs of the program area

  • Assess critical and emerging issues

  • Assess geographic gaps

  • Determine priorities

  • Coordinate with Program Leaders


Proposal evaluation criteria21 l.jpg
Proposal Evaluation Criteria Program Directors Meeting

The proposal

  • Is consistent with ANR Strategic Directions and Core Issues

  • Has likelihood of making a significant impact.

  • Builds on the strength of ANR.

  • Develops ANR’s capability to address high priority programmatic areas or critical programmatic goals in emerging areas.

  • Strengthens the research-extension continuum

  • Demonstrates input from stakeholders


Coordination and evaluation of proposals l.jpg
Coordination and Evaluation of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • Program Leaders share lists of proposed positions with Workgroups and Statewide Programs, Regional Directors, and County Directors

  • Development of integrated plans for specific program areas to help guide local and regional discussions

  • Determine areas of common concern among groups – geographic and program

  • Evaluation of new opportunities and emerging issues

  • Determine priorities


Coordination and evaluation of proposals23 l.jpg
Coordination and Evaluation of Proposals Program Directors Meeting

  • ANR counties, departments, other units develop budget proposals

  • Regional Directors, Program Leaders, Associate Deans, other administrators submit consolidated prioritized proposals to Asst VP

  • Program Council reviews proposals and makes recommendations to Associate VP

  • Associate VP, Asst VP make final recommendations to VP


Feedback to workgroups and statewide programs l.jpg
Feedback to Workgroups and Statewide Programs Program Directors Meeting

  • Program Leaders provide feedback to Workgroups and Statewide Programs on outcome of the budget cycle process – positions to be filled

  • Feedback includes information on prioritization at the level of Program Council

  • Rolling process that occurs each year – priorities are determined annually but there can be a legacy effect

  • Workgroups and Statewide Programs need to maintain ongoing communication and process for identifying new opportunities, emerging issues, and developing prioritized position proposals


Feedback to workgroups and statewide programs25 l.jpg
Feedback to Workgroups and Statewide Programs Program Directors Meeting

  • New process may mean change in meeting cycle, number of meetings, and annual budget requests – coordinate between the budget timelines and the conventional Workgroup meeting times

  • New process may mean a change in organizational structure within Workgroups – development of subcommittees and methods of feedback and information exchange within Workgroup

  • Continuing Conferences and may provide venues for communication among Workgroups and Statewide Programs and opportunities for programmatic prioritization


Engagement and feedback workgroups and statewide programs l.jpg
Engagement and Feedback: Workgroups and Statewide Programs Program Directors Meeting

  • Your turn

  • General topics

  • Program area discussions


Workgroup coordinating conferences overview purpose maxwell norton pl ag productivity l.jpg

Workgroup/Coordinating Conferences Overview & Purpose Program Directors MeetingMaxwell NortonPL – Ag Productivity



Slide29 l.jpg

  • Needs assessment research and extension activities

  • Communication and networking

  • Plan major publications

  • Plan collective research – especially multi-site projects

  • Plan outreach extension programming

  • Evaluation and reporting of program results

  • In-service training

  • Develop grant proposals (esp. Core grants)

  • Long-term staffing needs


Slide30 l.jpg


Slide31 l.jpg


Slide32 l.jpg


Slide33 l.jpg

  • Face-to-face meetings CE advisors, CE specialists and AES scientists.

  • Teleconferencing

  • Video or web-conferencing

  • E-mail list serves.

  • ANR collaborative tools sites


Slide34 l.jpg

  • No prescribed internal structure. CE advisors, CE specialists and AES scientists.

  • AES scientists, CE advisors, CE specialists, and other ANR academics may serve as chairs.

  • If co-chairs, one needs to be identified as the primary contact.


Slide35 l.jpg


Slide36 l.jpg

  • Workgroup funding decisions are based on the importance of the issues or problems to be addressed, the merit of the proposed strategies and success.

  • Proposals undergo comprehensive peer review.

  • Program Leaders present recommendations for workgroup ratification and funding to the Program Council.


Slide37 l.jpg

  • WG may have sub-committees the issues or problems to be addressed, the merit of the proposed strategies and success.

  • Informal interest groups

  • WG may involve other states or the WG may be a member of a larger interstate WG.


Slide38 l.jpg


Slide39 l.jpg

  • Overall Purposes activities of a number of closely related workgroups (e.g., PECC) or serve as a forum for sharing information in one of the Division’s major subject matter areas (e.g., NRCC).

    • Foster communication and collaboration across traditional inter-campus, interdisciplinary and inter-departmental boundaries.

    • More visible and active focal point for research and outreach activities.

    • Facilitate the formation and activities of appropriate workgroups addressing targeted areas.

    • Provide leadership for addressing crosscutting issues.


Slide40 l.jpg


Slide41 l.jpg


Slide43 l.jpg

Administrative Issues understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

Karen Varcoe

PL – Human Resources


Administrative issues l.jpg
Administrative Issues understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Central Administrative Support

  • Budget/Expenditures

    • Funding

    • Allowable Expenditures

      Joni Rippee and Chris Casey


Workgroup reports l.jpg
Workgroup Reports understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

Used to:

  • Evaluate WGs for funding and re-ratification

  • Provide up-to-date information

    • Activities, projects, research

    • Membership

    • Use in UC Delivers

  • Provide data for reports


Workgroup reports cont l.jpg
Workgroup Reports, cont. understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Reports need to be concise…

    • The Science, Technology, and Environmental Literacy (STEL) workgroup continues to address the need of increasing scientific literacy among youth and adult populations through collaboration and special projects. The workgroup has two ANR workgroup funded projects and non-funded UC projects as well. All projects have collaborative partnerships with UC academics, faculty and/or other professionals and agencies.


Workgroup reports cont47 l.jpg
Workgroup Reports, cont. understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Identify accomplishments

    • Grants received

    • Papers written and accepted in journals

    • Presentations

    • Websites developed

    • Conferences held


Workgroup reports cont48 l.jpg
Workgroup Reports, cont. understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Outcomes and Impacts:

    • How do you know that you are succeeding?

    • How is success being measured

      • Short-term--# or % or participants gaining knowledge

      • Medium-term--# of persons adopting a practice

      • Long-term--% decrease in contaminants or % increase in vegetable consumption

    • Tell us about your evaluation efforts


Examples l.jpg
Examples understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • “The new intervention showed promising results by significantly reducing biomechanical risk factors. However, productivity results are not as promising.”

  • “Young people have to perceive adults in the community value youth; it is not enough for the adults to say they value youth. The youth have to believe it.”


Examples50 l.jpg
Examples understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • “Evaluations from…showed that overall 61% of participants gained new knowledge. Ninety-eight percent of those who did not gain new knowledge reported that it was because they had a high level of knowledge prior to attending.”

  • “Our results highlight the need for further research exploring the potential effect of parental experience on portion sizes and food intakes of children. Serving larger portions of food to children may be implicated in the development of overweight among children. Future studies…”


Workgroup reports51 l.jpg
Workgroup Reports understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • They should not be:

    • Individual reports of activities

    • Compilation of member’s individual research


Workgroup process review l.jpg
Workgroup Process Review understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Purpose:

    • To review and assess the productivity, effectiveness and efficiency of workgroup activities and impacts of the past 7 years

    • To determine the appropriateness of the continuation of workgroups for the next 5 years


Process for review l.jpg
Process for Review understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Associate VP will appoint committee

  • Data will be collected during winter, 2006-2007

  • Report to Program Council in Spring, 2007

  • Recommendations made to Associate VP and Vice-President ANR


Review criteria l.jpg
Review Criteria understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

Have workgroups:

  • Achieved objectives as outlined in the proposed framework for workgroups?

  • Engaged in outreach activities to transfer knowledge?

  • Developed objectives and plans of action?

  • Brought AES, CE and non-ANR partners?

  • And more…..


Statewide program review process l.jpg
Statewide Program understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.Review Process

  • Each Program reviewed every 5 years

  • Purpose

    • Review and assess productivity, effectiveness and efficiency of the program’s activities and impacts over the previous 5 years

    • Determine the appropriateness of the program’s strategic plan for the next 5 years and its continuation as an ANR statewide program


Selected review criteria l.jpg
Selected Review Criteria understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Mission statement and strategic plan relevant and responsive to ANR Critical Issue(s)

  • Serve as mechanism for integrating campus- and county-based efforts

  • Identification of impacts

  • Generate an appropriate quantity and quality of scientific, professional and general publications


Selected review criteria57 l.jpg
Selected Review Criteria understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Effectively leverage ANR funding

  • Clearly identified and appropriately broad clientele for its outputs and activities

  • Have effective mechanism for assessing needs of clientele

  • Engage in public outreach efforts totransfer knowledge to clientele


Review process l.jpg
Review Process understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Program Director presents a 5 year review to Program Council (PC)

  • PC assists in framing the overall review process and questions

  • Program Leader (PL) consults with AVP to develop the plan for the review

  • PL assembles and charges the review committee


Review process59 l.jpg
Review Process understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • Review committee makes recommendations to PL

  • Statewide Program Director reviews report and prepares a response which is submitted to PL

  • Program Council reviews full committee report and Program Director response

  • PL presents the final report with recommendations to PC

  • PC makes recommendation to AVP regarding appropriateness of strategic plan and for continuation of program.

  • AVP makes final decision


Review schedule l.jpg
Review Schedule understanding, interest and involvement in ANR WG and CC.

  • 2006-07

    • 4-H Youth Development (near completion)

    • IPM

    • Mosquito Research

    • Genetic Resources Conservation

  • 2007 – 08

    • Ag Issues Center

    • SAREP

    • Renewable Resources Extension Act

    • California Communities


ad