1. University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service Using Crises to Develop Public Issues Education Program Southern Community Development Education Conference May 20, 2004 Tampa, Florida Wayne Miller

2. Public Issues Education & CES? Not what we do -- not CD, Ag, 4-H or FCS! No role for CES It’s new We don’t know what to do Its risky We can’t respond that quickly

3. Different Visions Create Need No property tax revenue Limit ability of state & local governments to raise revenue Versus Education critical for welfare of State Like representative form of government

4. What do we do? Nothing Educate Public Policy Education not new to CES Clear objective(s)

5. Program Resource Material Understand Issues Consequences Training Content Process / Role Process for feedback & interaction with faculty

6. Communicating Message Use & build on our communication strengths County faculty News Releases Use non-traditional methods to reach new audiences Compressed Video Internet/Web

7. Program Results Fact sheets, programs, radio, TV, newspaper & web hits 200,000 fact sheets 123,000 contacts 84 radio programs 74 newspaper articles 41 TV programs Over 32,000 hits in October & November 2002

8. County Agent Survey 1. What benefits did you or CES obtain from conducting the ballot issues program? Provided good non-biased information - resource material Increased visibility – credibility – public image Developed new contacts & clientele – opportunity to work with non-traditional clientele Improved / increased working relationship with local officials and & key leaders

9. County Agent Survey - Continued 2. What challenges did you experience in conducting a ballot issues educational program? Need more time! Staying unbiased Better advance planning Need to have on-going public policy program CES should not be involved in public affairs

10. County Agent Survey - Continued 3. What changes do you recommend to improve future public policy programs? Have fact sheets / resource material earlier. Plan ahead & receive information and program requests earlier Do every election so we aren’t perceived as doing this only in self-interest More training to better understand the issues

11. County Agent Survey - Continued 5. What recommendations do you have in developing future public policy educational programs? Stay neutral/unbiased & cover all issues, not just those affecting CES Must be on-going educational effort if program is perceived to be unbiased Start on program sooner Keep information simple and easy to understand Make sure county agents have enough information factually with no room for personal interpretation

12. Encouraging Responses County faculty received positive feedback Gained visibility & credibility Worked with new clientele Worked more closely with local leaders Provided information demanded by public & not available from other sources Public expects CES to provide this program

13. Things Learned More clearly define and impart objective Need to better develop consistent message Program continuity essential Provide guidelines for county faculty Provide in-depth training of public policy process and issues in advance Allow more time for county faculty to organize & conduct workshops\

14. Things Learned Better define audiences and modes of communication to reach desired audience Be proactive in providing a consistent flow of information Respond quickly to questions about ballot issues / Q&A’s Link ballot issues program with broader public issues education program Need for more in-depth analysis of issues

15. Summary Be prepared to use crises to develop new programs. Program development is continual & interactive process Providing good programs demanded by the public will generate visibility & credibility To avoid extinction we need to address major societal concerns Its more fun to develop new programs!