Plan of Work and Annual Report of Accomplishments Update Bart Hewitt May 18, 2010

Plan of Work and Annual Report Expert Panel Met May 4 – 6, 2010 Discussed the Future of the Plan of Work Making Recommendations to NIFA for Improving and Streamlining

Purpose of this Panel SEC REVIEW OF PLAN OF WORK REQUIREMENTS. (a) REVIEW.—The Secretary shall work with university partners in extension and research to review and identify measures to streamline the submission, reporting under, and implementation of plan of work requirements … In carrying out the review and formulating and compiling the recommendations, the Secretary shall consult with the land-grant institutions.

Things the Panel Discussed The Current Legislation The Current Guidelines Components of the POW and Annual Report Plan of Work Software REEport Logic Model Structure Benefits of Current System over Old System Data Usage Work Already in Progress to Streamline

Things the Panel Discussed Output and Outcome Targets Rolling Plan of Work (5 Years vs. Other) Evaluation Plans Knowledge Areas (KAs) Multistate Extension & Integrated Research and Extension Budgets How to capture the value of capacity

What’s Next? Panel is writing a report to NIFA on Recommendations – Due in 30 Days NIFA responds to Panel Recommendations How to implement recommendations?

National Outcome Indicators Lacking outcomes that can be aggregated across the nation to show a national impact Work has been done already –RREA –4-H SET Logic Model –Community Nutrition Education –EFNEP EEE-TIG: American Evaluation Association

Nationwide Performance - RREA The Renewable Resources Extension Act (RREA) calls for “expanded extension programs for forest and rangeland resources” to enhance the sustainability of these renewable natural resources. With NIFA funding, 69 land-grant institutions educated private forestland and rangeland owners regarding forest and rangeland sustainability. As a result of these activities: 937 income –generating business were created or expanded, 2,390 new jobs were created, 27,300 landowners increased their awareness of forest or rangeland resources, 21,100 landowners implemented at least one new renewable resource practice, landowners either earned or saved and estimated $17,810,000, loggers either earned or saved $198,571,756 by adopting new harvesting technologies, and every RREA dollar leverages from $5 -$15 from state, county and other resources.

National Outcome Indicators National Workshop Regional Host Outcomes Indicators around NIFA Priorities Need to Include Research National Program Leaders –Steering Committee –10 NPLs to Lead the Effort Where? When? Who?

Plans for REEport

Implementation of REEport Stage A – Non-Formula Grant Initiation –October 1, 2010 Stage B – Existing Non-Formula Grants & Project Reporting –January 15, 2011 (Target date) Stage C – Formula Grant Initiation –October 1, 2011 (Target date) Stage D – Existing Formula Grants & Project Reporting –October 1, 2011 (Target date)

Outcomes Outcomes is the name of the game De-emphasize Outputs Brief and written for the lay reader The most useful outcomes contain both quantitative and qualitative data

Sample Qualitative Outcome Issue: Producers, seedsmen, grain merchandisers, processors, crop consultants, plant breeders, and extension staff are interested in new cultivars that bring them increased revenue.

Sample Qualitative Outcome What has been done: The new varieties Faller Wheat, Lariat and Stampede pinto beans, Sheyenne non-transgenic soybean, RG7008RR soybean, and Pinnacle two-row barley were released for use.

Sample Qualitative Outcome Results: The estimated dollar value to producers, seedsmen, grain merchandisers, processors, crop consultants, and plant breeders on these new varieties is $290,600,000 for Moreover, because of best management practices developed by research and extension, wheat and barley producers reduced economic losses by $40,000,000 through use of better varieties of wheat and through use of fungicides.

Types of Outcomes Change in Knowledge Occur when there is a change in knowledge or the participants actually learn: –New fundamental or applied knowledge –Improved skills –How technology is applied –About new plant & animal varieties –Increased knowledge of decision-making, life skills, and positive life choices among youth & adults –Policy knowledge –New improved methods

Types of Outcomes Change in Action or Behavior Occur when there is a change in behavior or the participant’s act upon what they’ve learned and: –Apply improved fundamental or applied knowledge –Adopt new improved skills –Directly apply information from publications –Adopt and use new methods or improved technology –Use new plant & animal varieties –Increased skill by youth & adults in making informed life choices –Actively apply practical policy and decision- making knowledge

Types of Outcomes Change in Condition Occur when a societal condition is improved due to a participant’s action taken (Change in Action). For example, specific contributions to: –Increased market opportunities overseas and greater economic competitiveness –Better and less expensive animal health –Vibrant & competitive agricultural workforce –Higher productivity in food provision –Better quality-of-life for youth & adults in rural communities –Safer food supply –Reduced obesity and improved nutrition & health –Higher water quality and a cleaner environment

Types of Outcomes Needed Outcomes related to USDA Priorities: –Global Food Security and Hunger –Climate Change –Sustainable Energy –Childhood Obesity –Food Safety

Brevity and Conciseness in the Executive Summary The Executive Summary is a brief overview narrative of your total program. Copy and paste text into this field from your current state’s yearly brief publication. Two pages should suffice. Highlights of your State program Let the Planned Programs section attend to detail.

Where can you get data from POW and Annual Report? REEIS - –All Plans of Work and Annual Reports since FY 2000 Partnership LMD – (Leadership Management Dashboard) -

REEIS

Partnership LMD –

Partnership LMD - POW

Plan of Work Additional Information NIFA Plan of Work Web Page – Contact Information –Bart Hewitt, Accountability and Reporting Leader –

State Sharing Marie Blythe, Kansas State University

State Sharing How is your state adopting the new NIFA priorities? Are you continuing planned programs that are outside of these priorities? How do you determine/develop your planned programs? What are the pros/cons of having too many? Too few?

State Sharing Who is involved? If your institution submits a combined (Research and Extension) Plan and Report, who is on your “planning team”? How do you determine intended outputs/outcomes for your planned programs? How do you collect data (across your state/multiple states—shared outcomes/indicators?) to report against your intended outputs/outcomes? Who are your “data” contacts?

State Sharing Beyond submitting the required plan/report, how does your state use/share what you learn/develop through the process? How is your stakeholder input considered in the development of your planned programs? What is the merit review process in your state, especially for Extension?