1. Results from County Extension Educator Survey January 2017

2. Methodology
For ease of presentation, the data used in several of the following slides have been re-coded so that the most preferred option is represented by the highest number (i.e., not 1 as was the case on the survey itself).
Each of the questions presented here have also been analyzed for the following sub-groups. Data for these groups is presented only when it varies significantly from the aggregate response.
Group 1: Subject Area (Ag/FCS/4-H Educators)
Group 2: # of Educators in County (2 or fewer vs. more than 2)
Group 3: Time in OCES (fewer than 10 years vs. more than 10 years) There were no significant differences in responses based on time in OCES.
PLEASE NOTE: All data used in these slides are drawn from a 2016 survey of OCES county educators. The notes section for each slide will indicate the specific question(s) used for the slide as well as any additional comments about the data presented.

3. Potential Funding Models
Senate Model
All counties receive the same funding from OCES (the current model).
Similar to the equal representation of states in the United States Senate.
House Model
Counties may receive different funding from OCES depending on some characteristic determined in advance.
Similar to the proportional representation (by local population) in the United States House of Representatives.
These funding models were presented to respondents in the survey.

4. Total Support for House vs. Senate Model of Funding
Data: Question 5 – Which of these two funding models would you recommend for the future?
Respondents expressed a clear preference for the House Model of funding.

5. Funding Model Support by Number of Educators in County
Data: Question 5 – Which of these two funding models would you recommend for the future?
Data: Question 4 – How many educators are currently working in your county?
Educators assigned to counties with fewer than two educators expressed significantly less support for the House Model when compared with their peers across the state who work in counties with two or more educators.

6. Support for Expanding Fees to Prevent Further Staff and Service Reductions
Data: Question 9 – Do you support the use of fees as a viable alternative to help reduce staff and service reductions?
Respondents expressed clear support for increased use of fees as an alternative source of funding for Extension activities and personnel. No significant subgroup differences were found.

7. Preference for Funding Dimensions – Average Ranking of County Allocation Options
Data: Question 6 – If the House Model of funding is used, which of the following should be used to determine the distribution of funds to each county?
Higher numbers here represent dimensions preferred, on average, more by respondents.

8. Preference for Funding Dimensions – Average Ranking Differences by Subject Area
Data: Question 6 – If the House Model of funding is used, which of the following should be used to determine the distribution of funds to each county?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
Higher numbers here represent dimensions preferred, on average, more by respondents. Categories are created by shared topic/feature by combining categories from Question 6 as presented in the previous slide in the following ways: Econ (Farm Income, Poverty Rate), Non Econ (Population, # 4-H Age Youth, # Farms, Health Ranking, Crime Rate), Ag (# Farms, Farm Income), Non Ag (Population, Poverty Rate, # 4-H Youth, Health Ranking, Crime Rate), Count (Population, #4-H Youth, # Farms), Describe (Crime Rate, Health Ranking, Poverty Rate, Farm Income).

9. Communication Methods Used
Less than 25% of Respondents
Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest
25%-75% of Respondents
Webinar software, Adobe Acrobat, voic , fax, computer with speakers, website/blog, Excel, smartphone, text messaging
More than 75% of Respondents
Facebook, printer, local newspaper, PowerPoint, Internet,
Data: Question 8 – Which of the following hardware/media/software do you use to deliver Extension programming?
Nearly all educators report using online tools to deliver Extension programming. Relatively few educators reported using social media tools other than Facebook.

10. Educators Use of Social Media
Data: Question 8 – Which of the following hardware/media/software do you use to deliver Extension programming?
Significantly more 4-H educators reported social media when compared with Ag educators and FCS educators. A difference in social media use between Ag educators and FCS educators was also identified, but the difference is not statistically significant.

11. Importance of Communication Methods – Average Ranking
Data: Question 7 – Please rank the following communication methods by their importance to you in delivering Extension programming.
Higher numbers here represent dimensions preferred, on average, more by respondents.

12. Do County Residents See 4-H Youth Programming as Most Important?
Data: Question 10 – Do you agree that most Extension clientele in your county would rank working with 4-H youth as the highest priority program for Extension to deliver in your county?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
A statistically significant difference exists in the responses from educators from each of the three general program areas: 4-H, Ag, and FCS. 4-H educators were significantly more likely than any other group to agree with the statement. Ag educators were more likely that FCS educators to agree with the statement, although the difference was substantially smaller.

13. What if You were Asked to Increase 4-H Duties to 80% of Your Time?
Data: Question 12 – If a change in funding required you to become more involved in 4-H, how would you respond?
Data: Question 4 – How many educators are currently working in your county?
To get a better sense of how willing respondents are to become more involved in 4-H, responses are combined here based on the amount of time they indicated the educator would be willing to devote to 4-H activities. Educators who indicated that they would be willing to move to a more 4-H-centric position are listed here as “Accept,” while educators who indicated that they would take action to avoid such a change (including looking for a new position either within or outside of OCES) are listed here as “Resist.”
Thus, most Ag and FCS educators (4-H educators were not asked this question) indicated that they would be willing to accept more 4-H responsibilities. The only difference in this response pattern was for educators who work in counties with more than two educators. These educators were more than twice as likely as their peers in counties with fewer educators to indicate that they would resist a shift toward 4-H.

14. Impact of Loss of Resource – Average Ranking
Data: Question 22 – The loss of which service/support would lower your productivity the most?
Higher numbers here represent dimensions preferred, on average, more by respondents.
Here the educators identify the support their receive that would be most difficult to get along without. Thus, these responses indicate the resources that educators value most highly. In general, educators indicate that they most value assistance with administrative duties, including having a county office.

15. Significant Differences in Views of Importance of Loss of Selected Resources
Data: Question 22 – The loss of which service/support would lower your productivity the most?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
Higher numbers here represent dimensions preferred, on average, more by respondents.
Significant differences were found in some responses of educators from different program areas. They are presented here.

16. Perceived Feasibility of Increased Role for Volunteers in Ag Programs
Data: Question 28 – How feasible do you think it would be to give volunteers a greater role in Agriculture OCES activities?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
This question offers a response scale from 1 to 10. For ease of interpretation, responses are collapsed into three groups: options 1-3, 4-6, These new categories represent views of ”Not Feasible,” “Semi-Feasible,” and “Feasible,” respectively.
Educators express reservations about expanding the role of volunteers in either FCS or Agricultural activities. Ag and FCS educators are especially hesitant to voice support for an increased role for volunteers in their own area.

17. Perceived Feasibility of Increased Role for Volunteers in FCS Programs
Data: Question 28 – How feasible do you think it would be to give volunteers a greater role in FCS OCES activities?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
This question offers a response scale from 1 to 10. For ease of interpretation, responses are collapsed into three groups: options 1-3, 4-6, These new categories represent views of ”Not Feasible,” “Semi-Feasible,” and “Feasible,” respectively.
Educators express reservations about expanding the role of volunteers in either FCS or Agricultural activities. Ag and FCS educators are especially hesitant to voice support for an increased role for volunteers in their own area.

18. Perceived Impact on 4-H Programs of Increased Role for Volunteers in 4-H
Data: Question 25 – Do you foresee a decline in the quality of 4-H programs if more volunteers are recruited and fewer Extension staff are used?
Data: Question 2 – What is your current title (4-H, Ag, FCS)?
This question offers a response scale from 1 to 10. For ease of interpretation, responses are collapsed into three groups: options 1-3, 4-6, These new categories represent views of ”Little Decline,” “Some Decline,” and “Big Decline,” respectively.
The vast majority of educators in all three program areas expressed significant reservation about the increased use of volunteers if such use meant reducing the number of Extension staff.

19. Preference for Restructuring County Assignments - Options
Question 20: “It seems evident that with lower funding levels each Educator will have to cover larger areas.” Which option do you prefer?
Option 1
Keep the current staffing model, with possibly less funding per county.
Option 2
Define county clusters and assign educators to entire cluster.
Option 3
Use a hybrid where some educators are assigned to entire cluster while others are not.
Option 4
Other (respondent provided)

20. Preference for Restructuring County Assignments
Data: Question 20 – “It seems evident that with lower funding levels each Educator will have to cover larger areas.” Which option do you prefer?
No significant subgroup differences were found.

21. Preference for Area Specialists or Generalists
Data: Question 18 – In a system where educators are expected to cover more than one county, would you recommend having more educators who, based on the topics they address, are generalists or specialists?
No significant subgroup differences were found.