County Commission Focus Group Report

County Commission Focus Group Report

County commissioners’ perceptions of University of Missouri Extension 2004

Prepared by Cassy Venters, Ed.D.

Program Evaluation Coordinator

Business Development Programs

University of Missouri Extension

December 2004

County Commissioner Focus Group, 2004

Overview and Purpose

In November 2004, the University of Missouri Extension County Council Coordinator and Coordinator of Constituent Relations organized a focus group for county commissioners with the purpose of assessing key commissioners’ perceptions of how well extension was meeting the needs of citizens in their counties as well as county commissioners’ needs. They planned to use the information to inform decision making about marketing extension, improving communications with commissioners and identifying programmatic actions that could be undertakento improve commissioners’ perceptions of extension. It was hoped that, ultimately, the information gathered would provide insight into how to increase county extension appropriations.

The main benefits sought by using the focus group to collect data were the ability to gather data on the commissioners’ attitudes, feelings and beliefsabout extension and to hear responses in the commissioners’ everyday language. The interaction that occurred among commissioners in the focus group enabled them to ask questions of each other as they re-evaluated and reconsidered their own understandings of extension. The focus group also provided the opportunity to demonstrate to commissionersthat they are valued as experts and to empower them as participants. It also was thought that the focus group could serve as a preliminary step in creating a forum for information exchange with county commissioners. The data from this study can serve to develop future projects and studies with commissioners. In fact, additional studies are recommended due to the limitations of focus groups -- lack of the ability to generalize to larger populations and the potential for bias in a groupthat is not a representative sample.

Key Findings and Recommended Actions

Key Findings

Overall, responses from county commissioners reflect a desire to have an ongoing relationship with extension faculty and staff -- one that involves regular communication to engender an understanding of issues,needs and resources.

Responses to the focus group questions revealed that the commissioners wanted proactive, regular communication conducted through multiple modes of conversation, print and audio materials, and the Internet. Comments reflected the commissioners’ desire that extension faculty and staff take the initiative in forging relationships and communications. They used words like “become our extended staff” and “become our advocate” to describe roles for extension personnel.

The need for communications to be succinct was iterated repeatedly with examples of how commissioners want to get information: bullet points, 1 ½ paragraphs, one sheet with 10 points,a 15-minute training session. Commissioners also said they want information customized to respond to their needs and issues. They expected extension faculty and staff to take the initiative in identifying needs and

issues from information available to the public on the Web, in newspapers and in commission meeting minutes.

While county commissioners indicated they did not have a full understanding of extension’s capabilities, they could, and did, articulate needed services that they felt extension could provide. After reviewing a list of named programs, they identified areas where named programs could be adapted to meet county government needs.

Some negative comments regarding extension’s value to the community surfaced. These related to changes in extension programs, lack of clarity about the type of work extension staff might do and a lack of information about extension programs. A potential negative fact emerged as the commissioners in the focus group indicated county citizens do not talk to them about the value of extension in the county. Commissioners indicated they did not use extension services. Perception exists among some commissioners that the Internet can substitute for extension.

Recommended Actions

Regional directors and program directors should have planning sessions with regional and state faculty to create action plans that respond to these findings, designating the highest priority responses, identifying a project leader, and developing action plans and follow-up. Topics to explore for follow-up might include:

Adapting current named programs to respond to county government/county commissioner needs.
Creating new programs/projects that respond to county government/county commissioner needs.
Creating plans and follow-up procedures to ensure county staff and extension councils establish ongoing and proactive communication with county commissioners in a format that responds to commissioners’ needs in terms of frequency, style and modes. Tips for communication efforts could be prepared from information in this report.
Developing an advocacy effort to identify, coach and ensure extension service users advocate with county commissioners and other legislators and funders about the value of extension. Both formal and informal advocacy efforts should be promoted, including letters, conversations and phone calls that would occur throughout the year as well as at the time of budget requests.

Mechanisms to ensure that follow-up on recommendations occurs are needed from the Vice Provost and Director of Field Operations levels.

Review of the focus group results was conducted with the Program Leadership Council at the Dec. 14, 2004, meeting. A debriefing process used with the group identified actions PLC members planned to take:

Regional Directors
Meet with county commissioners in their region.
Share the results of this study at County Program Director training, and ask the CPD training committee -- now in the process of planning -- to find resources to implement recommendations.
Ask regional faculty to:
Visit county commissioners.
Provide the commissioners new information on a continual basis.
Work with county extension council members so that they have regular, ongoing communication with commissioners.
Invite county commissioners to visit programs or view work and projects of extension faculty.
Consider how extension faculty can bring county courthouse staff together and how CPDs, regional faculty and new staff can be trained.
Consider public issue forums as a way to connect extension faculty with local leadership.
Work with the extensionCounty Council Coordinator to direct visits with county commissioners, ensuring that one or two extension faculty join in county commission visits.
Program Directors
Establish a local government team with members from each region to review ideas from this presentation and wrestle with ideas. Connect campus resources, such as the Truman School of Public Affairs at MU and other campuses’ public policy resources, to the work of regional local government teams and extension regional faculty.
Provide tools/templates/brochures to regional faculty and administrators to inform county commissioners about the costs and benefits/impacts of regional faculty’s work.
Provide tools/templates for regional faculty to engage commissioners more directly with youth.
Change how we communicate about our program from “what we are doing” to “here are the issues/problems, here’s a potential solution; here is the impact.”
Administrators, State Specialists and Others
Provide information to county commissioners and regional faculty that explains how campus continuing education programs can meet county government needs.
Begin to see county commissioners as an audience, not just a funding source.
Involve county commissioners in resource development and diversity efforts so they understand the goals of these efforts.
Assign participants at new faculty orientation “homework” to meet their county commissioners.
Make the county data available through OSEDA more dynamic and easier to use with better linkages to summary reports.
Prepare mini policy briefs for counties.
Provide in-service training for CPDs and community development specialists so they can become the “extended staff” of county commissioners.
Send out post card announcements to commissioners on major evaluation project results.
Teach county council members and others how to advocate for extension.
Set up mechanisms to systematically re-engage with county commissioners.

Mechanisms to ensure that follow-up occurs on recommendations are needed from the Vice-Provost and Director of Field Operations levels.

Further review of the focus group results was conducted with the Program Leadership Council at the Dec. 14, 2004, meeting. A debriefing process used with the group identified actions they planned to take:

Regional Directors
Meet with county commissioners in their region.
Share the results of this study at CPD training and ask the CPD training committee to find resources to implement recommendations.
Ask regional faculty to:
Visit county commissioners.
Provide the commissioners new information on a continual basis.
Work with council members so that county extension council members have regular, ongoing communication with commissioners.
Invite county commissioners to visit programs or view work and projects of extension faculty.
Consider how extension faculty can work to bring county courthouse staff together and how CPDs, regional faculty and new staff can be trained.
Consider public issue forums as a way to connect extension faculty with local leadership.
Work with the extensionCountyCouncil Coordinator to direct visits with county commissioners, ensuring that one or two extension faculty join in county commission visits.
Program Directors
Establish a local government team with members from each region to review ideas from this presentation and wrestle with ideas.Connect campus resources, such as the Truman School of Public Affairs at MU and other campuses’ public policy centers, to the work of regional local government teams and extension regional faculty.
Provide tools/templates/brochures to regional faculty and administrators to inform county commissionersabout the costs and benefits/impacts of regional faculty’s work.
Provide tools/templates for regional faculty to engage commissioners more directly with youth.
Change how we communicate about our program from “what we are doing” to “here are the issues/problems, here’s a potential solution; here is the impact.”
Administrators, State Specialists and Others
Provide information to county commissioners and regional faculty that explains how campus continuing education programs can meet county government needs.
Begin to see county commissioners as an audience, not just a funding source.
Involve county commissioners in the resource development and diversity efforts so they understand the goals of these efforts.
Assign new faculty orientation participants “homework” to meet their county commissioners.
Make county data available through OSEDA more dynamic and easier to use with better linkages to summary reports.
Prepare mini policy briefs for counties.
Provide in-service training for CPDs and community development specialists so they can become the “extended staff” of county commissioners.
Send out post card announcements to commissioners on major evaluation project results.
Teach county council members and others how to advocate for extension.
Set up mechanisms to systematically re-engage with county commissioners.

Results

In response to the request to think back over the past month and identify issues that the county commission had discussed either in formal meetings or informal discussions, commissioners identified problems with increasing county expenses and decreasing county revenue most often, but they identified additional issues as well.

CountyCommission Issues / Percentage of Citations
Problems with increasing county expenses and decreasing county revenues / 64%
County administration or management: human resources, space, records storage / 12%
County officeholders’ communication / 12%
Other: election results, new county extension program director, annexation / 8%
Communicating with the public about budget priorities and county needs / 3.3%

As commissioners thought about how they used extension programs to deal with these issues, the group concluded that they did not use extension services for issues that represented their major needs. However, they cited times when extension services were used: correcting problems with storm water runoff in the city lake that provides drinking water, facilitating a meeting for commissioners, providing a leadership education program for juvenile offenders, developing a curriculum for poll workers, and helping citizens understand the options to meet new laws related to onsite wastewater ordinances.

When asked what words people in the community use to describe extension, the group said the only extension program they hear referred to is 4-H. However, group discussions provided further detail about their experiences:

In rural areas, the way ag is declining, many people feel there are better ways to use funding; (they are) negative about extension because they don’t know what extension does.
(Extension has) lost its usefulness; clubs are not there for the ladies; 4-H isn’t as strong as (it) used to be. Many people who worked with it understand it, but not many are around any more.
(Extension is) now more in the social services area. The general public doesn’t understand why extension services exist in the county; urban people don’t know how it might relate.

The focus group provided an opportunity for commissioners to learn from each other. When one commissioner said, “I’ve never talked with someone with a new experience in 4-H,” another responded, “We have. We have new kids in ours. We have some Hispanic people, some Ukrainians. We have many home-schooled kids, and they use 4-H as part of (their program). New clubs have started up and there is a shift in clubs.”

As the group focused discussion on how extension could meet county government and county commissioner needs, commissioners identified how extension could increase its value to the commission. Commissioners expressed that they would like extension to respond to the commission’s priority needs: “How many times have we heard extension say, ‘What can we do for you rather than what can you do for us?’” The focus group participants made specific suggestions for how extension could be of service to them:

Help find funding for the county; find grant sources; tell us what other counties have used as funding options.
Provide free, good legal advice. County prosecutors aren’t necessarily skilled in contracts.
Find out what is going on in other counties, and tell us what is working. Develop information and referral sources. You don’t have to BE the source, but know where the sources are.
Help us formulate policies. Provide research, but take the next step and pull policies from like counties and tell us what is working.
Help rural counties get access to GIS.
Coordinate roles with the regional planning commission.
Develop consortiums to help pay for services that several counties might need and use.
Provide strategic planning that involves elected officials so all elected officials in the county know where the county is headed and buyin.
Do a market study on salaries for us.
Express to the Legislature through your lobbyist the things that counties need and don’t need. Become our advocate for our problems at the state level.
Strengthen training with extension councils on how to interact with county government.
Prepare statistics on the county and bring it to us.

Commissioners expressed some statements reflecting difficulty in understanding extension:

Rather than us telling extension what we need from you, it would be better if you decided who you were; there is so much we can get from you that we can’t narrow it down; extension needs to narrow themselves down a bit; I want you to survive and give me expertise from the University, but it’s hard to figure out how that fits with county government.
How far will you go on things? Will we just get research, or will you help us write policies? Write grants?
Extension could compile solutions to problems and be a resource point. Would help when trying to budget for extension service in the county. The problem is, (we hear) why do you have to budget for that other than (what) is mandated in the statutes? (We) have to explain why (we are) budgeting for extension.
We’re missing out on a lot of service that we could use extension for, just because we don’t know about it.
I don’t think of extension as someone to call on to help with a problem. The Internet has taken away lot of what extension used to be for; (I) can turn on the computer and get the answers.

As discussions progressed, commissioners were asked how they preferred to have communication with county extension staff and learn about extension programs. They responded:

This (the focus group) helps – we’re learning now.
Give me bullet points on one sheet of paper. Then give me a call if you want to talk about enhancing that.
If the first paragraph and a half doesn’t make me think it’s worthwhile, (I’ll) file it in the trash.
Post it on the Website with quick access to information. “It’s what people want today.”
I want a person to say, “This is what you need, I’ll work on that.”
Provide me with a sheet of 10 things you can help with. Send it out to every county commissioner office – how extension can help.
Do a 15-minute session at the county commission training in February. You’ll get more calls than you can handle. But, make sure you’ve got someone who can handle the calls; have a plan ready to go. And be sure county staff know what was offered to the county.

And in response to a question about how extension could learn about county commission problems, commissioners said: