Breakout Session Frank b Clearfield p h D social sciences Consultant January 2018 Nashville TN Survey Goals Establish a baseline Increase NACDs understanding of what CDs ID: 681517
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "The National Association of Conservation..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
The National Association of Conservation District’s 2017 Survey of Conservation DistrictsBreakout Session
Frank b. Clearfield, p
h
.D.
social sciences Consultant
January 2018 – Nashville, TNSlide2
Survey Goals Establish a
baseline
Increase
NACD’s understanding of what CDs
value
Identify
current and future needs of
CDs
Explore
the relationship of CDs with Federal
partners Slide3
Survey BackgroundS
urvey ran from October 2 to December 1, 2017
A survey hyperlink and a PDF copy were sent through three email reminders by NACD’s Chief Executive Officer
Email was sent to 2,436 CDs and 596 responded (24% response rate)
Excellent response to a long complicated survey (74 questions)
Board members had to conduct research on their budgets, number of cooperators served, budgetary breakdowns, etc.
Board members also needed to generally agree on subjective response, which ideally meant collaborations in person, email, phone, etc.
A majority of CDs who answered the questionnaire fully completed the survey
Because not all CDs responded to the survey, caution needs to be exercised if generalizing to all District’s nationally and/or regionallySlide4
Presentation Outline
Profile of CDs
Cooperators served, budget and funding distribution
NACD services, communication, and dues
Resource
c
oncerns and relationship with
Federal
partners
Comments, summary and
r
ecommendationsSlide5
I. Profile of Conservation DistrictsSlide6
NACD Regions
NE
NC
NP
SC
SE
NE
PAC
SWSlide7
Breakdown of respondents by region and states
State
Percentage
(n=596)
TX
12
KS
6
KY
6
OH
5
IN
5
OK
4
IA
4
MI
4
7 states
0 18 states>10% of CDs in state
Region
Percentage
(n=596)
NE
6
SE
19
NC
27
SC
20
NP
13
SW
9
PAC
6Slide8
Professional Backgrounds of CDs (check all that apply)
Background
Percentage
(n=586)
Farm/Rancher
Owner or Operator/Manager
95
Business Owner
56
Retiree
50
Accounting/Bookkeeper
21
Educator
– non college
20
Contractor/Developer/Construction
18Government – County/Municipal
Level
18
Sales
14Slide9
Staffing Breakdown and Averages
Percentage Breakdown of CDs who Employ Staff
0
1
2
3 or more
Full-time staff (n=491)
15%
41%
19%
22%
Part-time staff (n=440)
34%
44%
12%
9%
Contractor(s) (n=308)
73%
18%
5%
4%
National staff average and categories of staff types
Average
National
6.0
Full-time
3.0
Part-time
2.0
Contractor
1.0Slide10
Job Titles (check all that apply)Slide11
CDs are co-located with the following organizations
NRCS
FSA
Not Co-located
RD
CES
Private
Other
78%
57%
14%
9%
7%
2%
14%
N= 518
NRCS/FSA
55%
NRCS/FSA/RD
9%
Based on 2,954 CDs, these percentages would translate as follows:
2,300 are co-located with NRCS
1,625 are co-located with NRCS-FSA
265 are co-located with NRCS-FSA-RD
413 are not co-locatedSlide12
Lease/Ownership of Office Space75% Lease; 19% Own; 6% Own and LeaseSlide13
II. Cooperators served, budget and funding distributionSlide14
Number of cooperators served during last fiscal year
N=464Slide15
CDs annual budget
N=488
National Average = $90,000Slide16
Association between budget, staffing, and number of cooperators served
Correlations between a CD’s (1) annual budget, (2) number of staff, and (3) the number of cooperators served are significant at least at the .005 level
CDs collocated at USDA service centers (NRCS-FSA-RD) had more positive relationships with these three variables than other types of locational situations. Sample size, however, is smallSlide17
Where do CDs get their budgets?
Source
Percentage
State Government
44
County Government
31
Federal Government
14
Product Sales
13
Fee for Service
13Slide18
Federal Funds 14% of CDs funds come from the Federal Government59% are from
Grants
55% are from
Cooperative AgreementsSlide19
Associating funding sources and CDs budgetsCDs with lower budgets are associated with state government
funding and product sales
CDs with higher budgets are associated with funding from Federal sources, Private Funding, and Fee for ServicesSlide20
III. NACD services, communication, and duesSlide21
Likert Scale
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Not Applicable or Don’t Know
1
2
3
4
5
-Slide22
Please rate the USEFULNESS of the following NACD Services - Advocacy
N = 341
ExampleSlide23
Please rate the USEFULNESS of the following NACD Services – Urban Ag Conservation Grant Initiative
N = 210
Mean = 3.0
ExampleSlide24
USEFULNESS of NACD services and communications methods
Services/Communication Methods
Mean
N
NA/or DK
Advocacy
2.2
341
115
Educational Materials
2.3
414
50
Envirothon
2.4
344
122
eResources (distributed every Tuesday)
2.5
392
66
Conservation Clip List (dist. every Friday)2.5416
51
District Operation Training Program
2.5
254
202
Grassroots Messages
2.6
318
129
Policy Position Papers
2.6
316
134
The Resource (distributed
quarterly)
2.6
385
69Slide25
USEFULNESS of NACD services and communications methods (cont…)
Services/Communication Methods
Mean
N
N/A or DK
Webinars
2.6
329
128
NACD Meetings
2.6
294
158
Soil Health Champions Network
2.7
256
198
Conservation
Planning Bootcamp
2.7
239
213
Online
Store
2.8
326
129
District
Training Recognition Program
2.8
222
231
Forestry Notes
2.8
415
53
Urban
Ag Conservation Grant Initiative
3.0
210
238Slide26
Satisfaction with NACD’s Education and Stewardship programs and future focus
Education Programs (N = 355) and Stewardship Programs (369) both were received a mean of 2.3
K-8 is
preferred for the focus of future educational programs, but educational programs on all levels would be mostly supported (N = 478)Slide27
What do these ratings tell us?CDs gave mostly average ratings to NACD’s communication methods and services
NACD has many ongoing programs and projects and it may be difficult to focus on all activities
CDs expressed themselves by checking the “Not Applicable/Don’t Know” response, which indicates that that service/method
may
not
be
useful
to the DistrictSlide28
Training received by CD Board members over past 3 years (check all that apply) and CD would benefit most from in the future (check one)Slide29
Which communication method do CDs prefer?
Method
Percentage of CDs
(N = 486)
Email (e.g., action alerts from
NACD leaders)
73
Electronic publications (e.g., eResources and Conservation)
13
Mail
11
Phone
1
Website
1
Text
and/or App
.4Slide30
How often do CDs prefer receiving communications from NACD?
Frequency
Percentage of CDs
(N = 482)
Once
weekly
42
Once monthly
35
Multiple times per month
13
Multiple
times per week
5
Daily
2
Other (i.e.,
when necessary, as needed, twice monthly)4Slide31
How frequently do CDs and local work groups meet?
Frequency
% of
CD
Boards
(N = 513)
% of Local
Work Groups
(N = 445)
Never
0
6
Monthly
96
1
Quarterly
22Semi-annually
0
7
Annually
.467As needed217Slide32
Factors that influence level of dues CD pays to NACDSlide33
IV. Resource Concerns and Relationship with Federal partnersSlide34
Resource Concerns by Region
Erosion
Soil H
GL
WQ
WQT
GL
Erosion
WQ
Soil H
Erosion
GL
SH,WQ, WQT
Erosion
WQ
Soil H
WQ
Erosion
Soil H
WQ
Erosion
Nut mgmt
National: Erosion & Sediment Control, WQ, Soil H.
Slide35
Importance of Federal and Farm Bill Programs to your CD
Program/Service
Mean
N
Conservation
Technical Assistance
1.4
460
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
1.4
456
Conservation
Stewardship Program
2.0
442
EPA 319 NPS Grants
2.2
376
Conservation Reserve Program (CREP)
2.2
400
Emergency Watershed Protection Program2.2403Slide36
Please rank the strength of your District’s relationship with NRCS District Conservation/Technical Staff who serve your CD
N = 506
Mean = 1.8
*CDs collated with any Federal organization rated this relationship even more positivelySlide37
Ratings of USDA service centers by CDs
Service
Mean
N
Administrative Services
1.9
373
Agency/District Coordination
1.9
494
Internet Services
2.0
368
Outreach Materials
2.2
453
Staff Training
2.3
409Slide38
Which Federal resource tools are used by your CD (assume staff members) (select all that apply
)
77% AgLearn
74% NRCS Web Soil Survey
54% Electronic Field Office Technical Guide (eFOTG)
49% Toolkit
34% National Conservation Practice Standards (NCPS)
31% ProtractsSlide39
Identify Joint Operations your CD has with USDA (select all that apply)
81% Telephone or Internet access
67% Equipment sharing (vehicles, computers, etc.)
41% Lease agreement
15% Other (i.e., office space, agreements, supplies, etc.Slide40
V. Comments, Summary and RecommendationsSlide41
Comment PageTraining, training, training
CDs want explanations of what NACD does and how it helps them
Agriculture is changing. CDs need an understanding of how to market CDs to urban/suburban areas
CDs need information about
ALL
Federal programs (not just Farm Bill and agricultural programs) and how to apply and be selected for these programs
(N = 83
)Slide42
Summary – CDs profile
Most Board members of CDs are farmers/ranchers, business owners, and retirees
National average number of staff is 6: 3 full time, 2 part-time, and 1 contractor
Over 3/4s of CDs are co-located with NRCS and more than half with both NRCS and FSASlide43
Summary – cooperators served, budget, and f
unding distribution
On
a national basis, positive relationships exist between higher CD budgets, larger number of staff, and a larger number of cooperators served
CDs collocated with NRCS-FSA-RD have more positive relationships with above variables than any other locational situation
CDs receive their budgets mostly from State and County governmentsSlide44
Summary – NACD services, communications, and dues
Ratings of the “usefulness” of
only a
few NACD services/communication methods are better than
average
NACD has many programs and projects and many CDs are unfamiliar with all NACD’s activities
Training
received and training desired is in
sync
A CD’s budget has the most influence on dues paid to NACDSlide45
Summary – Resource concerns and relationship with Federal partners
CTA
and EQIP are view as the most important Federal programs
CDs have a strong relationship with NRCS’s local field staff; those CDs collocated with Federal agencies rate the relationship more positively
CDs rate USDA service centers highest in Administrative Services, Agency/District coordination and Internet Services, but average in outreach materials and staff training. Conversely, CDs selected AgLearn as the most used Federal resource
tool used by staffSlide46
Recommendations
CDs would like to know what NACD does with their annual dues. NACD should regularly communicate their activities
along
with information on NACD budget priorities.
a.
NACD performs
multiple activities that CDs either don’t have a use for or are unfamiliar with. NACD should
consider focusing
their activities to produce high quality services and provide frequent updates. NACD should especially focus on its advocacy efforts, educational guidance/materials, and training
CDs want more training in (1) Responsibilities of CD
Board members
and CD authorities; (2) Farm Bill and Agricultural Programs; and (3) Strategic Planning. NACD may need to devote resources to develop and execute training as well as coordinating with NRCS and FSA to ensure
AgLearn, or other training vehicles, have courses
targeted for
CDsSlide47
Recommendations
CDs
need effective marketing and outreach materials. This information should include how to raise awareness of a CD’s activities to urban and suburban audiences as well as marketing CDs to nontraditional agricultural and non-agricultural groups
Since budgets of CDs seem to be a linchpin for generating more local district staff, and serving more cooperators, NACD
could offer tips/guidance/training
on how CDs can increase their budgets. Information should
cover all available sources
a.
NACD
could enlist those CDs who are effective at acquiring funds from multiple sources to provide advice and guidance to other CDsSlide48
Recommendations
Communication
methods – Most CDs would like their information from NACD through weekly emails and electronic publications. However, a little over 10% would like information delivered through the mail. To minimize costs, NACD needs to find out which CDs want
mailings
and send only these CDs information through the post office.
Future educational programs should focus on
K-8
CDs seem to perform more positively when they are collocated with USDA agencies. NACD can lend support to this type of collocation, but, at the same time, support those CDs that have credible reasons for being solely locatedSlide49
Questions, Comments, Observations
Contact Information
Frank Clearfield
Social Sciences Consultant
frank.clearfield@gmail.com
617-955-6093