CTAHR College-Wide Conference: Building A Shared Vision
Extension Workshop–May 10, 2002

Identified Strengths and Challenges

• All computerized now
  
• All on the web
  
• Addressing industry needs
  
• Located on almost every island
  
• Long work with diversified agriculture is paying off
  
• Excellent educational curriculum in the 4-H area
  
• Demand for our services
  
• Addressing needs of the small minority farmers
  
• Partnerships with agencies are solid
  
• Large volunteer base
  
• Recognized part of outreach
  
• Strong industry association
  
• Meeting the community’s needs
  
• CTAHR has good name recognition
  
• National network of USDA and other county offices
  
• Good information base
  
• Translated long-term research into viable technology
  
• Cover soup to nuts
  
• Provide practical solutions
  
• Work closely with stakeholders
  
• Recognized expertise
  
• Use volunteers to extend outreach in the community
  
• Public interest in beginners educational opportunities
  
• Public trusts us
  
• 4-H has a good reputation
  
• Persistently visit growers
  
• Nationally prominent programs
  
• International programs esp. in Pacific
  
• Loyal supporters
  
• Strong master gardener program
  
  

Cluster A

• A: too many bosses
  
• A: organizational efficacy
  
• A: some scientists don’t recognize the importance of extension
  
• A: uncertain acceptance by staff, commitment of admin to new organization of CTAHR to extension (agents in departments)
  
  

Cluster B

• B: consumer directory to extension expertise and products to our clientele
  
• B: accessibility to our services e.g. how do you find 4-H?
  
• B: lack of an integrated system of program delivery
  
• B: need to do a better job of capturing the knowledge of people in CTAHR
  
• B: getting all of our good crop production info on web so people can find it.
  
• B: Marketing to publicity strategies for publications and products
  
• B: clientele accessibility/marketing
  
• B: fairness in having equal accessibility to all clientele
  
• B: setting up a charge for services program
  
• B: info accessibility to non-English speaking stakeholders
  
• B: media bias-how do we reach our clientele with info currently we’re web biased
  
• B: CTAHR has name recognition but function misunderstood
  
  

Cluster C

• C: Need to decide what we don’t do anymore
  
• C: cover soup to nuts
  
• C: prioritize our work
  
• C: not being everything to everyone
  
• C: prioritizing/leadership
  
• C: statewide leadership and teamwork in addressing client needs
  
• C: mechanism for getting good ideas into execution
  
  

• D: impact assessment-“how to” need common understanding
  
• D: how to integrate with research
  
• D: P.O.W. evaluation/impact
  
• D: impact reports: behavioral changes as result of ext. Program
  
• D: research science project bias in writing ext. Proposals (format biased)
  
• D: training and help in writing up program plans, logic models, and reports
  
• D: disconnect with reality about writing , reporting, and assessing projects; measuring impact
  
  

• E: funding
  
• E: research driven by national levels and funding and less by extension funding
  
• E: funding
  
• E: getting new ideas into commercialization
  
• E: some fear that teamwork is not valued
  
  

• Maintenance work is costly and not flashy
  
• Developing productive and happy relationships with new USDA facility and UHH and community colleges
  
• How do we put all these good suggestions into action and who’s going to do it?
  
• Don’t have a UH credit card to purchase online-procurement card is limited-inability to use it.
  
• Environmental issues: PETA are a challenge
  
• We don’t even recognize each other!
  
• Doing more with less
  
• Parking on Manoa campus for clientele
  
• Liability- recommendations, re: volunteers
  
• Clear policy on confidentiality esp. related to clientele
  
• Procurement-Clarisse, Sarah, Angie