Based on review of the questionnaire input and Task Force members' input, the following were identified as the major strengths of and issues for the partnership.

Major Strengths of the Partnership

Diversity Within the System

• Diversity of expertise/capability
• Diversity of programs and expertise available to address local, state and national issues
• Diversity of expertise and experience
• Knowledge of each other - culture and capability
• Building research and outreach capacity to address issues, opportunities, needs
• Multiple functions and disciplines in our tool box
• Different university sizes, geographic distribution, and clientele diversity

• Public service vision
• Commitment of system to land grant mission
• Maintain and build on dedicated and competent employees

Integration of Research, Extension and CSREES

• Some programs are working well such as SARE and IPM

• That crosses institutions, political boundaries, disciplines, functions, stakeholder groups
• Network of institutions, including multi-state research committees
• Network of sharing across system
• Very complete infrastructure

• University/knowledge-based credibility
• Knowledge-based system

• Ability to leverage state, national and local resources
• NRI has good federal/state partnership

System Accountability to Stakeholders

Connection to Grassroots

Capacity for Shared Decision Making

Additional Strengths:

go to: top / table of contents
 

Communication

• email systems list jobs and announcements work well
• Review panels include all 3 partners
• Multi-state research committees include CSREES and AES
• IPA assignments between partners
• CRIS system provides central information
• Joint impact statements for 3 partners
• Some joint planning councils and task forces include all partners

Infrastructure for a Good Technological Communication System

Additional Thoughts on Communication:

go to: top / table of contents

Major Issues for the Partnership

Trust and Mutual Respect

• Building/enhancing trust
• Develop (restore) trust and respect
• Mutual trust and respect for our multiple functions
• How can we build trust and "comfort" with roles of partners

• Effective, clear and open communication
• Communication network that meets needs of all
• Communicate at values level, e.g., what is truly important to the system?

• Pursuit of science or career sometimes not consistent with "today's" priorities
• Improvement in discerning/understanding stakeholders' needs
• Commitment to responsiveness

• Smaller institutions are not fully included in decision making and their needs are not always considered
• Understanding diversity of important issues and cultural differences for others in partnership/relationship

• Agree on mutual expectations for roles and responsibilities including leadership responsibilities

• More joint interaction in decisions of the system
• Fractured or unclear/undefined decision making process

• Streamlined procedures for reporting, budgeting, planning

Fragmented and Ephemeral Leadership of AES and CES

• Annual turnover of leadership in ESCOP and ECOP hinder continuity needed for enhancing partnership goals

Additional Major Issues:

go to: top / table of contents

Possible Operating Principles to Address the Major Issues

Committee members brainstormed the following possible operating principles to address these major issues:

• Open, candid communication is required to make this partnership work.
• All partners agree to be good team players and work for the good of the whole.
• Trust will be developed through action - by each partner doing what it say it will do.
• We commit to sending and receiving information and knowledge from each other.
• We agree to include whoever is important in what we are doing.
• We agree to make decisions in a timely manner.
• We will look for ways to get things done, not reasons why things cannot be done.
• We acknowledge and respect the cultural differences between and among all partners:
• AES, CES and CSREES
• 1862's, 1890's and 1994's
• States and territories
• We acknowledge the contributions of all partners to the growth and development of the land grant system.
• Staying connected and committed to the partnership regardless of the funding.

We will represent the interests of all partners when they are not at the table

Additional Thoughts of Possible Operating Rules:

go to: top / table of contents

Possible Actions to Address the Major Issues

Committee members brainstormed the following possible actions to address these major issues:
 

• We will develop a structure and mechanisms to discuss concerns about each other's actions so we can support each other.
• We will develop the capacity of our intelligence-gathering systems to identify emerging issues and establish a system to synthesize intelligence gathered.
• We will develop a mechanism for identifying and maintaining information on good examples of excellent practice.
• We will choose one major action to demonstrate that we can and will do it.
• Leaders of AES, CES and CSREES will clearly express the value of the partnership.
• Leaders of AES, CES and CSREES will communicate decisions with respect.
• CES and AES leadership (ESCOP and ECOP) will serve longer terms.
• CSREES will clearly articulate:
• Role of NPL's
• Their responsibility for program leadership
• Their responsibility for grants and contracts
• CES and AES Directors will communicate more to discuss research and outreach issues, current projects, and funding. CSREES will participate in these discussions.
• The Director of CSREES will communicate more often to the system via email and will encourage sharing among system members.
• The ESCOP and ECOP Chairs will communicate regularly with the CSREES Director, and then communicate to the system about those conversations.
• We will resolve Schedule A and GPRA reporting issues openly as a first step.
• The leadership of ESCOP, ECOP and CSREES will talk weekly.
• CSREES will get a better computer system to support a better list serve and email, with the ability to query. AES and CES will advocate for this.
• CSREES, CES and AES will combine their stakeholder needs and priorities. They will add in outside groups.
• We will establish various committees and working groups including all three partners on several issues.
• The partners will jointly develop and maintain an easily accessible directory of staff.
• CSREES will establish a business practices committee to streamline paperwork flow and reporting, and will publish a monthly newsletter on business practices.
• We will eliminate the seniority system in the leadership.
• We will resolve the inequities between:
• Production agriculture and the social science/human capacity side
• The 1862's, 1890's and 1994's
• Job descriptions will be made available for NPL's and Deputy Directors of CSREES, the roles and responsibilities of ESCOP/ECOP/ACOP, etc.
• We will define ways to use state-of-the-art electronic communication as best we can to work toward enhancing utilization of current electronic capabilities.
• AES and CES will involve NPL's in planning efforts (committees, meetings, etc.).
• We will develop common strategies to enhance programs.
• There will be more joint interaction and decisions made between ESCOP and ECOP.
• More IPA's will be established between the 3 partners.

Additional Thoughts:

go to: top / table of contents