Criteria, Measures, and Metrics

Download the Excellence in Extension Publication

Many states are being asked to identify indicators that represent the Extension effort and to be accountable for their accomplishments. The process of identifying these measures through a national effort assists individual institutions in their choice of metrics, gives credibility to the measures themselves, and encourages uniformity in measurement throughout Extension.

The criteria will be useful on an institutional, multi- institutional, and national level:
1. The criteria and measures identified will assist institutions as they identify indicators.
2. Consistent criteria will provide a basis for standardized comparisons with other institutions.
3. It will be possible to aggregate measures reported by all institutions to represent the Cooperative Extension system.

Criteria and Measures Defined

1. The university recognizes Cooperative Extension as a major component of outreach/engagement.
Definition – Cooperative Extension is recognized as an integral part of the university’s outreach/engagement effort both on and off campus.
Measures
A. The role of Cooperative Extension in outreach/engagement is specifically documented in university strategic plan(s).
B. Cooperative Extension accountability measures are integrated into systems for university-wide reporting.
C. University legislative relations units include Cooperative Extension in seeking university funding.
D. The scholarly activity of Cooperative Extension faculty and professional staff is reflected in a success rate in achieving tenure and/or promotion that is proportional to faculty across the institution.

2. Diverse stakeholder input is used to shape programs.
Definition – Actions are taken to seek and use client and partner input that result in relevant educational programs.
Measures
A. Organizational policies that encourage participation by diverse stakeholder groups
B. Number of stakeholder groups that provide input
C. Number of individual stakeholders who provide input
D. Evidence that stakeholder input was utilized

3. Client Satisfaction
Definition – Satisfaction level of clientele with the educational programs and services received from Cooperative Extension
Measures
Two approaches to measuring client satisfaction would prove useful. They could be utilized independently, or they could be used in combination.
A. Degree of client satisfaction with Cooperative Extension overall
B. Degree of client satisfaction with specific programs delivered by Cooperative Extension

4. Best Practices/Exemplary Programs
Definition – The quality of outstanding/exemplary Extension projects, programs, and initiatives is recognized and valued.
Measures
A. “Programs of Excellence” identified based on such criteria as importance, innovation, capacity for replication, sustainability, focus, scope, relevance, and results
B. Scholarly productivity of Extension faculty and staff as indicated by the number of publications, creative programs and materials, decision-making tools, etc.
C. Excellence in Extension faculty and staff performance as indicated by the number of awards and recognitions received

5. Knowledge/Attitude/Skills/Aspirations (KASA) and Behavioral Change
Definition – Short-and medium-term outcomes are the result of Cooperative Extension educational programs.
Measures
A. Program evaluation tools are utilized to measure outputs such as number of people reached.
B. Program evaluation tools are utilized to assess the extent of change in knowledge, attitude, skills, aspirations, and behavior attributable to Extension programs.
C. Program outputs and outcomes are documented and disseminated.
D. Impact results are utilized for programming decisions and accountability.

6. Economic Impact
Definition – The economic value derived from programs delivered by Cooperative Extension
Measures
A. Evaluation methods are utilized to measure the economic impact of Extension programs.
B. The economic impacts are documented and included in reporting.
C. Economic impact results are used in programming decisions and in establishing accountability.

7. Funding for Cooperative Extension
Definition – Amount of funding by sources for Cooperative Extension
Measures
A. Total federal budgeted funds appropriated from NIFA, USDA
B. Total state budgeted funds appropriated
C. Total local budgeted funds in support of program costs
D. Total funds received from grants and contracts
E. Other annual revenue from such sources as fees, registrations, sales, endowments, and other cost recovery
F. Amount of volunteer time contributed (value to be determined)

Excellence Criteria Matrix

The matrix on page nine of the publication at the link above provides a visual depiction of the criteria used in this effort. The left side of the matrix demonstrates criteria from the perspective of the university/university system. The top side of the matrix provides a perspective from an external stakeholder point of view.

Excellence Metrics

Fiscal Metrics:
1. Total budgeted funds appropriated from NIFA (Smith-Lever 3b and 3c only) for the current federal FY.
2. Other NIFA funds including 3d/NRI and other NIFA federal competitive grants.
3. Total budgeted funds appropriated from the state legislature (all forms of state appropriations) for CES for the current FY.
4. Current FY funds that best reflect county/local contributions to personnel support or operations.
5. Total CES expenditures from immediate prior FY from grants and contracts. (Include non-CSREES federal/state funding/foundations/etc.).
6. Revenue for CES during the previous FY from any source other than those above (could include fees/registrations/rentals/sales/gifts/cost recovery/etc.).

Personnel Metrics:
7. Total number (FTEs) of agents/educators professional level regardless of title (filled and unfilled positions) from all fund sources located in county/area/local community offices.
8. Total number (FTEs) program assistants/associates/technicians/etc. supporting county agents/educators (filled and unfilled positions) from all fund sources.
9. Total number (FTEs) of state and area CES specialists or professional staff (filled and unfilled positions) with educational/programmatic responsibilities from all fund sources.
10. Total number (FTEs) of district-level administrators (filled and unfilled positions) in the state (estimate % of FTE devoted to administration if position(s) share administrative and program leadership functions).
11. Total number (FTEs) of district-level program leaders (filled and unfilled positions) in the state (estimate % of FTE devoted to programmatic leadership if position(s) share administrative and program leadership functions).
12. Total number (FTEs) of Directors/Associate/Assistant Directors and State Program Leaders (filled and unfilled positions) in the state. This does not include support units (e.g.-computing/communications/fiscal and personnel/etc.) or department heads.
13. Total number (FTEs) of personnel (filled and unfilled positions) in the areas of HR/fiscal communications/information technology/program development/etc.
14. Annualized entry level starting salary for agents/educators with baccalaureate degree.
15. Annualized entry level starting salary for agents/educators with master’s degree.
16. Annualized entry level starting salary for specialists with master’s degree.
17. Annualized entry level starting salary for specialists with doctoral degree.

Programmatic Metrics:
18. The role of Cooperative Extension in outreach/engagement is documented in the university strategic plan(s).
19. Whether Cooperative Extension accountability measures are utilized for university-wide reporting.
20. Whether university legislative relations units include Cooperative Extension in seeking university funding.
21. Whether the state leadership advisory council influences programming and funding.
22. Whether local leadership advisory councils influence programming and funding.
23. Whether the institution has a formal system(s) for gathering information on clientele satisfaction.
24. Does your institution have Banner Programs or Programs of Excellence? These types of programs are identified based on such criteria as importance/innovation/replicability/sustainability/focus/scope/relevance and results.
25. The number of Extension and journal publications developed by Extension professionals. Also includes number of result demonstrations.
26. The number of regional or national awards presented to Extension professional.
27. Whether program evaluation tools are utilized to assess the extent of change in knowledge/attitude/skills/aspirations and behavior attributable to Extension programs.
28. Whether program outputs and outcomes are documented and disseminated.
29. Whether impact results are utilized for programming decisions and accountability.
30. Whether studies of economic impact of Extension programs are conducted.
31. Whether economic impacts are documented and included in reporting.
32. The total number of clientele contacts in past year by Extension professionals and volunteers.
33. The number of hours contributed by volunteers/volunteer groups.
34. The total number of 4-H’ers.
35. The number of natural disasters, events, etc. responded to by your institution.

Demographics:
36. The total population of the state.
37. The total number of youth 5-19 in the state.
38. The number of counties in the state.
39. The number of off-campus local Extension offices (does not include Specialist or administrative offices).
40. The total number of areas/districts/regions/etc. above the county level used by CES for administrative/programmatic purposes.