Organizational
Structure
DISTRICT STRUCTURE
Submitted by: Tony Tyson
The "Synopsis of Models for Improving Extension Program Delivery"
document indicates the following options:
"Increase the CES
presence through increased location of specialists, research,
UGA programs, in district offices, similar to model of Tifton
and Griffin."
"Maintain the current four district configuration
with limited district staff and specialists."
"Abolish current districts and district leaders
and replace with 12 extension regions, each headed by a regional
Extension coordinator. Regional coordinators would interact more
closely with county government and, except in counties with 15
or more staff, abolish county coordinator position and have regional
coordinator provide management and coordination."
(For
a more complete description of this model, view
the PDF document.)
Number of Districts to remain at Four (4). The modeling reports raised
alternative scenarios including 6 or 12 districts/regions. The two
fundamental drivers behind the suggestions to change number of districts
seemed to be: (a) align CES districts more closely to the state Service
Delivery Regions and, (b) reduce the number of districts so District
Heads could spend more time with County Coordinators and county officials.
Both of the reasons are valid and with merit. We reduced the number
of CES districts primarily to reduce costs and that is still an important
factor. We saved eight agent positions in the process.
We can remain
at 4 districts and still address maximum alignment with the Service
Delivery Regions. To fully capture
the benefits of reducing the number of CES districts, we need to stick
with the current number for now and make it work.
At least one of
the models for more districts would have removed much of the responsibility
of the County Coordinator regarding budget development with county
officials. This seemed to be contrary to our guiding principles of
local presence and empowering decision making at the local level.
With four districts, we will look to the County Coordinator to play
a lead role in resource development, relationships with county, city
and local state officials and identification of program issues. The
District Heads will support the county coordinators, but we are looking
for leadership from the County Coordinators.
| UPDATE 12/16/05: |
In December, 2005 the titles of the "District
Extension Heads"” was changed to "District Extension
Director." There were a couple of reasons for this change.
The title of District Director is the title most commonly used
for this middle management position in Extension programs across
the country. With the change two years ago from five districts
to four and with the increased emphasis on resource development,
we have placed more responsibility on our District Directors.
They are responsible for personnel, programs and budgets for
approximately 40 County Extension programs each. It was felt
that the title of District Extension Director, more accurately
reflects this level of responsibility.
The title of the "Coordinator of County Operations" was
also changed in December, 2005 to "Director of County Operations."
This is the position that has statewide administrative responsibilities
for the County Extension programs across the state and works
closely with the District Directors to administer programs. This
position answers directly to the Associate Dean for Extension.
The title of "Coordinator" is often used in our college
for non-administrative positions, particularly for program coordinators.
The "Director" title more accurately reflects the
duties of this position and is consistent with the title used
for similar positions in other states.
These changes in titles do not represent any change in job
responsibilities. They are intended to more accurately reflect
the responsibilities as they currently exist. |
In order for the four district model to work effectively, it is desirable
that each district have a full staff of PDC’s. Currently the
ANR PDC positions in Southeast and Southwest Districts are vacant.
However, both positions have been advertised with the desire that they
will be filled by Fall, 2005. A second FACS PDS position is currently
being advertised. It will be housed in Griffin and will handle FACS
program development for Northwest District.
Return
to Progress Reports
