Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts

Graphic of the outline of the state of Arkansas with a pine tree and a water drop in the center.


Home


About US


Awards and
Programs


Board Information


Districts


Calendar and
Events


Youth Activities


By-Laws and
Manuals


News and
Publications


Special Projects


Links


AACDE


Conservation Partners
Announcements

 


 

Memo To: District Chairperson

From: Don Mitchell, President
Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts

Subject: Partnership Workload Analysis Assessment

Date: May 6, 1999

In September 1998, a National Field Workload Analysis was completed across the country by the Conservation Partnership, which includes the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), local conservation districts, state conservation agencies and Resource Conservation Development Councils (RC&D). The 1998 National Field Workload Analysis captured the needed staff years of technical support at the field level for that given period of time.

From March 1999 to April 1999, district leaders throughout the nation reviewed and updated workload estimates for the year 2000 workload analysis, now called the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000. This analysis is an on-going effort to document the conservation workload on the nation’s private lands and provide information that is critical to answer questions from congressional and state legislative members about the partnerships’ workload and staffing needs.

The 1998 National Field Workload Analysis identified that the staff needed exceeded the staff available revealing a "gap" in the Conservation Partnership’s ability to maintain basic conservation services for private landowners. This workload analysis identified a $300 million deficit in the funding NRCS receives compared to the dollars it would take the partnership to maintain an adequate local technical assistance delivery system. In Arkansas, the 1998 National Field Workload Analysis revealed an additional 315 employees are needed to fill the gap between the state’s workload and workforce.

The Chief of NRCS, Pearlie Reed, indicated conservation districts would receive more funding if NRCS received the $300 million identified as necessary in the 1998 National Field Workload analysis. Arkansas’s share of the $300 million increase to the NRCS budget would be $6.9 million.

Arkansas State Conservationist, Kalven L. Trice, informed the Arkansas Conservation Partnership that if the state receives the $6.9 million, up to one-third of the additional funding would go directly to the grants to districts program. This would

be over $2 million provided to conservation districts to hire additional technical support personnel. Your support for obtaining these funds is very important. Success in this effort will certainly benefit Arkansas by providing additional dollars for technical assistance through NRCS and conservation districts.

Enclosed is a short assessment form. This form is being provided to each Arkansas conservation district and is intended as a follow-up to the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000. Please use the assessment to provide comments and concerns about the analysis completed in April 1999. Conservation districts are also asked to provide input on how Arkansas may improve its process for Partnership Workload Analysis 2001, which is expected to begin August 1999.

 

Please fax your completed assessment form to the Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts office in Little Rock, (501) 682-3991, attention Johnny Belew, no later than close of business Tuesday, May 11, 1999. If you have any questions please feel free to contact Mr. Belew at (501) 734-8133.

 

ASSESSMENT FORM

 Conservation District Name:________________________________________

Please indicate how satisfactory your experience has been with the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000 process by circling the appropriate response for each question listed below.

(Fax this completed assessment form to the Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts, AACD, office in Little Rock at ( 501)- 682-3991, Attention: Johnny Belew, no later than close of business Tuesday, May 11, 1999.)

Partnership Workload Analysis 2000 Follow Up Assessment

How satisfied are you with the encouragement provided to the district board or the representative of the board for participation in providing county level data for Partnership Workload Analysis 2000?

a) Very Satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) Very Dissatisfied

Overall, how satisfied are you with the district board’s participation in the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000?

a) Very Satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) Very Dissatisfied

How satisfied are you with the quality of assistance received from NRCS staff to complete the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000?

a) Very Satisfied

b) Satisfied

c) Neutral

d) Dissatisfied

e) Very Dissatisfied

Disregarding the short timelines required nationwide, how would you rate the overall process for reviewing and updating workload estimates at the county level for the Partnership Workload Analysis 2000?

1- Simple, with little to no burden to conservation districts and NRCS field employees.

2- Somewhat, Complex with a minimal amount of burden to conservation districts and NRCS field employees.

3-Complex, with a reasonable amount of burden to conservation districts and NRCS field employees.

4-Very Complex, with too much of a burden to conservation districts and NRCS field employees.

Additional Comments:

 

 


© 2015


The Arkansas Association of Conservation Districts
8100 Bicentennial Road
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72118
Telephone (501) 734-8133