MINUTES

NORTH CENTRAL REGIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

STATE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION DIRECTORS

One Hundred Seventieth Meeting

July 13-15, 2004

Illini Center

Chicago, IL

 

Attendees: Marshall Martin (IN); Wendy Wintersteen (IA); Forrest Chumley (KS); Doreen Woodward, Hank Allen (MI); Bert Stromberg, Marilyn DeLong, Sarah Greening, Jennifer Obst (MN); Tom Payne (MO); Darrell Nelson (NE); Virginia Clark Johnson (ND); Steve Slack, Dave Benfield (OH); Kevin Kephart (SD); Margaret Dentine, Irwin Goldman (WI); Adrianna Hewings (USDA-ARS Midwest Area); Daryl Lund, Nicole Nelson (NCRA)

 

Tuesday, July 13, 2004

1-4pm              MRC Meeting

6-9pm              Reception, Orange and Blue Room, Illini Center 1^st floor

 

Wednesday, July 14, 2004

7-8am              Registrations and Continental Breakfast

Illinois Room, 4^th Floor

 

8-8:15am         Welcome

Robert A. Easter, Dean

 

8:15-8:30am   Illini Center: Delivering Education to Urban Audiences

Paul Cobia, Office of Continuing Education

 

8:30-9am         Welcome to Urban America

Dr. Jim Oliver, Assistant Dean, Urban & Metropolitan Affairs

 

9am-12pm       NCRA Meeting

 

 

 

AGENDA ITEMS

 

Item 4.0: Interim Actions of the Chair

Presenter: Wendy Wintersteen

 

·        Appointed past MRC members to evaluate the usefulness of the NCRA project review forms.  The appointees were Virginia Clark Johnson (chair of the committee), Gary Lemme, and Darrell Nelson.  This group will provide their recommendations during the MRC Report. 

·        Corresponded with ESCOP regarding the following March 2004 NCRA requests.  The results of this correspondence will be reported during the ESCOP Report:

o        ESCOP should undertake a review of the multistate project system to examine how increased efficiency and effectiveness can be achieved in the system. Specifically an ad hoc Committee led by Wendy Wintersteen on behalf of Dean Catherine Woteki raised this concern. Although their report focuses on projects in the North Central Region, we believe that some of the comments are applicable to the entire multistate system.

o        As a follow on to the discussion on the multistate project system, it was the consensus of NCRA that a reporting system should be in place to ensure simplification of accountability, meet the needs of the agency (CSREES), and contribute to evaluation and planning for the experiment stations. It was moved, seconded and passed to take the concerns about the Federal Plan of Work and Annual Report to ESCOP and request that these concerns are forwarded to the BAA and the Farm Bill Task Force so that they may be addressed. This topic is timely for the BAA Farm Bill Committee because the reporting requirements that we now labor under had some of their roots in the 1998 Farm Bill and the subsequent Agricultural, Research, Extension and Education Reform Act (AREERA) passed in 1998. Furthermore, CSREES has currently extended the Five-Year Plan of Work of 2000 another two years so the agency can critically evaluate the requirements and usefulness of the Plan of Work and the Annual Report. This presents an excellent opportunity for ESCOP to have input into this review.

·        Investigated compensation for Executive Director.

 

Item 5.0: Executive Director’s Report

 

Item 5.1: Activities from March 2004-June 2004

Presenter: Daryl Lund

 

March:

Chaired Review Team for OARDC Report on Economic Impact

Executive Vice Chair ESCOP Spring meeting

Co-chair DOE/NASULGC Project 1

Chair NIMSS Oversight Committee

Chair IFT Summit Committee

Member Sigma Xi Lectureship Committee

NCRA Spring meeting Perdido Beach Resort AL

Chair International Union of Food Science and Technology Distance Education Task Force

 

April:

NASULGC-ICA annual meeting Univ Georgia Chair Research Committee

BAA-Budget and Advocacy Committee ESCOP Alternate

Member IFT Task Force on Leadership Development

Member Rural Renaissance Act Steering Committee

Chair Scientific Advisory Council The World Food Logistics Organization

Member Board of Directors National Institute for Agricultural Security

Member National Multistate Coordinating Committee

 

May:

NASULGC Food and Society Project

Seminar Louisiana State University on Role of Food Science Departments

Visit National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden CO

IFT Editor-n-Chief Peer Reviewed Publications

 

June:

Executive Vice Chair NRSP Review Committee

Member FDA Food Advisory Committee

Co-PI Food Processing Video Project

Member NCRA Review Form Committee

 

Summary of Office Activity:

1.        Many of the activities mentioned above have recurring, regular spaced teleconferences.

2.        The NCRA posted 10 impact statements that were reviewed and edited by a professional writer.  We have developed a schedule to complete all impact statements (NC and NCR projects by Spring 2005.

3.        Nikki completed 4 credits with a 4.0 GPA.

4.        Nikki instituted a newsletter for NCRA project advisors.  This newsletter is also being sent to CSREES National Program Leaders by their request.

5.        Nikki is working with Rubie for the NIMSS upgrade which is to be released in mid-August 2004

6.        Nikki is working with AAs on timely submission of project reports (annual meeting minutes and SAES 422).

7.        Nikki has organized all the NRSP information, delivered it to the NRSP Review Committee, and posted all responses from NRSP projects. 

 

Item 5.2: Impact Statements

Presenter: Daryl Lund

 

NCRA project impact statements now have a home on our NCRA webpage at http://www.wisc.edu/ncra/impactstatements.htm.  We are in the process of gathering our second round of ten impact statements to be edited and posted by October. 

 

Discussion: Steve Slack also mentioned that we should emphasize that these impact reports are another opportunity to display the accomplishments of committees.  The impact statements should not be seen as more paperwork for the committee to labor through.  Marshall Martin, on behalf of the MRC, also mentioned the importance of explaining the committee benefits/impacts on stakeholders. 

 

Action: These points will be noted in the July addition of the AA newsletter. 

 

 

 

Item 5.3: MTA Survey

Presenter: Daryl Lund

 

Recall that at our March meeting, it was requested that the NCRA Office ask each experiment station to provide its boilerplate for MTAs. Specifically, each NCRA SAES was asked to comment on:

·         Policies regarding indemnity

·         Legal venue

·         Insurance assurance

·         What your offices sign

·         When are MTAs needed (patented germplasm only)

·         When are they not needed (routine germplasm)

·         Your experiences with NCURA and AUTM would also be helpful

·         Finally, identify a website for policies and procedures regarding MTAs (if your station has one)

To date, we have received responses from five of the twelve states (MN, MO, IL, SD, MI).  If your station has not yet sent its comments to us, please do so by August 1. The responses will be posted on the NCRA homepage.

 

Action: Wendy Wintersteen suggested that a sub-committee be formed to discuss specific problems and actions associated with MTAs.  In particular, the NCRA would like to pinpoint an exact definition of an MTA.  Kevin Kephart will chair this committee.  Other members of the committee include Irwin Goldman, Wendy Wintersteen, Forrest Chumley, John Gardner, and Bill Ravlin. 

 

 

Item 5.4: National C-Far Report

Presenter: Daryl Lund

 

National C-FAR 2004 Annual Meeting & Board Meeting

Highlights

 

ACTIONS TAKEN [1]

Board Election—National Members unanimously adopted the recommendation of the Nominating Committee to elect the following [term expiration date indicated in brackets]:

·        Stephanie Patrick (American Dietetic Association) [2007]

·        Dr. Terry Barr (National Council of Farmer Cooperatives) [2006]

·        Leonard Gianessi (CropLife America) [2007]

Election of Officers—The Board unanimously adopted the recommendation of the Nominating Committee to elect the following officers:

1.        Joe Layton (American Soybean Association), President

2.        Dr. Stephen Pueppke ( Natl Ag Biotech Council), Vice President

3.        R. Thomas Van Arsdall (Natl C-FAR Liaison), Secretary/Treasurer

* SEE http://www.ncfar.org/board.asp for 2004-5 Board & Officers.

Agricultural Research Institute Concept—

·        Staff was directed to distribute the final Institute task force report as soon as available to facilitate analysis and development of National C-FAR’s position.

·        It was agreed that a 1-page position statement should be developed on the concept so that National C-FAR would have a “proactive” statement to provide if the organization’s reaction is sought upon release of the final report, pending analysis.

o        Pueppke agreed to develop a draft for consideration.

o        Executive Committee to take lead in developing plan of action as soon as possible thereafter.

Research Outreach Committee[2]—

·        Hill Research Seminar:

o        The Board endorsed the Committee’s proposal to develop an enhanced action plan based on greeting the new Congress and staff with a mini-series of 4 monthly seminars, February-May and directed the Committee to move forward expeditiously.

o        Barr suggested enhancing the value of guest speakers by offering them as a resource in a separate briefing for consumer/environmental groups [other possibilities include briefing with selected media, agency staff].

o        Members will be asked for help in identifying and recruiting top speakers.

·        Research Success Profiles

o        Recommendations included increased focus on future benefits, complementarity with Seminar series.

·        Chairman:  Layton appointed Board member Larry Heider (AAVMC) to chair the Committee.

·        Committee Name:

o        The Board agreed that an appropriate name change should occur, deleting the term ‘advocacy’ to facilitate involvement of groups prohibited from lobbying activities in education/outreach efforts on behalf of research.

o        The Research Outreach Committee name will be used pending selection of any other alternative by the Committee.

Mission Statement—After debate on recommendations by Rules & Operations Committee, National Members opted to defer action and asked that the revised proposal be circulated for additional comment prior to action by the Board.

·        Current Draft of Mission Statement to be circulated separately.

NASULGC Synergies—The Board endorsed recommendations advanced by Buchanan to enhance coordination and communication between NASULGC and National C-FAR, including:

·        Liaison contacts on each of key committees, etc.  Van Arsdall to initiate by contacting Bobby Moser, exchanging e-mail contacts for appropriate distribution lists, and sharing documents as appropriate.

·        Improved sharing of information about the two organizations’ background and objectives.

·        It was agreed that members with overlapping responsibilities could help accomplish. 

·        Pueppke offered to represent C-FAR at NASULGC meetings he attends.

·        Explore development of common message as appropriate.

Bylaws—National Members voted to suspend the rules and after discussion unanimously adopted amendments to the bylaws recommended by the Rules & Procedures Committee to provide appropriate flexibility in (1) setting the dues schedule; (2) establishing standing committees; (3) approving the budget; and (4) scheduling the annual meeting date.  The Members also voted to change the due date for dues from July 31 to March 31, starting in 2005.  Enhancement of the ‘Objectives’ statement to appropriately recognize the role of extension in the research, education and extension matrix was also adopted unanimously.

Additional discussion:

·        Voting Rights—It was agreed that staff would inquire of affiliate members whether they have a concern about existing voting rights [National Members only].

·        Standing Committees—No action was taken on the bylaws, as the Board has the flexibility to establish Standing Committees that make sense.  The Rules & Procedures Committee recommended merging Finance and Membership Committees, but no action was taken. 

o        Any further action on committee structure is subject to discretion of the Chair.

SEE http://www.ncfar.org/BYLAWS2004.pdf for current bylaws.

Committee Assignments—Chairman Layton appointed the following:

·        Finance:[3]  Stallman (chair), Barr

·        Membership:[4]  Reid, Phillips, Jordan, Heider, Gianessi, Buchanan

·        Rules & Operations:  Dooley (chair), Marple

Membership—Committee of the whole.

·        Near-term priority, determine status of 2003 members who have not yet paid.

·        Staff to edit current C-FAR contact list re past and potential members and provide workable list to committee for consideration, editing and follow up.

 

SELECTED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, DISCUSSION

Comments by the New President—

·        Newly elected President Layton commented on the organization’s strengths (90 organizations, unique in bringing research community and its customers together as one voice, customer-led) and committed to enhanced communications to the membership and ensuring the leadership represents the membership. 

·        He also indicated a 4-person ‘executive committee’ [President, Vice President, Secretary/Treasurer & one at-large member to represent ‘non-ag’ members] would be formed to conduct day-to-day operations.

Administrative—

·        Modifications to Dues Invoice:

o        Considerable discussion about whether to include check box asking whether member’s charter prohibits spending $ on advocacy.

o        Dooley indicated that no change necessary since National C-FAR is 501(c)3 organization, and less than 10% of budget spent on lobbying.  C-FAR can accept funds from organizations prohibited from lobbying without problem, and should not be problem for contributing organization.  Could cause additional problems with accounting, etc. 

·        Dooley indicated would research the legal issues & report back to staff.

·        It was agreed that the Board listing should be dropped from C-FAR’s letterhead, to simplify administrative support.

·        The next planned Board meeting will be via conference call in late September-October.  A face-to-face Board meeting is being planned for late 2004.

o        Staff will poll Board members re availability.

Speaker Lineup—The groundwork was laid for informed discussion and decision-making about the future direction of National C-FAR by a strong slate of speakers and panelists in the annual meeting program who informed, challenged and inspired:  William Danforth, Chairman, REE ‘Institute’ Task Force; Colien Hefferan, Administrator, CSREES; Brian Klippenstein, Legislative Director, Sen Bond; Walt Smith, Appropriations Associate, Rep Bonilla; Dan Byers, Majority Staff Director, House Science Cmte; Carrie Golash, FASEB; Pat White, Am Assn of Universities; David Reid, IUFT; Andrew Jordan, NCC; Gale Buchanan, U of Georgia.

·        Hefferan:

o        NRI grossly under funded.

o        Leveraging, collaboration among agencies best growth opportunity in terms of achieving needed outcomes.

o        Pitting science programs against each other is a problem.

o        Need to focus on WHAT we need to do and strategic plan, rather than how funds should be distributed.

o        Staff observation:  Follow up, take Hefferan up on her offer to meet & discuss how to support food & ag research.

·        Klippenstein:

o        Universities lobbying for individual projects a challenge.  900 individual earmarks.  Critical to work together.

o        Need validation from producers [customers].

o        Creative sources of funding.  It’s not just ag approps.  VA, HUD, et al.

o        Recommended focusing on challenges that still need to be met.

·        Smith:

o        Ag victim of its own success.

o        Concerned that research perceived as last priority, while a top priority for committee.  Bonilla has named ag research as one of subcommittee’s two top priorities.

o        Members going to have to make tough decisions between earmarks & programs.

·        Byers:

o        Since doubling of NIH, recognition that there’s a need to restore balance. 

o        Homeland security focus.

o        In election year, projects under HUD more popular.

o        Mentioned VISA problem related to homeland security, noting that ½ of PhD candidates international.

·        Golash:

o        FASEB 22 societies, 2 main committees, since policy & public affairs.  USDA chapter under science.

o        FASEB supports competitive grants program, peer-reviewed (NRI), against earmarks.

o        Ag advocacy member & staff driven, comments filed, not much follow up.  Emphasis largely dependent on interests of their president [non-ag currently].

o        Would consider joint approach [adding name to letter] if approached.

o        Main interaction with USDA is animal welfare.

o        Perception by public & many in scientific community that ag is not a science.

·        White:

o        Successful efforts to double NIH funding benefited from number of factors, including “NIH advantage.”  Peddling hope [helping heal people].  Timing—strong budget surplus.

o        Hard work, but wind at their backs.  Strong, patient advocacy group, highly motivated, member-volunteers.

o        Grassroots, bottoms up.

o        Also grasstops.  Focused on 4-5 MC’s who chair key approps/authorizing cmtes.  5-20 year leadership tenures.  John Porter their champion.

o        Mentioned Michigan Farm Bureau phone tree & feedback re actions taken.

o        Don’t want industry setting basic research agenda, but need their involvement.

o        In response to question about what AAU has done for ag research, response was not much, AAU members not as much in ag.

·        Danforth:

o        Concern that ag not well served by seeking funding through NIH, NSF.

o        Why are we in this [funding] fix?  Public perception.  Agency differences.  Regional differences.  Support groups.

o        Assumptions—Ag important; innovation necessary; science vital; public funds critical.

o        Corporate research driven by profits, short-term.