Statistical data

Educational contacts cooperative extension — FY 2014

Program area Direct contact total Indirect contact total Total contacts
This chart includes both direct and indirect educational contacts. Direct contact occurs when participants are actively engaged in a learning process, whether in a group or individual setting, that promotes awareness and understanding of research-based knowledge and adoption of research-based practices. Indirect contact occurs when the distribution of information and resources does not meet the above definition of direct contact. This can include public events and dissemination of printed materials that deliver educational content.
Agriculture and natural resources 76,472 272,548 349,020
Human Environmental Sciences 881,153 822,788 1,703,941
Business Development 28,280 2,692 30,972
Community Development 99,122 218,764 227,886
4-H Youth Development 123,904 153,587 277,491
Totals 1,118,931 1,470,379 2,589,310
Photo: baby pigs

Missouri pork producers stepped up biosecurity measures this year to keep the porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV) from spreading. University of Missouri Extension Swine Nutrition Specialist Marcia Shannon said these efforts have kept Missouri numbers lower than national figures.

Missouri had 96 cases of PEDV compared to 1,646 in neighboring Iowa, 407 in Illinois, 214 in Kansas and 331 in Oklahoma. The disease has been reported in 27 states. Shannon credits improved biosecurity measures taken by pork producers such as Two Mile Pork, a family-owned operation near Monroe City. Their operation has taken several safety precautions against spreading PEDV.

The farm is closed to tours and delivery trucks. Deliveries are made to an off-site office, fumigated with a disinfectant and taken to the farm in a vehicle that has been washed and dried thoroughly before entering the farm. Employees wear clean disposable booties that have not touched the ground to create a line of separation.

Continuing Education Unit Number of
Individual hours
of instruction
Student FTE*

This table includes noncredit activities reported through MU continuing education units and does not include contacts by cooperative extension specialists.
* Student FTE = Student full-time equivalent
** Two other MU Conference Office activities with attendance totaling 1,927 have been distributed among their related academic areas and are represented in the MU Extension unit totals in this table.

Continuing Medical Education 1,821 27,322 2,765 230.2
Fire and Rescue Training Institute 674 13,958 10,588 564.1
Labor Education 33 775 302 20.5
Law Enforcement Training Institute 75 1,334 2,903 213.0
Missouri Training Institute 510 14,174 1,937 134.7
MU Nursing Outreach 70 1,889 27 47.5
Osher Lifelong Learning Institute 109 1,853 634 35.9
MU Conference Office**        
Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources 18 4,210 377 207.4
Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources Extension 2 142 28 7.1
Education 1 413 16 29.4
Engineering 4 280 106 16.5
4-H Youth Development 2 368 112 40.5
Human Environmental Sciences Extension 1 117 16 8.1
Journalism 2 89 29 4.5
Medicine 2 318 18 13.3
MU Administration 11 2,693 174 233.4
MU Extension 5 876 67 60.7
Veterinary Medicine 1 876 67 60.7
Conference Office-hosted 14 6,438 302 495.7
Conference Office totals 63 16,020 1,255 1,119.8
TOTALS 3,355 77,325 20,410 2,366

The Mizzou Mobile Turfgrass Diagnostic Lab is a laboratory on wheels that can respond to turf problems on golf courses and sports fields quickly and effectively. Many turf diseases can spin out of control if not treated in a timely fashion.

“The lab is outfitted with lab tools, microscopes and a workbench that allow me to take a close look at the sample and identify the disease-causing agent,” said Lee Miller, turfgrass pathologist for University of Missouri Extension. “With the lab, turfgrass managers don’t have to wait while samples are shipped back and forth to a plant diagnostic lab.”

Miller said the response to the Mizzou Mobile Turfgrass Diagnostic Lab has been overwhelmingly positive. The lab has been able to provide fast diagnosis and treatment, helping to keep golf courses and sports fields in tip-top shape.

Extension district option law passes

On July 2, 2013, Gov. Jay Nixon signed House Bill 542 into law, giving county extension councils the option to work with one or more other county councils to form extension districts.

“The main purpose of the district option is to help counties increase efficiencies and reduce costs by working together,” said Michael Ouart, MU vice provost and director of extension.

Ouart noted that the legislation does not require councils to form districts.

“This is an option and nothing more,” he said. “But it’s an important option for many counties that struggle to maintain extension services during times of limited funding.”

Similar legislation exists in 26 other states, including Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky and Tennessee. In these states, Ouart said, districting has helped extension offices remain open and continue to provide residents with extension services they rely on.

“This legislation allows for local solutions,” said H.C. Russell, then-chair of the University of Missouri Extension State Council. “It provides county councils greater control over how they manage their costs and gives communities more flexibility to dedicate resources to extension programs that best meet their needs.”

This legislation also allows districts to ask voters to approve a property tax to fund local programs. A majority of voters in each county of a district must approve the proposed tax for it to take effect.

“Again, this is an option available to districts and not a requirement. Any proposed tax levies must be approved by voters,” Ouart said. “Missourians realize the value of extension, but councils also understand that for some communities, a new tax may not be an appropriate or feasible solution to funding challenges.”

County councils that chose to form an extension district would appoint representatives to a governing board.

“Forming an extension district would not diminish the role of the county councils,” said Russell. “District boards will report to the councils, not the other way around.”