Christmas trees
Field crops
Fruit
Home and yard
Nursery and landscape
Turfgrass
Vegetable
Diagnostic Services
Soil/Plant Nutrient Lab
Enviro-weather
Regional IPM Center
Pesticide safety
Organic: New Ag Network
Invasive species
Sustainable ag & food systems
IPM Review Update: MSU Response to Review Team Recommendations |
|
|---|---|
| An administrative work group -- Gary Lemme, MAES/Project GREEEN; Doug Buhler, MSUE; Richard Merritt, Entomology Department; and Ray Hammerschmidt, Plant Pathology Department -- evaluated the recommendations of the Review Team. Mike Brewer, coordinator of the IPM Program, was invited to participate. The IPM/ICM staff also reviewed the recommendations. The key points of the Administrative Work Group were discussed and accepted at the fall 2004 CANR Deans and Directors meeting. Here are the key items: | Related documents Read review team report View agenda of review View the December 2003 planning session report View MSU Responses (Oct. 2004) |
| 1. Review Team Recommendation: Pursue a timely facilitated process to further develop plans initiated during the December 2003 planning session. Response: IPM staff and ICM agents will complete planning on the three emphasis areas (web/information services, IPM/ICM training, sustainable IPM implementation) presented at the December planning session. Colleagues (Department, Extension, and external) will be invited to participate in activities. Funds have been identified to sponsor pilot efforts. An advisory structure (internal and external groups) has been recommended by the Administrative Work Group as the central method to gain formal input in planning and priority setting. 2. Review Team Recommendation: Consider a name change for the IPM Program, because the totality of MSU IPM infrastructure is found in multiple units. Response: The Administrative Work Group concurs that the totality of IPM expertise at MSU is found in department and extension personnel devoted to IPM research and extension. The IPM Program (with linkage to ICM agents) is given a special charge to stimulate and integrate activities across units and state regions with the focus to increase implementation of IPM and related ICM practices. A name change is not advised. It may be useful to offer Extension staff an affiliation status with the IPM Program. Affiliation status exists now with the ICM agents, although the relationship is not formalized through acknowledgement or approval by the Regional Directors. The affiliation status concept should be developed further, possibly extended to other agents and department personnel, and brought to the advisory group for comment. 3. Review Team Recommendation: Convert IPM Coordinator to an academic tenure-track member. Response: The Administrative Work Group concurs that tenure stream is commensurate with the expectations of the position; the conversion would be an acceleration of the conversion plan in the original letter of hire. Given the responsibilities, this position should be considered cross-disciplinary with assignment to a unit for administration that is consistent with the academic specialization of the Coordinator. 4. Review Team Recommendation: Convert communications and integration staff to continuing stream appointments. Reconsider the funding structure for the critical Integrator positions to stabilize these positions. Response: The Administrative Work Group concurs that a continuous stream appointment is appropriate for the communications manager and assistant IPM coordinator. Although federal funding sources have recently stabilized, they do not permit additional conversion of additional communications personnel. The Integrator positions represent critical partnerships with Michigan’s agricultural industry. Fixed-terms for integrators are consistent with the philosophy of the partnership with industry to fund these positions. 5. Review Team Recommendation. Develop a plan for the comprehensive marketing of MSU IPM services and branded products. Response: The Administrative Work Group recommends revision of the communications manager’s job description to include the expectation of planning and working with other CANR personnel in this area. Additional resources will be provided to move forward in this effort. |
|
| Recommendations forwarded to other appropriate units: | |
| Review Team Recommendation: Encourage periodic review of the AoE team structure to insure relevance to current and future statewide needs as related to IPM (forwarded to MSUE). Review Team Recommendation: Seek a broadened base of support for the functions of the IPM Alliance (forwarded to IPM Alliance, chair sat on the Review Team). Review Team Recommendation: Institute a mechanism for financial returns to product developers as an incentive and for use in future product development (forward to CANR communications). |
|
Email the web developer.