Importance of the Access, Equity, and Opportunity Competencies Among 4-H Professionals

The 4-H Professional Research, Knowledge and Competencies (PRKC) is a professional development framework that can be used to identify competency gaps and training needs of 4-H professionals. The PRKC consists of 6 competency domains, 1 being access, equity, and opportunity (AEO). A tailored design method was used to gather data and sort the respondents between rural and urban community type. 4-H Extension agents serving urban communities perceived 12 out of the 14 AEO domain components as more important than agents serving rural communities did. The 2 AEO domain components that were not significantly different in perceived importance were values, norms, and practices and active listening. An essential element of the 4-H experience must include creating an environment where children and youth feel safe, included, and that they belong. The differences among 4- H youth development professionals’ perceptions of the importance of the AEO domain components, based on their work location, warrants further review. Implications of this information could influence the competencies that Extension systems look for in hiring. Furthermore, educational workshops and trainings around AEO for existing youth workers may need to be evolved.


Introduction
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and its land-grant partners recognize the importance of diversity and inclusion in the development and implementation of University Cooperative Extension programs. These Extension programs must be handled in a manner that treats every customer and employee with fairness, equality, and respect. This applies to all

The 4-H Youth Development Program and Diversity Efforts
The 4-H program of today is committed to serving all youth within communities. 4-H's infrastructure reaches nearly six million youth nationwide, including military youth; children of incarcerated parents; and economically disadvantaged youth, especially in rural communities (National 4-H Council, 2019). Nonetheless, the stereotype of 4-H as an organization of White, rural youth has been difficult to overcome. Since most communities tend to be homogeneous and the club model is usually based within the community, developing a diverse club membership can sometimes be difficult (Howard & Wahle, 2021). To accomplish its 2025 membership goal, 4-H must be deliberate in developing inclusive environments that welcome vulnerable and diverse youth populations. As a strategy, and under the umbrella of the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy (2020), 12 groups were formed with youth development professionals from around the nation. The groups, known as "Champions," concentrate on work to support vulnerable populations. These groups provided national-level direction by the 4-H Program Leaders Working Group (PLWG, 2020) and the Access, Equity, and Belonging Committee ([AEBC], 2020).
Today, fewer than half (43%) of 4-H participants live in rural areas; 30% are in cities and 27% in suburban areas. Yet only 18% of America's children live in rural areas (National 4-H Council, 2018). Moreover, the diversity of the United States' youth is not fully mirrored in 4-H. While 4-H demographics have shifted in recent years, the pace of change is not keeping up with the growth of minority population groups across the country. In 2018, for the first time, less than 50% of U.S. children under age 15 were White (Brookings, 2019). In 2014, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 66% of 4-H members were White (National 4-H Council, 2018).
Furthermore, while 4-H strives to be inclusive of all, the reality is that the bulk of membership within 4-H community clubs is often viewed with a heteronormative lens of participation (Rosenberg, 2015). This means, based on societal assumptions and social norming, there may be people who believe that the 4-H program does not include children who identify within the LGBTQ+ community. Although Howard et.al (2021) demonstrated evidence of LGBTQ+ individuals' involvement in 4-H for decades, the historic agrarian and rural background of 4-H origins, and a continued public perception that is similar, likely influence the perception that LGBTQ+ youth are not part of the 4-H experience (Elliott-Engel et al., 2020).
As outlined in the 4-H program history, there have been times when the 4-H program needed to shift its focus to allow for a more inclusive environment. The difficult reality is that the program sometimes faces volunteers who are not supportive of including all types of children or they do not feel equipped or educated enough to handle situations outside of what they are accustomed to (Howard & Wahle, 2021). For 4-H programs to be high quality, they require staff members that are trained well, positive, and knowledgeable about their work. The challenge, however, is finding ways to support the professionals who create and deliver the programs to youth (Astroth, 2007).
New networks such as the National Urban Extension Leaders and the Western Center for Metropolitan Extension and Research have embraced the challenge and have been instrumental in creating the space to have conversations about how Extension should be functioning to meet the needs of 21 st century America (Harder & Wells, 2017). A high degree of ethnic and racial diversity enriches and challenges metropolitan communities (Farrell & Lee, 2011;Graham et al., 2014;Meissner & Vertovec, 2015). Extension can view both the benefits and difficulties of this circumstance as opportunities for engagement.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Workforce Development and Hiring
Normative beliefs of the Extension programmatic focus, as it relates to diversity and equity, may default to a view of the Extension worker's competency needs for rural America. Additionally, the Extension educator workforce development pipeline is not preparing a demographically representative population, leaving state administrators struggling to hire prepared professionals, especially those with in-culture competency (e.g., racial and ethnic minority and urban; Elliot-Engel et al., 2020). Recruiting and hiring practices need to be developed to attract the next generation of Extension professionals who have the skill set and passion to work on the complex issues found in urban areas against a backdrop of diversity. Hiring procedures need to be streamlined and improved to match staff and consultant skill sets appropriately to roles (Harriman & Daugherty, 1992). Additionally, mentoring and intentional retention systems will be critical to ensuring that the next generation stays engaged with Extension (Fox et.al, 2017).

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Competency Needs of Extension Professionals
Extension professionals working in metropolitan areas need the same basic set of core competencies as any other Extension professional in other geographic settings. However, because of the unique community conditions previously described, these individuals and teams must have additional skills and attributes to effectively address the needs of metropolitan constituents (Fehlis,1992;Fox, 2017;National Extension Urban Task Force, 1996;Webster & Ingram, 2007). Due to the magnitude of diversity in metropolitan areas, cultural competence is essential for all personnel. Although this is an expectation throughout Extension, the scope in urban areas intensifies the degree to which personnel must apply related competencies (Krofta & Panshin,1989;Webster & Ingram, 2007). More recently, an overlying focus in Extension has been increasing the participation of urban minority youths in 4-H (Garcia et al., 2017).

Conceptual Framework
Extension researchers have developed competencies that entry-level Extension agents will need for the future (Harder et al., 2010). Using the suggested competencies as a baseline, Benge et al. (2011) conducted a study among University of Florida Extension faculty to identify pre-hire entry competencies of potential employees that should be considered. Interpersonal skills, specifically cultural sensitivity, is a highly ranked skill set sought in hires (Benge et al., 2011). As such, this approach could lead to Extension employees who have an enhanced level of empathy and awareness of vulnerable population communities (Howard, et.al. 2021). Recognizing the focused effort of land grant universities around the nation to enhance Extension's presence in urban settings it is reasonable to ask the question, "what are the competency needs of rural Extension educators as it relates to Diversity, Equity, and Opportunity?" An assessment of the perceived value among the youth workers was a starting point to develop a baseline of understanding that could potentially shape a learning approach to enhance cultural competency skills for all youth workers within Cooperative Extension.
The 4-H Professional, Research, Knowledge and Competencies (PRKC) is a "framework for professional competencies that are vital to the success of the 4-H professional" (NIFA, 2017a, p. 4). The PRKC is a roadmap and guide for the development youth development workers, creation of job descriptions, career development, and learning plans and performance standards (Stone & Rennekamp, 2004). Originally developed in 1987 as the 4-H Professional Research and Knowledge Base ([PRK]; Hutchins, 1990;Rennekamp, 1987), the PRKC underwent reviews in 2. Youth program development -"Planning, implementing, and evaluating programs that achieve youth development outcomes" (NIFA, 2017a, p. 10).
3. Volunteerism -"Building and maintaining a volunteer program management system for the delivery of youth development programs" (NIFA, 2017a, p. 13).

Access, Equity, and Opportunity (AEO) -"Interacting effectively and equitably with
individuals, and building long-term relationships with diverse communities. Culture is defined as the intersection of one's national origin, religion, language, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, age, gender identity, race, ethnicity, and physical and developmental ability" (NIFA, 2017, p. 16).
6. Organizational Systems -"Using systems to build capacity of the organization and its people to work with and on behalf of young people effectively" (NIFA, 2017, p. 25).
State 4-H programs and Extension professionals have utilized the PRKC since its creation in a variety of ways, such as conducting research, building professional development program and in-service trainings, and integrating through youth development theory. In one of the first studies, using the original PRK, Rennekamp (1987) examined the staff development needs of Extension 4-H agents. Rennekamp found that Extension professionals' academic major affected their preparation to be a 4-H agent, signaling the need for change to hiring practices of 4-H agents. Minnesota 4-H created their youth development, educational design, and volunteerism specializations based on the PRK (Hutchins, 1990), and Western 4-H program leaders have been using the PRKC to create an on-going regional in-service training program (Astroth, 2002;Astroth & Lindstrom, 2008;Varrella et al., 2016). Heck et al. (2009) used the PRKC to identify both competency strengths and weaknesses of California 4-H professionals, stating "on the whole we found it was useful in identifying areas in which staff members had expertise as well as those where they reported lower levels of confidence" (para. 32). Using personal effectiveness items from the PRKC, Harder and Narine The PRKC domain that aligns with diversity and inclusionary efforts is AEO. The AEO domain, which consists of 74 unique competencies, is comprised of five topics and fourteen components which can be viewed in Table 1.

Methods
The findings presented in our article are part of a larger study assessing the professional development needs of NAE4-HYPD members using the PRKC. We received approval from the University of Florida Institutional Review Board (IRB) and the NAE4-HYDP Executive Board prior to conducting this study.
The target population for our study consisted of NAE4-HYDP members who identified as active Extension professionals. We obtained a list of active association members from the executive board which included members' names, email addresses, state, and membership type (N = 4,281). After removing lifetime and student members, we had 3,316. We split this remaining population into two groups using a systematic sampling procedure, because only half were completing the current survey and the other half were completing a different survey, which was part of the larger investigation. We conducted a census of the final targeted population (n = 1,658) for the purposed of the current study.
To gather responses, we used the tailored design method (TDM) because it yields high response rates, develops trust with the respondents, reduces sampling error, and allows the researchers to follow survey procedures that have been researched and scientifically founded (Dillman et al., 2009). Furthermore, this approach minimizes nonresponse (Sivo et al., 2006).
We sent a pre-notice message through the NAE4-HYDP newsletter to inform association members of the study and thank them in advance for their participation. We used Qualtrics to send four emails to each of the 1,658 study participants in our target population. A total of 432 questionnaires were completed, for an overall response rate of 26%. Table 2 provides a comparison of membership and respondents by their respective NAE4-HYDP region. Our survey consisted of the 74 items from the AEO domain of the PRKC (NIFA, 2017) and one demographic question to determine whether they served a rural or urban community.
Regarding the AEO domain, we used the Borich model (Borich, 1980) importance scale, which is (below average importance), 2.50-3.49 (average importance), 3.50-4.49 (above average importance), and 4.50-5.0 (essential). We defined "rural" as a community comprised of fewer than 50,000 residents, and "urban" as a community comprised of more than 50,000 residents.
Prior to conducting the study, the questionnaire was reviewed and assessed by a panel of four experts for construct and face validity (Ary et al., 2006). The panel consisted of 4-H Extension professionals at both the county and state levels, each member being from a different NAE4-HYDP region. The expert panel did not make any changes to the instrument. We formatted the questionnaire into an online survey using Qualtrics. We calculated Cronbach's reliability coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) to ensure the AEO domain components maintained internal consistency (Ary et al., 2006;Cronbach, 1951). The AEO domain was a valid instrument for assessing the perceived importance of AEO domain competencies of rural and urban 4-H Extension agents, which can be seen in Table 3. We did not find any previous studies that assessed the reliability of the AEO domain components to compare. Note. Reliability levels ≥ .80 considered acceptable (Cronbach, 1951).
We analyzed the data using SPSS version 26 statistical software package for Windows. We calculated descriptive statistics for the first objective and inferential statistics for the second and third objectives. We utilized t-tests to determine whether the difference between two means was statistically significant (Ary et al., 2006), using an alpha level of .05 for all statistical tests.
There were three limitations of this study. First, respondents may have misinterpreted the questions, which would result in decreased validity. Second, we assumed the respondents in the study provided honest and accurate answers. The third limitation was the low response rate of our study. To address this limitation, Linder et al. (2001) and Sivo et al., (2006) recommend comparing early to late respondents to minimize nonresponse error. We did not identify any significant differences between early and late respondents, signaling we can generalize the results of our study to the entire population (Linder et al., 2001;Sivo et al., 2006).

Objective 2 Results
Objective 2 of our study was to determine if significant differences existed in 4-H Extension agents' perceived importance of the AEO domain components based on whether they were located in rural or urban communities. Table 5 describes the differences between rural and urban 4-H agents' perceptions of the importance of sensitivity components. Personal readiness for valuing diversity and respect and honor for cultural and human diversity were perceived as more important by 4-H agents serving urban communities than by 4-H agents serving rural communities. Note. Response options were coded from 1 (not important) to 5 (absolutely essential).
*p < .05. Table 6 describes the differences between rural and urban 4-H agents' perceptions of the importance of awareness components. 4-H agents serving urban communities perceived pluralistic thinking and power, privilege, and policy as more important than 4-H agents serving rural communities. There was not a significant difference between urban and rural 4-H agents' perception of importance of the values, norms, and practices component.       Note. Response options were coded from 1 (not important) to 5 (absolutely essential). *p < .05.

Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations
An essential element of the 4-H experience must include creating an environment where children feel safe, included, and that they belong. The idea that everyone is welcome and will be provided an equal opportunity to grow and learn in the program is critical to a child's development and the 4-H mission (National 4-H Council, 2019).
Do 4-H Extension professionals serving urban communities need a varied skillset relative to their rural community colleagues? The results of our study are beyond the scope of this question; however, our results do shed light on this question in that from an employee perspective, the answer might be yes. Statistical analysis demonstrated that urban 4-H professionals perceive diversity competence as being more important than those serving rural communities do, and previously cited literature supports this claim (Fehlis, 1992;Fox, 2017;National Extension Urban Task Force, 1996;Webster & Ingram, 2007). Furthermore, we investigated 4-H professionals' perceptions of how they feel or think about these competencies, not if they actually know or have the ability to practice them. One's perception of what they think versus what they do has been shown to be different (Kerman et al., 2007), and in the case of our study, further examination is needed.
An interesting finding of our study is that the respondents rated the importance of the AEO components as above average and not essential for the 4-H professional. The current foundational model for Extension professional competencies (Harder et al., 2010)  Additionally, NAE4-HYDP and other youth-serving organizations can use the results of this study employ targeted and intentional professional development efforts and resources, such as a workshop or resource repository, available to their members and employees. Furthermore, educational workshops and trainings around AEO for existing youth workers may need to be evolved.