National Association of University Forest Resources Programs

What it reported doing in 2024

USDA LIAISON The NAUFRP Executive Committee met two times in 2024 and the General Assembly once. At the March 11-12 meeting in Washington, D.C., the NAUFRP Executive Committee met with federal partners: Josh Stull, Stakeholder Affairs Officer, of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Dr. David Lytle, Deputy Chief, USDA Forest Service Research and Development, and Dr. Maria Janowiak, serving as both Acting Director, USDA Northern Forests Climate Hub and Acting Director, Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science, USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station. The Executive Committee also met with representatives of non-governmental partners including the Association of Public Land-Grant Universities, National Alliance of Forest Owners, National Association of State Foresters and the Society of American Foresters. Staff representatives from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture presented at the meeting. At its September 16th meeting in Loveland, CO the Executive Committee met with representatives of the Association of Public Land-Grant Universities, National Association of Forestry Association Executives and heard program updates from staff representatives of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. NAUFRP also met with the Society of American Foresters (SAF) to discuss establishing a consortium of organizations with interest in forestry/natural resource research that would help chart research priorities of national interest. It is envisioned that such a consortium would be housed with SAF. The NAUFRP General Assembly meeting on September 17th in Loveland, CO and included presentations and discussions with federal partners Dr. Kevin Kephart, Deputy Director of Institute of Bioenergy, Climate, and Environment, USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture and Dr. David Lytle, Deputy Chief, Research and Development, U.S. Forest Service. The General Assembly heard a presentation on enhancing diversity within university forestry and natural resources degree programs by Mississippi State University (MSU). MSU is committed to achieving an undergraduate enrollment that reflects the demographics of the state's high school graduating class by 2030. Noting other universities have similar goals, MSU would like to work with NAUFRP members to accomplish these goals collectively. The General Assembly also heard a presentation about #forestproud, an outreach initiative sponsored by the Society of American Foresters (SAF) and supported by a coalition of organizations (including specific universities) working to highlight the impact of forests in daily lives. #forestproud seeks to connect people to the role forests play in supporting jobs, building strong communities, advancing sustainable products, and inspiring a better future through storytelling, partnerships, and visuals. A member workshop was held during the General Assembly to consider Artificial Intelligence (AI) in forestry higher education. Discussion topics included what policies are needed and at what levels within institutions, what do program leaders/administrators need and what do faculty need to help navigate the AI world. The Family Forest Education Award, jointly sponsored by NAUFRP and the National Woodlands Owners Association, was presented at the General Assembly to the University of Idaho and Purdue University for their education and extension work with private forest landowners. The Idaho Forest Stewardship Program, developed and hosted by University of Idaho Extension Forestry, consisted of comprehensive educational seminars, workshops and field experiences on diverse topics in collaboration with local county Extensionists and through partnerships with the USDA Forest Service, Washington State University, and Idaho Tree Farm Program. Purdue University's Forestry and Natural Resources Extension developed and hosted the "Forest Management for the Private Woodland Owner Course" The course provided forest landowners eight learning

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
• Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
• Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
• Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings