2003 Annual Report for ENC02-064
Bringing Farmland Conservation-Based Estate Planning to Agricultural Professionals
Summary
Several significant causes of farmland loss are aging farmers with no heirs to take over operations, young farmers who cannot afford to purchase a farm, farmers who do not have the information needed to make informed decisions regarding land protection options, and agricultural professionals who do not have the necessary information and training to assist landowners. To address this problem, American Farmland Trust (AFT) convened a group of key agricultural, conservation and financial professionals to train them in conservation-based estate planning so that they could more effectively advise their clients, particularly agricultural professionals, farmers, and landowners.
Objectives/Performance Targets
- Educate agricultural professionals on current, conservation-based retirement, farm transfer, and estate planning concepts;
Educate agricultural and conservation professionals on how to profile farmland owners who might benefit from these options;
Educate conservation, legal, and financial advisors on how to effectively convey conservation-based estate planning and farm transfer information to farmland owners and professional colleagues;
Evaluate this project as a model for implementation nationwide.
Accomplishments/Milestones
November 2002 – January 2003
AFT staff worked with state collaborators in Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota to identify a group of 10-12 professionals, contact them, and form the core training and outreach team. Each team consisted of at least one person from the financial world (e.g., banker, financial planner, tax advisor, CPA), attorneys, NRCS and Extension personnel, and land trust professionals.
Before the workshops, members of each state’s core training group were surveyed to find out their level of knowledge about conservation-based estate planning.
February 2003 – May 2003
AFT organized workshops and prepared the program, agenda and support materials for workshops in all three states. (PowerPoint slides, agendas and a list of educational materials distributed at those meetings will be included with the final report.)
May 2003
Three workshops were held:
-Ames, Iowa, on May 1
-Sycamore, Ill., on May 15
-Farmington, Minn., on May 22
June 2003 – September 2003
AFT and core group members provided technical assistance to workshop participants. AFT scheduled follow-up meetings in the three states. However, due to significant staff changes at AFT and the closing of its Upper Midwest office, these meetings had to be postponed.
September 2003 – January 2004
AFT summarized evaluations from the workshops, prepared this report, and put together a new team to complete the project.
What is Left to be Done
If the no-cost extension we are applying for is approved, we will complete the following:
March 2004
Contact participants in each state with a follow-up “Zoomerang” survey to evaluate:
1. Whether or not they conducted the trainings they said they would;
2. How well the NCR-SARE training prepared them to advise farmers about conservation-based estate planning;
3. Whether or not the training prepared them to conduct their own training sessions.
April 2004
Organize follow-up workshops in each state to answer questions and encourage communication and team-building between the various disciplines brought together by this training.
May 2004
Conduct follow-up workshops in each state with an emphasis on helping the participants identify farmers who are good candidates for including conservation options in their estate plans.
June – September 2004
Evaluate the final workshops and provide technical assistance as needed. Submit final report.
Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes
The outcome of the workshops differed more widely than expected. While participants from each state had broad knowledge of agricultural issues, their experience and interest in conservation-based estate planning ranged from very much to very little. As a result, some are better prepared to provide follow-up training and technical assistance than others.
Illinois
Participants (11): Two attorneys, one financial planner, one appraiser, one person from NRCS, two people from Extension, one from the Department of Agriculture, two from land trusts, one from Farm Bureau.
Prior Knowledge: This was the most knowledgeable group at the start. Nine participants completed pre-workshop questionnaires (attached) to assess their level of knowledge, and six completed post-workshop evaluations to find out if they had increased their knowledge and whether they planned to conduct any training to share it.
Of the nine people who completed pre-workshop surveys, eight reported they had a high level of knowledge of conservation easements and one reported some knowledge. Going into the training, eight were familiar with the term conservation-based estate planning and only one was not. While only one had a lot of experience with it, five had some and only three had none. All participants were familiar with land trusts and seven were aware of the tax benefits associated with conservation easements.
Outcomes: After the training, all six participants who completed post-workshop evaluations reported increased understanding of conservation-based estate planning and a greater ability to provide follow-up technical assistance based on the training. They also reported feeling better prepared to deal with family issues than they had been before.
Participants identified 14 groups including NRCS and Extension to provide training to in the next three to six months. Follow-up still is needed to see if this occurred, to find out what if any new issues emerged and to convene the group again for more in-depth discussion based on this experience.
Iowa
Participants (11): Three attorneys, one financial planner, two bankers, one person from NRCS, one from Extension, one from a land trust, one from the Farm Bureau and a farm management specialist from the local community college.
Prior Knowledge: This was the least knowledgeable group at the start. Seven participants completed the pre-workshop questionnaire. Only one completed the post-workshop evaluation, which makes it impossible to evaluate outcomes for this group at this point.
Four participants reported a high level of knowledge about conservation easements going in to the workshop, one had some, one had little, and one had none. In contrast to Illinois where eight out of the nine people reported high familiarity with the term conservation-based estate planning, in Iowa, only one did. However, three were somewhat aware of the term, one a little aware and two not aware of the term at all. As in Illinois, only one participant reported having had a lot of experience with conservation-based estate planning, but here only two others had some, two had a little and two had none. Four had never heard of land trusts and only one had much experience with them. Six were aware of tax benefits for conservation, but their answers suggested their knowledge was of forest preserves and wetlands, not agricultural conservation easements.
Minnesota
Participants (11): Two attorneys, two financial planners, one banker, two Extension personnel, three from soil and water conservation districts (SWCDs), one from a land trust.
Prior Knowledge: Eight participants completed the pre-workshop questionnaire and five the post-workshop evaluation. All reported that the workshop increased their understanding of conservation-based estate planning, and four of the five reported they felt prepared to provide follow-up technical assistance based on the training. They all also indicated being better prepared to deal with family issues than they had before the training.
Participants identified 12 groups to provide training to in the next three to six months including Extension, NRCS and SWCDs. Follow-up is still needed to see if this occurred, to find out what if any new issues emerged and to convene the group again for more in-depth discussion based on this experience.
Overall Progress Toward Outcomes to Date:
AFT convened these groups of key agricultural, conservation and financial professionals to help them become better prepared to advise their clients, particularly agricultural professionals, farmers and landowners in conservation-based estate planning. Based on the evaluations, it appears that this was achieved in Illinois and Minnesota, but it is less clear what progress has been made in Iowa.
Farmland is most vulnerable when it passes from one generation to the next. As Extension and other agricultural advisors expand their knowledge of conservation options in farm transfer and estate planning, they can give farmers alternatives to selling their land to avoid estate taxes, divide assets amongst heirs or sell it at an affordable price to an entering farmer. AFT hopes that this project can continue to its finish so that we can find out what kind of follow-up trainings core members have conducted in the past year, provide additional training and technical assistance to answer questions, and provide advice to help members of the core groups feel fully prepared to help farmers and other clients pursue conservation-based options in estate planning and farm transfer.