////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////1

//////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////////extension.umd.edu EM—4 | DECEMBER 2018

Guidelines and Best Practices

New University of Maryland Extension (UME) faculty

are faced with a barrage of information and subsequently

many questions:

What is my role within the organization and what

does it expect of me?

What are my clientele needs?

Which committees should I serve on?

How do I build teams?

Where can I learn about the organizational culture?

What’s the process for promotion and tenure?

These are only a few of the many questions a new

junior faculty member might experience. It can be

overwhelming for new faculty to understand and balance

the enormity of their role, potentially influencing how

they develop a sound Extension plan and conduct

effective programming. While most faculty are subject

matter experts, they have not always had teaching or

program development training, further necessitating

fundamental and comprehensive employee development.

New employees in any organization need sufficient and

ongoing training, onboarding, coaching, and mentoring

to be successful in their positions (Baker et al., 2014;

Kutilek and Ernest, 2001; Safrit, 2010). The employee

development process is a strategic collection of

interrelated organizational investments, with each

element being critical to meeting the employee and

organization goals (See Figure 1).

As a key component of employee development,

mentoring provides invaluable early career support,

direction, and perspective, typically from a more

experienced organization member (Godwin et al., 2011).

Mentoring Univers i ty of Maryland Extension Faculty

Figure 1. Relationship of four investments in UME

faculty

A mentor by definition is a guide, which implies both

support and an element of trust in the mentor-mentee

relationship. It is important to note that coaching and

mentoring are often used interchangeably and involve

an educational support relationship.

“One of the greatest values of mentors

is the ability to see ahead what others

cannot see and to help them navigate

a course to their destination.”

— John C. Maxwell

extension.umd.edu

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////2

In coaching, the learner directs the process (Allen, 2013).

In mentoring, the mentor provides guidance catered to the

needs of the mentee in a mutually agreed upon

relationship (Franz and Weeks, 2008). Both are needed

for faculty growth and development (OSU, 2018).

This publication presents a snapshot of mentoring

principles, guidelines, and best practices garnered through

review of the literature and key informant interviews with

established mentoring programs throughout the

nationwide Cooperative Extension System.

Benefits of Mentoring

Mentoring is an effective educational and employee nurturing strategy that provides numerous benefits to the organization, mentee and mentor (NCCE, 2017; OSU, 2007; Powell, 2012). The significant value of these benefits should be understood by all parties to ensure appropriate investment in the process.

Organization: Mentoring programs benefit organizations by enhancing the capacity of experienced faculty while building and leveraging the capacity of new organization members. The result can be improved outcomes and increased programming outputs (Farrell, 2017).

Senior faculty continually build their leadership skill set through the responsibility of mentoring incoming junior faculty, and junior faculty are provided with a guide to navigate the potentially complex organization they’re joining. The results can be reduced disorientation, confusion and costs that are often associated with joining a new organization. Satisfied, productive employees may be less likely to leave the organization and more willing to grow into mentors for future junior faculty as they progress in their own career (Brodeur et al., 2011; Farrell, 2017; Strong and Harder, 2009). The results can be both reduced organization brain drain and decreased costs associated with onboarding and orienting of replacement employees (Strong and Harder, 2009). Mentor: By design, the mentoring relationship aims to enhance the skills of both the mentee and mentor. While mentors may be seasoned in their practice and invaluable sources of organizational history and wisdom, their skills were built through experience and repetition over years of practice.

Mentors gain exposure to new or emerging areas of study and opportunities for partnership by helping the mentee navigate their own career interests. They can strengthen their leadership by using and refining skills and approaches within the mentoring relationships. Mentee:

Incoming junior faculty can benefit from mentoring if the right pairing is made and the mentor and mentee both commit to investing in the relationship. Confusion and stress are common when joining a new organization (Place and Bailey, 2010). Indicators of their presence include:

Uncertainty about role expectations; Hesitancy in building relationships or collaborating

with others within and outside of the organization (Byington, 2010);

Reluctance to be creative in problem solving due to unfamiliarity with the academic support structure of the organization (Farrell, 2017).

Mentors can mitigate some of the challenges new faculty experience by providing the mentee opportunities to gain clarity into the performance expectations of the new role, guidance on navigating the physical and administrative landscapes, and input on approaches to networking and career development.

Attributes of a Good Mentor

A good mentor in many ways holds the roles and attributes of an advocate, particularly when working towards the mentee's best interests within the organization (Cyr, 2011; Powell, 2012). This role can be seen in the commitment of the mentor to act on behalf of the mentee to coach them towards the expectations of the program through sharing their own experiences and providing honest feedback.

Other attributes of a good mentor include a genuine interest in the mentee’s growth and development and a willingness to commit the time needed for that growth. Good mentoring skills are key to mentoring success. Those skills allow the mentor to challenge, support, and provide vision to their protégés.

While the technical knowledge of the mentor is an important attribute, more important than what the mentor knows is how the mentor approaches conferring what he/

“The delicate balance of mentoring someone is not creating them in your own image, but giving them the opportunity to create them-selves.”

-- Steven Spielberg

extension.umd.edu

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////3

she knows to the mentee. The personal characteristics present in a mentor’s approach such as being an encourager and good listener, being sincere, positive, and understanding, while also being professional, sensitive, and trustworthy, are all attributes of a good mentor (Byington, 2010; Cyr, 2011; Farrell, 2017: NCCE, 2017; Powell, 2012).

Mentoring Guidelines and Practices

While a considerable collection of mentoring practices exists in the literature, a fundamental set of practices are commonly employed and recommended by Extension systems:

Ownership and tracking of the process is identified and structured in policy (Mincemoyer and Thomson, 1998). Various models are used depending on the type of Extension administrative structure, responsibilities and load. The responsibilities can be handled by the human resources office; managed by a mentoring coordinator; assigned to Operation Director, County Extension Director, Area Extension Director or Program Leader, or a combination of these roles. A web-based tracking process is recommended for ease of access for all and to maintain records. Training of mentors is essential and web-based training is recommended (Safrit, 2010). Even with training, mentor quality will vary and evaluation of mentors with follow-up training is critical. Defining and discussing roles and responsibilities, establishing short- and long-term goals and identifying approaches to problem solving are skills needed by mentors (Byington, 2010). Matching mentor to mentee is cr itical and involves understanding the circumstances of both mentor and mentee. Best matches are made based on compatible interests, personality, and future goals of both (Menges, 2016). Mentee and mentors can complete a bio sketch form to help in the pairing process (Menges, 2016; Mincemoyer and Thomson, 1998; NDSU, 2012; VCE, 2013). Proximity matters as well. It is better if a mentor is located near the mentee (Mincemoyer and Thomson, 1998; NDSU, 2012). Pairing can be done through multiple models (See Table 1). Most common is assigning an official mentor to a new faculty member. Others include assigning a mentor team (with specific expertise, such as subject/topic, unit policies, promotion) to a new faculty member; and assigning multiple mentees to one mentor or mentor team. Evaluation of the relationship should be continual in regular intervals until the mentoring relationship is concluded. The pair should have dedicated quarterly contact at a minimum with initial meetings held face-to-face (within 1st month) and at least twice per year (Gallagher, 2004; Menges, 2016).

Formal meeting reports should include topics, ideas, recommendations, resources, and plans. These reports will help both the organization and pair and should be maintained by the mentee and tracked by an administrator via a web-based system. Length of the relationship var ies from two to three years with some continued support to promotion (Gallagher, 2004; UME, 2018). If the relationship is not productive for both parties, a no-fault approach is suggested (ACES; Luz, 2013; Menges, 2016; NCCE, 2017). New mentors and mentees can form new relationships. Peer mentoring can occur among new employees. The organization should provide a formal process for new employees to meet with each other to share stories and ideas. The organization could establish cohort networks. Responsibilities of a Mentoring Program

Organization: Organizational responsibilities include investment, implementation, evaluation and management of the mentoring program (Luz, 2013). Two organizational inputs are crucial: 1) comprehensive policy and 2) dedicated personnel. The organization is also responsible for providing tools for tracking and reporting on mentoring activities, and financial support for travel that may be needed for the mentor and mentee to meet face-to-face. Comprehensive policy sets the expectations for the program by establishing a vision and program guides, and sets expectations for the mentors and mentees through role manuals Llewellyn, 2013; Mincemoyer and Thomson, 1998). Dedicated personnel coordinate the administrative elements of the program that allow it to function. Mentors: Mentors hold valuable responsibilities in their roles working with junior faculty. Navigating the complexities of a new, large organization can be challenging for a new faculty member. Part of the mentor responsibility is to guide the mentee through the new landscape. Ideally, mentors will initiate contact with their mentees, and through an atmosphere of open dialogue provide guidance and insight on the expectations of their role within and outside of the organization (Byington, 2010; Farrell, 2017; Harder, 2013; Mincemoyer and Thomson, 1998). Within the organization, mentors will provide insight on how to set priorities (Gallagher, 2004), balancing time between scholarship, teaching, and service, and will help the mentee network with colleagues (Luz, 2013). Outside of the organization, mentors will help mentees navigate their relevant professional organizations, and

extension.umd.edu

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////4

connect with stakeholders and other advisors (Cyr, 2011; Denny, 2016). Honest, constructive criticism and encouragement (Cyr, 2011) will allow the mentor to provide motivation for the mentee to perform and meet the mentee’s goals (NCCE, 2017). Mentee: As new members to an organization, mentees hold responsibilities (Harder, 2013), influencing the success of their mentor-mentee relationship, as well as their progression in the organization. Regular meetings between the mentor and mentee are important. The mentor is responsible for initiating the contact and beginning the relationship. The mentee is responsible for their own growth by actively listening to, asking for, and giving feedback (Denny, 2016; NCCE, 2017; Powell, 2012), as well as articulately stating their needs (Byington, 2010). The mentee is expected to follow through on the information, referrals, or assistance provided by the mentor (Farrell, 2017; NDSU, 2012). Recommended Mentoring Topics

The following list of topics should be discussed by each mentor and mentee: Introduction to Extension and understanding of

professional position role/objectives and expectations (Farrell, 2017; Harder, 2103); Fundamentals of program development, including

logic model, needs assessment (Llewellyn, 2013), impact evaluation (Baker and Hadley, 2014; Farrell, 2017; Saunders and Reese, 2011); Learning how to find, build relationships, and work

with clientele, stakeholders, and community leaders (Luz, 2013); Building teams with peers/campus faculty/regional

colleagues/stakeholders (NCCE, 2017); Developing an advisory committee (Harder, 2013); How/where to tap into other resources (Farrell,

2017); Understanding system reporting and where to go for

resources and training;

Professional associations and getting involved; Scholarship opportunities and tips to be involved in

grants, how to publish, leadership roles (Kutilek and Ernest, 2001; Liewellyn, 2013; Saunders and Reese, 2011); Time management (NCCE, 2017) and balancing

scholarship, teaching and service. How and when to say yes/no; Balancing work and family (Luz, 2013; NCCE,

2017); Professional development ideas/strategies (Gallagher,

2004; NCCE, 2017); Effectively and efficiently responding to clientele

needs/inquiries and managing volunteers (Farrell, 2017; Harder, 2013; NCCE, 2017); Matching technology and program venues; Promotion strategies and available resources (Luz,

2013; OSU, 2013). Evaluation of the Mentoring Program

Evaluation is essential to understand whether the relationship is productive and beneficial to the mentee, demonstrate the impact of the program, and guide any changes needed to improve program and individual outcomes (Byington, 2010; Lumpkin, 2011) Formalized recordkeeping by the mentor and mentee is highly recommended to completely and uniformly track notable events and activities in the mentoring relationship (Harder, 2013). Providing tools and guidelines for recordkeeping can encourage some consistency in what is reported and how the mentee is progressing in his/her role. Administrative tracking through recordkeeping can assist in identifying the productiveness of the relationship and satisfaction with the match. Understanding productiveness, satisfaction, and the activities included with those elements can guide future mentor-mentee matching and the activities the matches are encouraged to explore in their relationships. If adequate recordkeeping is kept by both administrative personnel and by the mentors and mentees, overall mentor program evaluation will be easier to conduct at periodic intervals to address enhancement and revisions to the mentoring program. Conclusions

Successful mentoring is based on a relationship of trust (Byington 2010; Farrell, 2017) and genuine interest. Mentoring is an essential and cost-effective investment in Extension faculty. Mentoring is only one piece of educating faculty to be successful and must be accompanied by sufficient onboarding, ongoing professional development, and other coaching (Franz and Weeks, 2008). The mentoring process can be accomplished in many ways and the best approach is dependent on system/admin structure, roles, capacity. Formalized policies on

extension.umd.edu

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////5

mentoring structure, training, individual responsibilities, and organizational tracking and evaluation are recommended. To truly be successful, someone must own the program and champion it within and across Extension administration.

Table 1. Mentoring models used by universities – Hanover Research, 2014

One-to-One Mentoring: One mentor meets with one mentee at a time; this is the traditionally accepted model. The individualized attention that the mentor pays to the mentee allows for greater rapport building. These relationships often last a number of years but can be a lifelong partnership. These relationships are highly structured with multiple outcomes, often for both the mentor and the mentee.

Group Mentoring: One mentor meets with multiple mentees at a time. Mentees typically have a common or similar goal. This method is especially effective in situations where time and mentoring resources are at a premium. Once a level of trust and openness has been achieved, this model is also effective for tapping into collective knowledge, where shared knowledge and ideas can trigger larger possibilities.

Team Mentoring: Multiple mentors work with a single mentee. The relationship lasts for a limited time, until the goal is achieved or the project is completed. The focus of the mentoring relationship is the function of the group, rather than any psychosocial bonding. The mentors are assembled to act as guides and resources, providing feedback on the work, but it is the responsibility of the mentee to bear the burden of learning and to move the project forward.

Peer Mentoring: Another junior faculty member or members provide guidance and/or feedback to a junior faculty member. These relationships can be one-to-one or as a group, and are an informally structured relationship. This type of mentoring can be effective for sharing job-related knowledge or to share insight on some of the challenges and experiences the others may encounter.

E-Mentoring: One mentor works with a single mentee via the Internet. Some programs factor in an initial meeting or periodic face-to-face meetings, if distance is not too much of a barrier, but most do not because to the participants are in vastly separate locales. This type of mentoring is extremely helpful for schools or organizations that have multiple branches around the world. It is also a great way for participants in different locations but common fields to establish mentoring relationships. However, it is important that both parties be self-motivated to maintain regular communications and complete agreed upon tasks without the traditional "face time" to serve as an impetus.

Informal Mentoring: The mentee self-selects their mentor, usually initiated as part of a conversation or because the mentor is someone the mentee has identified as a role model. These relationships develop naturally, may not include any formal agreement, and may not have any formalized structure to them. Most of the relationship progresses at the behest of the mentee and even though there are goals, measures of success are seldom kept track of.

Reverse Mentoring: The junior faculty member has more experience or knowledge in a particular area than the senior faculty member. This kind of mentoring can be used when the senior person needs to know about a particular kind of new technology or can be used to encourage diversity and cross-generational understanding. For this kind of mentoring to be successful, it is important to remove barriers of status and position and to create a safe, open environment.

Recommended Resources: UMD Faculty Handbook – Faculty Mentoring: https://faculty.umd.edu/faculty/mnt_ndx.html University of Maryland Extension Faculty and Staff Affairs: http://extension.umd.edu/faculty-staff

References Alabama Cooperative Extension Service (ACES). Mentoring Program

Handbook – Mentor Guide. http://offices.aces.edu/business/wp-

content/uploads/sites/140/2016/02/MentoringHandbook.

Allen, K. (2013). Coaching: A Tool for Extension Professionals.

Journal of Extension 51(5), Article 5IAW1. Available at: https://

www.joe.org/joe/2013october/iw1.php

Arnold, S. and N. Place. (2010). Influences on Agricultural Agents'

Decisions to Remain in an Extension Career. Agricultural Education

51(2).

Baker, L. M., & Hadley, G. (2014). The New Agent: A Qualitative

Study to Strategically Adapt New Agent Professional Development.

Journal of Extension [online], 52(5) Article 5FEA3. Available at:

http://www.joe.org/joe/2014october/a3.php

Byington, T. (2010). Keys to Successful Mentoring Relationships.

Journal of Extension 48(6), Article 6TOT8. Available at: https://

umd.app.box.com/file/101761316541

Cyr, L. F. (2011). New Faculty Mentoring Handbook. University of

Maine Cooperative Extension. 23 pp. Available at: https://

extension.umaine.edu/plugged-in/wp-content/uploads/

sites/80/2011/12/MentoringHandbook.doc

Denny, M.D. (2016). Mentoring Adult Learners: Implications for

Cooperative Extension as a Learning Organization. Journal of

Extension, 54(3) Article 3FEA2. Available at: https://

umd.app.box.com/file/195495130251

Franz, N. and Weeks. (2008). Enhancing Extension Employee

Coaching: Navigating the Triangular Relationships. Journal of

Extension, 46(5) Article 5TOT1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/

joe/2008october/tt1.php

Ferrell, M. (2017). Mentorship Program. University of Kentucky

College of Agriculture, Food and Environment Cooperative

Extension Service. 24 pp.

Gallagher, T. (2004). Oregon State University Extension Service

Mentor Handbook. Available at: http://extension.oregonstate.edu/

sites/default/files/for-employees/training-technology/professional-

development/mentor.pdf

Kutilek, L. M. And G.W. Earnest. (2001). Supporting Professional

Growth through Mentoring and Coaching. Journal of Extension, 39

(4), Article 4RIBI. Available at: https://www.joe.org/joe/2001august/

rb1.php

Hanover Research. (2014). Faculty mentoring models and effective

practices. https://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Faculty-

Mentoring-Models-and-Effectives-Practices-Hanover-Research.pdf

Harder, A. (2013). UF/IFAS Extension Mentoring Roles and

Responsibilities. UFL WC087. Available at: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/

wc087

extension.umd.edu

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////6

The University of Maryland,

College of Agriculture and Natural

Resources programs are open to all

and will not discriminate against

anyone because of race, age, sex,

color, sexual orientation, physical

or mental disability, religion,

ancestry, or national origin, marital

status, genetic information, or

political affiliation, or gender

identity and expression. color,

sexual orientation, physical or

mental disability, religion, ancestry,

or national origin, marital status,

genetic information, or political

affiliation, or gender identity and

expression.

ANDREW LAZUR

lazur@umd.edu

SARAH D. RADICE

This publication, Mentoring

Extension Faculty – Guidelines

and Best Practices (EM- 4), is

a series of publications of the

University of Maryland

Extension. The information

presented has met UME peer

review standards, including

internal and external technical

review. For more information

on related publications and

programs, please visit

http://extension.umd.edu/ to

find out more about Extension

programs in Maryland.

Llewellyn, D. A. (2013). Finding first-year success in Extension: Navigating stakeholder needs and

institutional expectations. Journal of Human Sciences and Extension, 1(1), 115–124.

Lumpkin, A. (2011). A model for mentoring university faculty. The Educational Forum, 75(4).

Luz, C.C. (Ed.) (2011). Faculty mentoring toolkit: A resource for faculty, mentors and administrators

at Michigan State University (NSF ADVANCE Grant #0811205). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State

University. https://www.adapp-advance.msu.edu/files_adapp-advance/content/

FacultyMentoringToolkit-final.pdf.

Menges, C. (2016). Toward Improving the Effectiveness of Formal Mentoring: Matching by

Personality Matters. Group & Organization Management 41(1), 98-129.DOI: 10.59601115579567.

Mincemoyer, C. C., and J.S. Thomson. (1998). Establishing Effective Mentoring Relationships for

Individual and Organizational Success. Journal of Extension, 36(2), 18-26.

North Carolina Cooperative Extension (NCCE). (2017). The Extension Mentoring Program for New

Agents – Desk Reference Guide. Available at: https://eod.ces.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/

NCCE-Mentoring-Desk-Reference-Guide_01302017.pdf?fwd=no

North Dakota State University (NDSU). (2012). Extension Service Staff Mentoring Program. https://

www.ag.ndsu.edu/ext-employees/new-employees/ndsu-extension-service-staff-mentoring- program-1/

county-mentoring-program-information/county-mentoring-program-information

Ohio State University Extension (OSU). (2007). Peer Mentoring Program. 9 pp. https://

central.osu.edu/sites/extc/files/imce/Mentor-ProtegeCombined.pdf

Ohio State University Extension (OSU). (2013). OSU Extension Promotion and Tenure Mentoring/

Coaching Guidelines. 2pp. https://hr.osu.edu/public/documents/learning-development/mentoring-

mentor-toolkit-%20final-508.pdf

Place and Bailey. (2006). Mentoring: Providing Greatest Benefit to New and Seasoned Faculty in an

Extension Organization. AIAEE 22nd Annual Conference Proceedings. Clearwater Beach, FL.

Rockquemore, K.A. (2013). A Mentoring Manifesto. Inside Higher Ed. https://

www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/08?%2Fessay-how-be-good-faculty-mentor-junior-professors=

Powell, G. (2012). 4-H Faculty Mentoring Handbook. Rutgers Cooperative Extension. http://

nj4h.rutgers.edu/about/4-H_Faculty_Mentoring_Handbook.pdf

Strong and Harder. (2009). Implications of Maintenance and Motivation Factors on Extension Agent

Turnover. Journal of Extension, 47(1) Article 1FEA2. Available at: https://umd.app.box.com/

file/101761529993

Texas A&M Agrilife Extension. (2012). Mentoring in Extension. 26 pp. https://agrilife.org/od/

files/2010/04/Mentoring-Guidelines-2012.pdf

Safrit, R.D. (2006). Revisiting State 4­H Mentoring Programs for County 4­H Professionals. Journal of

Extension, 44(1) Article 1FEA67. Available at: https://umd.app.box.com/file/101761552566

University of Maryland Extension. (2018). University of Maryland Extension (UME) Policy and

Processes for Mentoring Tenure-Track Faculty. http://extension.umd.edu/faculty-staff

University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension. (2013). Mentoring Program Handbook. https://

extension.unh.edu/resources/files/Resource002353_Rep3448.pdf

Virginia Cooperative Extension Service (VCE). (2013). Mentoring Program Handbook – For Mentors and Protégés. http://srpsstate.edu/mm/proceedings/vce_mentoring_program_handbook.pdf

extension.umd.edu

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////7

APPENDIX

EXAMPLE MENTORING PROGRAM EVALUATION REPORT (online or paper)

Adapted from Texas A&M (2012) and UNH Coop. Extension (2013)

Name: _____________________________________ Cluster/REC: _________________________________________

Role (check one): ______ Mentee _______ Mentor

Report Date (check appropr iate one):

Describe the key topics of conversation:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What were the specific recommendations or actions?:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What problems have arisen?:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What was the resolution to the above problem(s)?:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

How would you describe the relationship between you and mentor/mentee?:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What assistance or resources are needed to enhance the relationship?:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Reviewed by:

Local Extension Director: ______________________________ Date: ______________ Program Leader: _____________________________________ Date:_______________ Director of Operations: ________________________ ________ Date: ______________

Year 1: _____ Qtr 1 _____ Qtr 2 _____ Qtr 3 _____ Qtr 4 Year 2: _____ Qtr 1 _____ Qtr 2 _____ Qtr 3 _____ Qtr 4 Year 3: _____ Qtr 2 _____ Qtr 4