Example 1: State Level Conference Becomes Multi-State Conference
State A Extension offers a three-day conference on economic development strategies to local economic developers on development strategies. State B Extension does not have this type of program but does have a potential audience within 90 minutes of the conference site. State A and B agree that "A" will open the conference to developers from "B" and that Extension in B will help endorse the conference and help promote it as a jointly sponsored one. If B has specialists in this area with time, they might collaborate in the planning and delivery. If not, state A might do it all. State B Extension benefits by expanding the offerings available to its citizens. State B Extension benefits by being able to offer more to its citizens and getting some credit as a co-sponsor. State A Extension, who might do most of the work, expands its market and has a larger number of paying customers, making the conference more sustainable even for the citizens in their own state. The "pilot" aspect of this means of expanding programming is making the program available to an audience in another state. This often requires getting to know the state-level stakeholders as well as the target audience so it involves a number of new challenges but not a new curriculum.
Example 2: Intensive Community Program Delivered in Two State by Team from One State
(Note: Although this example is a possibility, the example above is likely to be a more practical way to use the "pilot program" option because it capitalizes on economies of scale more than this one.)
State B Extension has a business retention and expansion program and one of its neighboring states, "C," does not but the state specialists in C realize there is a need. However, the train-the-trainer option won't work because the CRD staff is small and doesn't have capacity to add this program. Also, the major grant option doesn't appear promising right now based on a scan of potential sources. This is where the pilot program might work for the benefit of both states.
Based on experience in State B, Extension specialists in B realize they can deliver the program in C and cover their full costs (including time, materials and travel) for $10,000 to cities or counties within 90 minutes of their office. Yet, they also know that this price tag is likely to be too high for many rural communities. In their own state they use a funding model that charges the community a part of the fee and helps the community find outside sponsors to cover a part of the fee. The grant would help cover the cost of travel, materials, and meeting expenses for the key stakeholders from both states. State B specialist would do all of the program delivery while State C might have a county educator sit on the local task force as a local citizen (and to track how the program went).
State B benefits from an expanded market that covers salary costs and helps build examples of successful BR&E (which are useful in both states). State C benefits from being able to offer this program in at least a part of their state.
