Update Chesapeake Action Plan –

Report to Congress

Strengthening the Management, Coordination, and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership

June 4, 2008Working Draft – Do Not Quote or Cite

2Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

2

Expectations for this meeting

• Share information about how EPA CBPO funds are being used.

• Provide information regarding EPA CBPO responsibilities to Congress.

• Improve the grant guidance process to address your concerns.

• Discuss options to improve timeliness and quality of Data.

• Explore other programs to leverage funds.

• Explore accountability and effectiveness of state grant dollars to lead to accelerating successful practices which reduce the impact of the three principal sources of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment—agriculture, wastewater and developing lands through our shared funds.

• Discuss our needs to move towards Adaptive Management (integration of design, management, and monitoring to systematically test assumptions in order to adapt and learn)

3Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

3

EPA’s financial role in Chesapeake Bay Program Action Plan

• Since 1995, EPA funding of the Bay Program Office has remained steady at about $20 million annually.

• Approximately 45 percent of these funds is given back to the states as “implementation grants.”

• An additional 15 percent is used for various monitoring programs.

• Another 20 percent of the annual appropriation goes to fund grants, contracts and inter-agency agreements that bring experts to the Bay Program Office for projects ranging from agricultural conservation practices to wastewater treatment plant upgrades, as well as for critical special projects.

• The Bay Program's sophisticated computer modeling effort, used to calculate pollution reduction targets and to simulate various clean-up scenarios, captures 5 percent of the annual budget.

• The remaining money, about 15 percent, is used to support the personnel (salaries and benefits) and office (computers, phones, supplies, etc.) that support the larger partnership.

4Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

4

RtC and the Chesapeake Action Plan

• Chesapeake Action Plan (V. 1.0)

• CBP Strategic Framework aligned to Chesapeake 2000

• Operating Plan captures Partner activities and resources; includes ability to query by:

o Jurisdictiono Theme Areao Activity

• Dashboards portray progress, strategy targets and future strategy

• Adaptive Management describes how the CAP will guide CBP

CBPStrategic

Framework

Operating Plan

Dashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Chesapeake Action Plan

Report to Congress (GAO Recommendations

Fulfilled)•Report to Congress

•Addresses all 2005 GAO Recommendations•Summary of the CAP

5Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

5

CAP Element: CBP Strategic Framework

• Strategic context for goals of Chesapeake 2000:

• Provides rationale, strategic priorities and desired results

• Provides context for CBP’s priorities and activities

• Reconciles/aligns numerous planning documents (e.g., directives, MOUs)

Dashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Operating Plan

Chesapeake Action Plan

CBP Strategic Framework

6Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

6

CAP Element: Activity Integration Plan

• Database of implementation activities by CBP Partners

• Specific program/activity being implemented

• Lead and Collaborating Partners

• Resources

• Geographic Location (if appropriate)

• Functionality includes ability to query by:

• Jurisdiction

• Theme Area

• Activity

2007 Activity Resources (Version 1.0)

Federal Partners (10) - $200 million

State Partners (7) - $900 million

CBC - $1 million

Select NGOs (2) - $5 million

TOTAL – $1.1 billion

Dashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Operating Plan

Chesapeake Action Plan

CBP Strategic Framework

7Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

7

Scope of the Chesapeake Partnership and CAP

Contributors to the CAP Database (v 1.0)

States

DC*, MD*, PA*, VA*

DE, NY, WV

FederalPartners

EPA*, FWS, USACE,

NOAA, USFS, USGS, FHWA,

NRCS, NPS, BARC,

Corp. for National & Community Service

Commissions

CBC*

NGOs

Ducks Unlimited,

Chesapeake Bay Trust

*Signatories (members of the Chesapeake Executive Council)

8Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

8

CAP Element: Dashboards

• High-level summaries of key information in visual form

• Provide clear status toward Chesapeake 2000 commitments

• Show realistic annual targets

• Summary of resources and activities

Version 1.0 Dashboards Under Development• Implementation of Pollution Reduction Practices• Implementation of Agricultural Pollution Reduction

Practices • Wastewater Pollution Reduction• Riparian Forest Buffers Planted• Wetlands Restoration Efforts• Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Planting• Fish Passage Restoration• Forest Land Protection• Oyster Reef Restoration• Blue Crab Fishery Management• Meaningful Watershed Education Experiences

Dashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Operating Plan

Chesapeake Action Plan

CBP Strategic Framework

Wetlands Dashboard Performance:•Progress to Date

•Distance from Goal

•Realistic Annual Targets

Strategic Analysis

Amount & Source of Funding

Summary of Actual Activities

Working Draft – Do Not Quote or Cite

Pollution Reduction Dashboard Performance:•Progress to Date

•Distance from Goal

•Realistic Annual Targets

Strategic Analysis

Amount & Source of Funding

Actual Activities

Working Draft – Do Not Quote or Cite

Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

11

Protect and Restore

Fisheries

Restore Vital Habitats

Restore WaterQuality

Maintain Healthy Watersheds

Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

GOAL

Topic AreasEcosystem-Based

Fisheries Management

Oysters

Blue Crab

Striped Bass

Alosines

Fish Passage

SAV

Wetlands

Municipal and Industrial

Wastewater*

Agricultural Lands and Animal Operations*

Developed Lands*

Onsite and Septic Systems*

Streamside & Tidal Shoreline Riparian

Areas*

Land Preservation

Land Conservation

Public Access

Watershed Education

Place-Based Interpretation

Streambanks & Tidal Shorelines*

Citizen Engagement

Pre-Development Hydrology

Menhaden

Air Emissions*

Acid Mine Drainage

Chemical Contaminants

Organization Management

Infrastructure

Chesapeake Bay Program Goal Structure

Partnership Leadership & Management

Dashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Operating Plan

Chesapeake Action Plan

CBP Strategic Framework

*Basinwide Nutrient & Sediment Reduction

12Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

12

CAP Element: Adaptive Management

• Forum to assess progress and make directional changesDashboards

Adaptive Management

Process

Operating Plan

Chesapeake Action Plan

CBP Strategic Framework

13Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

13

Value of the Chesapeake Action Plan

Coordination/Integration/Accountability/Governance

• Coordinate and integrate activities/resources of vast partnership

• Very clear representation of progress

• Strategic basis for better focusing and targeting implementation and resources

• Promotes a greater sense of “shared leadership and governance”

• Ability to make decisions informed by more Partners and information

• Ability to reflect on:

• overarching adaptive management strategies

• specific implementation activities being undertaken

• corresponding resources

14Strengthening the Management, Coordination and Accountability of the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership – Working Draft Do Not Quote or Cite

14

Chesapeake Action Plan - Version 1.0

• Major enhancement to Bay Program’s management system

• Addresses GAO (2005) and 2008 Appropriations Report language

• Incorporates enhanced coordination, collaboration and accountability of selected Partner activities

• Includes actions of key Partners

• Solid foundation for creating CAP Version 2.0

• A major leap forward, but lots of work to do on Version 2.0

Questions and Discussion