DRAFT Workshop Proposal June 30, 2009
Environmental Conservation and Restoration Project Implementation
Metrics and Technology Workshop:
An Exploration of Project and Action Tracking, Planning, Reporting, Data Exchange and Data Interface
Technology.
Date to be Determined
Late August or Early September 2009
Sponsored by
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
and
The Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP)
NOTE: this is a workshop proposal, to be considered by the PNAMP Steering Committee as a potential
PNAMP-sponsored activity and to seek input from all interested parties.
WORKSHOP TITLE: Environmental Conservation and Restoration Project Implementation Indicators
and Metrics Workshop
PROPOSED DATE: Late August 2009 or Early September Pending Avaialbility
PROPOSED SPONSORS: Bonneville Power Administration & PNAMP
PLANNING TEAM: Russell Scranton (Ciber/BPA), Ben Zelinsky (BPA), Paul Cereghino (NOAA), Nick
Salafsy (Foundations for Success), Dan Salzer (The Nature Conservancy), Matt Deniston (Sitka
Technologies Group), Jen Bayer (USGS/PNAMP), Jacque Schei (USGS/PNAMP), Potential Planning
Team Member: Mary Beth Brown (Puget Sound Partnership)
PNAMP ROLE: planning & facilitation of workshop; outreach of workshop announcement, etc.;
facilitation of follow up (assist technical leads with workshop report; follow-up sessions as needed)
If you would like to be a member of the multi-agency team to further develop workshop format, agenda
and presentations, if you have topics you would like to discuss, or if you want to be a presenter at the
workshop itself, please contact Russell Scranton (rwscranton@bpa.gov) or Jen Bayer (jbayer@usgs.gov).
Workshop Rationale
In the Pacific Northwest significant time and money has been spent in research and development of action
tracking systems for environmental conservation and restoration to meet individual organization’s needs
for planning, compliance and reporting. With shrinking resources it has become more important to share
results and accomplishments across jurisdictions, as well as to move toward more cooperative approaches
for programmatic implementation of environmental strategies. Coordination of implementation efforts
offers an opportunity to identify priorities and to establish partnerships to support environmental
conservation and restoration activities, to evaluate effectiveness of actions, or report on the performance
of implementation to help inform adaptive management and program compliance.
This workshop is proposed to occur in late August, or early September 2009 pending optimal availability
and interest of potential participants. This timeline will support ongoing processes requiring action in
2009, such as updates to BPA’s, NOAA’s and other organizations’ systems by the end of the calendar
year 2009.
Workshop Purpose
This workshop will be designed to 1) describe the current state of implementation indicator and metrics
tracking, management and reporting; 2) share specific organization’s plans for changes to these systems;
3) identify next steps to jointly develop products and tools to help standardize or integrate implementation
efforts; and 4) provide opportunities to further develop BPA and PNAMP products.
It is understood that most organizations have already developed data systems and may not change data
structure codes or teminology. However, this workshop will to provide a means to identify opportunities
to create tools to crosswalk information between data systems or generate common reports. Agreement on
implementation indicators and metrics and tools to allow consistent reporting will facilitate aggregation of
information across agency jurisdictions or topics. For example, considerable work in the Pacific
Northwest has focused on tools to protect listed salmon species, with prioritization based on salmonid
limiting factors and threats and viability attributes. However, additional requirements for other species
like orca, bull trout, rockfish, abalone, or invasive species need to consider the same or additional
components of the ecosystem when evaluating implementation.
The workshop will focus on the importance of implementation tracking and will provide overviews on the
following areas or ongoing projects related to:
 project planning, strategies, prioritization & funding opportunities;
 data dictionaries, glossaries, and standard pick-lists (Species names and codes, etc)
 project tracking and compliance;
 action effectiveness assessments;
 High Level Indicators, performance measures and standardized reporting
 use of information for adaptive management of Biological Opinions or ESA recovery plans; and
 data sharing and data transfer.
Workshop Outcomes
The primary goal of the workshop is to facilitate dialogue about policy and technical details on
implementation tracking needs to inform development of regional standardized terminology and
protocols; and ensure interoperability and common reporting.
Specific goals of the workshop include:
 Overview of current processes
 Development of the PNAMP Monitoring Terminology Gossary project to coordinate standard data
dictionaries of common terms for use in project and action tracking to ensure data sharing &
interoperability
 Support PNAMP effort to identify High Level Indicators and common performance measures
 Develop tools to promote priorities strategies and data for reporting action and project
implementation.
 Identify forum and workgroups to further develop products or tools that may be used for project
tracking.
 Update Katz et al. metrics for effectiveness evaluation.
Potential Workshop Participants and Reference Material
Initial planning for this workshop has taken into consideration many ongoing efforts, with the goal of
leveraging existing work and ideas to improve regional implementation tracking. For example the
following data systems in Table 1 all share many common features and the publications "Meeting of
Project Tracking Database Experts: Supporting NFHAP Project Data System Development
2
Recommendations to the Science and Data Team" (NFHAP), and “Data Management Needs for Regional
Project Tracking to Support Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring” (Katz et. al.) provide some
initial insight on standards for implementation monitoring tracking systems or for evaluation and
reporting needs.
Table 1. Existing Environmental Resource Project Tracking Programs.
Agency / Entity
NOAA Fisheries
NWFSC
NOAA Fisheries NWR
Program
PNSHP
NOAA
NOAA/ USFWS
NERI
ROAR
NOAA Permits
NOAA
NOAA
NOAA
Bonneville Power
Administration
WA Recreation
Conservation Office
WDFW
StreamNet
APPS
PCTS
RCDB
STM
Pisces
Taurus
PRISM
Lower Columbia Fish
Recovery Board
Oregon Watershed
Enhancement Board
Defenders of Wildlife,
ODFW, OSU
PCSRF
Web Link
http://webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/portal/page?_pageid=33,1&_dad=portal
&_schema=PORTAL
http://webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/portal/page?_pageid=34,1&_dad=portal
&_schema=PORTAL
https://neri.noaa.gov/neri/
http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSWebpageRecovery?sort=1 or
http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/
https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov/index.cfm
https://pcts.nmfs.noaa.gov/pcts/
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/gis/data/hcr.htm
http://webapps.nwfsc.noaa.gov/ims/stm/
http://www.efw.bpa.gov/contractors/statementsofwork.aspx
http://www.cbfish.org/
http://www.rco.wa.gov/rco/prism/prism.htm
HWS
Exchange Format
Documentation
Salmon Port
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/project_schedules/projects.htm
Hard Copy
Oregon Explorer
http://oregonexplorer.info/ or
http://www.oregonexplorer.info/AdvancedMappingTool/imf.jsp?site=OR
EAll
www.conservationregistry.org/
Conservation
Registry
http://www.lowercolumbiasalmonrecovery.org/
The following individuals have confirmed their interest in participation in an initial scoping exercise and
based on known managers of existing data systems, but we need broader participation from multiple
partners to make this workshop a success.
Agency
Bonneville Power
Adminstration
UCSRB
The Nature Conservancy
LCFRB
Sitka Technologies Group
Defenders of Wildlife
Foundations of Success
California Dept. of Fish
and Game
Puget Sound Partnership
NOAA Restoration Center
NOAA NWR
NOAA NWFSC
NOAA
WDFW
WA RCO
Division or Area
PISCES & Taurus
Miradi
Salmon Port
PISCES & Taurus
The Conservation Registry
Restoration Center
PCSRF NWR
NWFSC
ROAR and APPs
HWS
Prism
Representative(s)
Russell Scranton, Ben Zelinsky, Jim
Geiselman
Julie Morgan, James White
Dan Salzer
Melody Tereski
Matt Deniston
Gina LaRocco
Nick Salafsky
Robin Carlson
Mary Beth Brown
Jen Steger, Paul Cereghino
Scott Rumsey
Katie Barnas
Susan Pultz, Carrie Hubard
Erik Neatherlin
Scott Chapman
3
WA RCO
OWEB
Stream Net
NPCC
Columbia Inter Tribal Fish
Commission
USFWS
WA Forum on Monitoring
Oregon Explore & OWRI
Ken Dzinbal,
Bobbi Riggers, Renee Davis-Born
Mike Banach, Bruce Schmidt
Nancy Leonard
Phil Rodgers
ROAR, FIS, Habits
Sean Connolly, Grant Canterbury, Krishna
Gifford, Kathy Hollar
FIRST DRAFT AGENDA: (subject to input from interested participants)
Day 1:
9:00 Introduction: Subject groups and tools for implementation management.
Overview of briefing and Introductions
Russell Scranton Jen Bayer: General Introduction Overview and Discussion of Data Flow
Bruce Schmidt StreamNet. Metadata Guidelines and Data Flow (tentative) 15 minutes
9:40 Standard Vocabulary and Interoperability: Term Definitions and Crosswalks- Project, Action,
Program, Activity, Work Element, Attribute, Metric, Variable, Indicator, Measure, Limiting Factors and
Threats; These terms mean something, but not necessarily the same thing to each of the participants.
Presentations:
Russell Scranton and Paul Cereghino; Monitoring Glossary and project language. 20-30 Minutes
TNC MIRADI and Standard Terminology Lexicon/Rosetta stone (tentative) 20 minutes
10:30 Break (10 min)
10:40 Species Lists: How are they used in implementation?
Who is responsible for managing and maintaining species lists in relationship to IBIS or other standards,
are there shortlists or ways to manage for improved implementation data entry? What codes should be
used for the field and in the lab, example for listed and non-listed salmon, vegetation, invasive species.
Presentation: Cathy Kellon & Russell Scranton
11:10 Break Out Session: Develop summary reports and workgroups to work on desired products and
processes to continue the work to allow for broader participation where more individuals can way in if
they could not participate in the workshop.
Monitoring Glossary Project: workgroup established to update key pick-list Controlled vocabulary on
indicators and metrics.
Standard reporting metrics for implementation:
Limiting Factors and Threats: NOAA, BPA Regional Expert Panels, Managing
For Success
Subject Groups:
Species Lists: Who maintains them, in relationship to IBIS or other standard sets
- ESA listed salmon database DPS/ESU, Major Population Groups, Population
and code names.
- Vegetation Species Names, Codes, and designation of noxious weeds by state
- Invasive Species Lists: Can we use an Invasive Species list or should we create
additional lists for Exotic Species.
Lunch 12:00-1:00
4
1:00 Regional Planning, Priorities and Strategies: FCRPS BiOp RPA 73’s Need for regionally
comprehensive implementation coordination tool to identify projects for funding priorities and how to
implement regional strategies for habitat restoration, recovery, BiOp Implementation, and RM&E, etc.
Presentation: Mary Beth Brown and Russell Scranton: Planning for Strategies
Paul Cereghino: Conservation Banking planning for partnerships. (40Minutes)
1:45 High Level Indicators: Overview of PNAMP effort: What are Implementation tracking and general
monitoring HLIs and performance measures, and how are they reported. (Optional pending PNAMP or
Workgroup interest)
Nancy Leonard or Steve Leider? 20 minutes
2:10 Evaluation for Effectiveness: How implementation monitoring is used for action effectiveness:
Updating Katz et al. habitat classifications, and new project types.
Presentation: Katie Barnas 20 minutes
Russell Scranton 10 minutes: Overview PNAMP Effectiveness Inventory
and Effectiveness Evaluation project, and goal for regional coordination.
2:40 Break out session: (50 Minutes)
Updating Standard Metrics in Relationship to Performance Measures: Discuss is there a need to update
metric standards and classifications from Katz et al? For example under plant removal, PNSHP tracks
the species names, but not the technique of removal, i.e. smothering, tilling, the pesticide name, etc. Are
there are additional estuarine and nearshore project types, or is there a way to simplify the list by adding
a feature of habitat zones? Is there a need for a clear regional list of effectiveness indicators and
performance measures for reporting?
Supporting the Effectiveness Monitoring Inventory and Evaluation process: How to add data to the
inventory. Supporting the evaluation of effectiveness studies.
3:10 Short (10 Minute) Presentation Overview: Posters of Existing Programs? Or would we be better
served by multiple presentations of various systems.
PISCES & Taurus 10 minutes (Zelinsky) Confirmed
NOAA RCDB/NERI 10 minutes (Cereghino) Confirmed
NOAA PCSRF/PNSHP 10 minutes (Sylvander?)
USFWS/NOAA ROAR 10 minutes (Canterbury) Confirmed
USFWS FIS 10 minutes (Connolly)
4:00 Finish or continue?
4-5:00 Continue Presentation Overview of existing programs
LCFRB Salmon PORT 10 minutes (Tereski)
Oregon Explorer 10 minutes (Davis-Born) Confirmed
Conservation Registry 10 minutes (LaRocco) Confirmed
WA RCO PRISM 10 minutes (Chapman) Confirmed
WDFW Habitat Work Schedule 10 minutes (?)
TNC Miradi 10 minutes (Salzer/Salafsky) Confirmed
Day 2:
8:00 Protocol Metadata Documentation: PNAMP Protocol and Method Library Catalog project. How
to support implementation tracking related to protocols and citations.
5
Presentation: Sean Quigley
8:30 Data Entry: Duplication of Effort and Duplicate Reporting- Time saving to grantees and report
generators.
Presentation: Paul Cereghino & R. Scranton
9:00 Tools for Reporting and Data Transfer: Multi-select pick-lists, Auto-complete location data
based on latitude and longitude, Identification of species targeted or impacted by projects based on GIS,
How to use GIS to report Salmon populations or species impacted by actions, Desktop applications
designed for portability and communication to larger systems, mapping project locations, etc.)
Presentation
Reporting Needs and Data Exchange Techniques: How to report information consistently, and tools
for data exchange, web and desktop services.
Matt Deniston and Ben Zelinsky 30 minutes
NOAA STEM Databank: Tools to Meet Regional And Local/Individual Needs (desktop services for
regional and local use)
Jeff Cowen? (Requested) (30 minutes)
Using GIS or Web Services to Draw/Map a Project: Strengths and Weaknesses to Draw Project vs.
Use of Latitude and Longitude.
Gina LaRocco, Matt Deniston (30 minutes)
10:40 Break:
The Need and Tools to Support Attribute Auto-fill Capabilities: Spatial Data (Location or Species)
and Multi-Select Pick-Lists:
Matt Deniston : 30 Minutes
Managing a Monitoring Master Sample: A tool to support the tracking and coordination of monitoring
implementation.
(PNAMP) (Requested) 20 Minutes
Data Exchange: A Model for Fish and Habitat Data
John Tooly Puget Sound Water Quality Data Exchange ? (Requested)
11:30 Closing Remarks on Main Conference and Presentations:
12:00-1:00 Lunch
1:00 Special Work Sessions:
BPA Metric and Classification work Session: Discuss BPA’s proposed metrics and Classifications;
opportunity to collaborate on development of standard metrics for BPA and Region.
Species Lists
Monitoring Indicators
Habitat Restoration Classifications
Technical Tools: discuss IT problems and options for data exchange, future workshops etc (Flesh out
with Sitka Technologies Group.)
6
Cover Letter
NOTE: BPA and PNAMP would prepare a cover letter as an invitation to accompany workshop agenda
and preparation materials. The items below would be included/referenced in that cover letter:
Insert : background Introduction and initial list of interested participants.
Attached is an example draft spreadsheet and crosswalk tool based on five draft system requirements.
(Note: the metrics identified for the NPCC ISRP, PCSRF, PNSHP, NOAA RCDB, and PISCES in the file
are all draft and are subject to change.)
If possible can you please provide me a copy of your programs existing data dictionary or metadata file;
We hope to use your programs data to further develop a draft implementation metric program dictionary
and crosswalk tool file before and after the workshop to help identify regional information needs and
potential standards.
7