See programmatic comments on coordination projects. A sound scientific proposal should respond to the six questions and related material at the beginning of the regional coordination section.

The proposal lacks specific information in several areas: problem statement, significance to regional programs, project relationships, adaptive management, limiting factors, methods and metrics.

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

The Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians (CTSI) has chosen to represent its interests and engage in technical and policy issues with resource managers in the Willamette/Lower Columbia Basin. The CTSI have received no prior coordination funding.

The project has six objectives. The objectives are worded as tasks instead of as desired outcomes. Deliverables include summarize meetings, coordinate and cooperate with restoration partners, document participation and communications, provide outreach and information dissemination, and manage, administer and report.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (ISRP Review of Results)

This is a new project, so technically there are no results to evaluate. Historical data on performance is available with the project, “Proposal RESCAT-1989-062-01 - Program Coordination and Facilitation Services provided through the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Foundation.” See the section, “Reporting & Contracted Deliverables Performance.”

No information is provided about how the project will apply adaptive management.

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions for Type of Work (hatchery, RME, tagging)

The geographic interest is the Willamette Basin and the Columbia River Estuary regions. The project will enable participation in “meetings and workgroups concerning (1) the Willamette Wildlife Mitigation Advisory and Program Development Group, (2) Willamette Wildlife Mitigation and Restoration Activities, (3) Willamette Biological Opinion Habitat work group processes, and (4) the Lower Columbia River Estuary Project restoration processes.”

Proposed work includes 50% coordination activities for Willamette basin, 20% project proposal review, 15% project development, 15% Focus workgroups. The proposal gives no explanation of concepts, hypotheses, monitoring and measurement procedures, or evaluation that will be associated with the proposed work.

The proposal says, “CTSI staff will educate and inform Federal, State, local governments, the NPCC, and NGOs about Siletz tribal history, traditions, tribal policies, and areas of interest.” Can specific themes of this education be identified? What techniques will be used to accomplish the education? How will the outcome of the education and methods used be evaluated? Are the educational messages being understood as intended?

This proposal identifies a number of very important issues that could be framed into one or more hypotheses that would show the value of coordination. Monitoring of these relationships would be very valuable in showing the value of coordination and how coordination procedures might be improved. This could be framed in an adaptive management context where the lessons learned from this project inform the next.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

Six deliverables are listed; each duplicates an objective.

The project has four components: coordination activities for Willamette basin (50%); project proposal review (20%); project development (15%); focus work groups (15%). The time allocated to proposal review seems disproportionately high.

Nine work elements are identified – 5. Land Purchase and/or Conservation Easement, 92. Lease Land, 99. Outreach and Education, 114. Identify and Select Projects, 115. Produce Inventory or Assessment, 122. Provide Technical Review, 174. Produce Plan, 175. Produce Design and/or Specifications, 189. Coordination-Columbia Basinwide, and 191. Watershed Coordination. Only 5, 92, and 99 have metrics. In a scientifically sound approach, the hypothesis(es) developed in the proposal would be measured during the course of the coordination activities and results presented in the report on this project.

The methods are briefly described under each deliverable. Descriptions are quite general.

4a. Specific comments on protocols and methods described in MonitoringMethods.org

The protocols for the nine work elements are published but do not provide adequate guidance on the methods and metrics. Guidance is available from ISRP (2007-14:2). Project sponsors are encouraged to design of metrics into their proposal and not to rely solely on the definitions for Work Elements.

Modified by Dal Marsters on 4/17/2012 3:06:31 PM.