1 / 18

Improving NCCP and HCP Efficiency Survey Results

Collaboration survey results for California's conservation planning showing challenges, delays, solutions, and the critical need for political will and guidance tools to streamline the process.

bjost
Download Presentation

Improving NCCP and HCP Efficiency Survey Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Shannon Lucas and Cassidee Shinn, CDFW Planning from Tahoe to the Bay Workshop November 20, 2013 NCCP AND hcp efficiency Survey Results A Collaboration of the California Habitat Conservation Planning Coalition, California Department of Fish And Wildlife, and U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service

  2. Plans take too long to prepare Plans are too expensive to prepare Plans benefit from lessons learned Why?

  3. Many meetings to arrive at survey questions • SurveyMethods.com • Sent to more than 1,200 people • Survey #1: 181 responded (14% response rate) • Survey #2: 100 responded (8.4% response rate) Methods Thank you to those who responded!

  4. Representation across the state

  5. Survey #1: position or role of respondent

  6. # of Plans worked on # of Years in nccp or hcp planning Survey #2: Delving Deeper- Planning Experience of Respondent

  7. Top reasons for delays • Difficulty reaching agreements • Politics • Unrealistic timelines • Wildlife agency staff turnover • When funding was a problem, primary reason was unanticipated tasks Survey #1:Challenges in plan preparation

  8. In what way was politics involved? • Local politics around • Cost of Plan • Some stakeholders having more influences than others • Different goals • Politics not an issue (15%) survey #2: Delving deeper - politics Preliminary Results

  9. Survey #2: Delving deeper - unanticipated tasks Preliminary Results • Unanticipated tasks: • Additional information and analyses • Additional drafts or revisions • Reasons why: • Lack of guidance orevolvingrequirements from Wildlife Agencies

  10. Delays were (or can be) overcome by • More frequent and structured communication • Adequate staffing levels • Dedicated staff • Effective initial planning framework and timeline Survey #1: Overcoming delays

  11. What should change? • Increase high-level, decision-maker involvement • Clear process, requirements, expectations • Regular summary of activities and results • Communication not an issue (20%) SURVEY #2: DELVING DEEPER – COMMUNICATION Preliminary Results

  12. Survey #1: Most critical for maintaining momentum

  13. How did a neutral facilitator help? Preliminary Results • Kept discussions or process on-track and focused Survey #2: Delving Deeper - Use of Facilitator

  14. There is a critical need for: • Political will and leadership • Guidance and tools focused on process, timelines, and problem-solving • Wildlife agency engagement and consistency in staffing • Decision-maker/high-level management involvement • Clear and realistic expectations Summary OF Results

  15. Develop targeted guidance materials (examples): • Political will • Promotional videos • Guidance and tools • Example timelines Next steps

  16. Actual Plan Preparation Timelines

  17. Shannon.Lucas@wildlife.ca.gov Cassidee.Shinn@wildlife.ca.gov Thank you

More Related