1 / 50

Measuring the Effectiveness of State Wildlife Grant Project s

Measuring the Effectiveness of State Wildlife Grant Project s. Mark Humpert, Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies. State Wildlife Grants. Millions of $’s. Fiscal Year. Wildlife Action Plans. Conserving at-risk fish and wildlife in Ohio. SWG Successes.

heidi
Download Presentation

Measuring the Effectiveness of State Wildlife Grant Project s

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. Measuring the Effectiveness ofState Wildlife Grant Projects Mark Humpert, Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies

  2. State Wildlife Grants Millions of $’s Fiscal Year

  3. Wildlife Action Plans

  4. Conserving at-risk fish and wildlife in Ohio SWG Successes Lake Erie Water Snake (Nerodiasipedoninsularum) Status: De-listed as federally threatened (Sept 2011) Project Description: Permanent conservation easements, research, monitoring, education Cost: $250,995 Outcome: Population increase to >8,000 (Recovery Plan Goal 5,555) Partners: ODNR, USFWS, Black Swamp Conservancy, Western Reserve Land Conservancy, Northern Illinois University, OSU-Stone Laboratory, private landowners

  5. Outputs vs Impacts

  6. The Need for EM • Improve Conservation Work • link measures & actions • Improve Accountability to Administration & Congress • show success • Maintain/Enhance Public Support • tell a story

  7. Adaptive Mgmt

  8. Two Questions Effectiveness ? Status ?

  9. Conservation Measures Partnership’s Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation CMP Open Standards • Developed by leading organizations & agencies • Draws on many fields • Open source/common language • Used around the world • Great Lakes • TNC Preserves • Swedish National Parks • Donor Funding Programs • Academic Training

  10. Bat Cave Results Chain

  11. Bat Cave Results Chain

  12. Bat Cave Results Chain i # breaches i # bats i # juveniles i # distinct cat tracks

  13. Plover Results Chain i # breaches i # eggs i # juveniles i # disturbed nests

  14. Generic Results Chain

  15. Mockup of Report

  16. Work Group Charge Develop and test a measures framework for assessing the effectiveness of State and Tribal Wildlife Grants, conservation actions more broadly, and potentially Wildlife Action Plans themselves.

  17. CONSERVATION PARTNERS Karl Hess (USFWS) Ron Essig (USFWS) Connie Young-Dubovsky (USFWS) Amielle DeWan (DOW) Tess Present (NAS) Shelley Green (TNC) Mary Klein (NatureServe) Mathew Birnbaum (NFWF) Terra Rentz (TWS) STATES Dana Baxley (KDFWR) Faith Balch (MNDNR) Tara Bergeson (WIDNR) Chris Burkett (VDGIF) Wendy Connally (TPWD) Jenny Dickson (CDEP) Mike Harris (GDNR) Eric Rickerson (ODFW) Tracey Tomajer (NYDEC) Work Group • AFWA • Mark Humpert • Priya Nanjappa • FOUNDATIONS OF SUCCESS • Nick Salafsky • Caroline Stem

  18. Timeline • Sept ’09-Working Group Formed • Dec’09-Workshop 1 • Jan’10-Subcommittees Formed • Mar’10-Interim Report to TWW Committee • Apr’10-Workshop 2 • June’10-Pilot Testing • July’10-Workshop 3 • Sept’10-Phase I Report to TWW Committee • Dec ‘10-Workshop 4 • Jan ’11-SWAP Coordinators Review • Mar ‘11-Final Report to TWW Committee • Apr ‘11-Print Final Report/Implement

  19. Framework Steps • Define Generic Conservation Actions • Use Results Chains to Describe the Theory of Change • ID a Limited set of Effectiveness Measures • Develop & Test Data Collection Questionnaires • Collect & Analyze Data & Adapt

  20. 11 Common Actions 11 Common Conservation Actions Funded through SWG

  21. Criteria for Measures • Linked-to key factors in results chain • Measurable-both qualitative & quantitative • Precise-defined the same by all • Consistent-unlikely to change over time • Sensitive-can measure change • Overarching-can be measured at diff. stages • Achievable-not onerous to collect

  22. Info for One Action Definition of Action Examples “Generic” Results Chain

  23. Species Restoration “Good” restoration plan completed Species Restoration Source population identified

  24. Species Restoration Species initially restored to site (short-term) Species breeding at sites : o )

  25. Species Restoration No breeding at sites : o (

  26. Species Restoration Key stakeholders buy into plan “Good” overall restoration plan for species

  27. Species Restoration

  28. Species Restoration Obj SP RST 2 – “Good” Plan Before implementation work starts, a "good" restoration plan has been developed for the specific project site(s). "Good" = … Obj SP RST 6a – Sp Breeding Within xx years of introduction, the restored population is successfully breeding within the restoration site(s). Obj SP RST 5 – Sp Initially Restored By specified target date, the target number of units* have been introduced to Area(s) YYYY.

  29. Species Restoration Ind SP RST 6 – Species Breeding Evidence of ongoing self reproduction of species within the site; Total units of species at the site Ind SP RST 2 – Quality of Plan Presence of plan; assessment of plan against a priori quality criteria

  30. Species Restoration

  31. Info for One Action Definition of Action Examples “Generic” Results Chain

  32. Crosswalk Table Result Questions Measures Objective

  33. Questionaire Questionnaire This is all most folks would see for performance reporting purposes!!

  34. Roll Up Measures Similar Projects Generating Similar Data • % of projects that answered research questions • % of projects where data reaching target audiences • % of projects leading to other management actions Demonstrate That These are More Than “Counting” Projects

  35. Report

  36. IT Systems • ConPro • Conservation Registry • HabITS • Miradi • Wildlife TRACS • Biotics 4 • DataBasin • NatureServe Explorer Web Service

  37. Wildlife TRACS

  38. Using OS to Evaluate Wildlife Action Plans

  39. Measuring the Effectiveness of State Wildlife GrantsFinal Report An approved framework Measures for 11 common conservation actions Wildlife TRACS as the IT System Grant Streamlining Next steps for SWAP Final Report www.fishwildlife.org/files/Effectiveness-Measures-Report_2011.pdf April 2011

  40. Questions “Efficiency is doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things.” -Peter Drucker

  41. Effectiveness Measures & Wildlife TRACS Reporting & Tracking Tool Mark Humpert, Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies

  42. Wildlife TRACS

  43. Process SWG Effectiveness Measures Working Group TRACS & Measures Sub-working Group TRACS Development Team PDT & PAG Testing

  44. Examples • Direct Management • Species Restoration • Data Collection

  45. Direct Management

  46. Direct Management

  47. Species Restoration

  48. Species Restoration

  49. Data Collection

  50. Data Collection

More Related