1 / 31

Performance Measure Implementation for the National Pesticide Program

Performance Measure Implementation for the National Pesticide Program. Dan Helfgott, Chief Government and International Services Branch US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs Western Regions Meeting May 17, 2006. The Program.

zia-rodriguez
Download Presentation

Performance Measure Implementation for the National Pesticide Program

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. Performance Measure Implementation for the National Pesticide Program Dan Helfgott, Chief Government and International Services Branch US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs Western Regions Meeting May 17, 2006

  2. The Program The National Pesticide Program consists of the combined efforts and results of the Federal, State, and Tribal partners.

  3. The Program Goal Protect public health and the environment by ensuring pesticides and alternatives are safe and available for a healthy America.

  4. The Drivers • PART • Budget Pressures • State Grant Templates • EPA Strategic Planning • Communication Needs • Management Needs • Accountability • Good Government • ….

  5. The Process • The performance measures for the National Pesticide Program were developed through a process that included, OPP, OECA, Regional, State and Tribal input (through AAPCO, SFIREG & TPPC), as well as other stakeholders through the PPDC.

  6. The Measures • We will be implementing a suite of measures designed to support federal/state/tribal needs, such as, program management, communication, budget, EPA strategic plan, PART, grants… • Designed to support each other. • Should tell our story.

  7. The Uses

  8. The Source • Most of the data that will feed the performance measures can be obtained from national databases or existing information supplied by states/tribes. • Some of the measures will require new data that must be acquired by EPA or supplied by states/tribes.

  9. Implementation • Data that will be supplied by states will be implemented through FY 07 Cooperative Agreements. • Reported to EPA via End-of-year reports. • Measures are showing up in EPA Strategic Plan, State Grant Templates, Division Workplans, PARS (employee agreements), Agency’s Annual Commitments System (ACS).

  10. FY 07 Cooperative Agreement Guidance • Streamlined Guidance to require as “core program activities” only those activities that are essential to baseline operation of the program, achieving environmental results, and are needed to feed the new performance measures. • At a minimum, for FY 2007 states/tribes must commit to accomplishing the “core activities”.

  11. FY 07 Cooperative Agreement Guidance • The guidance also includes "supplemental activities” which States/tribes should strongly consider. • “Supplemental activities” are optional and not considered essential to the baseline operation of programs, however, EPA feels these activities will enhance program implementation. • EPA separated these supplemental activities from the core activities in order to give the state/tribes more flexibility in recognition of budget constraints.

  12. End-Of-Year Reporting • The FY 07 Grant Guidance also includes streamlined End of Year (EOY) reporting forms to: • allow EPA verify that States are meeting the core requirements of the grant guidance; • ensure EPA is receiving the data necessary to support the performance measures of the national pesticide program. • facilitate uniform reporting and easier compilation of the reported information without creating an additional burden in terms of time and resources.

  13. Priorities • EPA/OPP’s Cooperative agreement national priorities identified in the FY 2007 Guidance are Worker Safety, Water Quality Protection, Endangered Species, and Container/Containment Structures.

  14. The Measures

  15. GOALS: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTHChampion – Debbie Edwards

  16. GOALS: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH HH2: Measure conc. in drinking water over time as a result of mitigation HH5: Reduce the number of acute poisoning incidents from pesticides In and around the home HH1: Reduce the level of currently registered pesticides in the general population (NHANES)

  17. GOALS: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH HH3: Reduce pesticide residues in the 20 foods most commonly eaten by children using the PDP residue data

  18. GOALS: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH WS1: Survey of ag workers’ awareness of WPS provisions • WS4,6: Support a low rate of poisoning incidents. • Cumulative reduction in moderate – severe incidents for 6 pesticides with highest incident rate.

  19. GOALS: PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH HH4: Ensure efficacious public health antimicrobial products in the marketplace

  20. Goals: Protect the EnvironmentChampion – Steve Bradbury

  21. Protect the Environment WQ2: Efficiency measure for evaluating and managing pesticides’ water quality WQ3: Tiered approach to managing 303(d) list concerning pesticides WQ1: Tiered approach to evaluating and managing pesticides to protect water quality – step 3: demo progress EN4: Increase % of acreage by crop moving to reduced risk chemicals EN1: Using EMAP and pesticide usage data, select and track priority aquatic environments

  22. Protect the Environment ES4: Cum. % of OPP actions for whichOPP has implemented appropriate ES determinations ES3: Cum. % of Sec. 18 requests with a credible effort to consider ESA implications ES1: % reduction each year in av. cost and av. time to produce ES Bulletin

  23. Protect the Environment NEW: For key pesticides, reduce the under of urban and ag watersheds exceeding aquatic life benchmarks using USGS’s National Ambient Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) data. EN3: “Meta-measure” – using performance measures developed by Task Groups and investigation of existing measures and data, develop an index to gauge environmental quality as it relates to pesticides

  24. Goals: Realizing “Other Benefits”Champion – Lois Rossi

  25. Goals: Other Benefits OB6: Resistance management SA1: Reports in SAI db show increase in use of whole farm practices on transition gradient SA2: % of crop transitioned grant funds/# of acres transitioned OB8: Incidents and costs associated with vector borne diseases OB1: Avoided crop loss due to pests measured thru the Section 18/Section 3 program NEW: 12 lower risk pesticide alternatives with coordinated approval among international partners

  26. Goals: Other Benefits OB7: Reduce expenditures resulting from insect structural damage OB2: Decreased costs associated with pesticide exposure (benefits from “me-too” registrations)

  27. Existing Strategic Plan Structure Goal 4: Healthy communities and ecosystems 4.1 Chemical, organism and pesticide risks 4.1.1 Reduce exposure to toxic pesticides 4.1.2 License pesticides meeting safety standards

  28. Proposed Strategic Plan Structure Goal 4: Healthy communities and ecosystems 4.1.1 Protect human health from pesticide risk 4.1.2 Protect the environment from pesticide risk 4.1.3 Realize the benefits from pesticide use

  29. EPA’s draft Strategic Plan for2006 - 2011 An draft was posted on the web. The website is: www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/plan.htm Look for OPP under Goal 4.

  30. Additional Measures • Cost per occupational incident avoided [Efficiency measure; conditionally approved by OMB]. • Number of applicators certified per State Grant $ (cost per certified applicator) [in draft guidance for State Grant Template].

More Related