Established in August 1998 to assess the effectiveness of the USGS Fed-State Cooperative Water Program Develop findings and recommendations Provide written report to ACWI by June 30, 1999,which will serve as basis of a report from ACWI to the USGS
PURPOSE
Established in August 1998 to assess the effectiveness of the USGS Fed-State Cooperative Water Program
Develop findings and recommendations
Provide written report to ACWI by June 30, 1999,which will serve as basis of a report from ACWI to the USGS
FEDERAL-STATE COOPERATIVE WATER PROGRAM -- MISSION
The Coop Program is designed to develop hydrologic data and technical analysis needed to assist in meeting the USGS mission of continuously assessing the Nation's water resources, and to provide technical assistance to state, tribal, and local agencies in seeking solutions to water-resources issues of national concern through a matched funding arrangement.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
Mission
Is the program successfully meeting its mission?
Is the mission still valid?
Prioritization
Given that there are more offerings than available matching funds, are matching funds applied to the most important issues?
Is there a proper balance between funding of long-term data collection versus short-term interpretive studies?
Conduct of work (primarily USGS)
Could this arrangement be improved w/o sacrificing its benefits?
What is the appropriate relationship with the
private sector, states, universities, etc. ?
What changes in products should the USGS Are there ways to further stimulate the
development of new approaches and methods and to
enhance the transfer to interested parties?
MEMBERSHIP
22 members - a balanced representation of Federal, regional, state, tribal, and local government agencies and the private sector
16 non-Federal agency representatives
6 Federal agency representatives
1 Executive secretary from the USGS
RESTON MEETING - OCTOBER 14-15, 1998
USGS and WRD overview
Coop Program overview - HQ, Regional, and District perspectives
TF deliberations
brainstorm issues
formed subgroups
Chair - Larry Rowe - Western Water (Mojave Water)
Vice - Chair - Fred Lissner - Oregon Department of Water
3 DISTRICT MEETINGS
At Colorado (Jan), at Arizona with Florida (Mar), at New York (May)
District Coop Program Overview
USGS topical presentations
Indirect costs
WRD products
WRD data bases
National Water-Quality Lab
Advancements in hydrologic instrumentation, methods development, and modeling
DISTRICT MEETINGS
Panel Discussions
Cooperators panels in CO, AZ, and NY
Data Users panel in CO
Competition Issues panels in AZ and NY
Surveys
Verbal survey/interview (approx. 40 cooperators)
Numerical survey of 400 randomly selected
cooperators
Numerous paper documents and data
CURRENT STATUS
Report outline has been developed
Preliminary findings and recommendations have been drafted
Need editing and consolidation of findings and recommendations
Present highlights of preliminary findings and recommendations to ACWI for feedback and comment
Iterative edit and revision of report
Meet in Chicago on June 28-30 to finalize report
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Mission
(F) The Coop Program is meeting its Mission and the mission is still valid. The Coop Program enjoys strong support because of its high technical standards and consistency, perceived objectivity, and high quality products.
(R) Write and adopt a mission statement for the Coop Program
(F) The Coop Program funding is seriously inadequate. In FY1998 the Federal share was $66M, the Cooperator share was $100M ($34M unmatched)
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Priorities
(F) While the Task Force found that most projects address national needs, we found that a small number of projects do not appear to meet national needs.
(R) In project proposals and in project information that is available to the public, districts should document how each project meets the applicable criteria outlined in WRD Memorandum No. 95.44
(F) The number of stream gaging stations involved in the Coop Program has decreased over the recent history of the Program
(F) In nearly all cases, long-term stream gaging stations have been lost because of the lack of funds
(F) The costs for operation and maintenance of stream gaging stations have increased over time with insufficient increases in congressional appropriations for the Coop Program
(R) Funds appropriated for and allocated to long-term data collection should be indexed to allow for increases in the cost of operations and maintenance of data collection sites
(R) Funding for long-term data collection should be stressed as a national priority. A national network of long-term streamflow and ground water core stations, vital to the national interest, should be established and funded entirely by federally appropriated monies. The funding for this network should not come at the expense of the Federal-State Coop Program
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conduct of Work
(F) Competition from the USGS is an issue, and has been reported to be increasing
(R) Convene focus groups by issue type, composed of all interested parties, to resolve competition issues as they surface
(R) Create and convene biennially(1x/2yrs) a criteria review panel to assess the effectiveness in managing competition and revise guidance as necessary in accordance with WRD Memorandum 95.44
(R) The USGS District should post the project description and rationale according to WRD Memorandum No. 95.44 on its web site. Copies of WRD Memorandum 95.44, 84.21, and any future updates to them should be posted on the web for easy reference
(R) Develop a consistent process for responding to an individual's concern about a specific project
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Products
(F) The products of the program are reasonably well balanced with respect to achieving the needs of cooperators. However, the program is unable to meet important needs due to federal funding constraints.
(R) Efforts are needed to significantly increase funding of the program
(F) While program products are of high standard, achieving that level of excellence is inherently time consuming. Timely issuance of some products, particularly interpretive project final reports, has been and remains a significant problem in the program. However, USGS staff has made significant strides to correct this important problem, in part, by revising the peer review process and establishing review authority at the region and district level
(R) To facilitate continued improvement in achieving deadlines for the release of products:
Secure date specific agreement between cooperator and USGS staff up front as to the date for the receipt of deliverables
Improve efforts to explain to cooperators the process for report development, review, and release
Develop the capability to be prepared for and respond to situations when USGS staff, who are serving as report authors, are disengaged from the responsibility (ex. due to retirement, resignation, transfer etc.)
(F) Use of the Internet and other electronic state-of-the-art technologies by the Coop Program has been innovative and highly effective. These technologies are and will continue to be an extremely important medium for the timely dissemination of stream gage data and other program products
(R) USGS should continue to aggressively explore ways to incorporate use of the Internet and other available and emerging electronic communication technologies in the development, review, and release of all its products, to the extent possible, on the World Wide Web
(F) The Coop Program has been the vehicle for the development of important innovations and technologies. Examples are the MODFLOW ground water model, numerical methods, acoustic Doppler and ultrasonic velocity meter technology for measuring stream flow
(R) Improve technology transfer to cooperators through direct effort in the field, laboratory and office work, topical seminars, and training center offerings.