Progress on Coordinating CBP and Federal Leadership Goals,

Outcomes, and Actions

Principals’ Staff Committee Meeting2/16/12

Carin Bisland, Associate DirectorEcosystem Management

Why Coordinate?• EC Request at June 2010 meeting:

– Form a Bay Program Action Team to work with the FLC to more clearly define the role of the Bay Program in implementing the Executive Order Strategy. As a result of our discussions at the April PSC meeting, the final Strategy includes language that articulates the need for a joint group to “recommend steps for coordinating and, where appropriate, integrating the goals, outcomes and actions of the Chesapeake Bay Program with the goals, outcomes and actions described in this strategy.”

• Efficiency (same people, similar goals, similar efforts)

• Communication (who is the CBP and what are our goals?)

PSC Decision at May 2011 Meeting

• The PSC approved the Alignment Team proposal with several edits and recommended that the revised proposal be presented to the Executive Council and Federal Leadership Committee. The PSC requested the following changes: – Extend the time for developing negotiation protocols called for in

Stage 2 to after completion of Phase II WIPs. – Clarify that Stages 3 and 4 (developing and implementing a new

Chesapeake Bay Agreement) would only be completed if determined necessary through the analysis completed in Stage 2.

– Extending the date of Stage 3 to the time of the 2013 EC meeting.

4

Purpose – Update/refresh C2K and streamline commitments;

ensure a set of shared priorities; clarify governance;

design efficient operational structure for collaboration; and,

enable effective communication of Partnership’s

refreshed goals, outcomes and accomplishments.

A four-stage path forward over the next two years:• Stage 1: Using Goal Implementation Teams (GITs)

for Aligning Interests, Priorities, and Efforts• Stage 2: Review Existing CBP Commitments, Develop Negotiation

Protocols to Determine Future Direction of

Partnership

*If determined in Stage 2 that a new agreement is necessary: • Stage 3: Negotiate the New Agreement• Stage 4: Implement the New Agreement

Aligning CBP and Federal Partners

Stage

1:

Using

GITs to

Set

Direction

• Priorities and areas of focus for each major goal area are refined by relevant GITs, guided by key strategies or agreements (e.g. C2K, EC Directives, EO Strategy)

• Priorities of the partnership will be described in narrative rather than as quantitative measures except where there is explicit EC commitment to a quantitative measure

• Decision-Making Framework presented by ChesapeakeStat would guide the setting of priorities and actions

• Management Board would provide oversight and guidance to GITs and identify opportunities for strategic coordination

Timing – Immediately

Governance: Discussions on necessary changes to structure, operational functions, and membership of MB initiated

Science, Technical Analysis,

and Reporting

Science, Technical Analysis,

and ReportingEnhance Partnering,Leadership

& Management

Enhance Partnering,Leadership

& Management

MaintainHealthy

Watersheds

MaintainHealthy

Watersheds

Protect & Restore Water

Quality

Protect & Restore Water

Quality

Sustainable Fisheries

Sustainable Fisheries

Protect & Restore Vital Habitats

Protect & Restore Vital Habitats

Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

Goal Implementation Teams

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

ImplementationWorkgroups

CBP Organizational Structure and Leadership 09-20-10

Management BoardManagement Board

Scientific & TechnicalAdvisory Committee

Scientific & TechnicalAdvisory Committee

Local GovernmentAdvisory CommitteeLocal Government

Advisory Committee

Citizens’ Advisory Committee

Citizens’ Advisory Committee

Action TeamsAction Teams

Chesapeake Executive Council

Principals’ Staff Committee

Chesapeake Executive Council

Principals’ Staff Committee

IndependentEvaluator

IndependentEvaluator

Communications Workgroup

Communications Workgroup

• ChesapeakeStat should be phased in as the Decision Support Framework to describe work across all CBP Goal Implementation Teams and to be used as a tool for adaptive management.

• Phasing in the use of the decision support framework will begin with interested GITs (Habitat - SAV, WQ – Agriculture, Watersheds) and will use that process to form the basis for content in ChesapeakeStat.

• The PSC also requested CBP staff identify case studies that may be used in a demonstration at the July 2011 EC meeting.

PSC Decisions at May 2011 Meeting

Adaptive Management Decision Framework

GOALS•Focus on release of info and data in timely, relevant, ongoing fashion (based on audience)•Create communications tools and strategies that reflect what’s driving CBP•Improved public recognition for CBP partnership’s work and expertise•Improved clarity / differentiation of public vs. partner products

How will the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) communicate assessment information to the public in 2012?

  Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

                         

PUBLIC AUDIENCE

Ongoing News Cycle Jan-Dec Calendar X X X X X X X X X X X  

Includes press releases, online news, videos, blogs, photo journals, press events                        

Wrap up / Summary                       X

                         

ENVIR STAKEHOLDERS / POLITICAL / INTERNAL AUDIENCES  

EC Report May - May Calendar           X            

                         

                         

Other Reports                        

UMCES Report Cards       X                

River report card     X   X X            

Stage 2: Develop Negotiation Protocols to Determine Future Direction

• Review process for assessing status of existing commitments, EC actions, and future commitments

• Determine if negotiating a new agreement would provide added value to the partnership

Governance: Develop protocol for including federal, state, local partners in development of new agreement or other future direction as determined above, with reasonable deference to current organizational structure. Determine protocol for public input

Timing: 2012 following completion of Phase II WIPs

C2K By the NumbersLiving Resources

Habitat Water Quality

Sound Land Use

Steward-ship

Total

Goals 1 1 1 1 1 5

Topics 5 4 5 4 4 22

Commitments Met/Not Met

1410 / 2

188 / 3

208 / 5

287 / 3

227 / 2

10240 / 15

-With dates* 13 12 13 15 10 60-With Measures Met/Not Met

2

1/1

5

1 / 3

3

0 / 3

6

3 / 3

1

0 / 1

17

5 / 9

* All but one date in Chesapeake 2000 expire on or before 2010

EC Signed Commitments

• 3 Comprehensive Agreements (1983, 1987, 2000)

• 3 MOUs• 25 Directives (16 prior to 2000, 9 post-2000)• 17 Adoption Statements (12 prior to 2000, 5

post-2000)• 23 Management Plans (all prior to 2000,

mostly fisheries and habitat management plans

Stage 2 Governance Issues

• Negotiation Protocols to be developed to review membership, representation and voting and decision-making procedures on:– Management Board– Principals’ Staff Committee– Executive Council

Next Up

• The CBP Decision Framework In Action - Jeff Horan (Chair, Vital Habitats GIT)

• Executive Order Action Plan and Progress Report - Peyton Robertson (Chair, Federal Office Directors)