Report on the Review of Sea Grant Extension Program

1
Report on the Review of Sea Grant Extension
Program a Call for GreaterNational Commitment
to EngagementA Presentation to the NOAA Science
Advisory Board

• Ronald C. Baird
• Director
• National Sea Grant College Program
• November 9, 2005

2
Outline

• Purpose
• Issues
• Presentation of Briefing
• NOAA Coordination and Views
• Desired Outcome

3
Purpose

• To inform the SAB on the central precepts from a
  review of Sea Grants extension program
• To stimulate discussion by SAB on
• Importance for NOAA of engagement with external
  constituencies
• Sea Grant Extension Programs relationship to
  NOAAs science enterprise
• Improving the future effectiveness of NOAAs
  science to user interface

4
Issue

• Unparalleled future demands on coastal ecosystems
  from exponential growth
• Solutions to coastal problems are dispersed,
  place-based, multi jurisdictional
• Increasing demand for NOAA to engage users,
  provide solutions (USCOP report)
• How NOAA can better engage users in long-term

5
BACKGROUND

• New management procedures introduced in Sea Grant
  (97-99)
• Series of national programmatic reviews begun
  (99-present)
• First in series review of SG Extension Program
  (SGEP) (99-00)
• First review of its kind in SGs 31-year history

6
Background (cont.)

• Blue ribbon panel, chaired by Dr. John Byrne (see
  report)
• Charge Provide recommendations to improve
  organization, administration and management of
  SGEP within National Sea Grant Organization, its
  university partners and NOAA
• Report published, November 2000
• Forward looking, basis of many changes in SGs
  extension enterprise since 2000

7
National Sea Grant Extension Review Panel

• Name Title
• John V. Byrne, Chair President Emeritus, Oregon
  State University/ex-Administrator of NOAA
• Brian E. Baird Asst. Secretary for Ocean
  Coastal Policy
• California Resources Agency
• B.J. Copeland Professor of Zoology, North
  Carolina State University
• Robert W. Corell Senior Research Fellow, Kennedy
• School of Government at Harvard
• University

8
National Sea Grant Extension Review Panel (cont.)

• Name Title
• G. Ross Heath Professor of Oceanography and Dean
  Emeritus, College of Ocean and Fishery
  Sciences, University of Washington
• Fred E. Hutchinson Retired. President,
  University of Maine
• Frank L. Kudrna Member, National Sea Grant
  Review Panel. CEO, Kudrna and Associates,
  Ltd.
• Michael P. Voiland Asst. Director for Research
  and Extension
• Cornell University College of Agriculture
  Life Sciences Cornell Cooperative
  Extension

9
Synopsis of Report Findings

• Emphasizes the importance of interaction with
  user constituencies in solving coastal problems
  as threats increase
• Makes series of 20 recommendations for improving
  engagement in NOAA and Sea Grant
• Imperative for public institutions to engage
  citizens, attend to their needs
• That NOAA, by reason of mission, will be called
  on to engage as never before

10
Synopsis of Report Findings (cont.)

• That the university-based SGEP has proven ability
  to transfer science-based info to users as an
  honest broker
• That NOAAs organizational structure is not well
  suited to engagement or maximum use of SGEP
  capabilities
• That NOAA adopt recommendations of Pew/USCOP
  reports regarding engagement
• That the seven guiding characteristics of Kellogg
  Commission for engagement of Universities is
  relevant to NOAA (see report)

11
Primary Recommendations

• NOAA should create office of outreach at the
  deputy assistant secretary level NSGCP assigned
  there
• - resonant with NRC 1994 report on SG
• - SG not situated in NOAA to maximize
  interactions across Line Offices
• NOAA should increase the number of SGEP
  specialists
• NSGO should establish regional programs

12
Primary Recommendations (cont.)

• SGEP leaders should be part of SG management
  teams
• Professional development improvements needed
• Increase networking/info exchange nationally
• Enhance partnerships with other Federal agencies

13
Results

• NOAA received report
• - rejection of organizational changes
• - poor timing, less impact (change of
  administration)
• - Byrne did report to NOAA leadership early in
  this Administration
• - NSGP implemented most recommendations

14
Results continued

• SG has established (not exclusive list)
• - advisory boards, formal planning
• - regional programs
• - national programs (e.g., fish extension,
  coastal community)
• - reporting structure of SGEP leaders
  (management teams)
• - codified program fundamentals (handout)
• - SG academy (two sessions)
• - SG training program (with CSC)
• - SG national assembly extension leadership
• - EPA MOA on coastal community development
  (partnerships)
• Bottom line very useful study, significant
  impacts on SGEP

15
NOAA Coordination and Views

• Coordination with
• - PPI, Goal Teams, Line Offices (part of
  eco-research)
• What has NOAA done to address this issue?
• - NOAA has adopted engagement as a priority
  goal
• What are NOAAs views on the subject?
• - Outreach and ecosystem based management are
  priorities in Strategic Plan
• - Created Office of Education (an outreach
  function)

16
Desired Outcome

• Provide Guidance
• SAB discuss how it might help shape NOAAs
  engagement agenda

17
Points to Consider

• Pew/USCOP reports strongly emphasize engagement
• SG has well developed extension program
• SG has over 370 extension agents on the ground in
  every coastal and Great Lakes state
• NOAA science enterprise under review, eco-science
  a priority role of engagement/info transfer
• Demand for regional/local knowledge growing
• Need to shorten science to user interface
  science as product
• How might other parts of NOAA use SGs extension
  structure (OAR lab example)
• Importance of local decision making to effective
  public policy education of policy makers