1 Report on the Review of Sea Grant Extension Program & a Call for Greater National Commitment to Engagement A 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 Grant’s extension program To stimulate discussion by SAB on: Importance for NOAA of engagement with external constituencies Sea Grant Extension Program’s relationship to NOAA’s science enterprise Improving the future effectiveness of NOAA’s 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 SG’s 31-year history

6 Background (con’t.) 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 SG’s extension enterprise since 2000

7 National Sea Grant Extension Review Panel NameTitle John V. Byrne, ChairPresident Emeritus, Oregon State University/ex-Administrator of NOAA Brian E. BairdAss’t. Secretary for Ocean & Coastal Policy California Resources Agency B.J. CopelandProfessor of Zoology, North Carolina State University Robert W. CorellSenior Research Fellow, Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University

8 National Sea Grant Extension Review Panel (con’t.) NameTitle G. Ross HeathProfessor of Oceanography and Dean Emeritus, College of Ocean and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington Fred E. HutchinsonRetired. President, University of Maine Frank L. KudrnaMember, National Sea Grant Review Panel. CEO, Kudrna and Associates, Ltd. Michael P. VoilandAss’t. 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 (con’t.) That the university-based SGEP has proven ability to transfer science-based info to users as an honest broker That NOAA’s 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 e stablish regional programs

12 Primary Recommendations (con’t.) 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 NOAA’s 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 NOAA’s 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 SG’s extension structure (OAR lab example) Importance of local decision making to effective public policy – education of policy makers