1. CBP Biennial Strategy Review System:
Workplan Revision Schedule Options Enhancing Partnering, Leadership and Management
Goal Implementation Team Meeting
December 6, 2016

2. Approved Model: QUARTERLY Progress SessionsEC
1-day Biennial Review
PSC
PSC
PSC
PSC
PSC
2017
2018
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
Healthy Watersheds
- Healthy Watersheds
- Protected Lands
- Stream Health/Brook Tr.
- Fish Habitat
- Fish Passage
Stewardship
- Citizen Stewardship
- Public Access
- Diversity
Ecosystem Snapshot
- Bl. Crab Abundance
- Bl. Crab Mgmt.
- SAV
- Oysters
- Forage Fish
Next Gen Stewards
- Stud. Env. Literacy
- Env. Lit. Planning
- Sust. Schools
Flex Space EC
2-day Biennial Review EC
PSC
PSC
PSC
PSC
PSC
2018
2019
May
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sep.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Categories: Integrated Outcomes (tied to release of indicators)
Healthy Watersheds (GIT: 1, 2, 4, 5)
Culture of Stewardship (GIT: 5)
Ecosystem Snapshot (GIT: 1, 2)
Next Generation of Stewards (GIT: 5)
Water Quality (GIT: 3, 2)
Change & Resiliency (GIT: 2, CW)
Local Action (GIT: 2, 4, 6)
Local Action
- Tree Canopy
- Local Leadership
- Land Use Meth./Metrics
- Land Use Options
Healthy Watersheds
- Healthy Watersheds
- Protected Lands
- Stream Health/Brook Tr.
- Fish Habitat
- Fish Passage
Water Quality
- Toxics Policy/Prevnt.
- Toxics Research
- 2017/25 WIPs
- Standards Attain.
- Forest Buffers
Change & Resiliency
- Wetlands
- Black Duck
- Climate Resiliency Mntr
- Climate Resiliency Adptn

3. Workplan Progress and Revisions
How often and when do GITs report progress on 2-year workplans?
How often and when do GITs revise 2- year workplans?
Can go through options today or can provide a recommendation from GIT 6 at December meeting

4. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule

5. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
Pros –
More aligned with the schedule of first 2-year workplans
Everything is updated at once, taking advantage of multiple benefits and priority setting among outcomes
Cons –
MB would need to handle discussions on 28 workplans simultaneously.
Would not benefit from preparation/discussion of the quarterly MB meetings
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule

6. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule
Pros:
Benefits from preparation/discussion at MB quarterly meetings
Fewer workplans to review at a time.
Cons:
The first round of reviews are misaligned (i.e. some will be completed before many intended actions have taken place)

7. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
Pros:
Can see where things are getting behind and adjust more quickly
Aligns with Federal EO requirement for reporting
Cons
Can be time-consuming
May not allow enough time for implementation to occur
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule

8. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
Pros:
Less time spent updating documents
Cons:
May not catch need for early course correction
Not aligned with Federal EO requirement.
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule

9. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
Pros:
Distributes workload associated with reporting
Gives earliest indication of issues/problems with implementation
Cons:
Requires commitment of GIT or Workgroup members to review and report frequently
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule

10. OPTIONS FOR REPORTING PROGRESS AND UPDATING 2-YEAR WORKPLANS
Annual
Every Two Years
Ongoing
By Calendar Year
According to each outcome’s quarterly MB review schedule ?