1. Chesapeake Bay Health and Restoration Assessment Performance Management and Tracking: Chesapeake Bay Program Collection, Integration, and Reporting of Key Indicators Nita Sylvester December 12, 2008

2. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 2 2 Briefing Outline Assessment Background 2007 Assessment Highlights Assessment Information on the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) Website Ties to the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) Lessons Learned, Issues/Challenges

3. Assessment Background 2007 2006 2005

4. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 4 4 GAO Evaluation and 2005 Report During an evaluation conducted August 2004 through October 2005, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reviewed the CBP’s indicators and its 2002 and 2004 State of the Bay reports. Based on that review, the GAO made the following recommendation in its October 2005 report to Congress: “GAO recommends that the Administrator of EPA instruct the Chesapeake Bay Program Office to (1) complete its efforts to develop and implement an integrated assessment approach; (2) revise its reporting approach to improve the effectiveness and credibility of its reports;…” (Chesapeake Bay Program: Improved Strategies Are Needed to Better Assess, Report, and Manage Restoration Progress, GAO Report to Congressional Requesters, October 2005).

5. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 5 5 CBP Response: IRT Concurrent with the GAO evaluation, an Indicator Redesign Task Force (IRT) began meeting in November 2004 to solve deficiencies in the CBP indicators and the way they were communicated. The IRT was a temporary group composed of a combination of monitoring and communication experts. IRT Tasks: Reorganize the existing suite of indicators to eliminate inconsistencies and to convey more clearly the answers to key questions about the Bay and the Bay restoration; improve timeliness of reporting and reporting framework; add some "overarching" composite measures of the state of the Bay, pressures on the Bay, and progress in its restoration; and stimulate change quickly.

6. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 6 6 CBP Response: Indicator Framework The IRT developed an indicator framework which employs a matrix approach that groups the indicators by functional role and then places each indicator into a hierarchy of detail within that functional role. All indicators are divided into one of four groups based on their function within an adaptive management framework. Factors Impacting Chesapeake Bay and Watershed Health: stressors and other factors affecting health of Bay and watershed. Chesapeake Bay Restoration and Protection Efforts: actions undertaken to improve health of Bay. Chesapeake Bay Watershed Health: assess ecosystem health of Bay watershed’s non-tidal rivers, stream corridors and surrounding watersheds. Chesapeake Bay Health: assess ecosystem health of Bay and its tidal tributaries.

7. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 7 7 CBP Response: Framework Hierarchy Reporting indicators/indices: small number; effectively communicate key messages of functional group; form basis for two upper levels of indices: Diagnostic and detailed indicators: facilitate interpretation of reporting indicators and associated indices; are not used in the generation of top level or overarching indices. Top Level Indices Overarching Indices

8. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 8 8 CBP Response: Assessment March 2006: CBP debuted a new way of accounting for the health of the Bay and efforts to restore it by releasing a draft of its first Health and Restoration Assessment (Draft Chesapeake Bay 2005 Health and Restoration Assessment). Separately reported Bay health and efforts to restore Bay health Bay health assessment: benchmarked current environmental conditions to Program-adopted restoration targets. Restoration efforts assessment: presented as “percentage of goal achieved” to communicate past efforts in relation to amount of work remaining. April 2007: CBP finalized the draft report (Chesapeake Bay 2006 Health and Restoration Assessment) Featured integrated assessment approach: reported 3 indices of ecosystem health and 5 indices of restoration effort April 2008: CBP released updated assessment (Chesapeake Bay 2007 Health and Restoration Assessment) Filled all reporting indicator gaps; provided web links to geographic cuts of information.

9. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 9 9 Implementation of GAO’s Recommended Actions The Chesapeake Bay Program’s 2005, 2006 and 2007 Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessments have been responsive to GAO recommendations and additional independent review/input: GAO RecommendationCBP Action Develop and implement integrated approach to assess overall restoration progress. Reduced >100 indicators into 3 indices of ecosystem health and 5 indices of restoration effort. Include assessment of key ecological attributes that reflect Bay’s current health conditions. Developed 13 environmental indicators that measure key ecological attributes of the Bay. Report separately on health of Bay and progress made implementing management actions. Separated restoration activities from ecosystem health and developed an annual reporting process for both. Establish independent and objective reporting process. Established new reporting process based on independent review.

10. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 10 Chesapeake Bay Health and Restoration Assessment Utilizing most up-to-date data gathered by Bay Program partners… an annual Assessment is assembled in the first quarter of each year… to provide a synthesis of the previous year's: Bay Health Factors Impacting Bay & Watershed Health Restoration Efforts Watershed Health

11. 2007 Assessment Highlights

12. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 12 2007 Chesapeake Bay Health Summary Monitoring data used to assess Bay health. Tracked with 13 “reporting-level” indicators in three priority areas: Water Quality Habitats & Lower Food Web Fish & Shellfish Quantitative restoration goals set for most indicators.

13. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 13 2007 Chesapeake Bay Health Indices Most of the Bay’s waters are degraded. In 2007, we were 21% of the way toward meeting Bay water quality goals, a drop from 23% in 2006. The Bay’s critical habitats and food web continue to be at risk. Currently, the Bay’s habitats and lower food web are at 44% of desired levels, up from 40% in 2006. Many of the Bay’s fish and shellfish populations are below historic levels. Currently, the Bay’s fish and shellfish are at 52% of desired levels, up from 48% in 2006.

14. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 14 Factors Impacting Bay and Watershed Health Monitoring data used to assess factors impacting Bay and watershed health. Tracked with 14 reporting-level indicators in four priority areas: Pollutants Land Use Natural Factors Fisheries Harvest & Pressures

15. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 15 Factors Impacting Bay and Watershed Health Pollutant loads continue to exceed target levels established to restore Bay water quality. Climate change/variability caused Bay water temperatures to exhibit greater extremes during the 20th century than the previous 2,000 years. Sea-level rise related to climate change contributes to coastal wetland loss. Historic over-harvest, compounded by impacts of poor water quality, disease and blocked access to historic spawning grounds, has resulted in low abundances of oysters, crabs and shad.

16. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 16 Factors Impacting Bay and Watershed Health Population has reached nearly 17 million and grows by 130,000 annually. Impervious surfaces increased at 5Xs the rate of population growth (1990-2000)—a trend that is expected to continue. One hundred acres of forest are lost each day in the watershed. As forests and wetlands are destroyed to make room for roads and buildings, their ability to hold back pollutants and the important habitat they offer are lost as well.

17. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 17 2007 Restoration and Protection Efforts Monitoring and tracking data and computer simulations used to assess work being done to restore Bay and watershed health. Tracked with 20 reporting- level indicators in five priority areas: Reducing Pollution Restoring Habitats Managing Fisheries Protecting Watersheds Fostering Stewardship Quantitative restoration goals set for most indicators.

18. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 18 2007 Restoration and Protection Efforts Indices Overall, based on available data, Bay Program scientists project that little more than half of the pollution reduction efforts needed to achieve the nutrient goals have been undertaken since 1985. Overall, habitat restoration efforts are collectively at 48% of Program goals; up from 45% in 2006, however, there is concern about the overall quality of habitats that remain.

19. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 19 2007 Restoration and Protection Efforts Indices Progress toward fisheries management goals ranges from 37-63% for the five key Bay fisheries, unchanged from 2006. Overall, watershed protection efforts show good progress and are 71% of the way toward meeting current Program goals, up from 69% in 2006. Overall the Program has reached 68% of its fostering stewardship goals, a rise of one percent from 2006.

20. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 20 Watershed Health Monitoring data gathered by Bay Program state partners as part of their federal 305b/303d reporting requirements used to assess health of freshwater streams and rivers. A map presents a summary of each state’s benthic macroinvertebrate impairments assessment results within the boundaries of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

21. Assessment Information on the CBP Website

22. One path to the Assessment How is the Bay Doing? Quickest path

23. Ties to the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP)

24. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 24 Health & Restoration Assessment and the CAP Chesapeake Action Plan is focused on restoration efforts: Includes strategy and plans for achieving restoration effort goals Assesses partners, resources and funding available to achieve goals Features realistic annual targets for key restoration efforts Maximizes coordination and collaboration of restoration efforts among a powerful and expanding partnership Informs efficient and effective use of available resources and funding

25. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 25 CAP Relationship to Health & Restoration Assessment CAP Goals CBP partners translated the five broad strategic themes of Chesapeake 2000 into five action- oriented goals and added a sixth goal, “Partnership, Leadership, and Management”. H&R Assessment Progress in partners’ restoration work should lead to improvements in the health of the Bay, as measured by the Bay health indices H&R Assessment Restoration effort indices evaluate progress CBP is making toward action- oriented goals.

26. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 26 Assessment of Restoration Efforts Status and trends summarized in Health & Restoration Assessment CAP “dashboard” provides additional information: Realistic targets for next three years Strategy and plans for achieving goals Assessment of partners, resources and funding available to achieve goals

27. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 27 Lessons Learned  Establish key measures for public reporting and use them consistently in all outreach products (including reports to Congress, GAO, OMB)  Align assessment periods (e.g. September through October “water year”).  Report separately on measures of ecosystem health and restoration efforts.  Goals and targets are critical for developing useful indicators but are useful only if they have been endorsed at the highest level possible and by all of the partners.  Since CBP has long-term goals for most key measures, status and trends for all measures can be reported using a common currency of “percent of goal achieved”.  This has been very helpful in communication and outreach efforts.  It also supports efforts aimed at “accountability”.  Using a common currency allows for easy “roll up” of individual measures into “indices”, which is very useful for communication and outreach.

28. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 28 Issues/Challenges: Restoration Efforts The CAP measures are focused on tracking our restoration efforts (activities). Since we have long-term (and, more recently, short-term) goals in place, these measures can be used as a relative accounting of our efforts. The issues related to developing these measures are quite different from those related to our environmental health measures. The “efforts” indicators ultimately rely on tracking data. Major issues related to tracking data include: Double counting Lack of timely data Refusal to provide data (can’t be held “accountable” since there are no data provided to prove one way or the other). Agreements on goals and targets

29. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 29 Issues/Challenges: Ecosystem Health Measures The ultimate measures of restoration efforts are the environmental health measures. Since goals are in place, status and trends are reported in relation to those goals. The “health” indicators ultimately rely on monitoring data. Major issues related to monitoring data include: Consistency (e.g. making sure that the monitoring programs are the same in all areas monitored for the same parameter and that the criteria and/or thresholds are consistent). Making sure the purpose of the monitoring program is consistent with the way the data will be used. Improvements in the monitoring and analysis programs over time, which requires a re-assessment of how to use historic data. Agreement on which monitoring data to use when there is a wealth of data available. Agreement on goals and targets. Lack of timely data.

30. Chesapeake Bay Health & Restoration Assessment 12/12/08 30 Additional Information Information about the CBP Indicators on the EPA Indicators Gateway site (http://iaspub.epa.gov/indgate/RESULTVIEW.about?pBioId=61). There is a great deal of information here, so please be sure to click on all of the “tabs”.http://iaspub.epa.gov/indgate/RESULTVIEW.about?pBioId=61 CBP “Bay Health and Restoration Assessment” webpage (http://www.chesapeakebay.net/indicatorshome.aspx). There is a wealth of information here, so please take the time to explore the links. Be sure to follow the link to “About Our Assessment Process”.http://www.chesapeakebay.net/indicatorshome.aspx CBP Indicators Workgroup webpage (http://www.chesapeakebay.net/committee_indicatorsworkgroup_info.aspx) and “Current Projects” page (http://www.chesapeakebay.net/committee_indicatorsworkgroup_projects.a spx).http://www.chesapeakebay.net/committee_indicatorsworkgroup_info.aspxhttp://www.chesapeakebay.net/committee_indicatorsworkgroup_projects.a spx Summary information about CBP indicators and assessment in the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) Report to Congress (http://cap.chesapeakebay.net/docs/EPA_Chesapeake_Bay_CAP.pdf, Chapter 2, page 5 and Chapter 3, pp 9-13)http://cap.chesapeakebay.net/docs/EPA_Chesapeake_Bay_CAP.pdf