Evaluation of the Sea Grant Program Review Process (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 Major Findings and Recommendations
5 Major Findings and Recommendations
Pages 87-98
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 87... ...
report A Review of the NOAA National Sea Grant College Program, the National Director instituted a number of changes in the way the program was evaluated.
|
From page 88... ...
First, one of the key recommendations of the 1994 report was to establish a process for strategic planning. Such a process was, in fact, established, and the individual Sea Grant programs have produced strategic plans.
|
From page 89... ...
As the level of routine engagement of the NSGO with individual programs is rather low, reliance on external review reduces the federal component of the partnership that is central to the Sea Grant program. The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce and in consultation with National Sea Grant Review Panel and the individual Sea Grant programs, should strengthen the ability of the National Sea Grant Office to carry out meaningful, ongoing internal assessment to complement periodic, external assessment currently tak
|
From page 90... ...
. The remainder of this chapter explores a number of changes that may be made to improve the overall value of program assessment within the Sea Grant program.
|
From page 91... ...
Steps should be taken by the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce and in consultation with National Sea Grant Review Panel and the individual Sea Grant programs, to strengthen strategic planning at both the national and individual program level. The strategic plans of the individual programs and the national program should represent a coordinated and collective effort to serve local, regional, and national needs.
|
From page 92... ...
The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce and in consultation with National Sea Grant Review Panel and the individual Sea Grant programs, should substantially reduce the overall number of scored criteria by combining various existing criteria, while adding cooperative, network-building activities as an explicitly evaluated, highly valued criterion. As discussed in Chapter 3, consideration should be given to reducing the number of scored criteria to be assessed in the next external, periodic review cycle.
|
From page 93... ...
With regard to length of PAT visits, to some degree concerns in this area reflect the lack of clarity regarding what constitutes acceptable or exceptional performances in the various performance metrics used during the PAT process. The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce and in consultation with National Sea Grant Review Panel and the individual Sea Grant programs, should shorten the duration and standardize the PAT site visits, based on the minimum time and material needed to cover essential, standardized ele
|
From page 94... ...
Review material prepared for the periodic review should be a compilation of the annual reports of individual programs, supplemented by material that demonstrates the extent to which the annual activities combine to form a cohesive, ongoing program of activity organized to accomplish the objectives of an appropriately ambitious strategic plan and demonstrates effective progress towards accomplishment of the strategic plan's goals and objectives. The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce, should rank the individual Sea Grant programs based on a program evaluation process that includes more robust, credible, and transparent annual assessments of each individual Sea Grant program.
|
From page 95... ...
The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, under supervision of the Secretary of Commerce, should revise the calculation of bonus funding allocation relative to program rank to ensure that small differences in program rank do not result in large differences in bonus funding, while preserving or even enhancing the ability to competitively award bonus funds as required by the National Sea Grant College Program Act Amendments of 2002 (P.L.
|
From page 96... ...
The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the National Sea Grant Review Panel, should take steps to ensure that sufficient human and fiscal resources are available to allow robust, ongoing, and meaningful interaction among the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, the staff of the National Sea Grant Office, and the directors of individual Sea Grant programs, and the administrators of the institutional homes of the individual Sea Grant programs. This interaction will provide a solid foundation for the annual performance evaluation needed to annually rate and rank individual programs as required by law, and will help ensure that the various elements of the National Program are truly capable of providing "an appropriately balanced response to local, regional, and national needs, which is reflective of integration with the relevant portions of strategic plans of the Department of Commerce and of the Administration" (33 U.S.C.
|
From page 97... ...
Developing such a "state of the program" report would seem to be an obvious role for the NSGRP. The Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, acting under authority of the Secretary, should direct the National Sea Grant Review Panel to undertake the development of a systematic review of the "state of the Sea Grant program" once every four years.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.