NERRS Science System Collaborative Evaluation Survey

OMB Control No. 0648-xxxx

Expiration Date: xx/xx/xxxx

NERRS Science Collaborative Survey for the NERRS

Survey Introduction

NOAA is evaluating the NERRS Science Collaborative in order to determine how effective it was at fostering targeted, multidisciplinary, collaborative research to address the impacts of human activities on coasts and estuaries. The purpose of this survey is to solicit your input on the NERRS Science Collaborative program. The survey information will be used by ERD in evaluating the overall effectiveness of the program in meeting NERRS goals and priorities.

Please tell us a bit about yourself:

1. What is your affiliation?

   1. National Estuarine Research Reserve staff

   2. Other (please specify)

2. If you work for a Reserve, please identify your sector.

   1. Manager

   2. Research Coordinator

   3. Coastal Training Program Coordinator

   4. Education Coordinator

   5. Stewardship Coordinator

   6. Other (please specify)

3. If you do not work for a Reserve what is your area of work?

   1. Please Specify

The rest of the survey focuses on the three main program components of the NERRS Science Collaborative: 1) competitive grants, 2) transfer, and 3) the TIDES (Training for the Integration of Decisions and Ecosystem Science) Master’s program. At the end of the survey you will have an opportunity to suggest alternative approaches to the goal of “fostering targeted, multidisciplinary, collaborative research to address the impacts of human activities on coasts and estuaries.”

Competitive Grants Component

Each year the Science Collaborative releases a Request for Proposals (RFP) that seeks proposals that integrate intended users into the conduct of applied research projects using collaboration practices to address priority coastal management problems in the Reserves and their surrounding communities. The following 4 questions ask you about your involvement in this program and your level of satisfaction with the focus of the NERRS Science Collaborative RFPs to date.

4. How often have you participated in the development of collaborative research proposals that were submitted for NERRS Science Collaborative funding?

   1. None

   2. 1 time

   3. 2 times

   4. 3 times

   5. 4 or more times

5. How many collaborative research projects that you participated in have been funded by the NERRS Science Collaborative?

   1. None

   2. 1 project

   3. 2 projects

   4. 3 projects

   5. 4 or more projects

6. What is your degree of satisfaction with the focus of the annual Request for Proposal’s on the following coastal and estuarine issues in a changing climate?

   1. Land use

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

2. Habitat restoration

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

3. Estuarine contaminants

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

4. Stormwater management and contamination

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

7. What is your degree of satisfaction with the Science Collaborative Program’s competitive funding approach that requires the inclusion of intended users in your research project?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

[Please explain your answer.]

Transfer Component of the NERRS Science Collaborative

The goal of this component of the program is to share information, good ideas, and lessons learned from the place-based research funded by the NERRS Science Collaborative with other Reserves in the most effective way possible. Some of the Transfer activities include the Collaborative Learning training (offered by Chris Feurt of the Wells NERR) or the project webinars offered by the program. The next 5 questions ask you about your level of satisfaction with this aspect of the NERRS Science Collaborative.

8. How often have you participated in the development of collaborative information transfer proposals that were submitted for NERRS Science Collaborative funding?

   1. None

   2. 1 time

   3. 2 times

   4. 3 times

   5. 4 or more times

9. How many transfer projects that you participated in have been funded by the NERRS Science Collaborative?

   1. None

   2. 1 project

   3. 2 projects

   4. 3 projects

   5. 4 or more projects

10. Please indicate the ways you have interacted with the Transfer component of the program.

Choose all that apply.

1. I have not interacted with the Transfer program

2. Collaborative Learning training

3. Webinars

4. Project-level transfer project

5. Other (please list)

11. What is your degree of satisfaction with the support provided by the Science Collaborative for Collaborative Learning Training workshops as a way to develop collaborative capacity in the NERRS?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

12. What is your degree of satisfaction with the overall Transfer component of the NERRS Science Collaborative?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

[Please provide reasons for your answer.]

TIDES Component of the NERRS Science Collaborative

TIDES (Training for the Integration of Decisions and Ecosystems Science) is a Master’s program based at the University of New Hampshire. Its goal is to increase the number of professionals specifically trained to create processes for linking science and decisions. TIDES students serve 6-month internships at Reserves as part of their program requirements working on projects funded by the NERRS Science Collaborative. The next 3 questions ask you about your level of satisfaction with this aspect of the program.

13. Have you had a TIDES student(s) work at your Reserve since the inception of the program in 2009?

    1. Yes – answer all of the following questions in this section

    2. No – Skip Question 14. Go to Question 15.

14. What is your degree of satisfaction with the TIDES program?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

[Please indicate how you personally have interacted with the TIDES program.]

15. What is your degree of satisfaction with NOAA supporting graduate training, with focus on training professionals to connect science to decision making?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

[Please elaborate]

General Questions on the NERRS Science Collaborative

One of the goals for NOAA in funding the Science Collaborative was to improve the Reserve System’s ability to address important coastal management challenges facing both the Reserves and the Nation’s coastal areas. The following 8 questions ask you about your level of satisfaction with how NOAA’s support for the Science Collaborative has helped Reserves address this challenge.

16. What is your degree of satisfaction with how Science Collaborative funding has improved your Reserve’s ability to address the following issues of importance to the NERRS?

    1. Impacts of land use change

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

2. Habitat change and restoration

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

3. Management of stormwater

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

4. Nonpoint source pollution

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

5. Climate change

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

17. What is your degree of satisfaction with how Science Collaborative funding has improved your Reserve’s ability to address the following issues of importance to the community your Reserve serves?

    1. Impacts of land use change

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

2. Habitat change and restoration

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

3. Management of stormwater

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

4. Nonpoint source pollution

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

5. Climate change

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

18. What is your degree of satisfaction with how Science Collaborative funding has improved the application of Reserve science to address Reserve management needs?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

19. What is your degree of satisfaction with how Science Collaborative funding has improved the application of Reserve science to address coastal management needs?

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

20. What is your degree of satisfaction with how the following Science Collaborative program activities have increased your Reserve’s capacity to make your community aware of Reserve-led management practices?

    1. Competitive research funding

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

2. Collaborative learning training

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

3. Transfer activities for project findings and information

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

21. What is your degree of satisfaction with the distribution of funding across the following Science Collaborative program activities:

    1. Competitive research program funding

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

2. Transfer program activities funding

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

3. TIDES program funding

1=Extremely Dissatisfied, 2=Not Satisfied, 3=No Opinion, 4=Satisfied, 5=Extremely Satisfied

[Please explain your response]

22. Has NOAA’s support for the NERRS Science Collaborative better positioned the NERRS to be more effective leaders in their communities?

    1. Yes

    2. No

[Please Explain]

23. Do you have other comments or suggestions for how ERD can use a system-wide research program, either similar to the NERRS Science Collaborative or quite different, to further the goal of fostering targeted, multidisciplinary, collaborative research to address the impacts of human activities on coasts and estuaries?

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement:

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 20 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other suggestions for reducing this burden to Dwight Trueblood, NOAA National Ocean Service, Estuarine Reserves Division, UNH, Gregg Hall, Suite 130, 35 Colovos Road, Durham, NH 03824.

Responses will not be reported individually, only in aggregate. Your name will not be placed on your completed survey or included in subsequent reports. A summary of results will be used by NOAA and individuals involved in the review of the NERRS Science Collaborative program activities. A summary of the results will also be made available to the NERRS community and the investigators implementing the NERRS Science Collaborative program at the University of New Hampshire.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subjected to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.