This section identifies the goals, defines the performance indicators used to measure performance, identifies the baseline, describes how the data is collected and identifies how the data is verified and validated.
Performance Measures and Verification Exhibit B
| Annual
Performance Goal |
Performance
Measure and Definition |
Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.1.1 By September
30, 2000, an additional 2 % of regional migratory bird populations of management concern (for which adequate population information is available) demonstrate improvements in their populations status because of management actions that have either increased their numbers or, in come cases, reduced the number of conflicts due to overabundance. |
# of regional migratory bird populations of management concern
with improved status.
This measure documents
|
The baseline
data consist of 250 regional migratory bird populations of management concern.
|
Information on the population status of regional migratory
bird populations of management concern is gathered annually by means of
a variety of standardized survey methodologies. These include:
|
The significance of observed changes in regional migratory bird populations will be evaluated using generally accepted statistical procedures. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.1.2 By September 30, 2000, an additional 2% of regional migratory bird populations that are of management concern will have baseline information available for establishing reliable population levels, and monitoring programs will be initiated or continued for those species. | 1.1.2 (a) # regional migratory bird populations of
management concern with reliable base-line information and on-going monitoring
programs.
The measure indicate the number of regional migratory bird populations of management concern for which available information on populations is of sufficiently high quality to allow a statistical assess-ment of changes in status and trends over time. (b) # baseline monitoring programs initiated for regional migratory bird populations of manage-ment concern. |
1.1.2(a) Same as 1.1.1 above.
(b) FY 1997 monitoring programs initiated for regional migratory bird populations of management concern is 0. |
Increases in monitoring capabilities for regional migratory bird populations of management concern will be achieved by increasing geographical coverage of existing surveys, improving survey methodology, or implementing new surveys for selected populations. With the exception of the Breeding Bird Survey, all information for assessing the adequacy of population survey information is housed by the MBMO. The BBS is coordinated by the U.S. Geological Survey's Biological Research Division, with summary information on populations trends available on the BBS home page. | The reliability and adequacy of existing and newly implemented survey programs for monitoring regional migratory bird population trends will be evaluated using generally accepted statistical procedures. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.1.2 Continued
1.2.1 - By September 30, 2000, 37% of endangered and threatened species populations listed a decade or more are stabilized or improved and 5 species in decline are precluded from the need for listing under the Endangered Species Act. |
The measure documents increases in the number of regional
migratory bird populations of management concern for which suitable
high quality information is available for monitoring changes in population
status and trends.
(c) # of regional migratory bird populations of management concern This measure provides a tally of the total number of regional migratory bird populations that are deemed to be of management concern 1.2.1(a)# of species approved for removal from candidacy.
|
(c) FY 1997 regional migratory bird populations of management concern is 400. (a) FY 1997 species approved for removal from candidacy is 11. (c) As of July 31, 1998 1,118 U.S. species listed as endangered or threatened. Baseline = ratio of listed species improving/stable to total #listed species (d) FY 1997 species included in proposed rules to delist or downlist published in Federal Register is 0. |
(a&b) Performance measure data will be obtained through annual Regional reports on:
|
Compiled data from all Regions are reviewed by the Washington Office staff, and data discrepancies are resolved with the Regional and field office staff. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.2.1 - Continued
1.3.1 - By September 30, 2000, 100 % of stable interjurisdictional fish populations remain at or above current levels, and 1% of depressed populations are restored to self-sustaining, or where appropriate, harvestable levels. |
(e) # of species included in final rules to delist
or downlist.
(f) #of total acres protected, restored, or enhanced under HCPs. (g) # of listed/candidate species covered by those HCPs. 1.3.1 (a) Develop status & trends baseline for interjurisdictional fish populations by September 30, 1999. Interjurisdictional Fish - Populations of fish that are managed by two or more states or national or tribal governments because of the scope of their geographic distributions or migrations. |
(e) FY 1997 species included in final rules to delist
or downlist is 0.
(f) FY 1998 level.
|
(c/d/e) Performance measure data will also be obtained
through annual Regional reports on recovery planning, implementation accomplishments,
and the status of species which will be compiled and held in the DTE recovery
database. This data will be managed by the Branch of Recovery and Consultation,
Division of Endangered Species in the Washington Office. Data is reported
by field office employees accomplishing the work
1.3.1 Status and trend database for interjurisdictional fish populations is collected in the Accomplishment module of the Fishery Information System---data source manager is the Deputy AD. |
Compiled data from all Regions are reviewed by the Washington
Office staff, and data discrepancies are resolved with the Regional and
field office staff.
1.3.1 Fisheries data is initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of data collection and management efforts. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance
Measure and Definition |
Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.3.1 Continuied
&nbs p;   ; &nbs p; |
1.3.1 Continued
(b) % of stable
Depressed Populations - Migratory bird species experiencing
consistent
Stable - Species known
|
1.3.1 Continued
Baseline to be determined.
Baseline to be determined.
|
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.4.1 - By September 30, 2000, 100% of marine mammal
populations over which the Service has jurisdiction will be at sustainable
population levels or protected under conservation agreements.
1.5.1 By September 30, 2000, 20% of transborder species of international concern over which the Service has jurisdiction will have an improved conservation status or be included under a conservation project, and conservation projects for 30 priority species of international concern will be initiated. |
1.4.1 (a) % of marine mammal populations at sustainable
levels or protected under conservation agreements.
Under the MMPA, optimum stainable populations is defined as
the number of marine mammals which will result in the maximum productivity
of the population or the species, keeping in mind the carrying capacity
of the habitat and the health of the ecosystem of which they form a constituent
element.
(b) # transborder international species with improved conservation status Transborder species of international concern: Those species addressed by well-established, multinational mechanisms to |
1.4.1 (a) FY 1997 baseline 100%.
A total of 6 non-listed marine mammal populations were under the jurisdiction
of the Service. All 6 populations were at sustainable population levels
or under conservation agreements.
(b) FY 1997 the complete list of transborder international species with improved conservation status is 409, the 1997 baseline covers 84 of these species. |
1.4.1 Fisheries. - Marine mammal population data
is collected in the Accomplishment module of the Fishery Information System
(data source manager is the Deputy AD - Fisheries).
1.5.1 Annual reports from grantees document field work accomplished under individual grants. They contain the established methodology through which conservation field work under the signed grant is accomplished. They also reference the species and areas that are protected through application of methodologies developed for the project. |
1.4.1 Data is initially assembled at field stations,
then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency
checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final
editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also
include review of data collection and management efforts.
1.5.1 Grants are issued competitively using peer review groups of scientists from the Service, USAID, and related agencies. Once approved, grant recipients report on their progress through an annual report mechanism, which validates that the work promised at the onset of the project is being carried out as agreed. As reports are submitted, the project manager reviews them for compliance with the |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance
Measure and Definition |
Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 1.5.1 Continued | 1.5.1 Continued
Conservation projects:
|
1.5.1 Continued
of the spot checks
|
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 2.1.1 By September, 30, 2000, meet the identified habitat needs of the Service lands by ensuring that 93,654,000 acres (total acreage managed by the FWS) are protected, of which 3,375,000 acres will be enhanced or restored. | 2.1.1 (a) # total acres managed by FWS
2.1.1 (b) # acres enhanced/restored in NWRS Acres protected reflects the total area of lands and waters under management of the Service. Protect habitat is defined as maintaining the current quality or preventing degradation to habitat. It is the act of ensuring that habitat quantity and quality do not change, most often as a result of human activities but sometimes in response to unwelcome natural processes or phenomena. Acres enhanced or restored refers to direct management actions to improve fish and wildlife habitats. Enhancing habitats is defined as the alteration, treatment, or other
land management of existing habitat to increase habitat value
|
2.1.1 (a) FY 1997 baseline for acres protected is
92,873,832 acres.
2.1.1 (b) FY 1997 baseline for acres enhanced or restored is 2,698,156 acres. |
2.1.1 Protected acres, data is collected in the Real
Property Management Information System and an annual fiscal year report
entitled "Annual Report of Lands Under Control of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service" is prepared (data source manager - Division of Realty).
Enhanced or restored acres, data is assembled as the total acres enhanced or restored during the fiscal year and comes from three sources: 1) activities funded by Refuge Operations and Maintenance funds are reported in the Refuge Comprehensive Accomplishment Report, a module of the Refuge Management Information System (data source manager - Division of Refuges. 2) activities funded or coordinated under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan are reported in the International Tracking System (data source manager - North American Waterfowl Management Plan Office); 3) activities carried out on National Fish Hatcheries are reported in the Fisheries Management Information System (data source manager - the Division of Fish Hatcheries). |
2.1.1 Protected acres, initial data is maintained
in Regional Realty offices and then forwarded to the Washington Office
Division of Realty for quality control, final editing and assembly of the
published report.
Enhanced or restored acres accomplishment reports are initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of data collection and management efforts. For the NAWWO, selected projects submit periodic progress reports and a final report. Information is included in the FWS International Tracking System. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 2.1.1 Continued
2.1.2 In 2000, complete 80% of scheduled contaminant cleanup projects on Service lands. |
2.1.1 Continued
Restoring habitat is returning the quantity and quality of
habitat to some previous naturally occurring condition, most often some
baseline considered suitable and sufficient to support self-sustaining
populations of fish and wildlife.
2.1.2 (b) # of cleanup projects completed Contaminants cleanup projects refers to projects identified in the Refuge Operating Needs. |
2.1.1 Continued
2.1.2 Baseline is the ratio of contaminant projects clean-up to the project comprising the total annual list. FY 1997 baseline for contaminants cleanup projects scheduled is 50. |
2.1.1 Continued
Data are collected from submitted proposals and entered into several
databases maintained by NAWWO. Final project information is submitted in
reports which delineate actual acreage involved (acquisition, restoration,
enhancement, creation).
|
2.1.1 Continued
2.1.2 Accomplishment reports are initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of data collection and management efforts. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 2.2.1. - By December 30, 1999, baseline will be established
for the Facilities Condition Index.
2.2.2 - By September 30, 2000, 4% of mission critical water management and public use facilities that will be in fair or good condition as measured by the Facilities Condition Index, will be completed. |
2.2.1 (a) % of facilities having current replacement
values established.
2.2.1(b) # of mission critical water management and public use facilities identified. These measures necessitate collection of baseline data on deferred maintenance
needs and replacement value to calculate a Facilities Condition Index
(FCI), an industry standard used to gauge the condition of facilities
and equipment. The FCI is the ratio of accumulated deferred maintenance
to the replacement cost for a facility or item of equipment or group of
facilities or items of equipment.
|
2.2.1 (a) No baselines are established for current
replacement values of facilities and equipment.
The Division of Realty is in the process of developing this essential information on replacement values.Baselines will be available by December 30, 1999. Targets were established based on partial baseline data.
|
2.2.1 Deferred maintenance needs data is collected
by field managers at individual stations near the end of each fiscal year
and reported in the Maintenance Management
System. Data on real property are collected annually by field managers and reported
in the Real Property Management Information System (data source manager
- Division of Realty). The update of databases to be completed at the beginning
of FY 2000 will include property numbers in all databases and a method
to estimate replacement values will be developed for both Real/Personal
property items.
|
2.2.1 Data is initially assembled at field stations,
then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency
checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final
editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also
include review of data collection and management efforts.
2.2.2 Same as 2.2.1 |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 2.3.1 - By September 30, 2000, improve the fish and
wildlife populations focusing on trust resources, threatened and endangered
species, and species of special concern by enhancing and/or restoring 250,000
acres of wetland habitat, restoring 79,000 acres of upland habitat, and
enhancing and/or restoring 500 riparian or stream miles of habitat off-Service
lands through partnerships and other identified conservation
strategies. |
2.3.1(a) # acres of wetlands habitat enhanced/restored
2.3.1(b) # acres of upland habitat enhanced/restored.
2.3.1(c) # miles of riparian or stream habitat enhanced/restored.
North American Wetlands Conservation Fund: 2.3.1(d) # acres of wetlands habitat protected
Definitions for Restore and Enhanced Habitats see 2.1.1 |
2.3.1(a) FY 1997 acres of wetlands , enhanced and/or
restored is 108,000 acres
2.3.1(b) FY 1997 acres of upland habitat enhanced/restored is
109,290 acres
2.3.1(e) FY 1997 acres of upland habitat protected is 52,054 acres. 2.3.1(f) FY 1997 acres of riparian habitat protected is 57 acres. |
Wetland acreage and stream miles for the Fisheries program
is collected in the Accomplishment module of the Fishery Information System
(data source manager is the Deputy AD- Fisheries).
Data are collected from submitted proposals and entered into several databases maintained by NAWWO. Final project information is submitted in reports which delineate actual acreage involved (acquisition, restoration, enhancement, creations). Performance measure data will be obtained via annual Regional reports on Partners for Wildlife, Project Plan-planning and Coastal program performance measures. The data will be managed by the Chief, Branch of Habitat Restoration in the Washington Office. Data are reported by Field Office employees accomplishing the work. |
Data is initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded
to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then
subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national
roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of
data collection and management efforts.
Selected projects submit periodic progress reports and a final report. Information is included in the FWS International Tracking System. Compiled data from all Regions are reviewed by Washington Office staff, and data discrepancies are resolved in conference with Regional and Field Office staff. Coastal Barrier Resources System data are provided by a contractor; a subset of the data is spot checked. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 3.1.1 By September 30, 2000, interpretive, educational
and recreational visits to National Wildlife Refuges and National Fish
Hatcheries are annually increasing by 2%.
3.2.1 By September 30, 2000, volunteer participation hours in Service programs increased by 30% and refuges and hatcheries have 55 new friends groups from 1997 levels. |
3.1.1(a)% increase in interpretive, educational and
recreational visits.
3.1.1(b) This measure reflects the percent change in the total
number of individuals who annually visit the National Wildlife Refuge System
and National Fish Hatchery System.
|
3.1.1(a) FY 1997 visitation to the Refuge System
was 30,746,000.
3.1.1(b) FY 1997 visitation to the Fish Hatchery System was 3,000,000.
|
Visitation data for the Refuge System is collected in the
Public Education and Recreation module of the Refuge Management Information
System.
Visitation data for the Hatchery System is collected in the Accomplishment
module of the Fishery Information System.
|
Annual reports are initially assembled at field stations,
then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency
checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final
editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also
include review of data collection and management efforts.
3.2.1 Annual reports are initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of data collection and management efforts. |
| Annual Performance Goal | Performance Measure and Definition | Baseline | Data Collection Methodology/Sources | Validation |
| 3.3.1 By September 30, 2000, 100% of all Federal
Aid state grant monies are used consistent with the enabling legislation.
3.4.1 By September 30, 2000, 100% of mitigation hatchery production requirements are satisfied relating to federal water development projects. |
3.3.1 (a) # of states & territories eligible
to participate in the Federal Grant program.
3.3.1(b) # of states found in compliance after audit resolution. 3.4.1 % of mitigation hatchery production requirements that are satisfied. Fishery Mitigation - The act of stocking fish in environments that have been altered by human activities, such as the construction and operation of dams and which can no longer support self-sustaining populations of native fish. |
3.3.1 (a) FY 1997 56 states and territories eligible
to participate in Federal Grant program.
3.3.1 (b) FY 1997 21 states found in compliance after audit resolution. 3.4.1 In FY 1997, 85% of mitigation hatchery production requirements related to federal water development projects were satisfied. |
3.3.1 Federal Aid Audit Reports, Regional Federal
Aid programs.
The amounts and numbers of production requirements are tracked in the Accomplishment module of the Fishery Information System. |
3.3.1 The FWS Federal Aid program will schedule and
coordinate audits of State Grantees, ensuring all states are audited at
least once every five years.
Fish distribution data are initially assembled at field stations, then forwarded to Regional offices for quality control and consistency checks, and then subsequently forwarded to the Washington office for final editing and national roll-up. Regional inspections of field stations also include review of data collection and management efforts. |
Mission Goal is a classification identifying outcome oriented goals that define how an organization will carry out its mission.
Long-Term Goals are the "general performance goals and objectives" identified in the Government Performance and Results Act. They define the intended result, effect, or consequence for what the organization does. They provide a measurable indication of future success by providing target levels of performance and a time frame for accomplishment. Long-term goals should focus on outcomes rather than outputs (products and services).
Annual Goal is a one-year increment of the long-term goal. It contains a targeted level of performance to be achieved for a particular year. It is to be expressed in an objective, quantifiable, and measurable form. OMB approval of an alternative form of evaluating the success of a program is required if the annual goal cannot be expressed in an objective or quantifiable manner.
GPRA Program Activity, is described as the
consolidation, aggregation or disaggregation of program activities that
are covered or described by a set of performance goals, provided that any
aggregation or consolidation does not omit or minimize the significance
of any program constituting a major agency function or operation.
Table of Contents:FY 2000 Annual Performance Plan
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Home
Page