|
Evaluation of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s National Environmental Performance Track Program
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Gabrielle Fekete,
United States Environmental Protection Agency,
fekete.gabrielle@epa.gov
|
| Jerri Dorsey,
United States Environmental Protection Agency,
dorsey,jerri@epa.gov
|
| Katie Martini,
University of Maryland,
kbmartini@gmail.com
|
| Abstract:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created the voluntary National Environmental Performance Track Program as a new model for achieving environmental protection goals be fostering innovation and recognizing and encouraging corporate leadership. The EPA's Office of Inspector General (OIG) evaluated the implementation and effectiveness of the Performance Track program.
The OIG found that Performance Track did not have clear plans that connected activities with its goals, and did not have performance measures that show if it achieves innovation or anticipated environmental outcomes. These implementation challenges detracted from EPA’s anticipated results. In assessing members’ leadership using independent criteria, the OIG found that most Performance Track members’ compliance and toxic release records were better than average, but some were not. Although most members showed leadership and environmental progress, the presence of underperforming facilities in this leadership program reduces the integrity and value of the Performance Track brand.
|
|
Uses and Suggested Structuring of an Environmental Behavior Index (EBI) at the National Level
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Andrea Hramits,
United States Environmental Protection Agency,
hramits.andrea@epa.gov
|
| Katherine Dawes,
United States Environmental Protection Agency,
dawes.katherine@epa.gov
|
| Abstract:
In 2005, Washington State’s King County developed an innovative tool: the Environmental Behavior Index (EBI). The EBI is a compilation of individual environmental behavior data collected by surveying King County residents. The success of the King County EBI as a tool for evaluation and its potential for use on a wider scale is the inspiration for exploring the viability of a nation-wide EBI.
A national EBI would collect data that could be used by many organizations for: informing and improving program design, performing program evaluations, marketing programs to the public, tracking trends in environmental behaviors, influencing regulatory decision, and providing useful data for environmental research. A national EBI would collect information on household or individuals’ environmental behaviors via telephone survey. This data could be collected at the local level and then aggregated at the national level. The data could then be made available for use nationally.
|
|
Using Evaluation to Identify Performance Measures and Their Relevance to Mission-level Program Outcomes
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| William Michaud,
SRA International Inc,
bill_michaud@sra.com
|
| Abstract:
Since the advent of GPRA, there has been an increasing focus on systematic measurement of outcomes that are directly related to a program’s mission. This has been reinforced by the OMB PART process. While laudable, the focus on direct measurement of outcomes that are far-removed from a program’s intervention could lead to inefficient use of performance measurement resources and poorly informed program management decisions. This is particularly true when a program operates in the context of complex environmental or social systems. A more cost-effective and, potentially, valid approach to performance measurement would be to focus resources on easier-to-measure, more immediate outcomes whose relationship to more distant, mission-level outcomes has been quantified using targeted evaluation. The paper will explain this argument, present a framework for optimizing performance measures, and consider the implications of this alternative for setting evaluation priorities.
|
|
Methodological Challenges to the Practice of Environmental Program and Policy Evaluation
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Matthew Birnbaum,
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation,
matthew.birnbaum@nfwf.org
|
| Per Mickwitz,
Finnish Environmental Institute,
per.mickwitz@ymparisto.fi
|
| Abstract:
During the last decade, environmental policy and program evaluation has taken a huge leap forward. The development has been established through the activities of AEA's environmental TIG and in particular the Environmental Evaluators Network (EEN) Forum since its inception three years ago. However any summarizing analyses of the development in the field of environmental evaluation is still missing. This presentation will put together the evaluation experiences of the leading international experts on the development on the key challenges related to time horizons, scales, data credibility and counterfactuals as part of an overall volume for NDE currently underway by the two of us who are co-editoring this volume. This discussion is directed to two distinct groups. The first are those that are directly involved with environmental evaluation. The second audience applies to other environ-mental practitioners who seeing their careers influenced by the increased demand for evaluation.
|
| | | |