1. CSREES Reporting Web Conference October 9, 2008

2. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Bob MacDonald Bob is Director of the Office of Planning and Accountability which provides leadership to the agency in strategic planning, performance measurement, and evaluation. These activities are used by the agency to improve program leadership and management, allocation of resources, and evaluation of success. (202) 270-5623 rmacdonald@csrees.usda.gov www.csrees.usda.gov/opa

3. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov User Support (202) 690-2910 or C2IT@csrees.usda.govC2IT@csrees.usda.gov Do not contact Texas A&M support FAQs and other information on the CSREES Reporting Web Conference web page at www.csrees.usda.gov/rwc www.csrees.usda.gov/rwc

4. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Format and Logistics E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.govrwc@csrees.usda.gov E-mail topic suggestions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov rwc@csrees.usda.gov Conferences are recorded and will be available on the Reporting Web Conference web page at www.csrees.usda.gov/rwcwww.csrees.usda.gov/rwc

5. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov To Receive Announcements An RWC e-mail list will notify interested parties on news, schedules, and other issues relating to the series. To subscribe: Send an e-mail to lyris@lyris.csrees.usda.gov.lyris@lyris.csrees.usda.gov Skip your subject line and in the body of your message type: subscribe reportingwc. Be sure you receive an e-mail confirming your subscription.

6. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Bart Hewitt Bart is the Accountability and Reporting Leader for the Office of Planning and Accountability. He leads the national effort for the State Plan of Work and Annual Report process under the Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform Act; manages the Multistate Research Fund Project Proposal approvals for CSREES; and develops performance information for the PART and CSREES Budget. (202) 270-0747 bhewitt@csrees.usda.gov www.csrees.usda.gov/opa

7. 2007 AREERA Annual Report Summary and Key Pointers for Preparing the 2008 Report

8. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Annual Report Data Use How will CSREES use the information from the Annual Report for planning and accountability? Program Leadership State Plan of Work Accountability Portfolio Reviews OMB PART process Budget Performance Integration GAO and OIG inquiries Answer Congressional & Departmental inquiries Brings greater visibility of successes of Formula Funded Programs

9. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Quick Statistics - Submission 85 Annual Report Received 93 Reports in Old Plan of Work 50 Combined Submissions 48 Combined Research/Extension 1 Combined 1862/1890 Research 1 Combined 1862/1890 Extension 35 Single Entity Submissions

10. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Quick Statistics - Review 2 Reports Returned for More Information All 85 Annual Reports Accepted Average Approval Time: 52 Days 79 days under the old Annual Report

11. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Planned Programs 1018 Planned Programs Range: 1 to 76 Planned Programs Median: 9 Planned Programs

12. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Most Frequent Top 10 Planned Program Title Themes 1. Youth Development and 4-H 2. Rural and Community Development 3. Natural Resources and Environment 4. Health 5. Plant Production 6. Animal Systems 7. Nutrition 8. Agricultural Systems General 9. Sustainable Agriculture 10. Food Safety

13. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov

15. Formula Grants Expended by CSREES Portfolio PortfolioSmith-LeverHatch 1890 ExtensionEvans-AllenTotals Markets, Trade, Policy, and International Development$5,622,324.39$7,272,795.97$732,653.36$1,057,504.92$14,685,278.64 Farm Management for Sustainability$7,597,715.38$6,612,712.31$1,069,127.49$1,660,387.45$16,939,942.63 Food Processing and Bio-based Products$6,963,788.75$11,391,176.22$755,865.12$1,942,914.38$21,053,744.47 Plant Systems$37,136,609.23$70,672,888.41$2,710,882.53$8,723,875.97$119,244,256.14 Animal Systems$21,303,520.36$37,013,663.96$3,962,303.94$8,268,926.46$70,548,414.72 Knowledge and Opportunity for Communities and Economic Development$19,397,214.68$6,754,450.53$3,210,476.57$1,039,977.51$30,402,119.29 Quality of Life in Rural Areas$78,318,473.69$7,864,379.93$11,076,995.33$2,453,731.22$99,713,580.17 Food Safety$5,362,822.75$4,804,543.11$598,427.60$1,725,033.46$12,490,826.92 Nutrition and Healthier Food Choices$13,453,516.48$6,799,095.70$1,595,293.05$2,552,268.03$24,400,173.26 Environment and Natural Resources$31,034,388.21$38,516,412.03$3,356,396.11$6,577,270.24$79,484,466.59 Education$1,720,549.08$874,955.83$235,955.90$73,683.36$2,905,144.17 Totals$227,910,923.00$198,577,074.00$29,304,377.00$36,075,573.00$491,867,947.00

16. Formula Grants Expended by USDA Goals and Objectives - 2007 Annual Report GoalsObjectiveSmith-Lever 3b&cHatch1890 ExtensionEvans-AllenTotals Enhance international competitiveness of American agriculture 1.2$567,319.50$945,631.97$6,459.48$50,472.09$1,569,883.04 Goal 1 Total $567,319.50$945,631.97$6,459.48$50,472.09$1,569,883.04 Enhance the competitiveness and sustainability of rural and farm economies2.1$12,018,793.64$17,718,340.22$1,482,059.00$2,949,947.21$34,169,140.07 2.2$36,033,106.44$65,853,450.15$4,735,644.84$11,752,099.26$118,374,300.69 2.3$6,833,456.18$6,405,562.96$1,059,855.89$1,660,387.45$15,959,262.48 Goal 2 Total $54,885,356.26$89,977,353.33$7,277,559.73$16,362,433.92$168,502,703.24 Support increased economic opportunities and improved quality of life in rural America3.1$21,882,022.96$7,836,555.71$3,455,704.07$1,113,660.87$34,287,943.61 3.2$78,318,473.69$7,864,379.93$11,076,995.33$2,453,731.22$99,713,580.17 Goal 3 Total $100,200,496.65$15,700,935.64$14,532,699.40$3,567,392.09$134,001,523.78

17. Formula Grants Expended by USDA Goals and Objectives - 2007 Annual Report GoalsObjective Smith-Lever 3b&cHatch1890 ExtensionEvans-AllenTotals Enhance protection and safety of the Nation's Agriculture and food supply4.1$5,362,822.75$4,804,543.11$598,427.60$1,725,033.46$12,490,826.92 4.2$22,407,023.15$41,833,102.22$1,937,541.63$5,240,703.17$71,418,370.17 Goal 4 Total $27,769,845.90$46,637,645.33$2,535,969.23$6,965,736.63$83,909,197.09 Improve the Nation's nutrition and health5.1$1,779,742.43$3,172,128.61$360,015.45$1,461,905.59$6,773,792.08 5.2$11,673,774.05$3,626,967.09$1,235,277.60$1,090,362.44$17,626,381.18 Goal 5 Total $13,453,516.48$6,799,095.70$1,595,293.05$2,552,268.03$24,400,173.26 Protect and enhance the Nation's natural resource base and environment6.1$12,928,338.75$13,998,629.64$1,325,610.71$3,104,244.29$31,356,823.39 6.2$8,912,755.79$12,655,656.48$865,051.86$2,291,602.06$24,725,066.19 6.3$7,716,348.18$9,262,726.37$1,087,718.79$987,803.69$19,054,597.03 6.4$1,476,945.49$2,599,399.54$78,014.75$193,620.20$4,347,979.98 Goal 6 Total $31,034,388.21$38,516,412.03$3,356,396.11$6,577,270.24$79,484,466.59 Grand Total $227,910,923.00$198,577,074.00$29,304,377.00$36,075,573.00$491,867,947.00

18. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Expenditures From All Sources by Knowledge Area - Top 10 806Youth Development7.91% 205Plant Management Systems6.25% 212Pathogens and Nematodes Affecting Plants4.03% 703Nutrition Education and Behavior3.71% 216Integrated Pest Management Systems3.52% 307Animal Management Systems3.37% 102Soil, Plant, Water, Nutrient Relationships3.19% 201 Plant Genome, Genetics, and Genetic Mechanisms 3.10% 802Human Development and Family Well-Being3.06% 211Insects, Mites, and Other Arthropods Affecting Plants2.51%

19. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Expenditures From Formula Grants by Knowledge Area - Top 10 806Youth Development9.86% 205Plant Management Systems6.07% 802Human Development and Family Well-Being3.89% 307Animal Management Systems3.37% 216Integrated Pest Management Systems3.37% 703Nutrition Education and Behavior3.34% 102Soil, Plant, Water, Nutrient Relationships3.10% 212Pathogens and Nematodes Affecting Plants2.84% 608Community Resource Planning and Development2.66% 601Marketing and Distribution Practices2.61%

20. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Expenditures From All Sources by Knowledge Area - Bottom 10 609Economic Theory and Methods0.15% 901Program and Project Design, and Statistics0.14% 902Administration of Projects and Programs0.13% 314 Toxic Chemicals, Poisonous Plants, Naturally Occuring Toxins, and Other Hazards Affecting Animals0.12% 405Drainage and Irrigation Systems and Facilities0.12% 214Vertebrates, Mollusks, and Other Pests Affecting Plants0.10% 122Management and Control of Forest and Range Fires0.08% 103Management of Saline and Sodic Soils and Salinity0.07% 611Foreign Policy and Programs0.06% 512Quality Maintenance in Storing and Marketing Non-Food Products0.05%

21. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Expenditures From Formula Grants by Knowledge Area - Bottom 10 404Instrumentation and Control Systems0.18% 134Outdoor Recreation0.17% 405Drainage and Irrigation Systems and Facilities0.16% 721Insects and Other Pests Affecting Humans0.16% 214Vertebrates, Mollusks, and Other Pests Affecting Plants0.11% 314 Toxic Chemicals, Poisonous Plants, Naturally Occuring Toxins, and Other Hazards Affecting Animals0.10% 103Management of Saline and Sodic Soils and Salinity0.08% 122Management and Control of Forest and Range Fires0.07% 611Foreign Policy and Programs0.07% 512Quality Maintenance in Storing and Marketing Non-Food Products0.05%

29. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov

40. Actual Outputs Patents Year Target in POW Actual Reported 2007349408

41. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Actual Outputs Extension Direct Contacts TargetActual Adult17,187,000 22,760,000 Youth9,132,000 3,507,000 (Rounded to nearest thousand)

42. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov State Defined Outputs and Outcomes Wide Array of Outputs and Outcomes Linked to KAs for Analysis Used in various CSREES Reports

43. Stakeholder Input Actions taken to seek stakeholder input that encourages their participation Use of media to announce public meetings and listening sessions75% Targeted invitation to traditional stakeholder groups91% Targeted invitation to non-traditional stakeholder groups74% Targeted invitation to traditional stakeholder individuals91% Targeted invitation to non-traditional stakeholder individuals75% Targeted invitation to selected individuals from general public65% Survey of traditional stakeholder groups66% Survey of traditional stakeholder individuals64% Survey of the general public39% Survey specifically with non-traditional groups39% Survey specifically with non-traditional individuals22% Survey of selected individuals from the general public28% Other22%

44. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Stakeholder Input Method to identify individuals and groups Use Advisory Committees96% Use Internal Focus Groups64% Use External Focus Groups62% Open Listening Sessions69% Needs Assessments66% Use Surveys65% Other26%

45. Stakeholder Input Methods for collecting Stakeholder Input Meeting with traditional Stakeholder groups95% Survey of traditional Stakeholder groups65% Meeting with traditional Stakeholder individuals88% Survey of traditional Stakeholder individuals62% Meeting with the general public (open meeting advertised to all)59% Survey of the general public35% Meeting specifically with non-traditional groups60% Survey specifically with non-traditional groups40% Meeting specifically with non-traditional individuals52% Survey specifically with non-traditional individuals32% Meeting with invited selected individuals from the general public65% Survey of selected individuals from the general public35% Other27%

46. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Stakeholder Input A statement of how the input will be considered In the Budget Process67% To Identify Emerging Issues96% Redirect Extension Programs71% Redirect Research Programs76% In the Staff Hiring Process66% In the Action Plans75% To Set Priorities96% Other19%

47. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Merit Review Process Internal University Panel71% External University Panel38% External Non-University Panel39% Combined Internal and External University Panel32% Combined Internal and External University and External Non-University Panel39% Expert Peer Review65% Other14%

48. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov What Next? Publish the 2007 Annual Report Summary Make Data Available Via the REEIS Leadership Management Dashboard Use Data in Various Reports

49. What’s New with the Plan of Work Software 2008 Annual Report

51. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov

53. A Good Impact Statement An Impact statement is a brief summary, in lay terms, that: Highlights the difference your program is making for the public good. Concisely summarizes what you did to achieve this difference. Clearly states payoffs to society. Answers key questions: So what? Who cares? Why?

54. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov How do I Report Impact? Be specific. Report economic, environmental, social or health/well-being impact in terms of: Knowledge gained and how that knowledge is applied. Behavior or attitude changes. Practice or situation changes. Results of those behavior, attitude, practice or situation changes.

55. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov How do I Report Impact? Effective Impact Statements: Provide quantifiable evidence of change or difference the program made. (It really is all about the money. Bucks are the gold standard. Audiences want to know the return of investment.) Give other evidence, such as testimonials or anecdotes. Realistically project potential benefit for work in progress. Provide only enough detail to be easily understood. Highlight public benefits, outcomes, payoffs.

56. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Condition) The Experiment Station at North Dakota State University released the new varieties Faller Wheat, Lariat and Stampede pinto beans, Sheyenne non- transgenic soybean, RG7008RR soybean, and Pinnacle two-row barley. The estimated dollar value to producers, seedsmen, grain merchandisers, processors, crop consultants, and plant breeders in North Dakota on these new varieties is $290,600,000 for 2007.

57. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Condition) Because of new Integrated Pest Management best practices developed with at Washington State University, cherry growers in Washington have saved over $ 4.5 million in labor, materials and application cost over the past four seasons. Surveys of potato fields and growers indicate that the mean number of fungicide applications now used for effective management resulted in an annual savings is $7,642,700 plus a 10.5 percent increase in yield in Washington's Columbia Basin.

58. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Condition) To validate the impact of 4-H in the lives of student, incoming freshman GPA's were tracked at Washington State University (WSU) and compared to the incoming WSU freshman population who self-identified as 4-H members. In 2007 the incoming freshman GPA at WSU was 3.42, the incoming freshman GPA of self-identified 4-H members was 3.59 indicating a.17 GPA increase. This statistic would indicate that as a pool 4-H members are stronger students. Moreover, 25 WSUE 4-H Youth Development members were honored with WSU Regents' Scholarships for their academic success and outstanding citizenship. Of those, six received the Distinguished Regents Award that includes a scholarship worth $60,000.

59. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Condition) Currently, wood adhesives are predominately derived from non-renewable petrochemicals and may contain hazardous formaldehyde. Research at Oregon State University has successfully developed an environmentally friendly wood adhesive from soybean flour had is currently used in commercial production of interiorly used plywood panels. The emission of volatile organic compounds and hazardous air pollutants in each production plant has been reduced by 90 percent by using this new technology.

60. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Action) An estimated 14% of preschool aged children in the United States are overweight. To prevent overweight among pre school aged children, family and consumer science extension agents in Virginia conducted the Food Friends program which was delivered in Virginia in 2007 to approximately 1,500 youth. Extension agents trained Head Start teachers from 125 classrooms on program materials, concepts, and child feeding issues. Overall, the program was found to be successful in improving not only children's dietary practices, but teacher's too. Pre- and post-test surveys indicated the children tried more "new foods" (84%); ate more fruits and vegetables (49%); and ate a wider variety of foods (64%). Teachers also tried more "new foods" (56%); ate more fruits and vegetables (38%); and ate a wider variety of foods (37%).

61. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Examples of Good Impact Statements (Change in Knowledge) In basic research four plants commonly used in folk medicine in different parts of the world were studied for their antimicrobial activities on select foodborne pathogens and anticarcinogenic activities on cancer cells. This project enabled the research team to identify natural bioactive agents with moderately strong anticancer properties from Rosa canina and Phytolocca americana. These bioactive agents may be helpful in cancer prevention and alternative treatment. In vitro tests showed that crude extracts from Rosa canina and Phytolocca americana significantly reduced the growth and proliferation of colon, breast, and cervical cancer cells; three prominent cancer types that affect both African-American man and women.

62. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Annual Report Data Use How will CSREES use the information from the Annual Report for planning and accountability? State Plan of Work Accountability Portfolio Reviews OMB PART process Budget Performance Integration GAO and OIG inquiries Answer Congressional & Departmental inquiries Brings greater visibility of successes of Formula Funded Programs

63. Budget-Performance Cycle Partners’ Plans & Results ProjectsFormula ProposalsPlans of Work Progress Reports Annual Report Portfolio Evaluation Internal Self- Assessment (Annual) Portfolio Review Expert Panel (PREP) (Every 5 Years) OMB Evaluation Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) (Every 5 Years) CSREES Strategic & Budget Planning Guidance: Portfolio Evaluations Stakeholder Input Administration Congress Performance-Based Budget Request Proposals for Increases Impacts Performance Measures PART results

64. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Plan of Work Additional Information CSREES Plan of Work Web Page http://www.csrees.usda.gov/business/reporting/planrept/plansofwork.html Contact Information Bart Hewitt, Accountability and Reporting Leader pow@csrees.usda.gov 202-720-0747

65. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Bill Bristow Bill is an Information Technology Specialist and Data Manager of the Research, Education, and Economics Information System (REEIS). REEIS is a source of information on the research, education and extension programs, projects and activities of the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and its partner institutions in the areas of food, agriculture. and natural resources. (202) 690-1956 wbristow@csrees.usda.gov www.reeis.usda.gov

66. Introduction to the Partnership Dashboard

67. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov Questions? E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.govrwc@csrees.usda.gov For more information, visit the REEIS web page at www.reeis.usda.govwww.reeis.usda.gov

68. E-mail questions to rwc@csrees.usda.gov See you in December!!! Next CSREES Reporting Web Conference will be on Thursday, December 11 from 2-4 pm (Eastern) A National View on Accountability The National Program Leader Perspective E-mail topic suggestions for February to rwc@csrees.usda.govrwc@csrees.usda.gov Visit the conference web site at www.csrees.usda.gov/rwc for:www.csrees.usda.gov/rwc The recording of this conference The slides from this conference Announcements