FY07-09 proposal 200702500
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Project Compliance Monitoring |
| Proposal ID | 200702500 |
| Organization | XLSolutions |
| Short description | The project compliance monitoring determines whether specified project criteria are being met. |
| Information transfer | Reports, Presentation, Tools |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| mary Ritz | XLSolutions Corporation | mary@xlsolutions-corp.com |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| mary Ritz | XLSolutions Corporation | mary@xlsolutions-corp.com |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Allsecondary: All Anadromous Fish
secondary: All Resident Fish
secondary: All Wildlife
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyze/Interpret Data | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 4/2/2007 | 8/1/2007 | $153,263 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 4/2/2008 | 8/1/2008 | $153,263 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Analyze/Interpret Data | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 1/1/2009 | 6/1/2009 | $201,941 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 1/1/2007 | 4/1/2007 | $153,263 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Develop RM&E Methods and Designs | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 1/1/2008 | 4/1/2008 | $153,263 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 8/2/2007 | 12/31/2007 | $153,264 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 6/2/2009 | 12/31/2009 | $201,942 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Disseminate Raw/Summary Data and Results | [Work Element Title Not Entered] | [Work Element Description Not Entered] | 8/2/2007 | 12/31/2008 | $153,264 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | [blank] | $264,500 | $264,500 | $223,780 |
| Fringe Benefits | [blank] | $58,947 | $58,947 | $43,760 |
| Supplies | [blank] | $25,561 | $25,561 | $25,561 |
| Travel | [blank] | $16,299 | $16,299 | $16,299 |
| Capital Equipment | [blank] | $16,483 | $16,483 | $16,483 |
| Overhead | [blank] | $78,000 | $78,000 | $78,000 |
| Totals | $459,790 | $459,790 | $403,883 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $1,323,463 |
| Total work element budget: | $1,323,463 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | $0 | $0 | $0 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $0 FY 2011 estimated budget: $0 |
Comments: |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date:
Comments:
Final deliverables:
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Expense | Basinwide | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Basinwide | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: While the concept of developing better tools to evaluate project compliance is a good one, this proposal did not provide enough information to warrant funding. The material provided did not engender confidence that the deliverables would be useful. The technical and scientific background section did not adequately explain the issue of compliance monitoring as related to the Columbia River Basin. No references were cited. Technical difficulties were not discussed. The proposal needed a more detailed discussion of compliance monitoring in relation to regional plans. The challenges of compliance monitoring for each of the four Hs -- hatcheries, harvest, habitat, and hydro -- in the context of regional programs should have been presented. The methods were inadequately described, and in general were not given at all. For example, the meaning of the term "population" in the context of stratified sampling referred to the population of restoration projects, not to fish and wildlife populations. Without clarification, it was impossible to know what was meant. Also, it was not clear what "fieldwork and site visits" would accomplish. Finally, the ISRP questions whether a fish and wildlife program project should review the compliance of other projects; this should be a job for Bonneville’s contracting officers.
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Not fundable
NPCC comments: While the concept of developing better tools to evaluate project compliance is a good one, this proposal did not provide enough information to warrant funding. The material provided did not engender confidence that the deliverables would be useful. The technical and scientific background section did not adequately explain the issue of compliance monitoring as related to the Columbia River Basin. No references were cited. Technical difficulties were not discussed. The proposal needed a more detailed discussion of compliance monitoring in relation to regional plans. The challenges of compliance monitoring for each of the four Hs -- hatcheries, harvest, habitat, and hydro -- in the context of regional programs should have been presented. The methods were inadequately described, and in general were not given at all. For example, the meaning of the term "population" in the context of stratified sampling referred to the population of restoration projects, not to fish and wildlife populations. Without clarification, it was impossible to know what was meant. Also, it was not clear what "fieldwork and site visits" would accomplish. Finally, the ISRP questions whether a fish and wildlife program project should review the compliance of other projects; this should be a job for Bonneville’s contracting officers.