FY 2000 proposal 198810804
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Streamnet: the Northwest Aquatic Information System |
| Proposal ID | 198810804 |
| Organization | Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Drew O. Parkin |
| Mailing address | 45 SE 82nd Dr., Suite 100 Gladstone, OR 97027-2522 |
| Phone / email | 5036505400 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Provide essential data services to the Fish & Wildlife Program including: 1) regionally consistent biological data, 2) access to data and documents via the Internet, Library, and custom products, and 3) technical support to projects and activities. |
| Target species | chinook, sockeye, coho, steelhead, bull trout, cutthroat |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
| 1998 |
StreamNet successfully added recent and/or current year data to all anadromous fish escapement trends. |
| 1998 |
StreamNet released the initial version of an Internet-based, Basin-wide project tracking system and made significant progree toward establishment of multi-agency data exchange standards for compiling enhancement project data. |
| 1998 |
StreamNet prepared and updated an online version of the annual FWP AIWP process. The product has proven to be extremely useful to FWP managers and decision makers. |
| 1998 |
StreamNet completed a first-ever regionally consistent hydrographic data layer, established lat-long identification protocol, and populated the system with regionally consistent anadromous fish distribution and use type data. |
| 1998 |
StreamNet produced a comprehensive online data query system that provides custom, user-defined remote access to all StreamNet data. |
| 1998 |
StreamNet produced a major update to its regional data exchange formats document, including new entries for project tracking and fish distribution. Significant improvements were also made to geographic location standards. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
| 8906200 |
CBFWA - Prepare Draft Annual Implementation Work Plan |
StreamNet will provide data and data services in support of CBFWA objects #1 (draft AIWP), #4 (regional research, monitoring, & evaluation plan), #5 (tracking of non-FWP restoration activites and budgets), and #6 (status of fish & wildlife populations). |
| 9700400 |
Kalispel Tribe - Resident Fish Status Above Chief Joseph & Grand Coulee |
StreamNet will provide data exchange protocol and technical support, integrates products with basin-wide datasets. |
| 5502000 |
IDFG - Snake River Native Salmonid Assessment |
StreamNet will provide data exchange protocol and technical support, integrates data with basin-wide datasets. |
| 8812001 |
Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project |
StreamNet will provide Internet access to applicable data prepared through this and other YIN-sponsored projects. |
| 9132 |
Implement Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit Watershed Restoration Plan |
StreamNet will provide baseline data, data exchange protocol, and technical GIS assistance; and will integrate applicable data into basin-wide datasets. |
|
Misc. Fish and Wildlife Projects |
Several FY 99 projects propose to use StreamNet as the principal means to provide Internet access to project data and results. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
PSMFC staff (project manager, database manager, GIS manager, programmer, data technician) |
$206,000 |
| Fringe |
@ 37% |
$76,220 |
| Supplies |
Includes Internet connections, computer system support, office supplies, limited computer upgrades. |
$60,000 |
| Travel |
|
$16,000 |
| Indirect |
@ 15% |
$53,733 |
| Other |
PSMFC administration of sub-contracts |
$29,500 |
| Subcontractor |
Warm Springs Tribe |
$26,000 |
| Subcontractor |
WDFW |
$310,000 |
| Subcontractor |
USFWS |
$15,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Umatilla Tribe |
$26,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Shoshone-Bannock Tribes |
$26,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Nez Perce Tribe |
$26,000 |
| Subcontractor |
MFWP |
$150,000 |
| Subcontractor |
IDFG |
$235,000 |
| Subcontractor |
CRITFC (tribal coordination and data management, library management) |
$345,000 |
| Subcontractor |
Yakama Indian Nation |
$26,000 |
| Subcontractor |
ODFW |
$310,000 |
| $1,936,453 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $1,936,453 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $1,936,453 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| National Marine Fisheries Commission |
Contract for coastal anadromous trend data comparable to in-Basin data (estimated). |
$75,000 |
unknown |
| Environmental Protection Agency |
Contract for compilation of related aquatic habitat and hydrological data (estimated). |
$75,000 |
unknown |
| National Marine Fisheries Service and/or others |
Contract for compilation of non-FWP enhancement project data (estimated). |
$75,000 |
unknown |
| Participating Agencies |
In-kind services and data (based on prior experience). |
$150,000 |
unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: StreamNet compiles data from a variety of sources. Delays in data development and/or verification by these sources may force alteration of schedule. Unforeseen demand for data services may also require adjustments to project priorities.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fund for one year
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund for one year. Subsequent funding contingent on the results of an independent project review on the quality of service delivery. Subject this project to a programmatic information management review as recommended in the ISRP's FY99 report.
Comments:
The programmatic aspects of the proposal are clear. However, it is unclear how this effort differs from FPC, CWT and PIT tag information systems. Although attempts are made to explain the distinction, the potential for duplication of data processing effort remains. The split of services seems arbitrary. We recommend evaluating the possibility for combining the data processing functions of the Fish Passage Center, PITAGIS (direct data), Streamnet, and DART. PSMFC has the critical mass to create a regional central database as recommended in the ISRP's commentary on the smolt monitoring proposals. For example, the DART forecasting model could be a link on the Streamnet website. We repeat the recommendation made in our FY99 review that the proposal could have better documented its relationship to other databases in the basin, such as PITAGIS.
It is hard to get a good sense from the proposal whether this many personnel are really necessary to do the information project. The program needs to develop measures of effectiveness and assess its impact in terms of those measures. Use of the services should be documented, and more focus should be placed on outputs rather than inputs. In addition, the proposal presents information on data consistency but not on quality control. Strategies for quality control should be strengthened. We recommend that the project receive an independent project review on the quality of its service delivery.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Criteria all: Met? yes - How can StreamNet improve data quality?
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $2,315,033 |
$2,315,033 |
$2,315,033 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website