National estuary program nep development activities and leveraging
Download
1 / 38

National Estuary Program (NEP) Development Activities and Leveraging - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 177 Views
  • Uploaded on

National Estuary Program (NEP) Development Activities and Leveraging. Tim Jones, US Environmental Protection Agency Association of National Estuary Programs (ANEP) Conference Manhattan, NY November 18, 2008. Outline. Leveraging Results and Analysis EPA Resources to Advance Leveraging

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' National Estuary Program (NEP) Development Activities and Leveraging' - cece


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
National estuary program nep development activities and leveraging

National Estuary Program (NEP) Development Activities and Leveraging

Tim Jones, US Environmental Protection Agency

Association of National Estuary Programs (ANEP)

Conference

Manhattan, NY

November 18, 2008


Outline
Outline Leveraging

  • Leveraging Results and Analysis

  • EPA Resources to Advance Leveraging

  • Discussion

    • NEP funding sources

    • Level of effort required

    • Return on investment


Summary of 2003 2008 leveraging results
Summary of 2003-2008 leveraging results Leveraging

  • 2008 marks 6th year of data collection

  • In 2008 NEPs collectively leveraged $12.70 for every EPA dollar received (primary role only)

  • Since 2003 NEPs have used $99 million in EPA funds to leverage $1.5 billion in resources – a leveraging ratio of 14.9:1 (primary role only)

  • States remain the major source of leveraging

  • Land acquisition dominated uses of leveraged resources (40% in 2008 and 47% since 2005) followed by habitat restoration


2008 leveraging by role

All Roles: $1.14 billion Leveraging

Significant

$738 mm

Support

Primary

$237 mm

Section 320

$160 mm

$13 mm

2008 Leveraging by Role*

  • Primary leveraging ratio of 12.7:1

  • Typical (median) NEP primary leveraging ratio of 4.7:1

  • NEPs played at least some role in leveraging $1.14 billion in 2008

*2008 data excludes Puget Sound


Sources of primary leveraging in 2008

State Leveraging

64%

Local

16%

Federal

Private

15%

5%

Shares of $160 million in primary leveraging

Sources of Primary Leveraging in 2008

  • States again provided the majority of leveraged resources

  • Local $ and share declined significantly


Land acquisitions again dominate leveraging investments in 2008

$70 Leveraging

40.0%

Millions

$60

$50

Uses of $160 million in

2008 primary leveraging

$40

21.4%

$30

$20

9.6%

7.2%

6.5%

6.2%

5.0%

$10

3.2%

0.9%

$0

Other

Outreach

Stormwater

Restoration

Wastewater

Administration

Land Acquisition

Nonpoint Source

Monitoring/Rsrch.

Land Acquisitions Again Dominate Leveraging Investments in 2008


2003 2008 leveraging results

Significant Role* Leveraging

Support Role*

$2.05 billion

$1.50 billion

EPA Section 320

Primary Role*

and Earmarks

$1.48 billion

$99.3 million

2003-2008 Leveraging Results

  • Over the last 6 years, NEPs received $99 million in EPA funding and…

    • Played the lead role in generating $1.5 billion

    • Played some role in generating more than $5 billion

Cumulative Leveraging: $5.02 billion


Cumulative primary leveraging at 1 5 billion

$1,600 Leveraging

Millions

$1,400

Cumulative Primary

Leveraging

$1,200

Cumulative Section

$1,000

320 Funding

$800

$600

$400

$200

$0

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Cumulative Primary Leveraging At $1.5 Billion

Primary leveraging since 2003


Primary leveraging ratio for the typical median nep

7.0 Leveraging

6.0

6.0

5.0

4.7

4.3

4.3

4.2

4.0

3.0

2.6

2.0

1.0

-

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Primary Leveraging Ratio for the Typical (Median) NEP


Most primary leveraging dollars from states then local governments

$7 Leveraging

$7

$5

$5

$10

$8

100%

$28

$20

$15

$19

$19

90%

$24

$119

$17

$19

80%

$28

$25

$69

70%

60%

Private

50%

Federal

40%

$146

$443

Local

$103

30%

State

$110

$126

$106

20%

10%

0%

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Most Primary Leveraging Dollars from States, Then Local Governments


Cumulative primary leveraging investments 2005 2008

$600 Leveraging

47%

$500

$400

Millions

$300

15%

$200

8.7%

7.4%

7.2%

$100

4.7%

4.4%

3.7%

2.0%

$0

Other

Outreach

Stormwater

Operations

Wastewater

Restoration

Land Acquisition

Nonpoint Sources

Monitoring/Research

Cumulative Primary Leveraging Investments: 2005 - 2008



Factors evaluated
Factors Evaluated Leveraging

  • Area of NEP

  • Population of NEP

  • Age (years since CCMP signed)

  • Institutional setting of CCMP

  • Could not evaluate budget factor (no data)


Basis for evaluation
Basis for Evaluation Leveraging

  • Cumulative primary leveraging dollars and ratios reported for the five years beginning in 2003 and ending in 2007

  • Ratios provide a better indication of leveraging “success” since they adjust for variation in 320 grants and earmarks

  • Significant and support leveraging are less reliable because fewer NEPs report them


Area summary
Area - Summary Leveraging

  • Leveraged dollars and ratios tend to be higher in larger NEPs

  • The largest 1/3 of NEPs account for 70% of primary leveraging

  • Area is the most consistent predictor of leveraging success among factors evaluated, but it is only one of many


Largest 1 3 of neps by area 70 of primary dollars

1,000 Leveraging

70%

Millions

900

800

700

600

5 Year Cumulative Primary $

500

400

22%

300

200

8%

100

-

Small (<900 sq.mi)

Mid (900-4500 sq.mi)

Large (>4500 sq mi)

Largest 1/3 of NEPs (by area) = 70% of Primary Dollars


Primary leveraging ratios also higher for larger neps

30 Leveraging

25

Mean

Median

20

5 Year Cumulatiive Primary Leveraging Ratios

15

10

5

-

Small (<900 sq.mi)

Mid (900-4500 sq.mi)

Large (>4500 sq mi)

Primary Leveraging Ratios Also Higher for Larger NEPs


Data plot and regression line

50 Leveraging

40

30

Primary Leveraging Ratio (5-Year Cumulative)

20

2

R

= 0.04

10

-

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Area in Square Miles

Data Plot and Regression Line

Excludes data point at 4,600 sq.mi

and ratio of 169

  • Correlation between area and primary ratio positive but weak for all NEPs; stronger if outliers excluded


Population summary
Population - Summary Leveraging

  • More populous NEPs tend to have more leveraging, but the relationship is weak

  • The most populous 1/3 of NEPs account for 46% of cumulative primary leveraging

  • Ratios increase only slightly with population increases


Share of primary leveraging dollars by population category

$700 Leveraging

48%

Millions

45%

$600

$500

$400

5 Year Cumulative Primary Leveraging $

$300

$200

7%

$100

$0

Small (<750K pop)

Mid (750K-3MM pop)

Large (>3MM pop)

Share of Primary Leveraging Dollars by Population Category


Median ratios increase with population but means are skewed by outliers

30 Leveraging

25

20

Mean

Median

5 Year Cumulative Primary Leveraging Ratios

15

10

5

-

Small (<750K pop)

Mid (750K-3MM pop)

Large (>3MM pop)

Median Ratios Increase With Population, But Means Are Skewed by Outliers


Data plot and regression line1

50 Leveraging

40

30

Cumulative Primary Leveraging Ratio

2

R

= 0.14

20

10

-

-

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Millions

NEP Population

Data Plot and Regression Line

Excludes data point at 1.7 million

population and ratio of 169

  • Ratios increase slightly with population, excluding one outlier


Age summary
Age - Summary Leveraging

  • Time since CCMP adoption is not a useful indicator of leveraging success

  • The least and most mature NEPs account for a disproportionate share of total dollars

  • Leveraging ratios trend slightly lower as age increases


The oldest of neps 44 of cumulative primary leveraging

$700 Leveraging

Millions

44%

$600

36%

$500

$400

5 Year Cumulative Primary $

$300

$200

12%

8%

$100

$0

6-8 Yrs Ago

9-12 Yrs Ago

12-13 Yrs Ago

13-17 Yrs Ago

The Oldest ¼ of NEPs = 44% of Cumulative Primary Leveraging


Neither mean nor median ratios follow a pattern with age

30 Leveraging

25

20

Average

Median

5 Year Cumulative Primary Ratio

15

10

5

-

6-8 Yrs Ago

9-12 Yrs Ago

12-13 Yrs Ago

13-17 Yrs Ago

Neither Mean Nor Median Ratios Follow a Pattern With Age


Data plot and regression line2

50 Leveraging

40

30

5 Year Cumulative Primary Ratio

2

R

= 0.13

20

10

-

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Years Since CCMP Signed

Data Plot and Regression Line

  • Age has a slightly positive correlation with primary ratios, excluding one outlier

Excludes data point at 7.2 years and ratio of 169


Institutional setting summary
Institutional Setting - Summary Leveraging

  • Small sample sizes limit conclusions from this data

  • Ratios trend higher at NEPs in government settings (EPA region, states, local governments) (n=18)

  • Lower ratios are found at NEPs in nonprofit, university, or other settings (n=10)


Share of primary dollars by setting

$700 Leveraging

Millions

44%

$600

$500

$400

26%

22%

$300

$200

6%

$100

2%

1%

$0

EPA Region

State

Local

NFP

University

Other

Share of Primary Dollars by Setting


Plot of primary ratios by setting
Plot of Primary Ratios by Setting Leveraging

University

State

Other

NFP

Local

169

EPA Region

-

10

20

30

40

50

5 Year Cumulative Primary Ratio


Elevator speech exercise
“Elevator Speech” Exercise Leveraging

  • Turn to the person next to you and explain to them in sixty seconds why they should donate to your organization.


A good elevator speech should include
A good “elevator speech” should include: Leveraging

  • Who your organization is

  • What the mission is

  • 1-3 of your current, top priorities

  • How you plan to achieve those priorities

  • What you would use additional funds for

    But how do you figure all of this out?



But really what can these epa watershed finance tools do for me
But really… what can these EPA watershed finance tools do for me?

  • Set priorities

  • Incorporate fundraisers into your organization's current activities

  • Capitalize on the strengths of your organization (save time and resources)

  • Target resources that are sustainable and likely to be obtained

  • Generate buy-in from your board, staff, and volunteers

  • Limit crisis fundraising


Funding lessons learned
Funding “Lessons Learned” for me?

  • Incorporate fundraisers into your organization's current activities

  • Capitalize on the strengths of your organization

  • Target a diversity of resources that are sustainable and likely to be obtained

  • Create a finance plan that can be used year after year to guide efforts

  • Diffuse fundraising efforts throughout your organization


In case you need more inspiration
In case you need more inspiration… for me?

“I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.” –Wayne Gretsky

“Think little goals and expect little achievements. Think big goals and win big success.” –David J. Schwartz


Discussion
Discussion for me?

  • NEP funding sources

  • Level of effort required

  • Return on investment

  • “Behind the scenes” of our hottest funding sources


Thank you
Thank You! for me?

  • Tim Jones

    [email protected]

    202-566-1245

Many thanks to River

Network, The Foundation

Center, and many other

organizations for use of their

materials!

epa.gov/owow/funding.html


ad