Transcript H Michael Harrington Executive Director WAAESD Revised, March 2014 ESCOP - Science Roadmap for Food and Agriculture Enhance the sustainability, competitiveness, and profitability of U.S. food.

H Michael Harrington
Executive Director
WAAESD
Revised, March 2014
ESCOP - Science Roadmap
for Food and Agriculture
Enhance the sustainability, competitiveness, and profitability of U.S.
food and agricultural systems
II.
Adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change on food, feed,
fiber, and fuel systems in the United States.
III. Support energy security and the development of the bioeconomy from
renewable natural resources in the United States.
IV. Play a global leadership role to ensure a safe, secure, and abundant food
supply for the United States and the world.
V.
Improve human health, nutrition, and wellness of the U.S. population.
VI. Heighten environmental stewardship through the development of
sustainable management practices.
VII. Strengthen individual, family, and community development and
resilience.
I.
Water, sustainability and health are transcending issues among 35 action items
See: http://escop.ncsu.edu/docs/scienceroadmap.pdf
USDA-REE
 Catherine Woteki – Undersecretary, REE/USDA Chief




Scientist
Ann Bartuska – Deputy Undersecretary, REE
Chavonda Jacobs – ARS Administrator
Sonny Ramaswammy – NIFA Director
Deputy Directors
 Meryl Broussard – Agriculture and Natural Resources
 – Food and Community Resources
 Institute Deputy Directors
 Food Production and Sustainability - Mike Fitzner*
 Bioenergy, Climate & Environment - Luis Tupas
 Food Safety & Nutrition - Robert Holland
 Youth, Family and Community Systems - Muquarrab Qureshi
* Acting
USDA National Priorities*
 Climate Change
 Renewable Energy
 Global Food Security
 Food Safety
 Nutrition and Childhood Obesity
REE Action Plan completed plan is outgrowth of the REE
Roadmap
* Unchanged
Changes in AFRI Programs
 Fewer new programs focus heavily on collaborations and
integrated teams
 Childhood Obesity Prevention Challenge Area
 Climate Change Challenge Area
 Food Safety Challenge Area
 Global Food Security Challenge Area
 Sustainable Bioenergy Challenge Area
 Foundational Program
 New Water Challenge Area
 Revised/combined Pest Management Program
The 2014 Farm Bill
 Matching Requirement Changed
 Establishes a new, uniform matching requirement for NIFA competitive grants; requires at least a
100% match; exempts ARS from the match; exempts land-grants and their partners from match;
authorizes the Secretary to waive the match for a year for research/extension grants “that the
NAREEE Advisory Board has determined is a national priority;” takes effect on Oct. 1, 2014.
 Mandatory Programs renewed
 Biomass R&D - $3m/yr., 4yrs.
 Beginning Farmer Rancher Program - $20m/yr., 5 yrs.
 Specialty Crop Research Initiative - $25m/yr., 5 yrs.*
 Organic Research and Extension - $20m/yr., 5 yrs.
 Foundation for Food and Ag Research
 Authorizes a Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research, a new nonprofit corporation designed
to supplement USDA’s basic and applied research activities; includes $200M in mandatory funding
(available until expended); “Foundation [not intended] to be duplicative of current funding or
research efforts, but rather to foster public-private partnerships…”
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/hubs/USDAHubsFactsheet.pdf
USDA Climate Hubs* Activities
 Technical Support:
 Provide support to USDA agriculture and land management program
delivery by offering tools and strategies for climate change response.
These approaches will help producers cope with challenges associated
with drought, heat stress, excessive moisture, longer growing seasons,
and changes in pest pressure. The Hubs will support applied research
and develop partnerships to facilitate this process.
 Assessments and Regional Forecasts:
 Provide periodic regional assessments of risk and vulnerability in the
production sector to contribute to the National Climate Assessment,
and provide accessible regional data and interpret climate change
forecasts for hazard and adaptation planning.
 Outreach and Education:
 Provide outreach and extension to farmers, ranchers, forest
landowners, and rural communities on science-based risk management
through the land grant universities, Extension, USDA service agencies,
and public/private partnerships and educate producers about the
effects of climate change on agriculture and forests.
* No specific funding at this time
Lay of the Land
•
•
•
•
Capacity of LGUs has declined due to inflation and unfunded
mandates
Increasing capacity (formula) and competitive funds in the
top priority for the AES and CES organizations (NIFA too)
OMB position: Competitive grants result in the best science
but there are no data to support this
Economic studies indicate the ROI on formula funds ranges
between 20 - 50% over the last 40 years
NIFA Appropriations Constant 1993 Dollars
2013-2014 Budgets
 2013 Budget – Fiscal Cliff
 All federal programs lost at least 7.62% due to
sequestration
 NIFA cuts distributed across all lines except AFRI (+ 12.8 M)
 ARS lost $78.3 M
 2014 major wins restored funding to 2012 levels
Budget Battles 2015 and Beyond
 House and Senate can’t agree on anything
 Another Fiscal Cliff – NO!
 All Committee are looking for savings and increased
efficiencies – combining lines/removing authorizations,
small programs are vulnerable
 Agencies have been asked to look for ways to increase
efficiency and reduce duplication
NIFA in the Federal Budget
Program
2015
FY 2014 Proposed
FY 2012
FY 2013
Enacted
Final
Final
Hatch Act
236.334
218.349
243.701
243.701
Evans-Allen 1890 Research
50.898
47.023
52.485
52.485
McIntire-Stennis Co-op. Forestry
32.934
30.427
33.961
33.961
AFRI
264.470
276.980
316.409
325.0*
Smith Lever (3-b,c)
294.0
271.618
300.0
300.0
1890 Extension
42.592
39.349
43.92
43.92
1994 Institutions Res. & Ext.
6.113
5.648
6.247
7.885
927.341
889.387
Total
* Reflects consolidation/movement of several small lines into AFRI, no real increase
996.723
1006.592
Experiment State Section
Multistate Research Excellence Award
 ~ 350 active Multistate Projects
 Any current Multistate Project listed in the NIMSS (http://nimss.umd.edu/)


•
•
•
is eligible for consideration for an Excellence in Multistate Research Award.
Each of the five regional research associations may nominate one
Multistate Project chosen from the entire national portfolio of active
projects.
Nominations shall be made to the Chair of the respective regional
multistate review committee (MRC) chair via the regional Executive
Director’s office.
Use of $15,000 of off-the-top MRF as award to national winner.
Up to $5000 for travel to award ceremony.
Balance of funds to support activities which enhance & contribute to
research and/or outreach objectives of project.
Evaluation Criteria
 Accomplishments, indicated by outputs, outcomes, and





impacts.
Added value from the project’s interdependency.
Degree of institutional participation (SAES and others).
Extent of multi-disciplinary activity.
Amount of integrated activities (i.e., is it multifunctional).
Evidence of additional leveraged funding to further the
goals of the project.
Impact Reporting
 Multistate projects required to complete SF-422 Annual
Report including a section on impacts.
 These reports feed into the National Impact Reporting
Project which creates high quality impact stories.
 Impact Statements used by local Experiment Stations,
Regional Offices, ESCOP/Cornerstone/kglobal) to educate
decision-makers in Washington DC.
 National Impact Reporting Project:
http://www.waaesd.org/multistate-program/multistateprojects-impact-statement-archive
Why worry about impact reporting?
 Multistate Research Fund projects are required to complete an SF-
422 Annual Report form that includes a section on project impacts.
 When a project terminates, and sometimes before, these reports
feed into the National Impact Reporting Project which creates an
Impact Statement with the information therein.
 Those Impact Statements are used by the Western Directors Office,
ESCOP (via advocacy firm Cornerstone and education/marketing
firm kglobal), and others to educate decision-makers in Washington
DC about the importance of work being done in Hatch Multistate
projects.
 Details on the current status of the National Impact Reporting
Project: http://www.waaesd.org/multistate-program/multistateprojects-impact-statement-archive
Lessons Learned
 There is a continuing need for all participants to clearly
understand what impacts are and why they are important
to our future.
 So what are they, and how can we get better?
 Presentation - Research Reporting: Why it matters and
how to do it well (Click here)