Friday, June 24, 2011

Alexandria, VA Open Space Message


Alexandria, VA Open Space Message
DRAFT
November 12, 2003
Glenn Eugster

I. Identity/ messaging:

In order for the Alexandria, VA open space effort to be effective it has to be understandable. If people have never heard of it; can't explain it; don't understand it; it won't go a far as we want it to.

Why? You need to find a way to make people care.

Why? In order to use collaboration and partnerships to help us help yourself accomplish our open space goals we have to make friends.

In order to make friends we have to be able to:

Have communications from one group to another
Achieve a top-of-the-mind consciousness and understanding of the effort and its work
Improve communication to increase opportunities to build long-term productive relationships with communities, businesses, and the individuals, within and outside the area.

Goal: Move Alexandria’s open space to the forefront of homeowner, neighborhood, community, business, and local consciousness when they think about environmental, economic and cultural qualities of life.

Messaging expert Phil Musselwhite said, “You cannot not communicate”.

Many of these efforts are struggling with what I call the tyranny of small solutions. Often our orientation is at a project level. Some of the site-specific identities are strong but unfortunately the collective identity of what we are trying to do is weak.

In some situations, where the strength of an open space effort is based on strong sites, then we have to build the identity from the sites up, not from a false overlay down.

Elements: Icon or symbols. What is the current identity of the open space effort? Think of the area as a product. Remember "got milk"? Think of great images--promote the area in the same way.

Boil each area or site down to its iconic self. Simplify the idea, make it a bold and symbolic image. Raise awareness through a visual campaign to "brand the area".

More than a short-term promo image but rather a permanent identity.

Message name: What are we calling this effort? Vague and cumbersome names don't work for messaging purposes--although they are the legal names that need to be recognized.



Let's go back to the idea that we need to find a way to make people care.

Why? People won't give their support, time or money to
something they don't understand. Need to make people aware of what they have and why it's important.

Who is the message carrier? Not all messengers are
equal--or trusted by leaders.

Also, who speaks for these open spaces areas?
Behind every great local open space effort is a great writer.


Collaboration/ partnerships: Public outreach equals friendsraising

How does our cause relate to people's lives?

Need to involve people--look for people of achievement who have a love for what we are trying to do. Give groups a place at the table so they can develop a sense of ownership.

Government approaches of the past: beware of projecting the role of
"the Tin Men"--selling aluminum siding in Baltimore, Md. Have I got a deal for you!

Stuart Cowan says in his book "Ecological Design" everyone is a participant and everyone is a designer. Recognize that everyone is an expert and that collaboration needs to be based on dialogue between the interests.

Dialogue: treat the others as equal in every respect; willing and
able to listen and respond empathetically; willing to bring one's own and others' assumptions into the open without judgement.

Listen to the wisdom you are seeking! Bring people into the vision you have and help them understand their role in achieving the vision.

Why? Identity equals loyalty, commitment and support


V. Possible Tasks:

Improve the identity of our open space effort. Work on the icons
and name.

2. Analyze key stakeholders by open space values--environmental, cultural and economic, and learn more about their point of view.

3.What do people know about the effort and your leadership group? Consider some quick informal research on values, image, messages, and effort. Perhaps some type of attitudes surveys.

Create a stronger awareness of opportunities for people,
businesses, and groups to become involved.

Think about the image of the key partners and primary
contacts. Does our image translate to government? Need to make sure that people don't confuse what our effort is about. It's not about government--it’s about open space!

6.Find a writer that speaks for Alexandria’s open space--behind every successful open space effort is a writer!

7.Lay a framework for earned income: think about products as a way to generate revenue and reinforce the image of the cause and our organization.

8.Prepare a framework for large philanthropic gifts. Consider marketing projects to seek support. Perhaps use the Northern VA Conservation Trust to receive donated funds, and, or, raise private money.

Find a way to measure success and communicate our
progress to others. Some sort of open space indicators are essential!


Sample Mission, Vision and Objectives Statements

Mission:

The Mission of the City is to transform the parks, open space and recreation areas of Alexandria, through public-private partnerships, into the premier (pick one or more) local park system in VA, the metropolitan region, and the U.S.


Vision:

In 20 years, Alexandria will be recognized for the quality of life afforded its residents, enhanced by a system of parks, open space and recreation areas, that provide first-class recreation, education and volunteer opportunities to the entire community.

Objectives:

Build awareness of open space resources and programs
Engage a broad cross section of the community in open space activities and support
Provide significant financial support for open space by matching
existing public funds with non-local funds.
Other ideas?

Thursday, June 23, 2011

NPS Partnership Council: State of the Council


NPS Partnership Council: State of the Council
October 3, 2003 Glenn Eugster

State of the Council

Many priorities in NPS.
--Joint Ventures dominates
--Other efforts

Council not a priority for WASO and many members
--National program manager interest
--Fading regional and park interest
--WASO staff invisible. No real partnership between regions and WASO.
--Joint Ventures and PC disconnected. No place for PC at the Joint Ventures Conference despite assurances from Acting Associate O’Neill and Peggy O’Dell

Limited time to pursue PC and NCR activities
--NCR Partnership Office is one person with very modest support from WASO or NPF.
--PC Co-Chair was envisioned to be in partnership with WASO. Over the year the headquarters assistance has disappeared. Rocky and Bullwinkel get more time!

NCR has expectations/ hopes for its investment of money and my time
--NCR funds my office annually and looks to see what is being accomplished. PC hasn’t helped NCR’s efforts.

Modest accomplishments with PC
--No WASO support for the Near-term Action Strategy approved in April
--Associate commitments unkept and expectations unmet.
--No WASO support on the FY 2004-05 budget for partnerships
--No progress to make NPF effective in helping the parks and regions with fundraising for NPS priorities.

Pressing problems and great opportunities in NCR
--NPF pulling out of GWNPF after three-years of promises and no real results (i.e. money being left on the table, promises broken, loans unpaid, etc.)
--Significant non-NPS interest in metro Washington Green Space


Bottomline: Why should this be a priority for us when it’s not for WASO?


II. Suggestions for WASO

Follow-up on commitments in time, words and deeds
--Near-term Action Strategy
--Associate Director’s List
--Joint Ventures offer
--Budget Workgroup for 04-05

Provide staff to the Partnership Council
--Dedicate staff to help the Council. Don’t make us beg for help.
--Make the twice a year meetings a priority with your staff

National Partnership Office: It’s broke, fix it!
--Fill the Office position with an Acting immediately (this was done for Tourism, why not Partnerships?)
--Find the best person you can for the Office Director job and get them on quickly.
--Make the office functional with a clear list of what you can do and can’t do. Eliminate so much trial and error.
--Create a better image with a webpage and some information on NPS Partnerships—see the draft paper the Council did 11/2 years ago and hasn’t been used.
--Do periodic communications on substance of what you do, either on the web or through conference calls, once a month.

Partnership Council
--Put the next meeting off until after the Joint Ventures Conference (You could ask the group if they want to do this during Tuesday’s call)
--Find a replacement for the Regional Co-Chair starting after the Joint Ventures Conference, or on January 1, 2004.

National Park Service Partnership Council


National Park Service Partnership Council

Charter

PREAMBLE

In the experience of the National Park Service (NPS), partnerships are voluntary relationships through which each member of the relationship advances its own mission by working collaboratively with others to achieve congruent and overlapping objectives. In short, partnerships -- when they are successful -- are win-win relationships. Many are documented through formal agreements. The NPS is increasingly using partnerships to deal with issues and opportunities that cross policies, programs, agencies, technical lines, parks, communities, and landscapes.

Most importantly partnerships can be used to connect people with their parks, ideas and a conservation ethic that will sustain our parks forever. Partnerships are important in both park and program management because they enable us to become more effective in our work, to be more responsive to federal, state, local, Tribal, and private sector concerns and to bring us closer to the public we serve. In order to help the NPS meet the opportunities and challenges of the future, we hereby establish and sustain this Partnership Council.

I. PURPOSE
The purposes of the Partnership Council are:
A. To provide leadership throughout the National Park Service that will expand the Service’s capacity to foster, manage, and sustain partnerships; enhance the quality of existing partnerships; and support partnership programs and activities that will serve as models for partnerships in the federal sector;
B. To advise and make recommendations to the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation, on issues related to partnerships;
C. To facilitate open communication and dialog among the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers and Outdoor Recreation; the WASO Partnership Office; park units; regional offices; service centers; program offices; the National Park Foundation; and other key partners;
D. To serve as a forum for the discussion of issues and concerns related to partnerships and to develop recommendations that help resolve and/or solve those issues and concerns; and
E. To suggest, test and promote new and innovative concepts related to a broad range of partnerships.
It is understood that some of the Council's recommendations and/or advice can and will be acted on by the Council; other items will be forwarded to/through the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers and Outdoor Recreation for his/her action or that of another Associate; and other items will be forwarded to the Director and/or National Leadership Council, as appropriate.

It is the Council's intent to deal with existing and future policy issues and that any other level of recommendation should be considered and implemented, as appropriate, through the line structure (e.g., Director to Regional Director to Superintendents) of the NPS.

II. REPRESENTATION
The Partnership Council consists of 25 members, as follows:
A. 7 representing the WASO Assistant Directors (2) and (5) Associate Directors
B. 1 representing the WASO Partnership Office
C. 7 representing each Regional Director
D. 2 representing the Service Center managers
E. 7 field representatives, preferably at the superintendent level, appointed by each Regional Director
F. 1 representing the National Park Foundation

The Council notes that the National Park Foundation participates on the Council because it is the only partner that has a congressional charter and, thus, is an official partner with the NPS. All other participants are federal employees.

Alternates, designated by the appropriate regional or associate director, may attend meetings when members cannot. Alternates carry the same level of responsibility as members. The Council may invite others to participate as non-voting members.

III. RESPONSIBILITIES, FUNCTIONS, AND COMMUNICATIONS
It is the responsibility of all members (or their alternates) to regularly attend meetings. Others may petition the Council for membership and participation. It is understood that Council representatives serve as liaison between their parks, programs, organizations, regional directors, or regions and the Council, bringing input, issues and ideas to the Council.

It is expected that representatives will coordinate agenda items and discussion with their principals before and after meetings. In particular, minutes from the Council meetings should be made available for review by principals.
Other NPS staff and programs may be invited to participate in Council meetings on specific issues.

The Council will advise the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers and Outdoor Recreation in naming task groups of NPS employees through the appropriate regional supervisory and organizational levels from time to time as necessary to deal with specific issues.

The Council may solicit input from subject matter experts as appropriate.
The Council may occasionally accept invitations from other groups to meet concurrently.

IV. GOVERNANCE, LEADERSHIP, AND DECISION MAKING
In order to improve the quality of decision making, the Partnership Council will manage itself through Co-Chairs. Specifically, the Council Co-Chairs will be the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers and Outdoor Recreation and one person from a regional office or a park. Also identified will be a back up Co-Chair who will assist the regional office or park Co-Chair.

The tenure of the regional office or park Co-Chair is one year from the date of selection, after which time the backup Co-Chair will assume lead responsibility and a new back-up Co-Chair from a regional office or a park will be elected by the Council. The criteria for selection of a regional office or park Co-Chair are available time, expertise, willingness, and location.

The Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation, is responsible for facilitating logistics in support of the Council. It is the responsibility of the regional office or park Co-Chair to identify views and concerns of the seven regions and to feed them into the Council's discussion, thereby creating a more explicit regional view in the full discussion of issues.

The regional office or park Co-Chair is responsible for facilitating the development of a draft agenda of items for consideration by the Council, drawing on the interest and issues identified through all Council members and their principals. Under this concept the Council will encourage the use of Task Groups to assist the members and to reach out to the other programs, parks, and interests. The regional or park Co-Chair will also monitor and track the Council's decisions and implementation of action plans and will develop a communication strategy to ensure wide and thorough communication.

When making recommendations, the Council will make decisions primarily by consensus. However, it is recognized that from time to time consensus is not possible. Therefore, as a fallback to consensus, the Council will send forward to the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation two or more options concerning an issue along with some analysis of the strengths and limitations of each as well as an outline of the majority view coupled with an explicit minority view.

V. OPERATING PRINCIPLES
The operating principles of the Council include open communication, collaboration, flexibility, inclusion, adaptive management (with learning and reflection), and open dialog. Using these principles, the Council will operate in a proactive manner, modeling the behaviors of true partnership including (but not limited to):
A. Dealing directly with each other.
B. Being forthright.
C. Being responsive to each other's questions.
D. Always acting as a team.
E. Doing self-education and reflection, including exploring
literature on partnerships and educating themselves on
partnerships.
F. Being responsive to each other's oral and written
communication -- including e-mails:
1. Indicating whether a communication can be shared
with the field, and partner organizations or not;
and
2. Clarifying when a response is needed.

VI. CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS
Continuity of operations -- including meeting arrangements, facilitation, logistics, general coordination, and maintaining files for meetings and issues -- for the Partnership Council will be provided by an office designated by the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation.

VII. MEETINGS
The Partnership Council will meet at least 2 times a year in person, once in the East and once in the West. Meetings will be facilitated, and the facilitator will prepare notes of the meeting. To further communication, there will be conference calls on the first Tuesday of every month. The schedule for conference calls may be changed as deemed necessary by the Council, so long as Council members are notified at least two weeks in advance.

VIII. TERM OF THE COUNCIL
The Partnership Council is intended to carry out its duties for a period of five years from the date that this Charter is approved by the Associate Director, , Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation. The Charter and the Partnership Council may be extended with the approval of the Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation and Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation with a consensus of the Council.
APPROVED:

_________________________________________ Date: ________________________
Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation, Education, Volunteers, and Outdoor Recreation

Trust for the National Mall, Roles and Relationships


Description of the Trust for the National Mall, Roles and Relationships
Partner: The Trust for the National Mall is a private non-profit organization incorporated and doing business under the laws of the District of Columbia. The organization was formed in March 2002 to lead a campaign to raise funds for the restoration, revitalization, and maintenance of the National Mall, the boundaries of which are described on the map attached as Appendix A.

The purpose of the Trust is "to operate exclusively for charitable, educational, scientific, and literary purposes.... to restore, beautify, maintain and preserve the National Mall in Washington, D.C. as a gracious and welcoming urban outdoor space for citizens, residents and visitors, for ceremonial, patriotic and recreational activities..."

The current Trustees of the Trust for the National Mall include:
John E. Ackridge III, The John Ackridge Companies
Lanny Griffith, Barbor, Griffith & Rogers, Inc.
Richard Moe, National Trust for Historic Preservation
Selden Morales, Executive Director, Trust for the National Mall
Jane Saunders, Motion Picture Association of America

Georgina Sanger serves as staff to the Trustees.

The Trust expects to appoint a total of 8-12 trustees in six months. Some of these Trustees are expected to serve to "start-up" the organization.

Nature of Relationship: In early 2002 Lanny Griffith, John Ackridge III and Georgina Sanger met with NPS to discuss the idea of forming a partnership with NPS to raise funds to restore, revitalize and maintain the National Mall. During the discussions the Trust leaders provided NPS with a "The Trust for the National Mall Concept Paper". NPS reviewed the document and suggested that the two parties work together to explore the potential of a fundraising partnership. A series of meetings were held between NPS, the Trust, the Greater Washington National Parks Fund (GWNPF), and the National Park Foundation (NPF) to discuss mutual intent, goals, objectives, priority actions, fundraising, communication and coordination, evaluation and measurement of progress, and other details of a partnership.

As a result of the discussions the Trust, NPS, NPF, and the leaders of the GWNPF agreed that it was desirable to work closely and collaboratively to be better stewards and educators, with the understanding that the National Mall will benefit from our collective efforts. A General Agreement was developed by the partners and signed on May 1, 2003 for the purpose of creating a partnership to restore, revitalize, and maintain the National Mall in Washington, DC. A copy of the approved General Agreement is attached.

The General Agreement committed the partners to complete a Fundraising Agreement.

National Park Service Partnerships


National Park Service Partnerships
Draft
Prepared by the Partnerships Paper Workgroup
January 26, 2003

Background: This paper is a summary of discussions that have gone on since October 2001 regarding the use of partnerships within the National Park Service (NPS). NPS managers and staff, at all levels of the agency within the parks, regional offices, service centers, and headquarters, use partnerships to carryout the agency Mission and its related responsibilities. Partnerships are an important technique that are used in parks, and in the states, territories, Tribal lands, communities and special places nationwide--and globally, that we provide services to through our natural, cultural and recreational programs.

Last year a NPS regional partnership leader proposed that the Regional Office Partnership Coordinators, National Program Offices, and the National Partnership Office work more as a functional service-wide team to help outline what needs to be done to advance partnerships within NPS and how to do it.

The regional proposal stressed that it is an appropriate time to share ideas about partnership activities. For example, over the last year NPS has gotten good insights from the recent Office of Management & Budget inventories on partnership activities; has begun dialogue on partnership training priorities; and several regions and program offices are working on related initiatives. It is believed that partnership offices, and programs that rely on partnerships, are separately doing good things but are not working together, nor sharing best practices and opportunities the way they could be.

It is important to note that this draft paper is for discussion purposes and is intended for internal purposes only. The draft paper is viewed as a way to facilitate dialogue about partnerships and set an appropriate direction for the future use of this approach. The paper has not had broad-based input or review from inside or outside NPS at this time.


Introduction: National parks, and the special places managed by Tribal, state and local entities and non-profit friends, together as a system of parks and conservation areas protect nature and culture, provide recreational opportunities, and preserve our heritage. In doing so, parks and conservation areas provide context and meaning to our lives as citizens. They instill a sense of appreciation for our democracy, stimulate pride in our country, and strengthen our connections to the natural world and our history in that world. Thus, parks and conservation areas contribute greatly to the quality of life on which our individual and collective health and well being depend.

Despite the diversity of conservation assistance and land management activities it conducts, NPS can not protect parks and conserve special places alone. The Service relies on a strategy that recognizes that park protection and conservation is a shared responsibility. NPS and our local, Tribal, state, federal, and private sector partners understand that it is only through our combined efforts that we can help our society to succeed in passing on unimpaired to future generations the national system of parks and special places we together manage and enjoy. Our most effective work results from engagement with others, where the collective effort extends the reach of all.

NPS leadership strongly encourages a new level of outreach and collaborative work to promote our collective local, state, and federal mission--"The NPS preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education and inspiration of this and future generations. The NPS cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout the country and the world".

By continuing collaboration and partnerships, the Service can strive to serve the public more effectively as a steward, educator, environmental leader, and advocate for a visionary nationwide system of local, state, and federal parks and conservation areas. Such as system can link parks, open space, outdoor recreation areas, communities and other special places and organize them through cooperation, consultation, and communication into a vibrant park and conservation network. Energized by this vision, NPS believes that the power of the park and conservation idea lies in its larger purpose--to create a citizenry that understands and serves as a steward of our heritage and our home on earth.


Existing NPS Policy on Partnerships: NPS has adopted a policy statement on partnerships. The policy, described in Section 1.9 of the NPS "Management Policies 2001", applies only to the management of the National Park System.

Other guidance documents address the many NPS partnership activities that extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world. Other partnership guidance documents are being summarized in the long-anticipated Part 2 of the Management Policies titled "Management of National Park Service Programs." Part 2 will focus on program activities such as Rivers and Trails, National Register of Historic Places, and the Land and Water Conservation Fund Program.


NPS Partnership Definition: The NPS Partnership Paper Workgroup describes partnerships as “voluntary relationships through which each member of the relationship advances its own mission by working collaboratively with others to achieve congruent and overlapping objectives”.

Workgroup members believe that partnerships are created and used to:

h Improve and, or, sustain resource conditions.

Improve service to the community by developing programs,
providing new opportunities to experience the parks, and other important places in communities.

Encourage collaboration among park and recreation systems
at every level--international, federal, regional, state, local--to make the nations park, open space, historic place and outdoor recreation network accessible to all.

Supplement funds appropriated by Congress, through the
assistance of the National Park Foundation, friends groups and other public and private sources.

Build the capacity of all partners to shape their own
futures.

Recognize parks as unique places for research and
learning.

Communicate to residents and visitors alike about the
extensive system of State, local, National parks and conservation areas and how those resources directly impact the quality of their life.

Inform and motivate the public to help ensure long-term
protection of resources under the care of the parks in this local, state, Tribal, and federal system of parks and conservation areas.

Assist communities with the preservation of historic
places, open space, natural areas, and recreation resources outside of the national parks through a variety of partnership-based programs.


Action: NPS is working through park, community, Tribal, state, regional, national and international partnerships to achieve this collective vision for the parks and special places of America and the world. NPS expects to expand the number and circle of friends working with us to:

h Care for the special places of the National Park System.

h Care for the special places managed by Tribal, state and local entities and non-profit friends that complement, and are complemented by, our resources.

h Share our inspiring stories through education, interpretation and dialogue.

h Use these stories and their context to help people feel more connected to these special places.

h Engage people in the preservation of important places in their communities, including parks, historic places, open spaces, natural areas, and recreation resources.

h Engender communities that feel responsibility for helping shape the future of parks and that, at the same time, draws on the experiences available in parks to help shape their futures as communities.


By working in partnerships, National Park Service park, regional, and Washington office personnel will encourage the network of park and partner organizations to:

h Provide the best possible service to citizens who use, live within, visit, and benefit from these parks and special places.

h Collaborate with international, federal, state, Tribal, and local governments, private organizations, and businesses to preserve the nation's natural and cultural heritage and provide for outdoor recreation.

h Reach-out to citizens and find ways to involve them in the decisions and actions needed to keep this system of parks and special places unimpaired for the enjoyment of present and future generations of people.

h Share technical information and expertise both within the system of parks and with the network of public and private land managers in the broader landscapes within which the parks occur.


Why Partnerships? There are many reasons why NPS staff and managers and their partners choose to work together to accomplish overlapping goals. In many cases partnerships will:

h Improve Effectiveness: Each partner will be better able to achieve its mission by working with a variety of other organizations and agencies to solve problems, share ideas, pool resources, and share responsibilities.

h Increase Efficiency: Partnerships can help share information and intentions to reduce the timeframe needed to implement critical plans, lower execution costs, and reduce expected resistance by affected stakeholders.

h Enhance Equity: Higher levels of participation through partnerships tend to improve the equity inherent in collaboration and enhance the perception of fairness and impartiality.

h Fulfill Missions More Effectively: Partnerships offer unique access to organizations that have similar interests.

h Gain Access to a Larger Resource Base: Working through partnerships gives each organization expanded access to resources of other partner organizations.

h Increase Predictability: Partnerships help avoid surprises and disputes that delay core operations or lead to litigation.

hIncrease Public Support: When partnerships expand participation to include others, the process and the partners tend to have more credibility with the public.

h Improve Employee Morale and Public Attitudes:
Partnerships that involve employees and employees, stakeholders, and other members of the public in the decision-making process enhance skills and morale of all participants, thus improving the performance of individuals, groups and agencies.


Future of Partnerships: NPS park, regional, service center, and headquarter offices will explore further use of partnerships to:

Create a NPS Partnership Council and charge them with
making recommendations to the Associate Director, Cultural Resource Stewardship & Partnerships on the creation, delivery and efficient use of partnership programs, tools, and ideas across NPS program and geographic lines;

Facilitate regional and national dialogue and the
exchange of ideas about the art of partnering, friends-raising, and fundraising to help achieve the protection of parks and other special places;

Develop, agree on, approve and publicize a NPS Management
Policy on partnerships.

Clarify, agree on, approve and publicize the
partnership roles and responsibilities at every level of the organization.

Refine and enhance the current management structure that
supports park employees in their partnership relationship building and managing activities; and

Prepare a partnership “direction-setting” document that
will be used to guide partnership activities, define the next “plateau” for the NPS to reach for in the realm of partnerships, and inspire action at all levels of the agency and from park and program partners.

Provide an “action plan” and schedule, with broad-based
agency input and support, for increasing Federal and non-Federal partnerships. This could include, but is not limited to, options such as partnering with: business schools to create business plans and enhance park management entrepreneurial skills; private sector organizations to broaden the housing program; science researchers in academia, US Geological Survey, and Fish & Wildlife Service to increase the usable knowledge available to park managers throughout the state, local, Tribal, and federal network; other countries to arrange for international exchanges; private and non-profit organizations to expand the cooperative use of historic and other structures through leasing arrangements; and education organizations to provide interpretive and educational materials and programs to learners of all ages and in every place.

Deepen the understanding of our park employees and
program managers about how to develop, maintain, and effectively use these types of relationships in park and community settings through training, dialogue, information and peer exchanges;

Assess the most cost and time-effective way to measure
the success of partnerships by assembling information about selected existing partnerships, financial benefits they generate, other intangible benefits they generate, and what partners they benefit. Develop a partnership reporting system starting with the FY 2003 budget process, assess the results, and determine future reporting activities.


For Further Information: For more information about NPS partnership activity contact:

h National Partnership Office:

Chris Niewold, NPS-National Partnership Office (202) 354-2188
By e-mail: Christopher_Niewold@nps.gov


h NPS Partnership Council Contacts:

Glenn Eugster, Regional Co-Chair (202)619-7492
By e-mail: Glenn_Eugster@nps.gov

Brian O’Neill, Co-Chair (202)208-4829
By e-mail: Brian_O’Neill@nps.gov

New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park

New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park
Prepared by Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, National Capital Region

Final Decmber 20, 2004

Introduction

On March 9, 2003 Director Mainella requested the National Capital Region to assist the NPS Washington Office with an internal review of the fundraising campaigns for a variety of partnership construction projects greater than $5 million. The New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park (JAZZ) was one of the projects identified for assessment. This document is a report on NPS's fact-finding/ gap analysis.

Background

NPS had a series of discussions between the National Leadership Council, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, the Development Advisory Board, and some of our park and regional offices about the relationship between public and private partnerships, park projects and NPS funding. During these discussions it has become apparent that there are inconsistencies in the way NPS structures, manages, implements and monitors some partnership agreements, including fundraising agreements, plans and campaigns, the relationship between these efforts, priorities for funding park projects, and communication with the Congress.

Specifically NCR was asked to examine the New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park fundraising campaign, identify real and perceived problems and matters of concern, identify options to respond to the problems and concerns, and identify ways that NPS can assist parks and regional offices in building better partnership projects. This information is to be shared with NPS managers to assist them in their decision-making.

The approach used for this fact-finding and analysis involved a review of relevant documents made available by headquarters, the regional office and the park; personal and telephone discussions with key leaders; a meeting with park and regional office managers; and analysis of the information collected. It is important to note that the time schedule for this analysis was limited. Further research may reveal different facts and lead to additional or different conclusions.

Individuals that were contacted and provided information to this report include:

Rick McCollough, Chief, Partnership Office, Southeast Region
Dave Herrera, Acting Superintendent, JAZZ
Francis Peltier, Special Assistant to the Regional Director
Gayle Hazelwood, former Superintendent, JAZZ
Chris Niewold, Senior Staff, National Partnership Office
Chris Jarvi, Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation, Volunteers, Outdoor Recreation, and Education

Facts

Park Name: New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park (JAZZ)

Project Summary: To preserve the origins, early history, development and progression of jazz; provide visitors with opportunities to experience the sights, sounds and places where jazz evolved; and implement innovative ways of establishing jazz educational partnerships that will help ensure that jazz continues as a vital element of the culture of New Orleans and the Nation.

Name of Partner(s): City of New Orleans, New Orleans Jazz Commission. Note: A Cooperative Agreement between NPS and the Friends of WWOZ, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporation established in 1986, was proposed and a fourth draft of an agreement was shared in May 2004.

PMIS: # 21467A

Estimated Gross Cost: $11,069,500

Targeted Completion Date: The completion date is unknown at this time. Current funding is not sufficient to install new utilities and rehabilitate the buildings at Armstrong park as first envisioned. Because the latest bids were significantly above the government estimate, the bid package had to be revised to exclude work on the buildings in hopes of awarding a contract. There are no funding requests for additional money.

Development of Permanent Facilities, Phase I”, an NPS managed LIC add-on project, is targeted for completion by April 2006. The City has funds for repairs to Armstrong Park that is targeted to coincide with this project.

Breakdown of Funds Needed:
NPS share: $5,291,500. Regional Office leaders indicate that this may be an old estimate for the Master Plan for site development? If so, it should be updated to reflect inflation and projected year for construction.
Other Federal Funds: 0
Private, Donated and State and local funds: $5,778,000
Operations Funds Needed: $1,079,200 annually
Cost-Offsets: 0

Chronology and Status of Planning, Partnership and Fundraising Activities

June 30, 2004
Correspondence from Regional Director Hooks to David Freedman, General Manager WWOZ Community Radio regarding guidance on a draft cooperative agreement for a proposed facility and interpretive and educational programs for JAZZ.

Senate Report 108-089
Senate Appropriations Committee Report Language
"The Committee is aware of discussions among the National Park Service, the City of New Orleans and prospective local partners regarding the development of an interpretive center for New Orleans Jazz National Park. The Committee is supportive of these efforts, and encourages the parties involved to continue their work toward an acceptable cooperative agreement. Participants in these discussions should be mindful, however, of the language regarding partnership projects that was included in the Statement of Managers accompanying the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2003. The Committee also notes that any interpretive center proposal must be consistent with the park's general management plan, and must address the safety of both visitors to the Park and National Park Service personnel".

May 4, 2004
Fourth Draft Cooperative Agreement between NPS and the Friends of WWOZ, Inc.

November 2000
Planning and design charrette was done by NPS with community leaders and partners. . We might want to add all of the planning and design and approval activities here. i.e. HSRs, AIA Planning Charette, Title I, Value Analysis, DAB Approval (see next comment), Title II, Director Approval, Solicitation, Cancellation, Current status with 8A….

July 9, 1999.
Record of Decision was signed

October 1998
General Management Plan approved.

October 1998
Draft General Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park, Louisiana

April 8, 1998
Cooperative Agreement between NPS and City of New Orleans to establish a framework for the NPS to expend appropriated funds for the preservation and adaptation of historic and non-historic buildings owned by the City.
Grants immediate possession of the Jazz Complex to NPS.
Complex includes Perseverance Hall; Caretaker's residence; Reimann House; Rebassa House, Elevator Tower and Breezeway; Appurtenant fencing, landscaping, parking lots, and other fixtures, upon completion of the Restoration Plan and GMP, to the NPS for admin as a part of JAZZ all lands and appurtenances within the Jazz Complex.
Lease for 50 years with an additional 49-year option.

January 1998
Project reviewed by Servicewide Development Advisory Board (Package 101). Review comments noted:
"Cooperative Developments: The Board is concerned about the possibility of escalating responsibilities and costs on this project, and recommends that the project be reviewed again after building assessments, schematic design, value analysis, Class B cost estimates, and an analysis of unit costs for comparable facilities are completed".

September 28, 1996
FY 1997 Appropriations for JAZZ--PL 103-433 Congress provided NPS $3 million for actions consistent with budget plan. Noted that "NPS should participate with the partners, and use Cooperative Agreements, where appropriate, in particular at Perseverance Hall No. 4". Also noted, Cooperative Agreements could be used that will accommodate the visiting public. It also notes that "The funds may be used, in whole or in part, prior to the completion of the General Management Plan".

October 31, 1994
New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park legislation passed:
"to preserve the origins, early history, development and progression of jazz; provide visitors with opportunities to experience the sights, sounds and places where jazz evolved; and implement innovative ways of establishing jazz educational partnerships that will help to ensure that jazz continues as a vital element of the culture of New Orleans and our Nation".

Legislation includes provisions:
To accept and retain donations
To construct, operate and maintain an interpretive center
Authorizing Cooperative Agreements, donations, grants and technical assistance.


Assumptions

The context for this research includes the following assumptions, identified by NPS park, regional and headquarters leaders, about the fundraising campaign.

NPS leaders are supportive of the park and indicate that they "want
to get construction project approved and want to obligate the funds". NPS leaders "want to put the NPS flag in Armstrong Park".

Congress envisioned that …"to the extent the partners
are capable of accomplishing some of the elements of the budget plan once it is developed, the National Park Service should participate with the partners, and use cooperative agreements, where appropriate, in particular at Perseverance Hall No. 4".

Congress indicated that, "The funds may be used, in
whole or in part, prior to the completion of the General Management Plan".

A long-term lease is needed with City of New Orleans to give NPS
authority to develop a visitor center in Armstrong Park. WWOZ wants to enter into a partnership agreement with NPS to operate on a portion of the park.

No commitment has been made by the City of New Orleans for direct
funding of NPS facilities and no organization currently plans a fundraising effort in support of the park.


Issues

NPS leaders indicate that "People in the community are
upset that things haven't moved yet". There have been a series of delays for various reasons. For example, the GMP was approved in 1998 but nothing happened since then. The superintendent of JAZZ has changed three times and with the changes have come differing philosophies, rapport with WWOZ, and NPS commitments.

One of the proposed partners, WWOZ, seem to have a
different perspective about the park partnership than the one NPS has. Then proposed Cooperative Agreement put forward by WWOZ asks for funds from NPS, while the NPS GMP envisions that Phase II of the park will be created by fundraising conducted by NPS, the New Orleans Jazz Commission and partners.

The status of fundraising for JAZZ is unclear. NPS
leaders indicate that, "No fundraising is underway--we are using appropriated money for the park project". Moreover, NPS Leaders indicated that, "They don't intend to do a fundraising agreement", and, "This wasn't going to be a joint fundraising effort--an operational agreement was expected. This isn't a partnership construction project".

However, despite the fact that there is no authorized fundraising agreement, according to NPS leaders WWOZ initiated fundraising for their new radio station with the announced intention of offering a portion of the building for NPS use. In addition, WWOZ requested through Senator Mary Landrieu of LA a $6 million earmark of NPS appropriations as a way to fund a new radio station. The radio
station had presented a draft cooperative agreement to the SER
Regional Director that included a suggested use of the new facility by NPS perhaps as a way to justify the earmark. But the agreement was not accepted nor approved.

The status and details of the partnership between WWOZ
and NPS is uncertain. WWOZ has been trying to partner with NPS for years. Although a Cooperative Agreement has been passed back and forth between WWOZ and NPS there is no agreement. Some delays are attributed to the fact that the superintendent of JAZZ has changed several times and the land is the City's.

WWOZ's proposal to build a new radio station may also be a point of disagreement between NPS and the organization. WWOZ had proposed to partner with NPS as a way to operate the radio station near the JAZZ visitor center in Louis Armstrong Park and that NPS funds would be made available to facilitate the move, and maintain and operate the property. NPS leaders indicate that the GMP does not propose a combined visitor center and radio station, nor does it indicate that Federal funds would be used to facilitate a new WWOZ facility. The radio station is currently operating in the Caretaker’s house, one of the four buildings leased by the NPS from the City.

Also, when WWOZ leaders were made aware of the June 2004 Director's Guidelines on Partnership Construction Projects they evidently were unhappy with the new guidance. NPS leaders are unsure what WWOZ's feelings about partnering are now. One leader indicated that, "They will likely go elsewhere".

NPS leaders expressed a concern about this and other
partnership construction projects. "More and more a partnership will impact NPS's budget". NPS leaders believe that the park will be realized if this is a true-partnership and they want to know what each party is bringing to the table? "If the project isn't a partnership NPS leaders believe that a determination needs to be made about whether JAZZ is a high priority--high enough to pull an existing project".



Background

NPS received $3 million from Congress for New Orleans
Jazz National Historical Park. Congress indicated that the funding for the park is provided to the NPS "to be expended in a manner consistent with a budget plan to be developed by the partners, including the NPS, the New Orleans Jazz Commission, and the City of New Orleans".
The budget plan currently describes rehabilitating two buildings-- Perseverance Hall and the Reimann House including the accompanying utilities.

NPS has developed and approved a General Management
Plan (GMP). The 1998 GMP recommends a "Proposed Action" entitled "Alternative C: Partnership Emphasis. The proposed action indicates that NPS would need to actively participate in partnerships with private and other public entities to provide these services and meet other goals such as resource preservation. The park would seek to leverage limited NPS funds by attempting to accomplish the bulk of the park's programs through partnership arrangements.

The proposed alternative would be achieved in two phases through a multifaceted partnership program and with significant resources coming from the private sector and other partners. The role of NPS would be to assist in coordinating efforts to preserve and interpret jazz and to help visitors understand how the diverse environments of jazz influenced its early development.

Phase I of the proposed action would be accomplished using appropriated funds.

The visitor center, at least on an interim basis, will be located at Perseverance Hall No. 4 complex in Louis Armstrong Park. The visitor center would be developed in Armstrong Park on lands provided to NPS under a long-term lease by the City of New Orleans.

Perseverance Hall No. 4 and the Reimann House would be rehabilitated. The Rabassa and Caretaker Houses would be considered for rehabilitation based on associated costs.

Phase II would be funded through partnerships and private sector support and would feature highly interactive and evocative interpretive media.

Fundraising for phase II would be conducted by NPS, the New Orleans Jazz Commission and partners. Phase II would provide the necessary interpretive facilities and media to fully meet park purposes, and would only be accomplished through support from the private sector and other partners.

Phase II proposes to "provide for the preservation of the origins of jazz and to ensure the continuation of jazz as a vital element of the culture of New Orleans. WWOZ desires to accept such engagement, to provide education and interpretation services…"

WWOZ would become a formal partner with the park and move to a larger more suitable location close to the visitor center. The station would cooperate with the park to broadcast music and educational programs, provide technical and musical expertise, and afford visitors and expanded opportunity to hear jazz and watch the operations of a public broadcasting enterprise.

NPS is supportive of the mission of WWOZ's and working
with them in a formal partnership to carryout the legislation and the recommendations of the General Management Plan. NPS leaders believe that JAZZ is "a park where real creativity needs to be applied. Things need to happen differently here. We envisioned working with WWOZ to interpret story for the visitors".

In June 2004 NPS Regional Director Hooks responded to a letter from the General Manager of WWOZ asking for guidance on a draft cooperative agreement for a proposed interpretive facility and interpretive and education program for JAZZ. Regional Director Hooks suggested that the partners work together and outlined steps to do so including tasks to: produce a description of the proposed project and its consistency with
the GMP; ensure that the project is included in the NPS Line-Item Construction Program; discuss the readiness of each partner; and prepare a letter of intent for review and approval by NPS.

It was also noted that the project would require "defining the project in more specific terms, including cost estimates, in preparation of review by NPS Washington and the Servicewide Development Advisory Board".

Options
The following options can and should be taken to address the New Orleans Jazz National Historical Park fundraising issues within the identified assumptions.

1. Clarify whether NPS envisions a partnership construction project with WWOZ, or other partners, to implement the General Management Plan for JAZZ and communicate that decision to Congress and NPS park-partners. If a partnership is envisioned clarify the appropriate roles and responsibilities for NPS and park-partners.
The enabling legislation, funding language and General Management Plan for JAZZ envision partnerships to help NPS establish, develop, maintain and interpret the park's mission. Although NPS has been working with WWOZ on a cooperative agreement to help implement the General Management Plan it is unclear whether the agreement is for a partnership construction project and if the partners agree on roles and responsibilities. Clarifying NPS, partner and Congressional expectations for partnership activities will avoid confusion, focus collaboration on areas of agreement and help sustain community and Congressional support for the park.

2. There is some evidence to suggest that WWOZ may have been raising funds for JAZZ without an authorized fundraising agreement and plan. If that is the case, NPS should advise WWOZ leadership of NPS policies on fundraising and donations.
WWOZ leadership is a recognized and important partner and their willingness to assist NPS with JAZZ is a positive gesture. If fundraising has been undertaken by WWOZ, in the name of NPS or JAZZ, it is important that NPS leaders request their leadership to discontinue fundraising until appropriate agreements are approved. NPS should also advise WWOZ leadership of the requirement in the Director's June 2004 Interim Partnership Construction Project Guidance that prohibits NPS park-partners from lobbying for federal appropriations.

Glacier National Park, West Side Discovery Center and Museum

Glacier National Park, West Side Discovery Center and Museum
Prepared by Glenn Eugster, Assistant Regional Director, Partnerships Office, National Capital Region

Final December 20, 2004

Introduction

On March 9, 2003 Director Mainella requested the National Capital Region to assist the NPS Washington Office with an internal review of the fundraising campaigns for a variety of partnership construction projects greater than $5 million. The Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center and Museum (Discovery Center) was one of the projects identified for assessment. This document is a report on NPS's fact-finding/ gap analysis. Note, this project has been refereed to, in writing and verbally, as a discovery center and museum, a visitor center, a transit center, interpretive facility, and a transit-staging center. For the purposes of this report the project is referred to as Discovery Center.

Background

NPS had a series of discussions between the National Leadership Council, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, the Development Advisory Board, and some of our park and regional offices about the relationship between public and private partnerships, park projects and NPS funding. During these discussions it has become apparent that there are inconsistencies in the way NPS structures, manages, implements and monitors some partnership agreements, including fundraising agreements, plans and campaigns, the relationship between these efforts, priorities for funding park projects, and communication with the Congress.

Specifically NCR was asked to examine the proposed Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center project, identify real and perceived problems and matters of concern, identify options to respond to the problems and concerns, and identify ways that NPS can assist parks and regional offices in building better partnership projects. This information is to be shared with NPS managers to assist them in their decision-making.

The approach used for this fact-finding and analysis involved a review of relevant documents made available by headquarters, the regional office and the park; personal and telephone discussions with key leaders; a meeting with park and regional office managers; and analysis of the information collected. It is important to note that the time schedule for this analysis was limited. Further research may reveal different facts and lead to additional or different conclusions.

Individuals that were contacted and provided information to this report include:

Mick Holm, Superintendent, Glacier National Park
Dave Dahlen, Supervisory Park Ranger, Glacier National Park
Becky Debs, Lead, Construction Group, Intermountain Region
Gary Brandow, Administrative Officer, Glacier National Park
Rick Frost, Public Affairs Specialist, Intermountain Region
Chris Niewold, Senior Staff, National Partnership Office
Chris Jarvi, Associate Director, Partnerships, Interpretation, Volunteers, Outdoor Recreation, and Education
Sue Masica, Associate Director, Park Planning, Facilities and Lands

Facts

Park Name: Glacier National Park

Project Summary: The 1999 General Management Plan (GMP) for Glacier National Park indicates, "A visitor service, education, and exhibition of museum objects can be provided with the construction of a new discovery center and museum. A facility will be built north of the Going-to-the-Sun and Camas Roads T-intersection, in the Apgar area. The new center, which will replace the interim contact station at Apgar, will be a full-service, accessible, year-round facility".

Name of Partner(s): Glacier Fund (National Park Foundation); Citizens Advisory Committee (formed to guide Going-to-the-Sun Road studies and advise NPS on how to best accomplish road rehabilitation); Federal Highways Administration (to possibly fund the Discovery Center as a "measure to minimize environmental harm").

PMIS: # 60161 (A&B) includes the construction of the Discovery Center and the design and development of the exhibits and other interior components. Note: IMR indicates, "The PMIS record 60161 does contain information on the project. An update needs to occur to add in the cost for the facility itself, but the descriptions exist for facility and exhibit/media".

Estimated Gross Cost: The proposed Discovery Center is expected to cost $7-9 million for the 15,000 square foot building.

Targeted Completion Date: Uncertain. NPS leaders indicate that they are probably a year away from establishing a partnership that focuses on a visitor center project.

Breakdown of Funds Needed:
NPS share: $ Unknown
Other Federal Funds: Unknown
Private, Donated and State and local funds: Unknown
Operations Funds Needed: $ Need estimate
Cost-Offsets: $ Unknown

Chronology and Status of Planning, Partnership and Fundraising Activities

November 5, 2003 Record of Decision for the rehabilitation of the Going-to-the-Sun Road within Glacier National Park approved

May 15, 2003 Going-to-the Sun Road Rehabilitation Plan/ Final Environmental Impact Statement approved

July 15, 1999 Glacier National Park General Management Plan approved

1999 Glacier Fund, an initiative of the National Park Foundation, is created to support priority projects for Glacier National Park.

Background

The 1999 Glacier National Park GMP recommends that "The National Park Service will construct a discovery center and museum inside the park in the vicinity of the T-intersection north of the West Glacier entrance station". This facility will provide a quality visitor center and museum, and will replace an existing small visitor contact station in Apgar Village.

From this entrance visitors follow the 50-mile Going-to-the-Sun Road (GTSR) which is the only route through the park that directly links the east and west sides. Numerous studies and investigations have been conducted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and private contractors to assess the condition of the GTSR and the appropriate actions necessary to correct structural deficiencies. Road repairs are to be made while maintaining visitor uses and access to the GTSR similar to current conditions. This "shared-use" alternative was recommended by the Congressionally funded Citizen's Advisory Committee in 1999 and part of the Record of Decision on the EIS.

The GMP recognized the importance and the need for a discovery center and museum. About 60% of park visitors enter through the west entrance. Park documents indicate, "Because the road is the park's primary automotive route, it defines the circulation pattern. Use has increased from fewer than 40,000 cars in 1933 to more than 660,000 cars annually in recent years".

The existing building used as the Apgar "Visitor Center" is a converted two-bedroom house that attracts 190,000 people annually. Park visitation in recent years has been over two million. The Apgar facility is small and frequently overcrowded. NPS leaders and park documents indicate that "the facility is woefully inadequate to meet the basic park functions of providing orientation, safety, protection, and interpretive and educational messages". The GMP notes that this entrance to the park is key and that "visitors need to receive important messages about resource protection, safety, educational and orientation messages upon entry to the park, not halfway through their visits".

In 2003, as part of it's planning and design to rehabilitate the Going-to-the Sun Road, NPS approved a Record of Decision for the road rehabilitation. It was recognized in the document that the impacts of the road rehabilitation are expected to be over at least 7-8 years and are likely to decrease total tourism expenditures an average of $9 million annually.

As a way to minimize the potential impacts to visitors, businesses, and tourism from the GTSR rehabilitation NPS agreed to:
Provide improved information, orientation and interpretive information for visitors.
Implement several visitor development strategies to offset impacts including expanding the existing transit fleet to 14 vehicles with shuttle service throughout the length of the Road…"

In addition, since the discovery center will focus on transit staging, as well as information and orientation for visitors, a part of the center was to be constructed using FHWA mitigation funds.

Assumptions

The context for this research includes the following assumptions, identified by NPS park, regional and headquarters leaders, about the project.

NPS has approved the West Side Discovery Center and Museum concept and the road rehabilitation project for the GTSR.
NPS leaders indicate that "Glacier National Park doesn't have a partnership construction project at this time". They have a road construction project and are considering different ways to fund the Discovery Center either through FHWA highway mitigation project funds or through a combination of NPS funds (i.e. fees, line-item construction, private fundraising, etc.)
The GTSR road construction and Discovery Center proposal are linked in the GMP and Environmental Impact Statement for the park, and the Record of Decision for Rehabilitating the GTSR. The public, as a result of civic engagement practices used to develop plans for the park and the GTSR, expects that the road will be repaired and the Discovery Center built.
The exact amount of funding for GTSR road construction, and mitigation measures, is uncertain and the final budget will help determine if FHWA funds can be used to fund all, or part, of the Discovery Center. If FHWA cannot fund the Discovery Center NPS will need to explore other agency, public and private funding sources to complete the facility.

Issues

At the outset of this research it appeared that NPS Washington leaders had a different perception of this project than park and regional leaders. For example, certain NPS leaders in Washington believe that the Discovery Center should be considered a partnership construction project because it is likely to require non-NPS funding. These leaders indicated "There are so many unknowns and uncertainties about the West Side visitor center. I don't think anyone[in Washington] is clear on what partnership really does or does not exist and whether there's anything beyond the concept going back to the General Management Plan".

The park staff has had conversations with the Glacier Fund Board about the possibility of entering into a formalized partnership, but both agree that feasibility and capacity of the Fund to make such a commitment, and the actual needs of the park to accomplish the project are preliminary questions that must be answered before a partnership is established. In the meantime, there is an implied assumption in the Environmental Impact Statement for the GTSR that the facility will be 100% federally funded. Should other FHWA funding be unavailable there will continue to be public expectations that NPS will complete this project.

NPS leaders indicated "The Visitor Center, in the public's eye, is a priority. The expectation is high--the question NPS faces is how do we realize expectations?"

A portion of the Discovery Center will focus on transit staging, as well as information and orientation for visitors. This part of the center was to be constructed as part of the GTSR Rehabilitation Plan using FHWA mitigation funds. The Federal Highway Bill originally proposed $140-170 million for road including $45 million for mitigation. However, demands on the Federal Highway Bill may make it difficult for FHWA to provide all the money that is needed for the road and mitigation projects.

NPS has determined that it will not use FHWA mitigation funds for the Discovery Center. Park and regional leaders indicated that "they will look at other strategies to make the project happen". NPS leaders noted that "maybe instead of funding it with mitigation money it would come from a combination of sources (i.e. FHWA, fee, line-item construction funds, etc.)".

There appears to be different opinions on the size and scope of the Discovery Center. NPS leaders indicate that the Transportation Center is 9,000 square feet and an additional 6,000 square feet is for interpretation and education. NPS management has determined that the Discovery Center will not be constructed using mitigation funding. A possible alternative proposal that was mentioned is to have a transit system with a minimum interpretive center.

The idea of a Visitor Center is supported by the Montana's Senators, House members, local governments and a Citizen Advisory Committee that was created to guide the road studies and advise NPS on how to best accomplish rehabilitation. NPS leaders noted that "Senator Burns and Bauccus have supported the mitigation proposals and the need for the visitor center. There is interest in having the Visitor Center by 2010--the Centennial of the Park". NPS leaders also indicated that, "If we take this off the table they (Senators) will still have an interest in finding a way to fund this project". They believe that "the Delegation will come to NPS and ask 'What can we do?'"

NPS is a partner with The Glacier Fund--an initiative of the National Park Foundation. The Fund, created in 1999, supports priority projects of Glacier National Park. The Fund is one of the most successful of NPF's "Local Programs" and donations to NPS are approaching $1 million in cash and inkind donations.

In March 2004 at the National Friends Alliance Meeting, a representative of the Glacier Fund indicated that they "were working on a capital campaign for a visitor center". This comment implied a more formal relationship had been established, which according to park staff, it has not. NPS park leaders indicate that they had discussion with the leaders of the Glacier Fund and they are
Exploring the feasibility of supporting the Discovery Center. The Glacier Fund leaders have contributed over $600,000 of project money to the park over the past three-years. According to NPS park staff neither the park nor Fund management has committed to fundraising the Discovery Center.

The Superintendent of Glacier indicated that he was unsure of the viability of private fundraising for this purpose. "I want to make sure partners have the capability for raising money, plus a maintenance endowment". The leaders of the Fund share the superintendent's view on the viability of fundraising and are now conducting a strategic planning effort for Glacier Fund. NPS and the Fund leaders are looking at priorities for 5 to 10 years from now, fundraising feasibility and capability, and the need for a visitor center. Three months ago the Board had its first strategic planning session. The Fund hired a consultant that is helping them determine whether or not it would be feasible to do a capital campaign.


Options
The following options can and should be taken to address the Glacier National Park West Side Discovery Center project issues within the identified assumptions.

1. The Glacier National Park Discovery Center is not a partnership construction project at this time, but informal discussions have taken place. Because of that, it is in the best interests of the park, the project and NPS to manage this effort consistent with the June 2004 Guidance for Partnership Construction Projects. Following the intent and details of the guidance will help NPS manage funding, internal and external collaboration and public expectations in a positive manner.

2. NPS should clarify the project name, PMIS #, description and scope to help better describe what is proposed, what is needed, and the construction and operation costs of the facility. This basic information will clarify project intent, funding needs and help to respond to, and manage, public's expectations.

3. NPS should seek to clarify what mitigation funds will be available for the Discovery Center from the GTSR Road Rehabilitation Funds of the Federal Highways Bill.

4. Since NPS will not use mitigation funds for construction of the Discovery Center, NPS should look at line-item construction funds, fee demonstration funds, the Glacier Fund, and other sources of public and private funding for this project.

5. NPS headquarters should require the Superintendent of Glacier National Park, and all other superintendents of partnership construction projects, to complete and update on a regular basis (to be determined) a Project Data Sheet. NPS headquarters should design and implement a computer program to provide for an easy way for superintendents to communicate with WASO about their projects.

The data sheet would describe where the project is in terms of design and planning, compliance with NEPA, fundraising, civic engagement, etc. This type of basic information would help improve communications at all levels of the agency, with Congress and partners.

Agreement between Friends of the Potomac and NPS

Cooperative Agreement
between the
United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service
and the
Friends of the Potomac

This agreement is made and entered into between The Friends of the Potomac (FOP) and the United States of America, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Capital Region (NPS).

ARTICLE I - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

WHEREAS, in 1997, the Potomac River was recommended, through a written "nomination", by numerous State and local governments, groups and organizations to be included as part of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative (AHRI) which was established by Presidential Executive Order 13061 on July 30, 1998 by Presidential Proclamation.

WHEREAS, the FOP, an organization of Potomac watershed organizations, was established as the principal non-profit organization to work on the Potomac American Heritage Rivers Initiative and support the objectives laid out by the Executive Order 13061 namely to support community-led efforts, that spur river-related sustainable economic revitalization, natural resources protection and preserve historic and cultural heritage.

WHEREAS, the NPS was requested and agreed to serve as the primary Federal sponsor for the Potomac River under the American Heritage Rivers Initiative by the Council on Environmental Quality.

WHEREAS, a federal government agency person, the "River Navigator", has been assigned to
help the Friend's of the Potomac implement the community's vision of the watershed and provide
a single contact/ liaison for all federal resources.

WHEREAS, there is an existing Memorandum of Understanding between the NPS and the FOP, executed on July 15, 1999 and which is superceded in its entirety by this Cooperative Agreement.

WHEREAS, the NPS owns and manages substantial acreage within the Potomac River watershed and conducts educational and information programs for youth and adults.

WHEREAS, the parties to this Agreement mutually wish to:

A. Simplify and expedite delivery of applicable federal and non-government services to communities in the Potomac River Basin.

B. Encourage coordination among federal agencies in order to minimize inconsistency and duplication, to reduce or eliminate conflicting priorities and programs and to achieve more efficient use of public funds.

C. Further facilitate collaboration with communities in the Potomac River Basin to work collaboratively with state and federal government agencies and the River Navigator
D. Complement the FOP’s efforts to facilitate cooperation basin-wide among federal, state, local and private entities to achieve the goals set forth in the Potomac River Visions study of 1994--a watershed strategy prepared by NPS, the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, and others, and the Friends nomination of the Potomac for American Heritage River status in 1997, including:

1. Restoring living resources, such as, historic Potomac fisheries.

2. Reducing acid mine drainage in the upper Potomac basin.

3. Fostering community and sustainable economic development throughout the basin.

4. Fostering the Chesapeake Bay Agreement Program goals.

5. Promoting appreciation and development of natural, heritage, and recreational assets.

6. Improving basin-wide educational efforts.

7. Encouraging more citizen involvement in decision making and community life.

WHEREAS, The FOP and the NPS have demonstrated a commitment to work on projects identified jointly and with other groups and agencies.

WHEREAS, The Friends and the NPS may work cooperatively on other goals, which are mutually agreeable.

WHEREAS, The NPS and the FOP agree that the activities under this Agreement will create no new regulatory requirements or rules for property owners or state or local governments.

WHEREAS, Executive Order 13061 of September 11, 1997 identified specific Federal agencies for involvement in the American Heritage Rivers Initiative (AHRI). These agencies are: Department of Defense, Justice, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Other federal agencies and departments have also volunteered their help, including Department of Education, Federal Emergency Agency, General Services Administration, and Small Business Administration.

These and other Federal agencies are encouraged to agree to:

A. Cooperate with the FOP, the NPS, and the River Navigator to develop strategies for achieving the goals of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Nomination, the Potomac River Visions Report (1994), and such other goals upon which the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

B. Assist FOP, the NPS, and the River Navigator in identifying federal agencies and existing federal programs that might contribute to the goals of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Nomination, the Potomac River Visions Report (1994), and such other goals upon which the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

C. Enter into stand-alone agreements with the FOP when such agreements will better serve the delivery of Federal assistance to the American Heritage River Projects as defined in Article I. D of this Agreement. The River Navigator will participate in the development of such agreements and the NPS will be notified of such.

ARTICLE II - AUTHORITY

This Agreement is authorized pursuant or consistent with the Act of August 25, 1916, otherwise referred to as the Organic Act, codified at 16 U.S.C. Section 1 et seq.; Section 508 of the 1986 Amendments to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, codified at 16 U.S.C. Section 1282(b)(1); Section 2(d) of the Outdoor Recreation Programs Act of 1963, codified at 16 U.S.C. Section 460l-1(d); the American Heritage River Initiative Executive Order of 1997 and other applicable statutory and regulatory authorities.

ARTICLE III – STATEMENT OF WORK

A. NPS agrees to:

1. Cooperate with the FOP to develop a strategy, by March 15 of each year, for pursuing the goals of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Potomac AHRI Nomination, Potomac River Visions Report, and other such goals upon which the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

2. Recognize FOP as the lead non-profit organization for the Potomac American Heritage Rivers Initiative and other such goals upon which the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

3. Assist the FOP, through the River Navigator, to convene a Federal Agency Team to assist in identifying existing federal programs that are available to contribute to the goals of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Nomination, the Potomac River Visions Report, and other such goals as the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

4. Provide office space, through the existing terms of the agreement with the General Services Administration. NPS will work with the FOP to identify future opportunities for the Potomac River Center office space.

5. Provide oversight, travel, office and administrative support for the River Navigator consistent with the approved strategy, work plan , budget policies and priorities of NPS (as described in Article IV below).

B. FOP agrees to:

1. Prepare and furnish to the NPS a list of local assistance needs and strategy to implement the Potomac American Heritage Rivers Initiative by March 15 of each year

2. Cooperate with the NPS, the River Navigator and any participating Federal agency to develop a strategy, by April 15 of each year, for achieving the goals of the American Heritage River Initiative, the Nomination, the Potomac River Visions Report (1994), and such other goals upon which the NPS and FOP may mutually agree.

3. Assist the River Navigator in working with Potomac River Basin communities and in identifying federal agencies and existing federal programs that might contribute to the goals of the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, the Potomac AHRI Nominations, the Potomac River Visions Report--a report prepared in 1994 at the request of Congress by the Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin and others, and other such goals as the NPS and the FOP may mutually agree.

4. Furnish the River Navigator relevant information regarding specific projects and other mutually agreed upon projects and activities during the next fiscal year.

5. Agree to a work plan between the FOP and the River Navigator by April 15 of each year. The work plan may be revised as necessary to reflect the availability of funds.

6. Prepare and furnish to the NPS, by November 15 of each year, a written status report on projects that were undertaken in the prior fiscal year and any necessary revisions to the April 15 strategy and work plan listing.

7. Convene a team of federal agencies, that agree to participate in the Potomac AHRI, in May and June of each year to facilitate delivery of applicable federal, state, and other services directly to those Potomac River Basin communities which requested assistance.

ARTICLE IV -TERM OF AGREEMENT

The Potomac American Heritage River Initiative portion of this Agreement has been approved until June 30, 2003, after which time it will be up to NPS to decide whether to continue providing appropriate services as part of its ongoing activities. The other provisions of this Agreement shall remain in force from the date of execution until September 30, 2006.

If the Friend's of the Potomac shall have satisfactorily performed the conditions of this agreement, it shall be renewed for successive five-year periods unless either (1) prior to the expiration of the agreement period the Regional Director shall state in writing publicly his reasons for determining that these conditions should not be renewed, or (2) prior to the expiration of the five-year period the Regional Director shall state in writing publicly that these conditions should not be renewed unless the conditions set forth in that written notice are met; and 3) unless such agreement is deemed inappropriate in light of changes within applicable laws or NPS policies.

ARTICLE V - KEY OFFICIALS

The personnel specified below are considered to be essential to ensure coordination and communication between the parties in the Agreement for the work to be performed. Upon written notice, either party may designate an alternate to act in the place of the designated key official, in an emergency or other short time period.

A. For NPS:

J. Glenn Eugster
Assistant Regional Director
National Park Service
National Capital Region
Partnerships Office
1100 Ohio Drive, SW, Room 350
Washington, DC 20242
202-619-7492
glenn_eugster@nps.gov

B. For FOP:

Anne M. White
Program Director
1730 K Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
202-467-4000
Anne@potomacfriends.org

Charles D. Estes
Chairman of the Board
1730 K Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
202-467-4000

ARTICLE VI – AWARD AND PAYMENT

A. General – The commitment of funds in furtherance of this Agreement will be authorized by individual Task Agreements issued against the Cooperative Agreement identifying each project or group of projects, amount of financial assistance, and any other special term or condition applicable to that project.

B. Payment/Invoices

1. Requests for Reimbursement and Advance of Funds (SF-270) will be submitted to the NPS Key Official noted in Article V. Payment will be made no more frequently than monthly and will be paid by Electronic Funds Transfer.

2. Any award is subject to availability of funds.


ARTICLE VII - PRIOR APPROVAL

A. Prior to reassigning any Key Official for NPS funded projects identified in this Cooperative Agreement or any Task Agreement to any other FOP programs, FOP shall notify the NPS Key Official reasonably in advance and shall submit a justification (including proposed substitutions) in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of the impact on the program. No substitution will be made without the written consent of the NPS Key Official.

B. Upon the request of the FOP, NPS may re-budget funds approved by this agreement. Re-budgeting, if approved, shall be done consistent with all appropriate laws, regulations and policies. However, post-award changes in budgets and projects shall require the prior written approval of the NPS Key Official as follows:

1. Any revision of the scope or objective of the project.

2. Any revision involving specific costs for which OMB Circular A-122 requires prior written approval.

3. The absence of either the approved principal or additional investigator, if any is specified in this Agreement, for more than three months or reduction in time devoted to the project by twenty-five percent or more. or

4. Increases in direct costs requiring transfer of amounts budgeted for indirect costs, or vice versa.

ARTICLE VIII - REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

For all activities specified in this Agreement or any Task Agreement as modified, amended or supplemented, FOP shall notify the NPS of any difficulties or delays that materially impair FOP’s ability to meet the objectives of this Agreement or any Task Agreement. In notifying the NPS, FOP will describe what action FOP has taken, or is considering taking, to address the situation and what assistance FOP needs in so doing.

A. FOP shall submit as appropriate the following financial reports to the NPS Key Official:

1. Standard Form SF-269 or SF-269a, financial status report, due no later than ninety (90) calendar days after the end of each calendar year during the term of this Agreement, and 90 days after the end of this Agreement. and

2. Standard Form SF-272, Report of Federal Cash Transactions, due fifteen (15) calendar days following the end of each quarter during the term of this Agreement.

B. FOP shall submit final reports on projects to the NPS Key Official within 30 days after completion of the project, including an accounting of matching funds and services.

ARTICLE IX - PROPERTY UTILIZATION

The use, disposition, and/or acquisition of new or existing property shall be in accordance with the rules set forth at 43 CFR § 12.933 through 12.935, as amended.

ARTICLE X - MODIFICATIONS AND TERMINATIONS

A. This Agreement may be modified only by a written instrument executed by the parties.

B. Either party may terminate this Agreement by providing the other party with sixty (60) days advance written notice. In the event that one party provides the other party with notice of its intention to terminate, the parties will meet promptly to discuss the reasons for the notice and to try to resolve their differences. If agreement cannot be reached, at a minimum FOP shall return any unexpended funds and work completed to date.

C. In the case of termination, the NPS shall not be liable for any anticipatory profits. Costs of FOP resulting from obligations incurred by FOP after termination are not allowable unless the NPS expressly authorizes them in the notice of termination or subsequently. Other FOP costs after termination which are necessary and not reasonably avoidable are allowable if:

1. The costs result from obligations which were properly incurred before the effective date of termination, are not in anticipation of it, and are noncancellable. and

2. The costs would be allowable if the award expired normally at the end of the funding period in which the termination takes effect.

ARTICLE XI – GENERAL AND SPECIAL PROVISIONS

A. General Provisions

1. OMB Circulars and other Regulations - The following OMB Circulars and other regulations are incorporated by reference into this Agreement:

(a) OMB Circular A-110, as codified by 43 CFR Part 12, Subpart F, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Non-Profit Organizations.”

(b) OMB Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations

(c) OMB Circular A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations.”

(d) 43 CFR Part 12, Subpart D, “Government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants).”

(e) 43 CFR Part 12, Subpart E, “Buy American Requirements for Assistance Programs.”

(f) FAR Clause 52.203-12, Paragraphs (a) and (b), “Limitation on Payments to Influence Certain Federal Transactions.”

2. Non-Discrimination - All activities pursuant this Agreement shall be in compliance with the requirements of Executive Order 11246; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, (78 Stat. 252; 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq.); Title V, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, (87 Stat. 394; 29 U.S.C. §794); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (89 Stat. 728; 42 U.S.C. §§ 6101 et seq.); and with all other federal laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination on grounds of race, color, sexual orientation, national origin, disabilities, religion, age, or sex.

3. Lobbying Prohibition - 18 U.S.C. § 1913, Lobbying with Appropriated Moneys- No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, to favor or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation or appropriation by Congress, whether before or after the introduction of any bill or resolution proposing such legislation or appropriation; but this shall not prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its departments or agencies from communicating to Members of Congress on the request of any Member or to Congress, through the proper official channels, requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business.

4. Anti-Deficiency Act - 31 U.S.C. § 1341 - Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as binding the NPS to expend in any one fiscal year any sum in excess of appropriations made by Congress for the purposes of this Agreement for that fiscal year, or other obligation for the further expenditure of money in excess of such appropriations.

5. Minority Business Enterprise Development - Executive Order 12432 - It is national policy to award a fair share of contracts to small and minority firms. The NPS is strongly committed to the objectives of this policy and encourages all recipients of its Cooperative Agreements to take affirmative steps to ensure such fairness by ensuring procurement procedures are carried out in accordance with 43 CFR § 12.944 for Institutions of Higher Education; Hospitals and other Non-Profit Organizations, and 43 CFR § 12.76 for State and Local Governments.

6. Liability - FOP shall be fully responsible for the acts and omissions of its representatives, employees, contractors and subcontractors connected with the performance of this Agreement. FOP, in furtherance of and as an expense of this Agreement, shall:

(a) Procure public and employee liability insurance from a responsible company or companies with a minimum limitation of one million dollars ($1,000,000), per person for any one claim, and an aggregate limitation of three million dollars ($3,000,000) for any number of claims arising from any one incident. The policies shall name the United States as an additional insured, shall specify that the insured shall have no right of subrogation against the United States for payments of any premiums or deductibles due thereunder, and shall specify that the insurance shall be assumed by, be for the account of, and be at the insured’s sole risk. Prior to beginning the work authorized herein, the FOP shall provide the NPS with confirmation of such insurance coverage.

(b) Pay the United States the full value for all damages to the lands or other property of the United States caused by such person or organization, its representative, or employees.

(c) Indemnify, save and hold harmless, and defend the United States against all fines, claims, damages, judgments, and expenses arising out of, or from, any omission or activity of such person or organization, its representatives, or employees.

7. Volunteers in the Park - All unpaid representatives of FOP conducting work under this Agreement shall be “volunteers in the parks” (VIPs) under 16 U.S.C. §§ 18g et seq. VIPs are not federal employees but shall be entitled to those benefits and protections related workmen’s compensation and federal tort claims as specified in the Volunteers in the Parks Act.

B. Special Provisions

1. Public Information

(a) The FOP will not publicize, or otherwise circulate, promotional material (such as advertisements, sales brochures, press releases, speeches, pictures, movies, articles, manuscripts or other publications) which states or implies Governmental, Departmental, bureau, or Government employee endorsement of a product, service, or position which the NIBS represents. No release of information relating to this Agreement may state or imply that the Government approves of the work product of the NIBS or considers the NIBS’ work product to be superior to other products or services.

(b) The FOP will ensure that all information submitted for publication or other public releases of information regarding this project will carry the following disclaimer: The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government.

(c) The FOP will obtain prior NPS approval from the NPS Public Affairs Office before releasing for any public information which refer to the Department of the Interior, any bureau or employee (by name or title), or to this Agreement. The specific text, layout, photographs, etc., of the proposed release must be submitted to the Public Affairs Office along with the request for approval.

(d) The FOP further agrees to include the above provisions in any sub-award to any sub-recipient, except for a sub-award to a state government, a local government, or to a federally recognized Indian tribal government.

2. Publications of results of studies

No party will unilaterally publish a joint publication without consulting the other party. This restriction does not apply to popular publication of previously published technical matter. Publications pursuant to this Agreement may be produced independently or in collaboration with others; however, in all cases proper credit will be given to the efforts of those parties’ contribution to the publication. In the event no agreement is reached concerning the manner of publication or interpretation of results, either party may publish data after due notice and submission of the proposed manuscripts to the other. In such instances, the party publishing the data will give due credit to the cooperation but assume full responsibility for any statements on which there is a difference of opinion.

C. Certifications - The following form(s) are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. These certifications are required in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement:

DI-2010, U.S. Department of the Interior Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters, Drug-Free Workplace Requirement and Lobbying.

D. Public Laws - This Agreement is subject to all laws, regulations and rules governing NPS property, and all other applicable laws and regulations, whether now in force or hereafter enacted or promulgated. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as in any way impairing the general powers of the NPS for supervision, regulation, and control of its property under any such applicable laws, regulations, and rules.

E. Severability - If any term or provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or illegal, such term or provision shall not impact the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions.

ARTICLE XII - ATTACHMENTS AND APPENDICES

In addition to the attachments previously specified in this Agreement, the following documents, provided by FOP are attached to or incorporated by reference and made a part of this Agreement:

A. FOP’s Task Agreement and Budget.

B. Form SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance (incorporated by reference).

C. Form SF-424A, Budget Information (incorporated by reference).

ARTICLE XIII - SIGNATURES

IN WITNESS HERETO, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date(s) set forth below:

FOR THE FRIENDS OF THE POTOMAC


___________________________________________ ____________________
Charles D. Estes Date
Chairman of the Board
Friends of the Potomac
1730 K Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
202-467-4000

FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE


___________________________________________ ___________________
Terry Carlstrom, Regional Director Date
National Capital Region
National Park Service
1100 Ohio Drive, S.W.
Washington DC 20242
202-619-7000


____________________________________________ ___________________
Susan Bachmann, Contracting Officer Date
National Capital Region
National Park Service
1100 Ohio Drive, S.W.
Washington DC 20242
202-619-6374 voice
202-485-9720 fax
susan_bachmann@nps.gov