Eastern Lands Resource Council Award.

Conservation Practitioner Series 2005.

VIEW FROM THE WATERSHED By J. Glenn Eugster, National Park Service, National Capital Region

VIEW FROM THE WATERSHED

By J. Glenn Eugster, National Park Service, National Capital Region

Ian McHarg, renowned educator and environmental leader died on March 5.  He worked for more than 50 years in ecological planning and is remembered for his book "Design with Nature" and the first ecological planning method in the U.S.  The "McHarg Method" was developed in the Potomac watershed in 1964 and it advocates an understanding of places, people and the work performed by both in order to ascertain human and ecological values, constraints and opportunities.  

Mr. McHarg's passing made me think about the state of the Potomac conservation movement today.  The Potomac's tradition of outstanding leadership and innovation is alive as an array of local initiatives have grown and matured.  

Today's Potomac River leaders speak for the river, its watershed, its residents and their vision of the future.  They seek a future for the valley that strives for a harmony between man and nature.  Like McHarg they "strive to abandon the simplicity of separation and give unity its due". 

Potomac leadership organizations have adopted discrete natural and cultural watershed values and are actively working with local officials, farmers, foresters, business leaders and residents to conserve resource values and solve problems.

For example, the Potomac Conservancy is working with local land trusts to conserve private property.  The Friends of the Potomac is working to increase local leadership. The Alice Ferguson Foundation works to increase education and clean up the river. The Potomac Interstate Commission is helping to sustain water quality and quantity.  The Potomac Trails Council is providing opportunities for recreation and interpretation.  Ducks Unlimited is assisting landowners manage forests and the Potomac Heritage Partnership is supporting heritage tourism activities. 

These groups are the keystones of leadership and innovation in the watershed.  Their goals, interests and constituencies reflect the principal values of the Potomac and their vision melds the past, present and future.

J. Glenn Eugster is the Assistant Regional Director for Partnerships with the NPS-National Capital Region.  He provides conservation and partnership assistance to community leaders and NPS park superintendents.   He recently opened the Potomac River Watershed Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Office.  

Alexandria Earth Day 1994.

Southern MD Heritage Resolution

REMARKS: Wetlands restoration CONFERENCE international partnerships & collaboration jUNE 20, 2001

REMARKS: Wetlands restoration CONFERENCE

international partnerships & collaboration

jUNE 20, 2001

bATON rOGUE, la.

Prepared by: glenn eugster

1. background & evolution:  

1. glynwood center & national park service:  uk

1. glynwood center, epa, chesapeake bay program: uk & france

1. glynwood center & EPA: japan

1. glynwood center, EPA office of international activities, nps: germany & netherlands

1. concept:

1. place-based

1. everyone is an expert

1. match local experts with outside experts.

1. charrette process to identify alternatives for action

1. tie charrette process to implementation through a committee of service providers

1. follow with specialized training and modest funding assistance

1. Why is a federal agency such as EPA interested in the Countryside 

Stewardship Exchange?

1)  Practical experience working with communities

1. Offers an opportunity to return to interdisciplinary 

approaches to solving problems and seizing opportunities.  

An approach that has vast potential.  Advance the Exchange to see 

how it works in different situations such as:

• In a place---large ecosystem/ landscape over an extended 

time period--multiple exchanges within a service/ regulatory and 

non-regulatory infrastructure

• Link visioning with implementation and assessment of 

outcomes and results

• Change institutional/ organizational mindsets about how to

work with communities; build local capability; short and long-

term relationships; and shift from a hierarchical to matrix form 

of management approach to land and water stewardship

1. Presents a role for the federal government---other than just 

giving grants.    

An alternative way to provide communities with 

financial, technical and information assistance. 

 Empower and help people to help themselves

 Target services/ service organizations to places

 Orchestrate the services/ activities of multiple service organizations

4) Provides outside expertise and local leadership/ direction

1. Exchange process (an RFP/ selection process) helped our 

community/ regional organizations organize themselves and their 

needs-----both the Exchange communities and the second place 

finishers.

1. Charette approach offers focused interaction.  The holistic 

concept allows for addressing environmental, community and 

economic goals simultanesouly.

7) summary

 Alternative to environmental, community, economic decision-

making.  Current approach falls short--produces technical plans 

without a heart and soul.

 Timing coincides with a fundamental ground shift in the way 

that NPS, EPA, and other federal agencies are looking at environmental 

protection and its relationship 

with communities---this is one of the next generation of 

environmental protection and sustainable development tools and  

approaches.

1. for further information:

juidth labelle, president, glynwood center, po box 157, cold spring, ny 10516

(845)265-3338 phone

(845)265-3391 fax

website:  www.glynwood.org

glenn eugster, assistant regional director

partnerships office

national park service, national capital region

1100 ohio drive, sw, room 350

washington, dc 20242

(202)619-7492 phone

(202)619-7220 fax

e-mail: glenn_eugster@nps.gov

Jaeger Tract Rationale

Date:             7/20/01 3:05 PM

Sender:             Glenn Eugster

To:             Joe Cook

Priority:             Urgent

Subject:             Jaeger Tract

             ------------------------------------------------------------------

             --------------

             

             July 20, 2001

             

             Joe,

             

             Here is what I think we can say about the value of the Jaeger 

             Tract land acquisition:

             

             The Jaeger Tract is located within the Anaocostia River watershed 

             in Greenbelt, MD.  The property is within the drainage area of 

             Still Creek, a tributary of the Annacostia River.  Acquistion and 

             management of the property as parkland will help and NPS, and 

             it's partner organizations, to implement its exisiting 

             commitments to:

             

             1)  "Protect and expand forest cover throughout the watershed and 

             create a continuous riparian forest buffer adjacent to streams, 

             wetlands and rivers". (1999-2000 Anacostia Watershed Restoration 

             Agreement, May 10, 1999)

             

             2)  "Permanently preserve from development 20 percent of the land 

             area in the watershed by 2010". (2000 Chesapeake Bay Agreement, 

             June 28, 2000 )

             

             Hope this helps!

             

             

             Glenn Eugster

PROJECT AGREEMENT BETWEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION, NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS-EAST And FRIENDS OF LINCOLN PARK

PROJECT AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION, NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS-EAST

And

FRIENDS OF LINCOLN PARK

This Project Agreement entered into by and between the United States of America, Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Capital Region, National Capital Parks-East hereinafter referred to as the “Service”, and The Friends of Lincoln Park, hereinafter referred to as “FoLP”.

Article I

Background and Objectives

WHEREAS, the National Park Service, represented by the Superintendent, National Capital Parks-East is responsible for the administration of Lincoln Park, which is located in the District of Columbia, for use and enjoyment of all people of the United States: and 

WHEREAS, The Service and FoLP desire to cooperate for the purposes of supporting the National Park Service at Lincoln Park within National Capital Parks-East in improving the playground equipment and children’s play area in the North section of the park.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C. §§1 et  seq.), the parties in consideration of the mutual promises herein expressed, do hereby agree as follows:

Article II

Statement of Work

1. THE SERVICE AGREES TO:

1. Work with the FoLP to replace the playground equipment in the North section of the park with safe equipment which meet the requirements of the Service
2. Monthly (or as agreed upon) communication meetings between NPS and FoLP including minutes and action items
3. Acknowledge the relationship with the partner
4. Accept donations to the Service in the form of goods or services  in accordance with the goals of the site and NPS rules, etc and DO21
5. Accept donations to the Service in the form of cash will be for pre-agreed upon items at a pre-agreed upon funding level.  Direct reimbursements with prior request from Superintendent
6. Superintendent or designee will make all requests for donations made available by FoLP in writing
7. Review and coordinate media/press/websites/external communications/each others remarks 

1. THE FoLP AGREES TO:

1. Work with the Service in obtaining funds to replace playground equipment in the North section of  the park in accordance with NPS rules and regulations
2. Monthly (or as agreed upon) communications meetings with the NPS, including minutes and action items
3. Acknowledge the relationship with the Service
4. Refrain from on-site solicitation; provided however that FoLP may provide information on-site about FoLP and its plans with a contact name, address, and website for further information
5. Annual budget submission showing sources and uses
6. Current list of Board of Directors, Advisory Committees and Members, and Officers of both.  Notify NPS of any changes in timely manner.

1. Donations to the Service in the form of goods or services will be used to further the goals of the site in accordance with NPS rules, etc and DO-21.
2. Donations to the Service in the form of cash which will be for pre-agreed upon items at a pre-agreed upon funding level. 
3. Superintendent or designee will make all requests for donations made available by FoLP in writing.
4. Review and coordination of media/press/external communications/ each other’s remarks.
5. Make reasonable efforts to ensure that all participants of FoLP are aware of, and agree to comply with, the responsibilities of FoLP pursuant to this agreement. 

Article III

Liability

1. Following a discussion between the Service and FoLP regarding the needs for such insurance and a written request sent by the Service, FoLP will procure public and employee liability insurance from a responsible company with a minimum limitation of $1,000,000 per person for any one claim, and an aggregated limitation of $3,000,000 for any number of claims arising from any one incident.  The insurance policy shall name the United States as an additional insured, shall specify that the insured shall have no right to 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.

1. Pay the United States the full value for all damages to the lands or other property of the United States caused by the said person or organization, its representatives or employees.

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

Article IV

Term of Agreement

This Agreement shall be in effect for a period of 2 years from date of execution.  The agreement shall not be revised or amended in any manner whatsoever unless the revision or amendment is in writing, and is mutually agreed upon by the FoLP and the Service.  Should the decision be made to continue the effort, this agreement may be renewed for up to five years with the mutual agreement of both parties.

Article V

Key Officials and Consultation

The FoLP and the Service shall maintain a close liaison and consult regularly on all matters pertaining to the Agreement.

Correspondence: All correspondence relating to this Agreement should be mailed to:

National Park Service:

Superintendent John Hale

National Capital Parks-East

1900 Anacostia Drive S.E.

Washington, D.C. 20020

Friends of Lincoln Park:

Article VI

Assignment

No transfer or assignment of this Agreement, or of any part thereof or interest therein, directly or indirectly, voluntarily or involuntarily, shall be made unless such transfer or assignment is first approved in writing by the parties.

Article VII

Termination of Agreement

Either party may terminate this agreement without any legal process whatsoever by giving thirty (30) days written notice of termination to such party, effective at the end of the thirty (30) day period.

The National Park Service may terminate this Agreement for the convenience of the government, when it is in the best interest of the Public to do so, without legal process whatsoever by giving thirty (30) days notice of termination.  Such termination shall not be deemed a breech of the Agreement.

     

Article VIII

Required Clauses

NON-DISCRIMINATION:  All activities pursuant this Agreement and the provisions of Executive Order 11246 (3 C.F.R. 339) shall be in compliance with the requirements of TitleVI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252; 42 U.S.C. §2000 et seq.); Title V, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (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, national origin, handicap, religious or sex in providing of facilities to the public.

PUBLIC LAWS: Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to be inconsistent with or contrary to the purpose of or intent of any Act of Congress or the laws of the District of Columbia establishing, affecting, or relating to the Agreement.

APPROPRIATIONS: Nothing contained in the Agreement shall be construed as binding the Service 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 as involving the United States in any contract or other obligation for the further expenditure of money in excess of such appropriations.

No Member of, Delegate to, or Resident Commissioner in, Congress shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or to any benefit to arise therefrom, unless the share or part or benefit is for the general benefit of a corporation or company.

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 of Congress, through the proper official channels, requests for legislation or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business.  PENALTY: Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, violates or attempts to violate this section, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and after notice and hearing by the superior officer vested with the power of removing him, shall be removed from office or employment.

SIGNATURES

IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Service and FoLP have executed this Agreement this _________day of ___________________, 2000

By _______________________________       ____________________

Superintendent                                                    Date

National Capital Parks-East

By _______________________________        ____________________

            President                                                              Date

Friends of Lincoln Park

EPA Grant “Community Partner Workshops”

EPA Grant “Community Partner Workshops”

Background: The Friends of the Potomac will provide assistance to local governments and community-based organizations to hold six (6) “Community Partner Workshops” in 2000.  The workshops will be held in the communities described in attachment A.  They are intended to help communities implement protection, restoration, conservation and revitalization actions related to the Potomac River Watershed Visions Project.  

The workshops will be designed to emphasize identifying the causes, effects and extent of water pollution and local alternatives for the prevention, reduction and elimination of water pollution.  The meetings will be held in cooperation with the Federal agencies which committed to assist this effort (see July 30, 1999 Commitments to the Potomac) including USDA-NRCS, HUD, OSM, COE, FS, FWS, EPA-CBPO, NPS and FEMA.  In addition, the Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin Commission, appropriate State government agencies and private non-profit groups will be invited to participate and assist. 

Workshop Process: The workshops will be designed and implemented as follows.

Task 1: The Friends of the Potomac and the communities interested in co-sponsoring a “Potomac Community Partner Workshop” will design the workshops to meet local needs and capabilities. Local partners will be encouraged to involve a cross-section of community leaders, including local elected officials to participate in the pre-planning; arrange for and host the workshop; attend the workshop; and help the Friends and the Potomac AHR River Navigator prepare a report on the workshop results.

Task 2: The Friends will request the local partners to identify a list of community needs which related to the goals and objectives of the Potomac River Watershed Visions Project.  Local partners will also be asked to identify the Federal and State agencies, and conservation and revitalization expertise they would like to have available for the workshop.

Task 4: Based on the discussions and community input the River Navigator will identify Federal and State government agencies, and private sector organizations, and representatives to participate in the workshop.  The River Navigator will secure the assistance of these service providers for the workshop.  Government and private sector representatives will be provided background information on community needs, resources/ assets, and interests prior to the workshops. 

     

Task 5: The Friends of the Potomac, lead community partner, and the River Navigator will facilitate the workshop session which will include:

1. Overview presentation on the Friends of the Potomac and the Potomac River Watershed Visions Project.
2. Presentations by community leaders on their Potomac River watershed conservation, restoration, and revitalization assets, needs, water quality and living resource issues and problems, and interests.  Specific attention will be given to identifying a list of community projects and needs.
3. Presentation by Federal, State and private sector representatives on programs and services relevant to local needs and interests. Specific attention will be given to locally available programs which can be used to prevent, reduce or eliminate water pollution (i.e. stormwater management, brownfields, riparian buffers, source water protection, habitat restoration, etc.).  Specific attention will be given to identifying agency programs and priorities, and defining program eligibility.
4. Discussion and work session on the common local needs and government and private sector program/ service interests.  Specific commitments for collaboration and local action, with federal, state and non-government assistance, will be identified.
5. Presentation on the results of the work session and next steps.

Task 6.  The Friends of the Potomac and NPS River Navigator will be responsible for preparing a brief report on the discussions and follow up commitments.  The report will be made available to community partners, the workshop attendees, EPA and the appropriate State government offices. 

     

 Attachment A—Add Leigh’s list

Executive Summary Building Livable Communities

Executive Summary

Building Livable Communities

Sustaining Prosperity, Improving Quality of Life, Building a Sense of Community

A Report From the

Clinton-Gore Administration

Revised June 2000

Building Livable Communities Report

The Building Livable Communities report describes the changes to the American landscape over the past several decades and the current challenges of dealing with unplanned growth, or “sprawl.” The report celebrates a “wave of local innovation” as Americans work together to improve the quality of life in their communities and cites several local and state examples of smart growth. The report also defines the appropriate role for the federal government and presents a 30-point package of policy actions and voluntary partnerships – the Livable Communities Initiative – which demonstrates the federal government can be a supportive partner with communities.

A Wave of Local Innovation

Effective responses to the challenges and opportunities posed by sprawl cannot originate from the federal government. They must arise in communities as concerned citizens join in partnership with civic and business leaders. Indeed, a wave of local innovation already is sweeping across America as communities and regions take creative steps to tackle economic, social, environmental, and safety challenges posed by our patterns of development. The report lists several examples of local and state efforts designed to promote sustainable, smart growth. 

Communities Know Best

The Livable Communities Initiative is based on the principle that communities know best. Land use decisions have traditionally been – and must remain – the domain of state and local government. Each community should grow according to its own values. The responsibility of the federal government to assist and inform, not direct. The initiative is based on this and focuses on expanding the choices available to communities to help preserve open spaces and the environment; ease traffic congestion; revitalize our older cities, towns and suburbs; restore a sense of community; promote cooperation among neighboring communities; and ensure sustained prosperity. 

Role of Federal Government

The emergence of this “wave of local innovation” raises the question of the appropriate role for the federal government in building livable communities. The Clinton-Gore Administration strongly believes that it is the responsibility of the federal government to support, not direct, such efforts. The Livable Communities Initiative defines four primary roles for the federal government in building livable communities: 

• Expanding Community Choices by Providing Incentives. The livability challenges facing communities are as diverse as the communities themselves.  Tackling these challenges requires a variety of strategies based on the unique assets and needs of the community. The federal government can support local efforts to address livability issues by expanding the choices available to communities by providing incentives. Examples from the report include the Better America Bonds proposal, expanding alternative transportation choices, increasing brownfields redevelopment, offering regulatory incentives under the Clean Air Act, and creating a task force on urban-influenced agriculture and forestry.

• Expanding Community Choices by Providing Information. Good information contributes to good decisions. Many communities recognize that a lack of quality information impedes the consideration of the full range of choices available to address the challenges they face. The federal government has data, information, and analytical tools that can be useful to communities. This section details ways to make federal information, data, training, and tools more accessible to communities. Examples from the report include publishing community livability guides, providing smart growth and other types of training, and establishing a national, web-based livability resource center.

• Being a Good Neighbor. The federal government manages buildings, lands and its workforce in communities across the country. In these communities, the federal government has an obligation to be a good neighbor and ensure that its actions support – not hinder – community efforts to achieve livability goals. Examples from the report include working closely with communities to catalyze smart development, helping communities adapt to military base closings, encouraging federal workers to use alternative transportation, and seeking legislative approval to lease federal building space to private retail interests.

• Building Partnerships. Partnerships are emerging across issues, sectors and regions as people realize that livable communities policies and practices can foster economic prosperity, environmental quality, and a higher quality of life. The initiative includes 15 partnerships with communities across the country. The Partnership for Regional Livability includes the metropolitan areas surrounding Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, and the San Francisco Bay and is regional in nature. An additional 11 Community Partnerships focus on community-identified issues in the following 11 areas: Brownsville, Texas; Central Kentucky; Eastern North Carolina; Hartford, Connecticut; Los Angeles, California; Omaha, Nebraska; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Riverside County, California; Rochester, New York; San Diego, California; and Tioga County, New York.

The Livable Communities Initiative was developed under the leadership of the White House Task Force on Livable Communities. The Task Force was created by the Clinton-Gore Administration in August 1999 to coordinate livable community policies and activities across 18 agencies of the executive branch of the federal government. 

The full report can be found on the Internet at <www.livablecommunities.gov>.

Fort Stevens/ Vinegar Hill Meeting September 2, 2001

Fort Stevens/ Vinegar Hill Meeting

September 2, 2001

Prepared by Glenn Eugster, NPS-NCRO

On September 2, 2001 I met with a group of community leaders about their interest in the Military School building at 1375 Missouri Avenue. The meeting was in response to calls from Pat Tyson, Ft. Stevens/ Vinegar Hill Military School Road Heritage Alliance, and Phil Oglvie, George Washington University, Potomac Heritage Partnership, Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin, and other organizations.  Pat Tyson, Charles Powell, Loretta Newman, and others met me in front of the school and we talked briefly about their interest in trying to secure the building for community purposes.

The group would like to secure the school for community purposes.  Evidently it is owned by the District and leased to a woman who agreed to use it for a Charter School.  Although the lessee has had the building for several years the project has not progressed.  As a result the building condition is deteriorating, the grounds are unkempt and the school has not opened.

The group feels that because the lessee has not acted, and evidently lost her charter, there is a good opportunity to save the building and do something good for the community.

Despite being attacked by a variety of flying insects, the group held it's position near NPS lands looking up toward Ft. Stevens and talked about the area.  They briefly described a development proposal that would threaten the about a one acre tract along the tree line, adjacent to NPS lands across from the school.  Evidently they are working with the National Park Trust to find funds to acquire this property.  They talked about a residential structure owned by the Lightfoot family where Dr. George Lightfoot once entertained noted African American leaders such as Woodson, Kelly, DuBois, and others.

The group talked with pleasure about our lands and how they link to other civil war forts in the DC area.  This NPS site they feel is a "gateway" to the forts.

They also mentioned that there was once a school, perhaps on the school property--or on our land, that was used to educate Free Negro slaves.  They expressed an interest in recreating the original structure.

They pointed out with pride the successful community gardens not far from Ft, Stevens and the value of such urban agriculture--and their appreciation of NPS support for this activity.

As some of the group left to present their ideas at an ANC meeting, Mr. Powell and Ms. Newman, walked me to Ft. Stevens and talked of their vision.  Ms. Newman is working with Historic Takoma and wants to see if there is a way to link this area to her area.  She has had a great deal of experience with heritage corridors and envisions these features and values as being an important part of something larger.

Mr. Powell spoke eloquently about going attending the School and living in the community.  His vision is to restore the community by developing a stronger sense of historical and cultural pride and social commitment.  He believes

The group would like to meet with Superintendent Adrienne Applewhaite-Coleman, and other appropriate NPS officials, to share information on the interests of NPS and the Alliance for the future of the area.  They would like to exchange information to see if there is any basis for future collaboration.  Although money is needed to pursue some the ideas of the Alliance, the group indicated that they are not making a request for NPS financial assistance.

They may wish to come back to the Regional Office and ask for help to identify sources of funding for the adaptive reuse of the school--should they secure it.

On September 10, 2001 I discussed this meeting with Superintendent Applewhaite-Coleman and she agreed that I should have Pat Tyson of the Alliance contact her to arrange for a meeting.  On September 20, 2001 I contacted Pat Tyson and asked her to contact the Superintendent.  She indicated that she will contact the Superintendent very soon.

Partnerships Report—February 21, 2008

Partnerships Report—February 21, 2008

J. Glenn Eugster

1. Created in 2002 by Regional Managers to:

• Put a more collaborative face on NCR parks and programs
• Find more public and private funds
• Give partnerships more visibility
• Intent is to help park and program managers, and our partners, accomplish goals, objectives and tasks.  Help people help themselves to protect and serve

2.  Since that time we have been a period of partnership mania.  Most recently we are hearing a steady stream of promises of funding related to the Centennial Initiative.  NCR has had a long tradition of partnerships so some of the mania isn’t new to us—or is it?

3. Givens:

• Initiatives come and go with each administration.
• Work belongs to each of you and you decide how it gets done.
• The world, and our world at NPS, has changed and will continue to change.  

--More demands; 

--more immediate demands;

--expected to practice multi-tasking (muddled tasking); 

--NCR is seeing the arrival of the next generation of NPS leaders and with that comes new ideas and a loss of institutional memory and contacts

--less money to do everything we are being asked to do; 

--anti-fed sentiment; and 

--we are losing parkland and open space at an alarming rate.

4. So…What do we do about it?  

Many believe that new levels of success require organizations that foster collaboration within and with others.

We use partnerships sometimes when we can’t, or shouldn’t do something alone, or when we want to do something better.  

Let’s go back to the purpose of my office---it’s about money right?  

First step, reconsider old or bad decisions.  Look for ways to eliminate expenditures that don’t make sense anymore.

• such as annual payments to support NERO programs—that are fully funded.

Second step, find the low hanging sources of funding.

• such as leveraging WASO funds for services to secure funds to start the planning process for the National Mall Plan 
• or RTCA—programs that have been providing NPS regions funding for 25 years that NCR hasn’t taken advantage of;
• and, Unilever/ Lipton’s Trails Forever/ Healthy Parks-Healthy Living effort

Third, open for the donation business.  Answer the question for partners and the public, How can I help the National Park Service?

• such as the Cherry Tree Replacement Endowment Fund and work with the Willard Hotel and their commitment to Sustainable Development.

--$7,500 donation to the Cherry Tree Fund

--Assistance to NAMA with Pershing Park

--Working with NCR on the Green Event Planning Guide

--Sharing information with NPS on Sustainable Hospitality Standards including: healthy foods; energy conservation; healthier employees; 

Fourth,  be more of an advocate for parks, open space and outdoor recreation areas.

• such as partnering with the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments on the Green Infrastructure Demonstration project;
• and partnering with the America the Beautiful Fund and SCA to help support Urban Gardens in DC

Fifth, look for partners to help fundraise for NPS for specific projects.

• such as the Georgetown Waterfront, National Mall, Frederick Douglass NHS, Education Center at Piscataway Park.

Our region is unique and uniquely situated to use partnerships more effectively to accomplish our work.

• Jack Fish once said, Washington, DC is a city within a national park”.
• Because of that close relationship to people and communities, many of our partners have a stake in mutual success.
• Partnerships and finding HELP OR money are  inseperable.  If you want to raise funds you need to:

1. Raise friends
2. If you want to raise friends you need to be clear on the cause, and be able to describe who is behind the cause and why it is important to act know.  dON’T FORGET—THEY DON’T CARE HOW MUCH YOU KNOW UNTIL THEY KNOW HOW MUCH YOU CARE.

• Think of it as a FORMULA:

CASUE + WHO IS BEHIND THE CAUSE+ FRIENDSRAISING= FUNDS AND ASSISTANCE