[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19242-19248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9638]
[[Page 19241]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Agriculture
_______________________________________________________________________
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
_______________________________________________________________________
Proposed Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the Agricultural
Research and Extension Formula Funds; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 74 / Monday, April 19, 1999 /
Notices
[[Page 19242]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
Proposed Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the Agricultural
Research and Extension Formula Funds
AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice and Request for Comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service (CSREES) is requesting public comment on the proposed
Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the Agricultural Research and
Extension Formula Funds. These guidelines prescribe the procedures to
be followed by the eligible institutions receiving Federal agricultural
research and extension formula funds under the Hatch Act of 1887, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 361a et seq.); sections 3(b)(1) and (c) of the Smith-
Lever Act of 1914, as amended (7 U.S.C. 343 (b)(1) and (c)); and
sections 1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221
and 3222). The recipients of these funds are commonly referred to as
the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-grant institutions,
including Tuskegee University. CSREES is also requesting public comment
on the development of research and extension protocols used to evaluate
the success of multistate, multi-institutional, and multidisciplinary
research and extension activities, and joint research and extension
activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in
the submitted plans of work.
DATES: Written comments are invited from interested individuals and
organizations. To be considered in the formulation of the guidelines,
comments must be received on or before May 19, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments to CSREES-USDA; Office of Extramural
Programs; Policy and Program Liaison Staff; Mail Stop 2299; 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-2299. Comments may be
hand-delivered to CSREES-USDA; Office of Extramural Programs; Room 302
Aerospace Center; 901 D Street, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20024. Comments
may also be mailed electronically to oep@reeusda.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George Cooper; Deputy
Administrator, Partnerships; Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Washington, D.C.
20250; at 202-720-5285 or 202-720-5369, 202-720-4924 (fax) or via
electronic mail at bhewitt@reeusda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regulations (5 CFR Part 1320) that implement the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information collection and
recordkeeping requirements imposed by the implementation of these
guidelines have been submitted to OMB for approval. Those requirements
will not become effective prior to OMB approval. The eligible
institutions will be notified upon this approval.
Title: Reporting Requirements for State Plans of Work for
Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds.
Summary: The purpose of this collection of information is to
implement the requirements of section 7 of the Hatch Act of 1887, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 361g); section 4 of the Smith-Lever Act, as amended
(7 U.S.C. 343); and section 1444(d) and section 1445(c) of the National
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977
(NARETPA), as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221(d) and 3222 (c)), which require
that before funds may be provided to a State or eligible institution
under these Acts a plan of work must be submitted by the proper
officials of the State or eligible institution, as appropriate, and
approved by the Secretary of Agriculture.
Need for the Information: The Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185, amended the
Hatch Act of 1887, Smith-Lever Act, and sections 1444 and 1445 of
NARETPA to require plans of work to be received and approved by CSREES
prior to the distribution of funding authorized under these Acts. This
collection of information will satisfy the plan of work reporting
requirements as imposed by these Acts. This collection of information
includes three parts: the submission of a 5-year plan of work every
five years; the submission of an annual update of the 5-year plan of
work, if applicable; and the submission of an annual report of
accomplishments and results.
The first two collections of information are required in order to
satisfy the above amendments to the Acts that authorize the
distribution of agricultural research and extension formula funds to
States and eligible institutions. In addition to a description of
planned programs, the 5-Year Plan of Work must include information on
how critical short-term, intermediate, and long-term agricultural
issues in the State will be addressed in research and extension
programs; how the State or eligible institution has developed a process
to consult users of agricultural extension and research in the
identification of critical agricultural issues in the State and the
development of programs and projects targeting these issues (also
referred to as stakeholder input); how the State or eligible
institution has made efforts to identify and collaborate with other
universities and colleges that have a unique capacity to address the
identified agricultural issues in the State and the extent of current
and emerging efforts (including the regional and/or multistate efforts)
to work with these institutions; the manner in which research and
extension, including research and extension activities funded other
than through formula funds, will cooperate to address the critical
issues in the State, including activities to be carried out separately,
sequentially, or jointly; and for extension, the education and outreach
programs already underway to convey available research results that are
pertinent to a critical agricultural issue, including efforts to
encourage multicounty cooperation in the dissemination of research
information.
Section 103(e) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7613(e)) also required,
effective October 1, 1999, that a merit review process be established
at the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-grant institutions in
order to obtain agricultural research and extension formula funds. The
5-Year Plan of Work includes a section for the description of the merit
review process to ensure that such a process is in place prior to the
distribution of agricultural research and extension formula funds.
Sections 104 and 105 of AREERA also amended the Hatch Act and
Smith-Lever Act to require that a specified amount of the agricultural
research and extension formula funds be expended for multistate
activities and that a description of these activities be reported in
the plan of work. Section 204 of AREERA further amended the Hatch Act
and Smith-Lever Act to require that a specified amount of the
agricultural research and extension formula funds be expended for
activities that integrate cooperative research and extension and that a
description of these activities be included in the plan of work. Two
components of the 5-Year Plan of Work submission on Multistate
Activities and on Integrated Research
[[Page 19243]]
and Extension Activities have been included to meet these additional
requirements.
The second collection of information will be an annual update to
the 5-Year Plan of Work. This will be required only if there is a
substantive change to planned programs or a significant change in
funding as outlined in the proposed guidelines.
The third collection of information will be the Annual Report of
Accomplishments and Results. This will be based on the 5-Year Plan of
Work and will assist CSREES in ensuring that federally supported and
conducted research and extension activities are accomplished in
accordance with the management principles set forth under section
102(d) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7612(d)). These principles require that to
the maximum extent possible, CSREES shall ensure that federally
supported research and extension activities are accomplished in a
manner that integrates agricultural research, extension, and education
functions to better link research to technology transfer and
information dissemination activities; encourages regional and
multistate programs to address relevant issues of common concern and to
better leverage scarce resources; and achieves agricultural research,
extension, education objectives through multi-institutional and
multifunctional approaches and by conducting research at facilities and
institutions best equipped to achieve these objectives.
Respondents: Respondents will be the 57 1862 land-grant
institutions and the 17 1890 land-grant institutions, including
Tuskegee University, who will provide a 5-year plan of work once every
five years; will update annually this 5-year plan of work, if
necessary; and will report on the accomplishments and results of this
5-year plan of work annually to CSREES.
Estimate of Burden: The amendments to AREERA require a plan of work
for funds that are distributed on an annual basis. To reduce the burden
on respondents, CSREES proposes a 5-Year Plan of Work to be modified by
an annual update only where there are substantive program changes and/
or significant funding changes.
The total reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the
submission of the ``5-Year Plan of Work'' is estimated to average
1,349.44 hours per response. There are five required components of this
``5-Year Plan of Work': ``Planned Programs,'' ``Stakeholder Input
Process,'' ``Program Review Process,'' ``Multistate Activities,'' and
``Integrated Research and Extension Activities.'' The total reporting
and recordkeeping requirement for ``Planned Programs'' is estimated at
690.00 hours; for ``Stakeholder Input Process'' is estimated at 9.19
hours; for ``Program Review Process'' is estimated at 276.00 hours; for
``Multistate Activities'' is estimated at 216.75 hours; and for
``Integrated Research and Extension Activities'' is estimated at 157.50
hours.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 57.
Estimated Number of Responses: 148.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 199,717.12 hours.
Frequency of Responses: Once every five years.
If the ``5-Year Plan of Work'' needs to be updated as an ``Annual
Update to the 5-Year Plan of Work,'' the total reporting and
recordkeeping requirement is estimated to average 134.94 hours per
response.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 7.
Estimated Number of Responses: 15.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 2,024.16 hours.
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
The total annual reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the
``Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results'' is estimated to
average 1,366.67 hours per response.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 57.
Estimated Number of Responses: 148.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 202,267.16 hours.
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: CSREES-
USDA; Office of Extramural Programs; Policy and Program Liaison Staff;
Mail Stop 2299; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-
2299 by June 23, 1999 or to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, D.C. 20502. Reference should be made to the volume, page,
and date of this Federal Register publication.
Background and Purpose
The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
(CSREES) proposes to implement the following Guidelines for State Plans
of Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds in
order to meet the plan of work reporting requirements enacted in the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998
(AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185. The AREERA amendments added new and
consistent plan of work requirements for agricultural research and
extension formula funds provided under the Hatch Act of 1887 (7 U.S.C.
361a et seq.), the Smith-lever Act (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.), and sections
1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (U.S.C. 3221 and 3222). The specific plan
of work reporting requirements are outlined in the ``Preface and
Authority'' section of the Guidelines.
These guidelines were developed by CSREES in consultation with the
State partners at the 1862 land-grant institutions and the 1890 land-
grant institutions, including Tuskegee University. Since the enactment
of AREERA on June 23, 1998, the Agency has engaged in these
consultations, under an exemption to the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(7 U.S.C. 3124a(e)), with members of both the Federal and State
partnership focusing on different aspects of the plan of work and
requirements for the agricultural research and extension formula funds
(i.e., stakeholder input, multistate and integrated activities), and
has received input and comments from the 1862 and 1890 land-grant
community to ensure that the Guidelines, while meeting the legal
requirements of the legislation, address the issues and concerns of the
recipients.
CSREES is committed to a set of basic principles regarding the plan
of work emphasizing the content in the plan of work rather than the
format. CSREES has developed guidance about what goes into a plan of
work, not how it is to be reported. Thus, CSREES does not intend to
develop a prototype, template, or a model plan of work. CSREES is
committed to allowing all institutions maximum flexibility in
responding to the content required by legislation.
The amendments to the Hatch and Smith-Lever Acts plan of work
requirements made by section 202 of AREERA require the Secretary of
Agriculture to develop protocols to
[[Page 19244]]
evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional, and
multidisciplinary research and extension activities, and joint research
and extension activities, in addressing the critical agricultural
issues identified in the plans of work. Although not included in the
Guidelines at present, CSREES also seeks comments on evaluation
protocols and criteria for the plans of work that will eventually
become part of the Guidelines. This section also stipulates that these
protocols be developed by CSREES in shared consultation with the
National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics
Advisory Board. CSREES is in the process of developing these protocols
in consultation with this Advisory Board.
CSREES is proposing to use the Annual Reports of Accomplishments
and Results to evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional,
and multidisciplinary activities, and joint research and extension
activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in
the 5-Year Plans of Work. At this time, CSREES proposes to use the
following evaluation criteria: (1) Did the planned program address the
critical issues of strategic importance, including those identified by
the stakeholders? (2) Did the planned program address the needs of
under-served populations of the State(s)? (3) Did the planned program
describe the expected outcomes and impacts? and (4) Did the planned
program result in improved program effectiveness and/or efficiency?
Pursuant to the plan of work requirements enacted in the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, the
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service hereby
proposes to implement the Guidelines for State Plans of Work for
Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds as follows:
Guidelines for State Plans of Work for Agricultural Research and
Extension Formula Funds
Table of Contents
I. Preface and Authority
II. Submission of the 5-Year Plan of Work
A. General
1. Planning Option
2. Period Covered
3. Projected Resources
4. Submission and Due Date
5. Certification
6. Definitions
B. Components of the 5-Year Plan of Work
1. Planned Programs
a. National Goals
b. Format
c. Program Descriptions
2. Stakeholder Input Process
3. Program Review Process
a. Merit Review
b. Scientific Peer Review
c. Reporting Requirement
4. Multistate Research and Extension Activities
a. Hatch Multistate Research
b. Smith-Lever Multistate Extension
c. Reporting Requirement
5. Integrated Research and Extension Activities
C. Five Year Plan of Work Evaluation by CSREES
1. Schedule
2. Review Criteria
3. Evaluation of Multistate and Integrated Research and
Extension Activities
III. Annual Update of the 5-Year Plan of Work
A. Applicability
B. Reporting Requirement
IV. Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results
A. Reporting Requirement
B. Format
I. Preface and Authority
Sections 202 and 225 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185, enacted
amendments requiring all States and 1890 institutions receiving formula
funds authorized under the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended (7 U.S.C. 361a
et seq.), the Smith-Lever Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.), and
sections 1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA), as amended (7
U.S.C. 3221 and 3222), to prepare and submit to the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) a plan of work for
the use of those funds.
While the requirement for the Hatch Act and Smith-Lever Act funds
applies to the States, CSREES assumes that in most cases the function
will be performed by the 1862 land-grant institution in the States. The
only ``eligible institutions'' to receive formula funding under
sections 1444 and 1445 of NARETPA are the 1890 land-grant institutions
and Tuskegee University. Therefore, these guidelines refer throughout
to ``institutions'' to include both the 1862 and 1890 land-grant
institutions, including Tuskegee University.
Further, these guidelines require a plan of work that covers both
research and extension. Although the District of Columbia receives
extension funds under the District of Columbia Postsecondary Education
Reorganization Act, Pub. L. 93-471, as opposed to the Smith-Lever Act,
CSREES has determined that it should be subject to the plan of work
requirements imposed under these guidelines except where expressly
excluded.
All the requirements of AREERA with regard to agricultural research
and extension formula funds were considered and were incorporated in
these plan of work guidelines including descriptions of the following:
(1) The critical short-term, intermediate, and long-term agricultural
issues in the State and the current and planned research and extension
programs and projects targeted to address the issues; (2) The process
established to consult with stakeholders regarding the identification
of critical agricultural issues in the State and the development of
research and extension projects and programs targeted to address the
issues; (3) The efforts made to identify and collaborate with other
colleges and universities that have a unique capacity to address the
identified agricultural issues in the State and the extent of current
and emerging efforts (including regional and multistate efforts) to
work with those other institutions; (4) The manner in which research
and extension, including research and extension activities funded other
than through formula funds, will cooperate to address the critical
issues in the State, including the activities to be carried out
separately, sequentially, or jointly; and (5) For extension, the
education and outreach programs already underway to convey available
research results that are pertinent to a critical agricultural issue,
including efforts to encourage multicounty cooperation in the
dissemination of research information.
These guidelines also take into consideration the requirement in
section 102(c) of AREERA for the 1862, 1890, and 1994 land-grant
institutions receiving agricultural research, extension, and education
formula funds to establish a process for receiving stakeholder input on
the uses of such funds. This stakeholder input requirement, as it
applies to research and extension at 1862 and 1890 land-grant
institutions, has been incorporated as part of the plan of work
process.
The requirement of section 103(e) of AREERA also is addressed in
these plan of work guidelines. This section requires that the 1862,
1890, and 1994 land-grant institutions establish a merit review
process, prior to October 1, 1999, in order to obtain agricultural
research, extension, and education funds. For purposes of these
guidelines applicable to formula funds, a merit review process must be
established for extension programs funded under sections 3(b)(1) and
(c) of the Smith-Lever Act and under section 1444 of NARETPA, and for
research programs funded under
[[Page 19245]]
sections 3(c)(1) and (2) of the Hatch Act (commonly referred to as
Hatch Regular Formula Funds) and under section 1445 of NARETPA. Section
104 of AREERA amended the Hatch Act of 1887 also to stipulate that a
scientific peer review process (that also would satisfy the
requirements of a merit review process under section 103(e)) be
established for research programs funded under section 3(c)(3) of the
Hatch Act (commonly referred to as Hatch Multistate Research Funds). As
previously stated, these program review processes must be established
prior to October 1, 1999, in order for the institutions to obtain
agricultural research and extension formula funds. Consequently, a
description of the merit review and scientific peer review process has
been included as a requirement in the submission of the 5-Year Plan of
Work.
These plan of work guidelines also require reporting on the
multistate and integrated research and extension programs. Section 104
of AREERA amended the Hatch Act of 1887 to redesignate the Hatch
regional research funds as the Hatch Multistate Research Fund,
specifying that these funds be used for cooperative research employing
multidisciplinary approaches in which a State agricultural experiment
station, working with another state agricultural experiment station,
the Agricultural Research Service, or a college or university,
cooperates to solve the problems that concern more than one State.
Section 105 of AREERA amended the Smith-Lever Act to require that each
institution receiving extension formula funds under sections 3(b) and
(c) of the Smith-Lever Act expend for multistate activities in FY 2000
and thereafter a percentage that is at least equal to the lesser of 25
percent or twice the percentage of funds expended by the institution
for multistate activities in FY 1997. Section 204 of AREERA amended
both the Hatch and Smith-Lever Acts to require that each institution
receiving agricultural research and extension formula funds under the
Hatch Act and sections 3(b) and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act expend for
integrated research and extension activities in FY 2000 and thereafter
a percentage that is at least equal to the lesser of 25 percent or
twice the percentage of funds expended by the institution for
integrated research and extension activities in FY 1997. These sections
also require that the institutions include in the plan of work a
description of the manner in which they will meet these multistate and
integrated requirements.
These applicable percentages apply to the Federal agricultural
research and extension formula funds only. Federal formula funds that
are used by the institution for a fiscal year for integrated activities
may also be counted to satisfy the multistate activities requirement.
The multistate and integrated research and extension requirements
do not apply to formula funds received by American Samoa, Guam,
Micronesia, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
Since the Smith-Lever Act is not directly applicable, the multistate
and integrated extension requirements do not apply to extension funds
received by the District of Columbia, except to the extent it
voluntarily complies.
The amendments made by sections 105 and 204 of AREERA also provide
that the Secretary of Agriculture may reduce the minimum percentage
required to be expended by the institution for multistate and
integrated activities in the case of hardship, infeasibility, or other
similar circumstance beyond the control of the institution. CSREES will
issue separate guidance on the establishment of the FY 1997 baseline
percentages for multistate activities and integrated activities and on
requests for reduction in the required minimum percentage.
Also included in these guidelines are instructions on how to report
on the annual accomplishments and results of the planned programs
contained in the 5-Year Plan of Work, information on the evaluation of
accomplishments and results, and information on when and how to update
the 5-Year Plan of Work if necessary.
II. Submission of the 5-Year Plan of Work
A. General
1. Planning Option
This document provides guidance for preparing the plan of work with
preservation of institutional autonomy and programmatic flexibility
within the Federal-State Partnership. The plan of work is a 5-year
prospective plan that covers the period of fiscal year 2000 through
2004, with the option to submit annual updates to the 5-Year Plan of
Work. The 5-Year Plans of Work may be prepared for an institution's
individual functions (i.e., research or extension activities), for an
individual institution (including the planning of research and
extension activities), or for state-wide activities (a 5-year research
and/or extension plan of work for all the eligible institutions in a
State). Each 5-Year Plan of Work must reflect the content of the
program(s) funded by Federal agricultural research and extension
formula funds and the required matching funds. This 5-Year Plan of Work
must describe not only how the program(s) address critical short-term,
intermediate, and long-term agricultural issues in a State, but how it
relates to and is part of the broad national goals.
2. Period Covered
The 5-Year Plan of Work should cover the period from October 1,
1999, through September 30, 2004.
3. Projected Resources
The resources that are allocated for various planned programs in
the 5-Year Plan of Work, in terms of human and fiscal measures, should
be included and projected over the next five years. The baseline for
the institution's or State's initial plan (for five years) should be
the Federal agricultural research and extension formula funds for FY
1999 and the required matching funds. During the course of the 5-Year
Plan of Work, if the baseline for the formula funds at the FY 1999
level changes by more than 10 percent in one year or by 20 percent or
more cumulatively during the 5-year period, a revised 5-Year Plan of
Work should be submitted as an annual update the following fiscal year.
4. Submission and Due Date
The 5-Year Plan of Work must be submitted by July 1, 1999, to the
Partnerships Unit of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture. It is preferred that
these 5-Year Plans of Work be submitted electronically to
bhewitt@reeusda.gov in either WordPerfect file format, Microsoft Word
file format, or ASCII file format. If this submission method is not
available, an original and two copies of the 5-Year Plan of Work should
be submitted to: Partnerships/POW; Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Stop
2214; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington. D.C. 20250-2214.
5. Certification
The 5-Year Plan of Work must be signed by the 1862 Extension
Director, 1862 Research Director, 1890 Extension Administrator, and/or
1890 Research Director, depending on the planning option chosen.
6. Definitions
For the purpose of implementing the Guidelines for State Plans of
Work for Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds, the
following definitions are applicable:
Formula funds for the purposes of the plan of work guidelines means
funding
[[Page 19246]]
provided by formula to 1862 land-grant institutions under section 3 of
the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended (7 U.S.C. 361a) and sections 3(b)(1)
and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 343(b)(1) and (c))
and to the 1890 land-grant institutions under sections 1444 and 1445 of
the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act
of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221 and 3222).
Formula funds for the purposes of stakeholder input means the
funding by formula to the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-
grant institutions covered by these plan of work guidelines as well as
the formula funds provided under the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative
Forestry Research Program (16 U.S.C. 582, et seq.), the Animal Health
and Disease Research Program (7 U.S.C. 3195), and the education
payments made to the 1994 land-grant institutions under section 534(a)
of Pub. L. 103-382 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).
Integrated or joint activities means jointly planned, funded, and
interwoven activities between research and extension to solve problems.
This includes the generation of knowledge and the transfer of
information and technology.
Merit review means an evaluation whereby the quality and relevance
to program goals are assessed.
Multi-institutional means two or more institutions within the same
or different States or territories that will collaborate in the
planning and implementation of programs.
Multistate means collaborative efforts that reflect the programs of
institutions located in at least two or more States or territories.
Multi-disciplinary means efforts that represent research,
education, and/or extension programs in which principal investigators
or other collaborators from two or more disciplines or fields of
specialization work together to accomplish specified objectives.
Outcome indicator means an assessment of the results of a program
activity compared to its intended purpose.
Output indicator means a tabulation, calculation, or recording of
activity of effort expressed in quantitative or qualitative manner
which measures the products or services produced by the planned
program.
Program review means either a merit review or a scientific peer
review.
Scientific peer review means an evaluation performed by experts
with scientific knowledge and technical skills to conduct the proposed
work whereby the technical quality and relevance to program goals are
assessed.
Seek stakeholder input means an open and fair process which allows
opportunities for individuals, groups, and organizations a voice in a
process that treats all with dignity and respect.
Stakeholder is any person who has the opportunity to use or conduct
agricultural research, extension, and education activities in the
State.
Under-served means individuals, groups, and/or organizations whose
needs have not been addressed in past programs.
Under-represented means individuals, groups, and/or organizations
especially those who may not have participated fully including, but not
limited to, women, racial and ethnic minorities, persons with
disabilities, and limited resource clients.
B. Components of the 5-Year Plan of Work
1. Planned Programs
a. National Goals. The 5-Year Plan of Work should be based on the
five national goals established in the Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) Agency Strategic Plans and
linked to the five national goals within the Research, Education, and
Economics (REE) Mission Area of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
These national goals were adopted by the National Agricultural
Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board. These
goals were developed from stakeholder input in conjunction with
existing Federal-State Partnerships. The body of the 5-Year Plan of
Work narrative should focus on these goals and outcomes.
Currently the national goals are:
Goal 1: An agricultural system that is highly competitive in the
global economy. Through research and education, empower the
agricultural system with knowledge that will improve competitiveness in
domestic production, processing, and marketing.
Goal 2: A safe and secure food and fiber system. To ensure an
adequate food and fiber supply and food safety through improved science
based detection, surveillance, prevention, and education.
Goal 3: A healthy, well-nourished population. Through research and
education on nutrition and development of more nutritious foods, enable
people to make health promoting choices.
Goal 4: Greater harmony between agriculture and the environment.
Enhance the quality of the environment through better understanding of
and building on agriculture's and forestry's complex links with soil,
water, air, and biotic resources.
Goal 5: Enhanced economic opportunity and quality of life for
Americans. Empower people and communities, through research-based
information and education, to address economic and social challenges
facing our youth, families, and communities.
b. Format. As mentioned under the Planning Options section, an
institution or State may opt to submit independent plans for the
various units (e.g. 1862 research) or an integrated plan which includes
all units in the institution or State. Regardless of the option chosen,
the 5-Year Plan of Work should be reported in the appropriate matrix
format, each cell of which identifies planned programs that fall under
one of the national program goals. If an integrated 5-Year Plan of Work
is submitted, the various units within the entity for which the 5-Year
Plan of Work has been developed (i.e., 1862 research, 1890 research,
1862 extension, 1890 extension) would appear on the vertical axis.
Individual cells within the matrix would be used to summarize the State
programs.
The following example illustrates the desired matrix.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1862 Research
1862 Extension
1890 Research
1890 Extension
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Program Descriptions. Program descriptions presented in a
narrative form or in each cell of the matrix for a planned program will
be related to one of the five national goals and should reflect the
following planning components:
[[Page 19247]]
1. The statement of issue to be addressed. This component should
discuss the critical agricultural issue within the State that was
identified and being targeted by this planned program. This component
may also reference the stakeholder input which identified the critical
agricultural issue in the State and the need for the targeted research
and/or extension program.
2. The performance goal(s) is a target level of performance. The
output indicators should reflect the tabulation, calculation, or
recording of activity or effort expressed in quantitative or
qualitative manner which measures the products or services produced by
the program. The outcome indicators should assess the results of a
program activity compared to its intended goal.
3. The key program component(s) identify the major efforts included
in the work to be conducted.
4. The internal and external linkages include activities identified
as integrated, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, and/or
multistate. This component may also address any efforts made to
identify and collaborate with other colleges and universities that have
a unique capacity to address the identified agricultural issues within
the State and the extent of current and emerging efforts (including
regional efforts) to work with those institutions.
5. The target audiences identifies the set of stakeholders,
customers, and/or consumers for which the program is intended. The 5-
Year Plans of Work should address the institution's commitment to
facilitating equality of service and ease of access to all research and
extension programs and services.
6. The program duration should be expressed as short-term,
intermediate (one to five years), or long-term (over five years).
7. The allocated resources (human and fiscal measures) must be
described for each planned program. This component may not only include
the amount of Federal agricultural research and/or extension formula
funds and matching funds allocated to this planned program, but also
the manner in which funds, other than formula funds, will be expended
to address the critical issues being targeted by this planned program.
8. Education and outreach programs must be described that are
already underway to convey the research results that are pertinent to
the critical agricultural issue identified in the ``Statement of
Issue.'' Efforts to encourage multicounty cooperation in dissemination
of research results should also be identified. This planning component
applies only to those 5-Year Plans of Work incorporating extension
activities of the 1862 and/or 1890 land-grant institutions.
2. Stakeholder Input Process
Section 102(c) of AREERA requires the 1862 land-grant institutions,
1890 land-grant institutions, and 1994 land-grant institutions
receiving agricultural research, extension, and education formula funds
from CSREES to establish a process for stakeholder input on the uses of
such funds. CSREES will promulgate separately in the Federal Register
regulations to implement this stakeholder input requirement.
As a component of the 5-Year Plan of Work, each institution must
report on the actions taken to seek stakeholder input that encourages
their participation and a brief statement of the process used by the
institution to identify stakeholders and to collect input from them.
This report will be required annually and may be submitted with the
Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results. This component will
satisfy the reporting requirements imposed by the separately
promulgated regulations on stakeholder input.
3. Program Review Process
a. Merit Review. Effective October 1, 1999, each 1862 land-grant
institution and 1890 land-grant institution must establish a process
for merit review in order to obtain agricultural research or extension
formula funds.
b. Scientific Peer Review. A scientific peer review is required for
all research funded under the Hatch Act of 1887 Multistate Research
Fund. For such research, this scientific peer review will satisfy the
merit review requirement specified above.
c. Reporting Requirement. As a component of the 5-year Plan of
Work, each institution depending on the type of program review required
will provide a description of the merit review process or scientific
peer review process established at their institution. This description
should include the process used in the selection of reviewers with
expertise relevant to the effort and appropriate scientific and
technical standards.
4. Multistate Research and Extension Activities
a. Hatch Multistate Research. Effective October 1, 1998, the Hatch
Multistate Research Fund replaced the Hatch Regional Research Program.
The Hatch Multistate Research Fund must be used for research employing
multidisciplinary approaches to solve research problems that concern
more than one State. For such research, State agricultural experiment
stations must partner with another experiment station, the Agricultural
Research Service, or another college or university.
b. Smith-Lever Multistate Extension. Effective October 1, 1999, the
cooperative extension programs at the 1862 land-grant institutions must
expend up to 25 percent of their formula funds provided under sections
3(b)(1) and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act for activities in which two or
more State extension services cooperate to solve problems that concern
more than one State. As required by law, CSREES will work with each
1862 land-grant institution to identify the amount each institution
expended for multistate extension activities for fiscal year (FY) 1997.
For FY 2000 and thereafter, cooperative extension programs must commit
two times their FY 1997 baseline percentage or 25 percent, whichever is
less, for multistate activities. Institutions should describe the
contributions of extension staff and programs toward impacts rather
than to describe the programs. Each participating State or territory
must be a collaborator towards objectives and involved in the outcomes.
Evidence of the proposed collaboration must be provided in the 5-Year
Plan of Work submitted by each State. This planning is documented
through formal agreements, letters of memorandums, contracts, or other
instruments that provide primary evidence that a multistate
relationship exists.
c. Reporting Requirements. The 5-Year Plan of Work should include a
description of the Multistate Research, where applicable, and
Multistate Extension programs as specified above and these programs
must be reported consistently across the units of an institution as
well as with the 5-Year Plan of Work of the cooperating State(s) or
State institutions.
5. Integrated Research and Extension Activities
Effective October 1, 1999, up to 25 percent of all funds provided
under section 3 of the Hatch Act and under section 3(b)(1) and (c) of
the Smith-Lever Act must be spent on activities that integrate
cooperative research and extension. As required by law, CSREES will
work with each 1862 land-grant institution to establish the
institution's baseline for integrated research and extension activities
for FY 1997. For FY 2000 and thereafter, 1862 land-grant institutions
must commit twice the FY 1997 baseline percentage or 25 percent,
whichever is less, for integrated activities. Integration may occur
within the State or between units within two or
[[Page 19248]]
more States. Integrated programming must be reported in the 5-Year Plan
of Work and be reported consistently across the units of the
institutions as well as with the 5-Year Plan of Work submitted by
cooperating State(s). Federal formula funds used by a State for
integrated activities may also be counted to satisfy the multistate
research and the multistate extension activity requirements.
C. 5-Year Plan of Work Evaluation by CSREES
1. Schedule
All 5-Year Plans of Work will be evaluated by CSREES. The 5-Year
Plans of Work will either be accepted by CSREES without change or
returned to the institution, with clear and detailed recommendations
for its modification. The submitting institution(s) will be notified by
CSREES of its determination within 90 days (review to be completed in
60 days, communications to the institutions allowing a 30-day response)
of receipt of the document. Adherence to the Plan of Work schedule by
the recipient institution is critical to assuring the timely allocation
of funds by CSREES. Five Year Plans of Work accepted by CSREES will
remain in effect for five years and will be publicly available in a
CSREES database. CSREES will notify all institutions of a need for a
new 5-year plan of work two years prior to the plan's expiration on
September 30.
2. Review Criteria
CSREES will evaluate the 5-Year Plans of Work to determine if they
address agricultural issues of critical importance to the State;
identify the alignment and realignment of programs to address those
critical issues; identify the involvement of stakeholders in the
planning process; give attention to under-served populations; indicate
the level of Federal formula funds in proportion to all other funds at
the director or administrator level; provide evidence of multistate,
multi-institutional, and multidisciplinary and integrated activities;
and identify the expected outcomes and impacts from the proposed 5-Year
Plan of Work.
3. Evaluation of Multistate and Integrated Research and Extension
Activities
CSREES is proposing to use the Annual Reports of Accomplishments
and Results to evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional,
and multidisciplinary activities and joint research and extension
activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in
the 5-Year Plans of Work. Once evaluation protocols are developed,
these guidelines will be modified to specify the protocols that will be
used to evaluate the Annual Reports of Accomplishments and Results.
III. Annual Update of the 5-Year Plan of Work
A. Applicability
An annual update to the 5-Year Plan of Work is optional and is only
required if: (1) there is a substantive change in planned programs; (2)
if the change in Federal agricultural research and extension formula
funding is 10 percent or greater in one year from the FY 1999 base
year; or (3) if the cumulative change during the five year period is 20
percent or greater than the FY 1999 base year.
B. Reporting Requirement
If a revised 5-Year Plan of Work is required, or if the
institution(s) chooses to submit an optional update to the 5-Year Plan
of Work, it should be submitted at the beginning of the next plan of
work cycle (July 1) to either the same electronic mail address or
regular mail address as listed for the submission of the 5-Year Plan of
Work.
IV. Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results
1. Reporting Requirement
The 5-Year Plan of Work for a reporting unit, institution, or State
should form the basis for annually reporting its accomplishments and
results. This report will be due on or before December 31 each year
with the first report being due on December 31, 2000, for FY 2000. This
report should be submitted to either the same electronic mail address
or regular mail address as listed for the submission of the 5-Year Plan
of Work.
2. Format
This annual report should include the relevant information related
to each component of the program in the matrix cells of the 5-Year Plan
of Work. Accomplishments and results reporting should involve two
parts. First, institutions should submit an annual set of impact
statements linked to sources of funding. Strict attention to just the
preceding year is not expected in all situations. Some impact
statements may need to cover ten or more years of activity. Focus
should be given to the benefits received by targeted end-users. Second,
institutions should submit annual results statements based on the
indicators of the outputs and outcomes for the activities undertaken
the preceding year. These should be identified as short-term,
intermediate, or long-term critical issues in the 5-Year Plan of Work.
Attention should be given to highlighting multistate, multi-
institutional, and multidisciplinary and integrated activities, as
appropriate to the 5-Year Plan of Work.
Done at Washington, D.C., this 13th day of April 1999.
I. Miley Gonzalez,
Under Secretary, Research, Education, and Economics.
[FR Doc. 99-9638 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P