Detailed Information on the
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration: Navigation Services Assessment

The Budget provides funding to expand the program's capacity to build and maintain ENCs.

Determine the optimal investment strategy required to adequately survey the 500,000 square nautical miles of navigationally significant areas through the conduct of a rigorous cost, schedule and performance analysis.

Enhance performance measures to better demonstrate more efficient use of service contracts.

The Budget proposes funding for state-of-the-art technology, Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs), to increase the efficiency of hydrographic survey data collection.

The program will continue to develop long-term performance measure that clearly link to annual goals.

Measure: Percent of top 175 United States seaports with access to full suite of NOAA's Navigation Products and Services.

Explanation:Over 99% of the nation's cargo as measured by tonnage on an annual basis (by USACOE) transits through the nation's top 175 seaports. This measure tracks the availability of key NOAA Navigation products and services suite at each seaport as an indicator of improved navigation safety and efficiency. The measure can be correlated with a number of MTS statistics such as tonnage, value, commercial fishing landings, etc. Targeted studies have and are being conducted to link these services to improvements in safety and efficiency. For example, a 2005 study for the Tampa Bay PORTS documented reductions in groundings and up to $7 million of direct annual quantifiable economic benefits.

Measure: Percentage of U.S. counties rated as fully enabled or substantially enabled with accurate positioning capacity

Explanation:Substantially enabled capacity indicates when a county has demonstrated, through the local use of NOAA models and tools, that it has the NOAA-enabled infrastructure, tools and local capacity needed for accurate positioning. Fully enabled to conduct accurate positioning indicates that NOAA has verified that the county has the NOAA-enabled infrastructure, tools and local capacity needed for accurate positioning. This includes direct interaction with a county geospatial representative and acceptance of local positioning data submitted by that county into the National Spatial Reference System database. An example of local positioning data would be the precise latitude, longitude and height coordinates of local height modernization monuments.

Measure: Reduce the hydrographic survey backlog within navigationally significant areas (in square nautical miles surveyed per year). Resource-dependent goal of 10,000 square nautical miles a year is final target.

Explanation:

Measure: Average number of days from hydrographic survey data acquisition to navigation product delivery

Explanation:This measure tracks progress in reducing the time it takes to collect data, process it, apply to charting products and deliver the finished product to the mariner. The goal is to achieve a ship-to-chart delivery in 90 days.

Measure: Improve the cost per linear nautical mile of hydrography accomplished by NOAA vessels

Explanation:The total cost includes not only the cost of data acquisition, but project planning, water level/tide support, shoreline mapping, data processing and data archiving. Costs per linear nautical mile vary depending on remoteness, weather, bottom topography and other factors unrelated to efficiency. To account for some of these variable factors from the efficiency measure, the cost per linear nautical mile will be provided in 10 different geographic areas. These areas were recommended by the Congressionally established Hydrographic Services Review Panel (FACA) as representing areas which have different difficulty in acquiring hydrographic data.

Measure: Number of ENCs in continual maintenance

Explanation:ENCs, once built, must be kept in continual maintenance or they become obsolete. Target metric assumes FY2004 President's Budget increase of $2M for ENCs. At FY2004 funding levels, NOAA will reach its capacity to effectively maintain a partial ENC suite in FY2006. NOAA's goal is to provide full contiguous ENC coverage for U.S. coastal waters. NOAA estimates a total of approximately 1000 ENCS is required to achieve this goal.

Measure: Number of Lithographic Editions Printed

Explanation:NOAA annually prints new editions of nautical charts with the greatest number of updates and new data, and those low in stock. NOAA continually maintains a suite of 1000 charts for paper/rater/Print-on-Demand provision

Measure: Number of 2,700 locations in tidal current prediction tables with updated predictions.

Explanation:Over 70% of the 2,700 tidal current predictions are based on data over 30 years old or of insufficient length resulting in many predictions being inaccurate. Approximately 350 locations are in priority port areas and the remaining 2,350 are in other coastal areas. Short term observations are required to update tidal current predictions. The requirement is to update the priority port areas every 10 years and the other coastal areas every 25 years, resulting in a total requirement for observations at 130 locations every year.

Measure: Number of operational nowcast/forecast models for US ports and harbors

Explanation:Oceanographic models provide mariners with accurate forecasts of environmental conditions up to 30 hours in advance.

Measure: Percentage of National Water Level Observation Network stations fully operational.

Explanation:This measure indicates the ability of the NWLON to provide accurate, timely and reliable data to MTS users.

Measure: Percentage of top 175 seaports analyzed for shoreline change

Explanation:The CSCAP project uses commercial satellite imagery and some aerial photography to analyze top 175 seaports for change. The analysis allows for rapid updates to shorelines without entirely recompiling a shoreline. This measure indicates the percentage of the top 175 high priority seaports that have been analyzed for change during the given year.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the program is (1) to manage the National Spatial Reference System. This system provides the foundation for positioning and navigation activities in the United States. It is the reference base for latitude, longitude, height (elevation) and distance between points on the Earth's surface, and defines the nation's shoreline; and (2) to provide navigation products and services that ensure that people and goods move safely and efficiently through waters of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (200 miles offshore of U.S. coastlines). NOAA's Navigation Services include hydrographic surveys (mapping of surface waters and depths); tide and current observations; geodetic (global positioning) surveys; and field surveys for aeronautical charts, gravity, and other measurements used to create products for safe navigation. In NOAA's strategic planning framework, these activities fall under the Marine Transportation System Program and the Geodesy Program. Both are essential parts of NOAA's mission to support the nation's commerce with information for safe, efficient, and environmentally sound transportation.

Evidence: The mapping and charting program of today derives from the Organic Act of 1807 (2 Stat. 4134) - Survey of the Coast. The Coast and Geodetic Survey Act of 1947 (C&GS) authorizes the provision of nautical charts and products for safe maritime navigation, hydrographic and topographic surveys, and analysis and prediction of tide and current data. The C&GS Act also authorizes developmental work to increase cartographic efficiency and engineering and scientific knowledge. The Hydrographic Services Improvement Act of 1998/2002 updated the C&GS Act to include testing, developing, and operating technologies necessary to ensure safe navigation. A more complete listing and explanation of the program's purposes, as well as its underlying mandates and mission drivers, can be found in the Marine Transportation System Program and Geodesy Program charters, publicly available at http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/prog_charters.htm.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: NOAA Navigation Services provide the nation with a common spatial reference system for establishing the coordinate positions of all geographic data and make mariners aware of their operating environment so they can make safe navigation decisions. The need for this program was first identified in 1807 by Thomas Jefferson, who recognized the dependence of our nation on safe marine transportation for commerce and movement of people and goods. That economic dependence is even stronger today, as noted in the 1999 Report to Congress on the Marine Transportation System, the 2004 U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Report, and the 2004 U.S. Ocean Action Plan. By 2020, container traffic is expected to double, which will increase risk to vessels and ocean ecosystems. Because today's ships are carrying more cargo and hazardous materials, their safe, efficient movement relates directly to economic profit and loss, and environmental protection. Ships are also growing wider and deeper, requiring the use of every inch of water depth in U.S. channels. NOAA's accurate hydrographic surveys, real-time water-level data and precise positioning help these vessels avoid groundings and bridge strikes and load/unload cargo for maximum efficiency.

Evidence: 1. An Assessment of the U.S. Marine Transportation System, September 1999; Department of Transportation Report to Congress (http://www.dot.gov/cmts/library.htm). The report comprehensively reviews and assesses the issues and challenges facing the Marine Transportation System. 2. National Height Modernization Study, June 1998; NOAA Report prepared for Congress. This report outlines the immense economic benefits to the nation if Height Modernization is fully implemented. 3. Geodetic Programs Needs of Louisiana and Wisconsin, August 2001; NOAA Report to Congress (http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PUBS_LIB/NGSreport_823.pdf). This report assesses the requirements and potential benefits of Louisiana and Wisconsin participating in the National Height Modernization System and geodetic spatial reference programs 4. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf).

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services provide the primary environmental information that other public/private entities use to make sound commercial decisions. NOAA's National Spatial Reference System provides the foundation for positioning and navigation activities in the United States. Because NOAA is the only producer of nautical charts, tide and tidal current predictions, and other navigation products for all U.S. coastal waters, the U.S. Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, state departments of transportation, private land surveyors, ship captains and others rely on NOAA's data and observations. NOAA is an active member of the Cabinet-level Committee for the Marine Transportation System, made up of 18 federal agencies that work together to safeguard marine transportation. NOAA also participates on the Federal Geographic Data Committee. NOAA employs regional Navigation Managers and State Geodetic Advisors who coordinate activities among federal, state and local partners to avoid redundancy.

Evidence: 1. Charter for the Committee on the Marine Transportation System (http://www.cmts.gov//index.htm) - the CMTS coordinates the responsibilities of the Federal Agencies which play a role in the MTS. 2. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FDGC) is an interagency committee that promotes the coordinated development, use, sharing, and dissemination of geospatial data on a national basis. (http://www.fgdc.gov) 3. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-16 Revised, August 19, 2002, "Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities," identifies the (NOAA managed) National Spatial Reference System as the fundamental geodetic control for the United States. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a016/a016_rev.html) See Appendix E of the Circular).

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services are designed as end-to-end, linking research to data collection enhancements for improved products and services, as well as outreach to build public literacy and forge strategic alliances to leverage capabilities. Focus on data management, technology, and human capital development is critical to the success of Navigation Services. Contracting and external partnerships are also important facets of NOAA Navigation Services. For example, private sector surveyors are valuable assets in NOAA's effort to improve the quality of navigation data on nautical charts. NOAA has found that partnering with private industry to conduct hydrographic surveys is effective because they provide significant additional capacity to address the 500,000 square nautical mile survey requirement in navigationally significant areas. To ensure that the most effective investment strategy is identified, implemented and executed NOAA designated Hydrography as a Major Project in NOAA's Requirements Management process. This designation ensures that the Hydrography investment strategy undergoes rigorous analysis, high level review, and approval by senior NOAA management. Navigation Services and the private sector also collaborate through the NOAA/University of New Hampshire Joint Hydrographic Center on the development of new technology and data management processes to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of all parties for hydrographic survey operations and end products. NOAA has also used Congressionally designated projects to accelerate the advancement of vertical geodetic positioning capacity in specific states; these projects are necessary incremental steps toward achieving national coverage and long term positioning performance outcomes. In general, coastal states have been at the forefront of these height modernization efforts because of their concerns for subsidence/uplifting, storm surge/inundation/long term sea level rise, habitat restoration, the need for ensuring safe highway evacuation routes, crustal motion, flood plain mapping, and restoration of coastal habitat.

Evidence: 1. Marine Transportation System Program and Geodesy Program charters, (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/prog_charters.htm) 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. An Assessment of the U.S. Marine Transportation System, September 1999; Department of Transportation Report to Congress (http://www.dot.gov/cmts/library.htm). 4. NOAA Administrative Order 216-108 Requirements Management - this order implements the process for conducting Major Project reviews.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: As the national authority for navigation data to support safe movement of goods and people, NOAA's Navigation Services have clearly defined requirements, products, and users. While NOAA's data is primarily targeted to support commercial shipping and those responsible for safe movement in the Marine Transportation System (Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, pilots, port authorities, ferry operators, fishing vessels) it also serves other purposes. Non-navigation users, such as coastal zone managers, emergency planners, and scientists use NOAA's data to better understand issues such as storm surge, harmful algal blooms, coastal erosion and flood evacuation routes. NOAA focuses much of its activities on the nation's port areas, where the vital flow of economic goods must occur safely and efficiently, as well as on other areas of significant activity or risk. NOAA has many formal procedures to ensure that its funds directly address its purpose and that its products and services reach the intended beneficiaries.

Evidence: 1. NOAA Hydrographic Survey Priorities, 2004 Edition (http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/staff/NHSP.html). This report is based on reviews and assessments of the marine community's charting and hydrographic product needs. It is updated every three years and used as an evaluation mechanism. 2. Geodesy County Scorecard Results (http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=156119392757). This survey is distributed among a large number of county designated geodetic representatives on an annual basis in order to ascertain whether Navigation Services is meeting each county's geodetic infrastructure, models and tools, and capacity building and outreach needs. 3. Geodesy Web User Survey. The website for the geodetic portion of Navigation Services employs a web survey that is randomly distributed to website visitors. The survey results are tabulated and analyzed by an independent company. Since much of Navigation Service's geodetic and positioning products and services are delivered via the Internet, the survey results provide insight into how well Navigation Services is meeting the geodetic and information needs of its customers. 4. Footprint socioeconomic studies that identify user bases for specific Navigation Services products and services are being conducted for several areas, including nautical charts, tides, currents and real time data. A PORTS?? business model has been developed that enables U.S. seaports to assess the return on investment associated with establishing a PORTS??.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services has three long-term goals (performance measures) that focus on the program outcomes of improving safety, efficiency, environmental protection, and enabling accurate positioning. They are: (1) Reducing the backlog of hydrographic surveys in important U.S. navigational waters, an area of approximately one-half million square nautical miles (sq nm). This will mean attaining a survey capacity of 10,000 sq nm per year. (2) Increasing the percentage of U.S. counties rated as fully or substantially enabled with accurate global positioning capacity. NOAA will track local usage of its models and tools, and validate positioning capacity with local experts. NOAA's goal is to enable over 90% of U.S. counties. (3) Increasing access to NOAA's Navigation Services in the top 175 U.S. seaports. The goal is to attain 100% coverage of these seaports, through which over 99% of the nation's cargo passes each year. This measure can be correlated with a number of MTS statistics such as tonnage, value, commercial fishing landings, and others. Directly relating outcomes to this measure is difficult for NOAA to do alone, so Navigation Services is working with other federal agencies to develop and implement high level outcome measures for the safety and efficiency of maritime commerce. Studies undertaken thus far have shown substantial economic benefits from coverage of a port area. For example, a 2005 study for the Tampa Bay PORTS documented reductions in groundings and up to $7 million of direct annual quantifiable economic benefits.

Evidence: 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm) provides an accountability of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) financial and performance results, enabling the President, Congress, and the American people to assess the Department's performance 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. GPRA Information can be found in the FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) (http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf) 4. Past performance is reported in NOAA's annual technical budget and public "Blue Book" documents (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/07bluebook_highlights.html)

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services has set targets for public safety and economic efficiency that are national in scope and recognize the need to keep pace with rapid growth in the Marine Transportation System and other economic sectors that rely on NOAA's navigation and geodetic (global positioning) products and services. All goals are based on the public's need for accurate, timely, reliable information. (1) NOAA is responsible for surveying and charting the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), an area covering over 3.4 million square nautical miles (sq nm). NOAA has classified 500,000 sq nm of this area as "navigationally significant." This area requires the capacity to conduct 10,000 sq nm of hydrographic surveys each year to adequately cycle through the areas at least every 50 years, and to ensure that nautical charts accurately portray navigation depths and obstructions. NOAA continually sets ambitious long-term production targets that rely on partnerships, new technology, and operational efficiency. (2) NOAA is striving to implement accurate global positioning capabilities in almost every U.S. county. This will provide the public with information in a variety of economic sectors, including transportation, agriculture, mining, construction, and others. (3) NOAA is also targeting the top 175 U.S. seaports, through which 99% of vital energy supplies, manufacturing goods, agricultural commodities, and other essential goods must transit to support the nation's economic prosperity.

Evidence: See Performance measures. The Hydrography portion of the program is a NOAA Major Project whose targets are reviewed by NOAA senior management. Performance also reported in: 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm) provides an accountability of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) financial and performance results, enabling the President, Congress, and the American people to assess the Department's performance 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. GPRA Information can be found in the FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf 4. Past performance is reported in NOAA's annual technical budget and public "Blue Book" documents (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/07bluebook_highlights.html)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services provides a suite of information products and services to its customers and uses limited annual performance measures to track progress on their delivery in terms of accuracy, timeliness and reliability. The six annual measures are: (1) Number of Electronic Navigational Charts (ENCs) in continual maintenance; (2) Number of Lithographic Editions Printed; (3) Number of 2,700 locations in tidal current prediction tables with updated predictions; (4) Number of operational nowcast/forecast models for U.S. ports and harbors; 5) Percentage of National Water Level Observation Network stations fully operational; and (6) Percentage of 40 priority ports analyzed for shoreline changes. These measures track and support the Navigation Services' long-term performance measures, which, in turn, demonstrate progress toward the higher level inter-agency measures under development for improving safety, increasing efficiency and protecting the environment. These measures also demonstrate progress in improving the timeliness, accuracy and reliability of NOAA's products and services. Stakeholders in the Marine Transportation System say that this should be NOAA's highest priority.

Evidence: See the Performance Measures Section. NOAA tracks progress on a quarterly and annual basis and submits updated goals during each annual budget formulation cycle. Performance measures are published in the NOAA Strategic Plan and the Department of Commerce Annual Performance Plan and Performance Accountability Report. 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm) provides an accountability of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) financial and performance results, enabling the President, Congress, and the American people to assess the Department's performance 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. GPRA Information can be found in the FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services sets annual performance goals for its performance measures that reflect optimal, but realistic, delivery levels. Performance targets are developed and validated through NOAA's five-year planning process. NOAA uses cost, schedule and performance data to determine performance baselines. Due to NOAA's long history and experience providing Navigation Services, the costs and operational challenges of collecting environmental data, expanding and maintaining observing and spatial reference systems, and building and maintaining Electronic Nautical Charts are well established and can be accurately projected on an annual basis. The annual targets push production limits while providing some allowances for operational issues such as weather conditions, emergency response events, platform (vessel and aircraft) mechanical problems, and other challenges. Because efficiency is anticipated to increase due to technological advances, external partnerships and other improvements to the system, targets are pushed to optimal levels each year.

Evidence: See the Performance Measures Section. NOAA tracks progress on a quarterly and annual basis and submits updated goals during each annual budget formulation cycle. 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm) provides an accountability of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) financial and performance results, enabling the President, Congress, and the American people to assess the Department's performance 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. GPRA Information can be found in the FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The Navigation Services Program engages partners at all levels, via a wide variety of financial and legal instruments, to make progress toward program outcomes. All partners commit to working toward NOAA's program outcomes. For example, the Joint Hydro Center is a NOAA/University of New Hampshire cooperative institute partnership fully vested in the development of improvements to hydrographic surveying technology. The Physical Oceanographic Real Time System (PORTS) program is a cost-shared partnership in which the partners agree to fund the establishment, local operations and maintenance costs of individual PORTS. The Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) network involves contributions from more than 175 organizations, including other Federal agencies, universities, the private sector, and others who share the goal of making accurate global positioning available nationwide. NOAA awards grants to states and universities to build regional Spatial Reference Centers, which work to modernize positioning networks to improve public safety and improve efficiency across many economic sectors. Together with the states, NOAA shares the cost of employing State Geodetic Advisors who coordinate technical expertise and ensure that technology is effectively shared with all interested parties. Furthermore, private-sector contractors are essential partners in all facets of Navigation Services activities. Contractors are used to obtain, manage and process essential environmental observations, and their work significantly complements NOAA's in-house capabilities. For example, contractors report their hydrographic survey production figures to NOAA on a monthly basis which are directly inputted into processes to track progress on the hydrographic long term performance measure. NOAA program managers establish annual goals after interacting with stakeholders, grantees and contractors to determine what is feasible and necessary to support safe, environmentally sound navigation and accurate positioning.

Evidence: All contracts, grant work plans, memorandums of agreement, and other binding partnership mechanisms identify the NOAA strategic goals and outcomes in terms of long term outcomes being pursued as well as short term annual deliverables. Stakeholders are provided an annual opportunity to provide input on NOAA-wide performance and priorities. NOAA has a FACA advisory body, the Hydrographic Services Review Panel (http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/ocs/hsrp/hsrp.htm), which represents a broad cross spectrum of the user community. NOAA also maintains open channels to its constituents via its regional Navigation Managers (http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/nsd/reps.htm), Geodetic State Advisors (http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/ADVISORS/AdvisorsIndex.shtml), and other regional representatives, who liaise with the maritime and positioning community to keep abreast of current/future needs. Key partners are NOAA Stakeholders (the maritime community, including commercial and recreation boaters, pilots associations, etc.; the environmental community, including state and local planners); contractors; and government agencies from whom NOAA receives or provides data: USCG, USACE, Navy, FEMA, and NGA.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Independent evaluations are periodically conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the Navigation Services Program. The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council (NRC) conducts reviews of the program on an as-needed basis. Recent reviews include "A Geospatial Framework for the Coastal Zone: National Needs for Coastal Mapping and Charting," "Charting a Course into the Digital Era: Guidance for NOAA's Nautical Charting Mission," and "Vessel Navigation and Traffic Services for Safe and Efficient Ports and Waterways." Navigation Services, along with NASA and other agencies, is funding a 15-month National Research Council study in 2007 entitled "National Requirements for Precision Geodetic Infrastructure." NOAA uses these reviews to ensure program relevance, identify areas for improvement, and examine program effectiveness. Navigation Services also uses Federal Advisory Committees (FAC) to review and evaluate its programs. The Hydrographic Services Review Panel (HSRP) FAC, established in 2003, meets several times a year to evaluate NOAA's Navigation Services and make recommendations to the NOAA Administrator on issues such as mapping and charting, tides and currents, and geodesy. NOAA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) meets regularly to assess all NOAA Programs, including Navigation Services, and advise the NOAA Administrator on their status. In addition, internal reviews such as Management Control Reviews and NOAA Inspector General Audits routinely provide an objective look at the program's effectiveness, performance and processes. Socioeconomic studies also have been conducted to align program products and services with user groups and identify benefits. Through this type of study, NOAA developed a methodology to establish the economic benefits of existing or potential PORTS (Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems). To ensure that stakeholders are involved in efforts to assess and improve Navigation Services, NOAA continually seeks evaluations from its customers regarding the overall quality of the program. For example, NOAA contracts an independent survey firm to conduct annual surveys of mariners and other customers of navigation services regarding the utility of NOAA nautical charts and its tides and current data. A County Scorecard is distributed yearly to customers of NOAA's geodetic (global positioning) services to rate the scope and quality of the program's infrastructure, models and tools, capacity-building efforts, and overall customer satisfaction. Finally, external reviews conducted by NOAA's SAB have found that Navigation Services is effective in meeting NOAA's mission.

Evidence: 1. NRC studies such as "Charting a Course into the Digital Era: Guidance for NOAA's Nautical Charting Mission" and "Vessel Navigation and Traffic Services for Safe and Efficient Ports and Waterways" (http://www.nationalacademies.org/nrc/) establish a framework that NOAA has followed in modernizing the program. 2. The Hydrographic Services Review Panel Federal Advisory Committee was created in December 2003 (http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/ocs/hsrp/hsrp.htm). 3. The Science Advisory Board is a "Federal Advisory Committee" with responsibility to advise NOAA on long- and short-range strategies for research, education and the application of science to resource management and environmental assessment and prediction" (http://www.sab.noaa.gov/index.html). 4. The program has undergone three recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) audits. Audit Report No. FSD-14998-3-0001/February 2003. http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf) and multiple Management Control Reviews. Virtually all recommendations of these reports were adopted.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: NOAA has made significant progress using a Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBES) to better define how the components of Navigation Services contribute to annual, long-term, and strategic goals. This process helps to guide programmatic activities through an annual review of priorities and budget allocations to ensure that the program is on track to meet its strategic objectives. Annual budget requests include the full cost of attaining performance goals and all programmatic increases include specific performance information. Budget and performance data are integrated, and the impact of funding decisions on performance is apparent. As examples: Funding levels for hydrographic surveys correlate with the number of square nautical miles surveyed. Funding levels for PORTS (Physical Oceanographic Real Time Systems) correlate with the number of seaports with access to real-time oceanographic data. Funding levels for geodesy (global positioning) correlate with the number of U.S. counties enabled with accurate positioning. NOAA provides both current and proposed funding scenarios to illustrate the impact of program budget increases, decreases, and steady budgets.

Evidence: Both NOAA's annual technical budget and public "Blue Book" documents (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/07bluebook_highlights.html) describe the annual performance goals, prior progress, and performance goals for NOAA's Navigation Services. Each of the Navigation Services' programs has performance goals that are tracked to separate funding lines, so that correlation can be made between funding and performance progress.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services are fully engaged in all levels of NOAA's strategic planning processes to address planning deficiencies. Integration across all NOAA strategic goals is pursued through the PPBES (Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System) process. NOAA is currently using measures that provide a good sense of progress being made. They are supported by targeted economic studies that identify user groups and quantify returns on investments. The recently formed Cabinet-level Committee on Marine Transportation System (http://www.cmts.gov//index.htm), which possesses significant data and covers the full range of roles and responsibilities, has formed an action team to address this issue. In addition, the Committee is planning to establish a strategic plan and update the 1999 assessment of the Marine Transportation System. NOAA and its partners face the challenge of restructuring state-based funding so that accurate positioning capacity is built according to a national approach. This will allow more efficient achievement of Navigation Services' long-term outcomes.

Evidence: Footprint socioeconomic studies that identify user bases for specific Navigation Services products and services are being conducted for several areas, including nautical charts, tides, currents and real time data. A PORTS business model has been developed that enables U.S. seaports to assess the return on investment associated with establishing a PORTS. These foundational studies lay the groundwork necessary to provide data critical to supporting outcome based measures.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Navigation Services, like all of NOAA, collect and reports on performance measures on its mapping, charting, surveying, and geodetic activities. Internal quarterly reports are required by office annual operating plans. NOAA's major projects report cost, schedule, and performance data monthly, and require management approval at key decision points prior to moving forward. Annual and long-term performance measures are used to help manage the programs and improve program performance. Navigation Services tracks metrics such as the amount and type of incoming survey data, time spent reviewing data and applying it to charts, the number of charts in continual maintenance mode, and county-level positioning capacity. These metrics help managers gage employee and contractor performance, identify potential production and service shortfalls early on, and adjust personnel assignments based on target requirements. NOAA also actively solicits feedback and recommendations for improving products from key partners and customers. For example, Navigation Services conducts Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) and Height Modernization workshops and forums, and distributes the Geodesy County Scorecard and Nautical Charting Customer Service Survey. Additionally, key partner and customer information is gathered through the State Geodetic Advisor Program and Regional Navigation Managers. This feedback often leads directly to nationwide improvements in mapping, charting, and global positioning. Contracts are handled in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations, which require periodic reports on goals and milestones. Based on these regular reporting requirements, Navigation Services manages program partners' performance and takes corrective action, including redirection of funding or shifting of personnel as necessary. Navigation Services grants are managed by NOAA's grants management process, which requires grantees to submit progress reports on deliverables every six months. NOAA Grants Federal Program Officers analyze these reports and assess supporting evidence if project goals or timelines are not met.

Evidence: 1.Federal Acquisition Regulation, The FAR is the primary regulation for use by all Federal Executive agencies, including NOAA, in their acquisition of supplies and services with appropriated funds.(www.arnet.gov/far/). 2.NOAA Acquisitions Management Division Manual is the manual that addresses all Acquisition as they pertain to NOAA. (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/ad/customer.shtml). 3. Geodesy County Scorecard Results (http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=156119392757). 4. NOAA's Grants Management Division including information on Grants.gov (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/).

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: NOAA managers are held accountable beginning with senior NOAA management. The NOAA Deputy Undersecretary meets with the NOAA Administrator on a quarterly basis to review cost, schedule and performance results for all NOAA programs. NOAA senior managers are evaluated on program results achieved, such as the meeting of GPRA measure goals. This appraisal is the basis for adjustments in pay, the granting of awards, and other personnel actions. NOAA programs within Navigation Services must present quarterly program updates on cost, schedule and performance to the NOAA Executive Panel, which oversees the NOAA planning, programming and budgeting process. The Management and Budget Offices of each NOAA Line Office require monthly reporting on budget plans versus actual expenditures. Furthermore, Navigation Services' projects are reported monthly to NOAA to ensure that project targets and goals are being attained. Most program partners, such as contractors, are held accountable for performance through deliverables specified in their contracts, including requirements on quality and timing. Hydrographic survey contractors must produce data to the specifications cited in the NOAA Hydrographic Specifications and Deliverables Circular. Electronic Nautical Chart contractors also have a set of specifications to which they must adhere. Program partners and contractors are held accountable for achieving program results through the terms of the recipient's award. Grants are adhered to by procedures instituted by the NOAA Grants Office via Grants Online, such as 6-month performance/progress reviews. For the Joint Hydrographic Center partnership with the University of New Hampshire, a NOAA employee is one of the co-directors, which helps ensure recipient accountability. Grant recipients must account for cost, schedule and performance results as part of their reporting requirements for associated quarterly, annual and final performance reports. If contractors and grant recipients do not perform to requirements, penalty clauses are enforced, and they do not receive additional contracts or grants.

Evidence: 1. NOAA's Grants Management Division including information on Grants.gov (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/) 2. Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/downloads/DOC_Standard_Terms_and_Conditions_Jan_2005_Rev_with_Highlights.pdf) 3. Description of the NOAA Executive Panel and Decision Coordination Office (http://www.dco.noaa.gov/about.htm) 4. NOAA Hydrographic Specifications and Deliverables Circular (http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/hsd/specs/specs.htm) 5. NOAA Monthly Performance Reports 6. Federal Acquisition Regulations , the FAR is the primary regulation for use by all Federal Executive agencies, including NOAA, in their acquisition of supplies and services with appropriated funds (www.arnet.gov/far/)

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: Navigation Services funds are spent for the intended purpose as prescribed by NOAA's Business Operations Manual to ensure accurate tracking by NOAA business databases. Funds are generally obligated in a timely manner, according to the schedule defined by the Department of Commerce Grants Manual and Grants Online, and Budget Operating Plans are submitted and tracked on a monthly basis. Navigation Services utilizes the Advanced Acquisition Plan tool to properly plan, coordinate, and execute its major contract acquisitions. The program has personnel dedicated to contract management, and complies with all COTR (contracting official) requirements. The Grants Online process ensures that reporting is uniform and accurate for review by the NOAA Grants Office. The spending of grants is strictly regulated by the NOAA Grants Office, which monitors and approves grant expenditures, compares planned expenditures versus obligations, and analyzes discrepancies. If discrepancies are found, the program manager works with the grant recipient to correct the discrepancy. Execution of the program's operating budget is tracked on a monthly basis, and is subject to quarterly reviews conducted by NOAA management and NOAA budget offices.

Evidence: 1. NOAA's Grants Management Division including information on Grants.gov (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/) 2. Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/downloads/DOC_Standard_Terms_and_Conditions_Jan_2005_Rev_with_Highlights.pdf) 3. NOAA Business Operations Manual; description of matrix management structure (www.ppi.noaa.gov) 4. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf)

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The nautical charting component of NOAA's Navigation Services has undertaken a time productivity measure to track and reduce the average number of days it takes from acquiring hydrographic survey data to delivering navigation products. NOAA's goal is always to put better navigation data into the hands of mariners as fast as possible. To increase cost-effectiveness, the program also measures cartographers' (mapmakers) ability to review ever-increasing amounts of chart data without creating a backlog. Navigation Services also measures efficiency and maximizes cost-effectiveness through federal acquisitions regulations and grants. The program pools resources and collaborates on projects involving multiple entities, both within NOAA or externally. Cartographic contracts are awarded on a competitive basis to ensure cost-effectiveness. NOAA conducts IT and technology reviews and implements improvement mechanisms. The charting program's research and development component supports cartographic and hydrographic processes with new techniques and improved technology, such as methods to more accurately measure depth, shoreline, and bottom characteristics and to locate underwater hazards. Databases have also been developed to track both internal and external performance measures and the program's progress toward meeting them.

Evidence: 1. Federal Acquisition Regulations. The FAR is the primary regulation for use by all Federal Executive agencies, including NOAA, in their acquisition of supplies and services with appropriated funds.(www.arnet.gov/far/) 2. NOAA's Grants Management Division including information on Grants.gov (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/) 3. Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions (http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/downloads/DOC_Standard_Terms_and_Conditions_Jan_2005_Rev_with_Highlights.pdf) 4. NOAA Annual Operating Plan 5. FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf)

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: At the state and local levels, Navigation Services has established partnerships that have resulted in numerous shared resource and management initiatives. As examples: (1) NOAA collaborates with state interests through the State Geodetic Advisor Program, which provides a liaison between NOAA and the host state to guide and assist the state's geodetic and surveying programs. (2) NOAA developed and is implementing the VDatum tool, which allows its federal, state and local partners to transform data collected via different reference systems to a common reference plane. (3) NOAA's Height Modernization Program coordinates federal, state and local resources to establish accurate elevations for all types of global positioning and navigational needs. (4) NOAA works with many related programs at the state, local, private, and academic levels to acquire, perform quality control on, and distribute real-time oceanographic data, and is the only agency to do so on a 24/7 basis. (5) Navigation Services works with hydrographic, modeling, shoreline mapping, geodetic and tides/water levels programs to form an integrated suite of services for mariners and other non-navigation customers. The PORTS (Physical Oceanographic Real-time System) program is a cost-shared partnership in which the partners agree to fund the establishment, local operations and maintenance costs of individual PORTS. At the national level, Navigation Services collaborates and coordinates effectively with the U.S. Coast Guard (responsible for aids to navigation and security) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (channel dredging, locks and dams), and actively coordinates with 18 federal partners through the Cabinet-level Committee on the Marine Transportation System. NOAA also effectively collaborates with related organizations on the Federal Geographic Data Committee, and chairs the Federal Geodetic Control Subcommittee. Navigation Services has an Aviation Systems Standard Agreement, which serves as the basis for NOAA's collaboration with the Federal Aviation Administration and airports across the nation in support of aeronautical charting for safe navigation.

Evidence: 1. FAA/NGS Aviation Systems Standard Agreement describing the scope of services provided by the National Geodetic Survey for the FAA. 2. List of states participating in the Height Modernization Program (http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/heightmod/states.shtml) 3. Joint Hydrographic Center Memorandum of Understanding 4. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-16 Revised, August 19, 2002. This Circular describes the effective and economical use and management of spatial data assets in the digital environment for the benefit of the government and the nation. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a016/a016_rev.html) 5. Committee on the Marine Transportation System (http://www.cmts.gov//index.htm) - the CMTS coordinates the responsibilities of the Federal Agencies which play a role in the MTS.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: Navigation Services has a clean audit opinion and is free of material internal control weaknesses reported by auditors. Further, there are no issues with other non-compliance with laws and regulations related to financial management. NOAA follows prescribed Department of Commerce financial management and accounting policies, procedures, and controls, and uses the Commerce Business Systems (CBS) as its financial management system. CBS is compliant with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act and permits daily review of financial transactions. Navigation Services managers closely track actual vs. planned spending to ensure obligations are made for intended purposes, ensure obligations are timely, and take prompt corrective action, as necessary. Expenditure reports are reviewed quarterly by NOAA and DOC leadership. Furthermore, NOAA has begun to implement recommendations resulting from a multi-year Business Process Reengineering study intended to improve the management and delivery of financial and administrative services. The study team examined NOAA's financial management practices across 8 functional areas (acquisitions, budget, finance, grants, IT, workforce management, facilities and logistics, and environmental compliance, health and safety). The team then researched relevant best practices that could be applied to improve NOAA's budget and financial systems.

Evidence: 1. Commerce Business Systems (CBS) is a financial management system compliant with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act and permits daily review of financial transactions. 2. FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) 3. Annual Operating Reports 4. GAO Business Process Reengineering Assessment Guide provides information on the BPR process (http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/bprag/ai10115.pdf)

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: NOAA conducts Management Control Reviews (MCR) annually to help ensure that program objectives are accomplished and to take meaningful steps in addressing a program's management deficiencies. These reviews ensure that management controls are in place so that programs achieve their intended results, resources are used in ways that are consistent with agency missions, programs and resources are protected from waste, fraud, and mismanagement, and that regulations are followed. Navigation Services has made extensive use of this tool. For example, Navigation Services conducted an MCR examining the annual maintenance life cycle of the National Water Level Observation Network, a major observing system operated by Navigation Services. The review identified and implemented a number of recommendations to improve this activity, including technology development, improvements in information technology, and the development of an outsourcing plan. Navigation Services has also participated in three recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) audits, which led to improved performance measures. NOAA recently implemented a new process for managing mission requirements (NAO-216-108), including a Major Project component. This process ensures that the investment strategy for any NOAA Major Project undergoes rigorous analysis, high level review, and approval by senior NOAA management and that any deficiencies are identified and resolved. Hydrography was designated as a Major Project. However, the program has not yet completed all of the analyses that are required by this process and therefore may have some management deficiencies that require correction. A key consideration will be determining an optimal approach for the utilization of in-house and private sector assets in meeting requirements to adequately survey Navigationally Significant areas.

Evidence: 1. Management Control Review - Annual Project Instructions for Installation and Maintenance of Coastal Water Level Stations (2001) 2. IG Report "Improvements Needed in the Reporting of Performance Measures Related to Promoting Safe Navigation and Sustaining Healthy Coasts", Audit Report No. FSD-14998-3-0001/February 2003. http://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2003/NOAA-FSD-14998-02-2003.pdf 3. NOAA Administrative Order 216-108 Requirements Management - this order implements the process for conducting Major Project reviews

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: Navigation Services has made steady progress to meet its ambitious long-term measures, and is on track for FY 2006. (1) Reduction of the hydrographic survey backlog shows a steady upward trend, although platform mechanical issues, weather, and other factors beyond NOAA's control may impact annual targets. In 2005, NOAA doubled its 2002 production rate. New technology and data management processes contributed to this success. (2) In FY 2005, NOAA instituted a new performance measure to increase the percentage of U.S. counties rated as fully or substantially enabled with accurate global positioning capacity. This measure is exhibiting healthy progress. By 2008, 60% of U.S. counties are targeted to be enabled for accurate local positioning--effectively doubling the nation's capacity from 2005. (3) Over the past 5 years, NOAA has increased services to the top 175 seaports, where they can be most effective, by approximately 12%. NOAA's long-term goals have ambitious targets that strive to meet customer needs as determined through interaction with customers. The data comes from navigation managers, state geodetic advisors, annual surveys of mariners and customers of navigation services, web satisfaction surveys, and forums and workshops conducted throughout the year. Navigation Services has consistently demonstrated progress toward meeting these goals.

Evidence: See Performance Measures. Performance is also reported in: 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. GPRA Information can be found in the FY06 NOAA Annual Performance Plan (http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/06APP/NOAA06APP.pdf) 4. Past performance is reported in NOAA's annual technical budget and public "Blue Book" documents (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/07bluebook_highlights.html)

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Navigation Services consistently achieves its annual performance goals. Navigation Services recently exceeded annual performance goals for updating tidal current predictions, updating shoreline data for priority U.S. port areas, and producing reliable water-level information. New technology and data management processes resulted in the hydrographic backlog target being exceeded in FY 2005. Navigation Services also met its annual goal to implement new nowcast/forecast models that provide timely environmental information up to 30 hours in advance. The only annual performance goal not met in FY2005 was the number of Electronic Navigational Charts (ENCs) produced. Navigation Services decided not to build the remaining 10 ENCs planned that year (out of 100 planned) because they could not be immediately maintained (periodically updated with new data) based on the FY2005 appropriation. NOAA has an internal policy not to build ENCs if they cannot be maintained because the product would quickly become out-of-date. This policy supports safety and prevents false expectations from NOAA's customers.

Evidence: See Performance Measures. Performance is also reported in: 1. Department of Commerce 2005 Performance and Accountability Report http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY05PAR.htm 2. NOAA Strategic Plan (http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATEGIC%20PLAN/Strategic_Plan_2006_FINAL_04282005.pdf) 3. Past performance is reported in NOAA's annual technical budget and public "Blue Book" documents (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/~nbo/07bluebook_highlights.html)

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: NOAA's Navigation Services program is improving its efficiency in terms of collecting, processing and delivering data to mariners. Its nautical charting component has undertaken a time productivity measure to reduce the average number of days it takes from acquiring hydrographic survey data to delivering navigation products. Increased cost-effectiveness is being demonstrated by requiring cartographers and hydrographers to process and review more data in shorter amounts of time. The program has also significantly improved its approach to contracting for hydrographic services since 1997. NOAA now advertises contracts that are national in scope, with the 5 most qualified firms selected for the 2004 award. The 5 contracts give NOAA additional flexibility in assigning firms to specific work areas, and in comparing prices to ensure that costs are reasonable. If one firm becomes unreasonable in its pricing, NOAA has four other firms to which it can award the work. NOAA closely reviews prices and levels of effort during negotiations; in FY2006, the final amount for all task orders awarded with survey backlog funds was significantly less than initial contractor proposals, and NOAA was able to redirect this savings to additional contract survey efforts.

Evidence: See performance measures 1. 2004 Ocean Action Plan (http://ocean.ceq.gov/)

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Navigation Services compares favorably to federal and other programs producing navigation and geodetic data. Both the public and private sectors consider NOAA's Navigation Services to be the national authority on global positioning, tides and current data, hydrographic surveying and nautical charting. NOAA's nautical charts integrate navigation data from a multitude of public and private sources. For example, though NOAA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have different survey missions, NOAA uses USACE data to chart the controlling depths for USACE-maintained navigation channels. Occasionally, the USACE requests NOAA's assistance with high-resolution hydrographic surveys of dredged channels, although this is primarily a USACE responsibility. Other federal agencies engaged in work similar to NOAA's (e.g., survey grade positioning, water level observations) also regularly request assistance from NOAA's technical experts or make use of NOAA's highly accurate reference systems and technology to perform their own work. The recently released USACE-led Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force report cited NOAA as the national authority on geodetic and tidal datum expertise. NOAA and USACE also collaborate on technology development to address the mapping needs of both agencies; shoreline and near-shore imaging with a sensor known as LIDAR is one such area. A number of state government agencies have worked closely with NOAA to establish their water-level observing stations and operate them according to the standards set by NOAA's National Water Level Observation Network. NOAA's standards ensure that the states' data can be used for many non-navigational purposes, including emergency response, habitat restoration, storm-surge warnings, and long-term sea-level trends. The quality of NOAA's products is also illustrated by the GPS satellite orbits that NOAA calculates, which are on par with those computed by 8 federal, academic and international global analysis centers, including NASA, the U.S. Navy and the European Space Agency.

Evidence: 1. NOAA News Report on various offices' response efforts to Hurricane Katrina: http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2500.htm 2. Federal Geodetic Control Subcommittee - led by component of Navigation Services. http://www.fgdc.gov/participation/working-groups-subcommittees/fgcs/index 3. The IGS (International GPS Service) website contains information on Navigation Services' favorable GPS orbit computation comparisons with other agencies (http://www.gfz-potsdam.de/pb1/igsacc/index_igsacc.html) 4. Interagency Performance Evaluation Taskforce (https://ipet.wes.army.mil/) - this post Katrina evaluation report notes the importance the USACE places on NOAA geodetic and tidal datum expertise.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: A number of economic benefit studies, such as the National Height Modernization Study Report to Congress and Estimating Economic Benefits from NOAA PORTS: Tampa Bay Case Study, have been conducted, and more are in progress. The Tampa Bay PORTS study found $2.4 to $4.8 million in direct annual economic benefits from the Tampa Bay PORTS and improvements in safety, such as reductions in groundings. It established a model to evaluate improvements in safety and efficiency and is now being conducted at other PORTS. Navigation Services contracts an independent survey firm to conduct annual surveys of mariners and other users of navigation services regarding the utility of NOAA nautical charts and its tides and current data. The latest 2006 survey shows a 6% increase over 2004 in people very satisfied with NOAA, from 38% to 44%. Of the remaining respondents, 47% fell into the satisfied category. The Hydrographic Services Review Panel Federal Advisory Committee provides feedback on a variety of programmatic issues, such as assessments of core capabilities and contracting policies. The Panel has recognized the effectiveness of the program's activities. For example, the Panel specifically noted that PORTS is an invaluable tool for navigation safety and that NOAA has made good use of contract survey funding. Navigation Services routinely involves stakeholders to evaluate program effectiveness through customer and web satisfaction surveys. For example, a County Scorecard is distributed yearly to customers of NOAA's geodetic (global positioning) services to rate the scope and quality of the program's infrastructure, models and tools, capacity-building efforts, and overall customer satisfaction. The first distribution showed that 78% of respondents were satisfied with NOAA's positioning models and tools.

Evidence: 1. The Hydrographic Services Review Panel Federal Advisory Committee http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/ocs/hsrp/hsrp.htm. 2. National Height Modernization Study Report to Congress 3. Geodesy County Scorecard Results Link (http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=156119392757) 4. Hydrographic Services Review Panel Meeting Minutes. Specifically referencing July 29 2004. Publicly available at http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/ocs/hsrp/archive/minutes/july29mins.pdf: