Performance Measure EN4

Note: Information on this page is subject to change. Applicants should always refer to the performance measure instructions published with the NOFO. Grantees should refer to the performance measure instructions for the grant year in which they were funded.
 
Number of acres of national parks, state parks, city parks, county parks, or other public and tribal lands that are improved.
Goal 1: Environmental Stewardship: At-Risk Ecosystems
 

Definition of Key Terms

National parks, State parks, city parks, county parks: Park/recreation areas that are designated by national, state, city, or county governments (not trails or rivers; see #5)
 
Other public lands: Other publicly owned lands
 
Tribal lands: Same meaning as imparted by the definitions of "Indian Lands" and "Indian Tribes" provided in. SEC. 101. [42 U.S.C. 12511]
 
Improved: Restored to reduce human impact, removed invasive species, established native plants, built riparian buffers, cleared of natural debris (such as fallen trees/limbs) and unnatural debris (such as hazardous fuel and waste). Improvements must go beyond basic trash removal.
 

How to Calculate/ Measure/ Collect Data

Count of number of acres that are improved. Count each acre that is improved only once during the program year. It may be necessary to improve an acre more than once, but it should be counted only once. Only count the acres that are actually improved; do not count the entire park/land area unless your project improves the entire area.
 
Tracking document, survey or acknowledgement of receipt of services from entity that owns or administers the area improved.
 
CNCS encourages applicants and grantees to perform service with the greatest impact versus providing minimal impact to the highest number of acres. The applicant or grantee should identify a certain deficiency or serious environmental risk or describe a compelling problem that is well documented and propose an evidence-based intervention to address the problem and restore the land or habitat to a quality ecosystem. The evidence-base could be a governmental land management improvement plan if it addresses the targeted problem, and is preferably an identified priority in the plan, although it is preferable to also describe how the proposed intervention will return the targeted area to a quality environment and relevant evidence to support the value of the intervention. For example, while conducting seasonal maintenance may allow a grantee to report greater numbers of acres "improved", it is less likely to be selected for funding if it does not address a compelling environmental problem, deficiency, risk or priority (ideally one that has been documented in a governmental land management improvement plan).
 

Enter Keywords to Find Resources:

 

 


Find us on Facebook


 

Have Feedback or Questions?

Email Us

Back to Top