Chesapeake Bay Program Conclusions Drawn From LGAC Needs Assessment Results

Conclusions Drawn From LGAC Needs Assessment Results

In Spring 2001, the Chesapeake Bay's Local Government Advisory Committee administered a
Needs Assessment to local governments regarding their information needs about water resources
and Bay-related issues in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The purpose of ftas Needs Assessment
was to obtain information that would provide guidance on what types of information to provide to
local governments in the watershed.

Of the approximately 1,900 assessments that were administered to local governments within the
watershed, 111 (5.9%) were returned. The composition of the 111 returned assessments include
one (1) from the District of Columbia, 23 from Maryland, 51 from Pennsylvania, and 36 from
Virginia. Not all respondents answered every question.

The results of the six needs assessment questions (see survey) are as follows:

Question 1: On a scale of 1 to 5 (mean average taken), 1 being very important and 5 being

not important, collectively, the most important information/technical assistance worth
having is Stormwater Management (2.01) and the least important being Modeling (3.02).

a. In the District of Columbia eight items, some of which include Stormwater
Management and Watershed Management Planning ranked equally important
(1.00) and Smart Growth, Habitat Restoration/Preservation, and Monitoring
ranked equally somewhat important (3.00).

b. Maryland's respondents, ranked Maps/GIS Analysis most important (1.96) and
Air Pollution being least important (3.30).

c. Pennsylvania's respondents, ranked Stormwater Management most important
(2.05) while Modeling ranked least important (3.13).

d. Virginia's respondents, ranked Watershed Management Planning most important
(1.75) while Air Pollution, Point Source Issues, and Toxics ranked equally least
important (2.94).

The mean average responses indicate that no topic is less than slightly important and there is little
difference between what ranked most important versus what ranked least important. All topics
are seemingly important when looking at the whole numbers, i.e., what is ranked first is only
tenths from what is ranked tenth. The concentration of responses falls between 2 and 3. In
addition, there is little variation of importance between the Land Use topics (2.24) and the
Technical/Scientific topics (2.61).

Question 2: On a scale of 1 to 5 (mean average taken), 1 being widely available and 5
being not available, the most widely available information/technical assistance to local
governments, according to the respondents, is Wetlands Restoration/Preservation (2.14) while
the least available is Living Resources (3.17).

a. In the District of Columbia, it was indicated by the one respondent that Nutrients
and Point Source Issues (1.00) are the most widely available while seven items,
some of which include Land Preservation and Non-point source issues (3.00)
ranked equally least available.

-------
b.	Maryland's respondents, ranked Smart Growth (2.00) as the most widely
available while Air Pollution and Modeling (3.35) as least available.

c.	Pennsylvania's respondents, ranked Stormwater Management (2.15) as the most
widely available while Modeling (2.92) are least available.

d.	Virginia's respondents, ranked Maps/GIS Analysis (2.31) as the most widely
available while Modeling (3.44) as least available.

The mean average responses indicate that no topic is less than slightly important and there is little
difference between what ranked most important versus what ranked least important. All topics
are seemingly important when looking at the whole numbers, i.e., what is ranked first is only
tenths from what is ranked tenth. The concentration of responses falls between 2 and 3.

A gap appears in the some of the areas that ranked of higher importance in question one and the
availability of adequate technical assistance in those areas in question two; these areas are as
follows:

The largest gaps appear in Maps/GIS Analysis and Stormwater Management.

Question 3: Collectively, the respondents in the watershed are most actively involved in
Stormwater Management (80.2%) while they collectively are least involved in Low Impact
Design (23.4%).

a.	The District of Columbia is equally involved in Low Impact Design, Monitoring,
and Stormwater Management (100%). The District of Columbia is not involved
in any other activities. Note only one response.

b.	Maryland's respondents indicated their greatest involvement is in Smart Growth
(86.9%) while they are least involved in Monitoring (26.0%). The top three rated
issues are Smart Growth, Land Preservation, and Stormwater Management.

c.	Pennsylvania's respondents indicated their greatest involvement is in Stormwater
Management (82.4%), while they are least involved in Low Impact Design
(17.6%). The top three rated issues are Stormwater Management, Watershed
Management Planning, and Maps/GIS Analysis.

d.	Virginia's respondents indicated their greatest involvement is in Maps/GIS
Analysis (88.9%) while they are least involved in Low Impact Design (25.0%).
The top three rated issues are Maps/GIS Analysis, Stormwater Management, and
Watershed Management Planning.

•	Watershed Management Planning

•	Maps/GIS Analysis

•	Model Codes/Regulations/Programs

•	Smart Growth

•	Best Management Practices

•	Stormwater Management

01/02

(2.16/2.56)

(2.13/2.87)*

(2.14/2.54)

(2.24/2.59)

(2.26/2.79)

(2.01/2.89)*

2

-------
Pennsylvania and Virginia respondents both ranked Maps/GIS Analysis, Stormwater
Management, and Watershed Management Planning as their top three areas of greatest
involvement. Maryland's top three areas of greatest involvement differ from Pennsylvania and
Virginia, and appears to reflect state government initiatives. In addition, Maryland,

Pennsylvania, and Virginia all ranked Stormwater Management as one of the top three areas of
greatest involvement.

The mean average responses indicate that no topic is less than slightly important and there is little
variation between what ranked most important versus what ranked least important. All topics are
seemingly important when looking at the whole numbers, i.e., what is ranked first is only tenths
from what is ranked tenth. The concentration of responses falls between 2 and 3.

Question 4: The top three formats in which respondents collectively would prefer to receive
information/technical assistance on the subjects listed in question three (see survey) are
Workshop (42.3%), Print Newsletter (37.8%), and Book, Meetings, and Email Newsletters
ranked equally (25.5%). Collectively, they were equally least interested in a Listserv and
Online Training (4.5%).

a. The one District of Columbia respondent stated an interest in Peer Exchange
(100%), Case Study (100%), and in Workshop (100%) formats.

b. Maryland's respondents are most interested in Workshop (52.2%), Print
Newsletter and in Email Newsletter (34.8%) formats. There was no interest in
Listserv and Online Training (0%).

c. Pennsylvania's respondents are most interested in Print Newsletter (54.9%) and
equally interested in CD Rom, Periodic Meetings, and in Workshop (25.5%)
formats. There was no interest in a Listserv.

d. Virginia's respondents are most interested in Workshop (58.3%), Web Site
(41.7%), and in Email Newsletter (36.1%). The least interest lied in Online
Training (2.8%).

Question 5: On a scale of 1 to 5 (mean average taken), 1 being very aware and 5 being not
aware, the level of awareness of the Chesapeake Bay Program and its activities collectively
is 2.46; DC(1.00), MD(2.62), PA(2.13), VA(2.03).

Of the 111 respondents, 105 respondents level of awareness of the Chesapeake Bay Program and
its activities is between 1 and 3. This means that 95% are somewhat to very aware of the Bay
Program.

-------
Question 6: The respondents collectively, would prefer to receive information concerning

the Chesapeake Bay Program activities in Print Newsletter (39.6%) and in Electronic

Newsletter (18.9%) format. Collectively, they least prefer serving on a Chesapeake Bay

Program Committee (0.09%).

a. The one District of Columbia respondent indicated that the Electronic Newsletter
(100%) format was preferred for receiving information concerning Chesapeake
Bay Program activities while all others are not preferred.

b. Maryland's respondents prefer the Print Newsletter (39.1%) format for receiving
information concerning Chesapeake Bay Program activities while there was no
interest in attending an LGAC meeting or Serving on a Chesapeake Bay Program
Committee.

c. Pennsylvania's respondents prefer the Print Newsletter (51.0%) format for
receiving information concerning Chesapeake Bay Program activities while there
was no interest in Serving on a Chesapeake Bay Program Committee.

d. Virginia's respondents prefer Electronic Newsletter (41.7%) for receiving
information concerning Chesapeake Bay Program activities while the least
interest lied in Serving on a Chesapeake Bay Program Committee (2.8%).

Summary

In summary, the Local Government Advisory Committees' Needs Assessment revealed the
following:

1. All subject areas questioned were ranked at least somewhat important and information
available on these areas was ranked somewhat available. Opportunities exist here to
increase awareness and to make more information available.

2. Stormwater Management rates as the most important issue and it is the area that local
governments in the watershed are most actively involved in; keeping in mind that there
was minimal variation in the importance of other issues.

3. A gap appears in the some of the areas that ranked of higher importance in question one
and the availability of adequate technical assistance in those areas in question two. The
largest gaps appear in Maps/GIS Analysis and Stormwater Management.

4. For local governments that responded in the watershed, there is equal interest in Land
Use and Technical/Scientific issues.

5. Overwhelmingly, the local governments of the watershed that responded indicated that
they would like to receive information on the Bay Programs' activities and information/

-------
technical assistance (see subjects in question 4) in either a Workshop or in a Print
Electronic Newsletter format. Print or Electronic Newsletter formats represented 73% of
those formats preferred.

As the role of local governments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed increases, it is important that
needed information is made more readily available to assist them in their efforts to fulfill the
commitments of the C2K Agreement. The LGAC Needs Assessment is intended to be a guide to
the Bay Program for what the local governments of the watershed need in terms of technical
assistance.

5

-------