Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings

Authors: Prepared for: Barry Goodstadt, PhD. United States Gia Meli National Park Service Sam Mathur Washington D.C.

21515 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling VA 20166

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 5

Section 1: Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Report 11 1.2 Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor 12 1.3 Evaluation Methodology 14

Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor 2.1 Introduction and History of the Erie Canal 19 2.2 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor and its Partners 23 2.3 Strength and Sustainability of Erie Canalway Partnerships 29 2.4 Chronology of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor 34

Section 3: ECNHC Fulfillment of the Authorizing Legislation and Management Plan 3.1 Goals and Objectives of ECNHC 37 3.2 Grants 43 3.3 Preservation 51 3.4 Tourism Development 58 3.5 Education 63 3.6 Marketing & Outreach 66 3.7 ECNHC Partners 69

Section 4: Public/Private Investments in ECNHC and their Impact 4.1 Investments in ECNHC Activities 72 4.2 Use of Financial Resources 77 4.3 Impact of Investments 80

Section 5: ECNHC Sustainabilitye Report 85 5.1 Defining Sustainability 85 5.2 Legislative Mandate of the ECNHC 85 5.3 Partnerships 91 5.4 Financial Sustainability 92

Appendix 1 95 Appendix 2 98 Appendix 3 109 Appendix 4 116 Appendix 5 119

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings

Executive Summary

Executive Summary Purpose of the Report

This report was prepared on behalf of the Na- • The canals and adjacent communities are a tional Park Service (NPS) as part of the evalua- nationally significant resource of historic and tion of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Cor- recreational value ridor (ECNHC). In overall terms, the goals of this • The Erie Canalway was instrumental in es- report are to evaluate the following questions: tablishing strong political ties between New England, New York and the old Northwest 1. Based on its authorizing legislation and gen- and facilitated the flow of ideas and people eral management plan, has the Erie Canalway ensuring that social reforms like the aboli- National Heritage Corridor achieved its pro- tion of slavery and women’s suffrage spread posed accomplishments? across upstate New York 2. What have been the impacts of investments • The construction of the Erie Canalway was made by Federal, State, Tribal and local an unrivaled engineering feat at the time government and private entities in the Erie and American canals were subsequently Canalway National Heritage Corridor? modeled on New York’s canals 3. How does Erie Canalway management struc- • At the time of construction, the Erie Canalway ture, partnership relationships, and current was the largest public works project under- funding contribute to its sustainability? taken by a state • The Erie Canalway played a significant role in At present there are 49 National Heritage Areas making New York City into a major East Coast that have been designated by Congress. As each port and New York State into a key center for of these NHAs reaches the end of funding autho- commerce, industry and finance rization period, NPS conducts an evaluation of • The Erie Canalway demonstrated the the program and reports the results to Congress. strength of American ingenuity, solidified the national identify and is memorialized in To ensure unbiased evaluations, NPS contracts legend, song and art with an independent firm to conduct the evalu- • There is a national interest in the preserva- ation and prepare the evaluation report. This in- tion and interpretation of the Erie Canalway’s dependently produced report was prepared by engineering planning and execution, its his- ARCBridge Consulting & Training and serves to tory and culture, its scenic beauty, and its document the methodology used and the find- recreational opportunities. ings that have emerged from the analysis. The Congressional legislation authorizing the Erie Evaluation Methodology Canalway National Heritage Corridor in October, 2000 pointed to several distinct themes which In order to address the three questions described served as the basis for the designation. above, ARCBridge used a structured evaluation methodology that was previously used in the • The year 2000 marked the 175th Anni- evaluation of other NHAs. This methodology in- versary of New York’s opening of the Erie volves a three-phased process which includes: Canalway for commerce, transportation and recreational purposes which established a 1. Tailoring of the evaluation design to the Erie network which made New York, the “Empire Canalway Legislation and Management Plan State”

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 5 Executive Summary

2. Gathering and performing an initial view of • Sites and buildings where Erie Canalway has results been involved in or sponsored programmatic 3. Analyzing the data and documenting findings efforts (such as the Ticket to Ride Program visits to Chittenango Landing. Cohoes Falls The process of tailoring the evaluation required Park, Peebles Island, Saratoga National His- working with Erie Canalway staff to assemble toric Park) and review foundational documents. Such doc- • Members of the Erie Canalway Heritage uments consisted of the enabling legislation Fund Board of Directors and planning documents (such as management • Members of the Erie Canalway Canal Com- plans, strategic plans, marketing and communi- mission cation plans). Gathering of these documents be- • Consumer intercept interviews at several gan in conjunction with a “meet and greet” ses- sites along the canal sion held at the beginning of the project and was • Interviews with leaders in communities that subsequently continued through conference focused economic development around the calls and follow-up discussions over the course canal of the ensuing months. The analysis of this material also involved exam- During the “meet and greet” session, the ARC- ination of financial records, partnership records, Bridge team met with Erie Canalway staff and and grants management records as well as a re- with members of the Board of Directors and view of studies undertaken by other organiza- visited several sites and communities to under- tions. A significant portion of the analysis was stand the work and process used in implement- focused on finances of the organization including the Erie Canalway program. The “meet and ing fund-raising, non-federal matching funds, ex- greet” session was also an occasion where the penditures, and the overall economic impact of ARCBridge team held a discussion with Erie the program (as described in the economic anal- Canalway staff to identify program inputs, pro- ysis completed by the Tripp Umbach consulting gram participants, and various types of program group in 2015). out-puts/impacts. This discussion led to the development of a logic model which described the Key Findings process by which the program staff believed that the program was able to generate impact in the Question 1. Based on its authorizing legisla- community. tion and general management plan, has Erie Canalway achieved its proposed accomplish- This early project work was followed by a lat- ments? er visit to carry out further data collection and interviewing. The interviewing included discus- Congressional legislation specified that the aim sions with: of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor was to preserve and to interpret the cultural and • Individuals who managed partner organiza- historical resources of the New York State Canal tions (e.g., various community, civic organi- systems and the towns adjacent to the Canal as zations, state organization and institutions key elements encompassing commerce, trans- such as the Erie Canal Corporation) portation and recreational activities of residents and visitors. In addition, the Canalway has had a critical role in the history of the nation of the state of New York in its role as a center of trade and finance.

6 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Executive Summary

Chapter 3 of this Report and Table E.1 out- Table E-1 makes it evident that the activities lines the overall scope of the mission and Erie of Erie Canalway have been clearly focused on Canalway activities addressed to Evaluation the purposes of the legislation and the goals Question 1 based upon the legislation and the outlined in the Erie Canalway management Erie Canalway Management Plan. plan.

Table E.1: Legislation, Goals, and Activities Purposes Specified in Goals Outlined in ECNHC Pres- Erie Canalway Activities Legislation ervation and Management Plan • To provide for and • The Corridor’s historic and • Preserve Corridor Resources through assist in the identifi- distinctive sense of place will documentation and mapping and pro- cation, preservation, be widely expressed viding access through websites promotion, mainte- • The Corridor’s natural • Preserve historic resources by iden- nance of the historical, resources will reflect the tifying candidates for National Reg- natural, cultural, sce- highest standards of environ- ister and National Historic Landmark nic and recreational ment quality nominations resources of the Erie • The Corridor’s recreation op- • Sponsorships of bike tours throughout Canalway portunities will achieve maxi- the Corridor mum scope and diversity, in • Advocate and leverage federal, state, harmony with the protection and local support for Canalway Trail of heritage resources completion in collaboration with the NYS Canal Corporation and Parks and Trails New York • To promote and pro- • The Corridor’s current and • Erie Canalway Heritage Award of Ex- vide access to the Erie future generations of residents cellence for best practices in heritage Canalway’s historical, and visitors will value and development. ECNHC publishes case natural, scenic, cultur- support preservation of its studies and lessons learned from these al, and recreational heritage projects on the web to serve as models. resources • Provide a framework • The Corridor’s economic • Sustain the organization by building up to assist the State growth and heritage devel- both established and new partnership of New York and its opment will be balanced and relationships that carry on the work local governments in self-sustaining of the ECNHC and result in realized the development of financial returns through public/private integrated cultural, partnerships historical, recreational, • A fundraising professional is hired and economic programs. has created a long range sustainability plan. • To authorize Federal • The National Heritage Corridor • The legislatively authorized Commission financial and technical will serve as an “umbrella” to stewards the management plan’s im- assistance to the Com- unite and coordinate existing plementation, and its partners – federal mission to serve these federal, state, and local plans and state agencies, individual commu- purposes and multiple points of view, nities, nonprofit and private organiza- focusing on partnerships that tions – in formulating policies and taking cross jurisdictional boundaries action to achieve the National Heritage and build on mutual interests. Corridor’s full potential

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 7 Executive Summary

Question 2. What have been the impacts of Federal Highway Administration in the U.S. De- investments made by Federal, State, and local partment of Transportation. government and private entities within the Cor- ridor? Matching funds for the program amounted to $23.7M. These funds came from New York State Chapter 2 (Overview of the Erie Canalway Na- as well as a variety of private sources. From a tional Heritage Corridor) provides a high level leverage standpoint, the total leverage over the view of the Erie Canalway and the various small- period from FY2002 to FY2017 was $27.8M. This er canals that make up the overall canal system. translates to $2.81 in leverage for every dollar This chapter also provides a history of the canal of Heritage Program funds that was received and some of the characteristics that describe the by ECNHC. Chapter 4 also describes how Erie canal communities in 2019. Chapter 2 focuses Canalway spent its funds over the course of the on a number of characteristics associated with period between FY2002 and FY2017. The total the 23 counties in New York that comprise the expenditure was $37.49M. Corridor. For example, an analysis of the population of the 23 counties showed that over a In terms of overall investments, ECNHC is clearly 17-year period the population has experienced in line with the legislative mandate. As part of a slight decline, while the business activity in the legislation, the Heritage Corridor had a re- these counties has grown in terms of the num- quirement to match all NR&P funds 50/50 and ber of establishments, business sales, annual this has been exceeded. . Based upon the ARC- payroll and number employed. Bridge analysis, it would appear that the minimum amount Erie Canalway would have had to Chapter 3 provides evidence that many of the provide was a match of $9.74 M; instead ECNHC projects initially funded by ECNHC are still in op- had a match of $23.7M. In effect, the Canalway eration, in spite of the fact that many of these ef- has matched 68% of the funds used in the Corri- forts were a single activity and were only funded dor’s programs, while the National Park Service for a limited period of time. Thus, many of the Heritage Partnership Program funding contribut- projects have become self-sustaining. ed to 29% of the program’s expenditures. Clear- ly, the Heritage Corridor has not only matched Chapter 4 (Impact of Public/Private Investments the NPS funds as required in the law but has also on Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor) leveraged a significant amount of funds through documents the sources of investments in the their various partnership projects. National Heritage Area prior to national heritage designation. This data revealed that the area Question 3. How does the Erie Canalway- Na now constituted as the Erie Canalway National tional Heritage Corridor’s management struc- Heritage Corridor received approximately $37.7 ture, partnership relationships and current M between FY2002 and FY2017. This included funding contribute to its sustainability? Heritage Program funds from the National Park Service ($9.74 M) as well as other funds ($4.5M) To address this question, ARCBridge examined from the National Park Service to cover NPS em- how Federal and non-Federal funds were ex- ployees detailed to ECNHC and funds from the pended to support the NHA program initiatives. NPS Service-wide Combined Call for specific These data indicate that Erie Canalway has ex- projects which amounted to $465,722. ceeded its match requirements by approximately $14M by leveraging $23.7M in matching funds Funding also came from non-NPS federal agen- in exchange for a National Park Service Heri- cies ($607,000) including the Department of tage Partnership Program fund contribution of Housing and Urban Development as well as the $9.74M.

8 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Executive Summary

Overall, programming activities undertaken by ARCBridge analysis indicates that Erie Canalway Erie Canalway consumed $28.2 M or 75.3% of has a number of key elements that contribute total expenditures while management/opera- to its long-term capability for sustaining its fi- tional expenses constituted $9.3M or 24.7% of nancial position: total expenditures. • Erie Canalway Heritage Fund (the non-profit Within the programming expenditures 48% arm of the organization) has a strong board went to promoting the Canalway, 32% was for of directors with backgrounds in finance Preser-vation and 20% was used for Fostering and fundraising, marketing and cultural Vibrant Communities. tourism, and city revitalization • The board has representation from leaders in the local municipalities along the canal • The board has been intimately involved in the management and strategic direction of Chart E.1: Program Expenditure by Area Erie Canalway • The organization has a staff that is well suited to the various tasks required for moving the organization forward • The balance sheet of the organization is well-managed and currently includes a retained earnings balance of nearly $365,000. • In terms of Erie Canalway’s history of non-Federal matching funds; the required match for the organization was to provide at least a 100% match of the funds received through the NPS heritage budget. The organization has over performed its match requirements by nearly $14M which indicates a strong capability of fundraising from The impact of these investments have been sig- state, private and foundation sources nificant and are discussed in detail in Section 3 • Erie Canalway is deeply embedded in the of this report. community with 422 partner organizations and 368 individual partners that have col- A key issue in this analysis revolves around the laborated with the organization between definition of “sustainability.” To guide this as- 2001 and 2017. sessment, ARCBridge used the definition that was developed by NPS which is as follows: Structure of this Report

“…the National Heritage Area coordinating en- This report is organized into five section: tity’s continuing ability to work collaboratively and reciprocally with federal, state, community, • Section 1 describes the underlying purpose and private partners through changing circum- of the evaluation and methodology used stances to meet its mission for resource conser- • Section 2 provides an overview and descrip- vation and stewardship, interpretation, education of the Erie Canalway including charac- tion, recreation and economic development of teristics of the population, the area’s history, nationally significant resources.” current economic conditions, and changing population. This section also describes Erie

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 9 Executive Summary

Canalway’s organizational structure, autho- • Section 4 analyzes Erie Canalway’s financ- rizing legislation, board membership and es. That is, in line with evaluation ques- staffing, as well as the organization’s relation #2, what are the impacts of Federal/ tionship with its partners in the community non-Federal funds? • Section 3 describes in detail Erie Canalway’s • Section 5 explores the third and final ques- various programs and how these relate to tion in the evaluation—how does Erie the initial question in the evaluation—has Canalway’s management structure, current Erie Canalway achieved its proposed accom- funding and partnerships contribute to the plishments? program’s sustainability?

10 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 1: Introduction

Section 1:of the Report Introduction

National Heritage Areas (NHAs) are places that -nated National Heritage Area. Erie Canalway are established by the U.S. Congress to stimulate National Heritage Corridor is required to provide historic preservation, interpretation, conserva- a 100% non-federal match for Heritage Partner- tion, outdoor recreation and economic devel- ship Program funds. opment of specific areas of the country. These areas represent blends of natural, cultural or The management plan typically describes the historic resources and are aimed at describing organizational structure, key stakeholders in a unique element of history and development the NHA operation as well as the strategies to of the United States. The Illinois and Michigan be used for conservation, preservation, and in- Canal National Heritage Area, designated in terpretation as well as the funding and manage- 1984, has the distinctions of being the first Na- ment of the program. tional Heritage Area designated by Congress and signed into law by President Reagan. At present, 1.1 Purpose of this Report there are 49 NHAs authorized by Federal law. This report was prepared by ARCBridge Consult- NHAs are managed by states or municipal au- ing and Training Inc., on behalf of the Nation- thorities, local not-for-profit institutions, univer- al Park Service as part of the evaluation of the sities or federal commissions. The National Park Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. In its Service within the Department of the Interior advisory capacity, the National Park Service has provides advisory-type services and some level the responsibility for reporting to Congress on of annual financial support (between $150,000 evaluations of the performance of the various and $710,000 per NHA) from Heritage Partner- National Heritage Areas. This report provides ship Program funding. documentation of the methods and findings of the evaluation that was focused on assessing the Each of the NHA coordinating entities is tasked Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. in the law with developing its own management plan that describes the key goals and objectives The evaluation is meant to address three funda- set forth by the local coordinating organization. mental questions: These goals and objectives are specified in the enabling Congressional legislation that sets forth 1. Based on its authorizing legislation and gen- the specific goals of each National Heritage Area. eral management plan, has the Erie Canalway The coordinating entity or the managing entity National Heritage Corridor achieved its pro- generally creates an advisory or governing Board posed accomplishments? of Directors usually formed by representatives 2. What have been the impacts of investments from diverse segments within the local commu- made by Federal, State, Tribal and local gov- nity involving businesses, elected government ernment, and private entities in the Erie officials, educational institutions, not-for-profit Canalway Corridor? entities and public institutions. As part of its mis- 3. How does Erie Canalway National Heritage sion, the coordinating entity has the responsibil- Corridor management structure, partnership ity for managing the federal funds and obtaining relationships, and current funding contrib- matching funds from other sources that are ob- ute to its sustainability? tained to implement the management plan and to execute the NHA program within the desig-

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 11 Section 1: Introduction

1.2 Overview of the Erie Canalway Na- These include Erie Canal East, Erie Canal West, tional Heritage Corridor Erie Canal Central, the Cayuga-Seneca Canal, the Champaign Canal and the Oswego Canal (collec- Vision: “The Erie Canalway National Heritage tively, the “Canal”). Corridor, working through a wide range of partnerships, is preserving and interpreting our na- Each of these regions consists of numerous sites tion’s past, providing world class recreational of interest for both residents and visitors. These and education opportunities, fostering economic typically include museums, parks, historic sites revitalization, improving quality of life in Corri- and homes, recreational trails for hiking, biking dor communities, and guiding the reemergence and cross-country skiing as well as various his- of the Erie Canalway as a 21st century ‘River of toric canal features such as canal locks. The Ca- Commerce and Culture’.” nal provides access to the water for paddling, rowing and various canal rides and excursions. The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor In addition, there are retail areas for shopping encompasses territory that includes 23 counties in the towns adjacent to the canal. Detailed de- in upstate New York with a population of more scriptions of the sites in each region and nearby than 4.37 million residents. The canal has 524 state parks can be found on the Erie Canalway miles of navigable waterways and includes four website: major cities (Albany, Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo). In addition to these major cities, there “This nationally significant landscape and water- are an additional 230 municipalities in the coun- way contains an abundance of natural, historic, ties adjacent to the canal waterways. As shown and cultural wealth, and richly deserves our best in the map found in Figure 1.1, the large geo- efforts for the benefit of all our citizens.” graphic area surrounding the canal includes six major regions associated with different canal – Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary of the Interior, areas. 6/26/06

Fig 1.1: Map of six regions within the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Oswego Canal Champlain Canal Erie Canal West Cayuga-Seneca Erie Canal Central Erie Canal East (Erie Canal to Lake (Waterford to (Lyons to Buffalo) Canal (Oneida to Clyde) (Albany to Rome) Ontario) Whitehall)

12 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 1: Introduction

Table 1.1: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor was designated as a Na- tional Heritage Area in October, 2000, through Public Law 106-554, the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act of 2000. The legislation recognizes that the areas adjacent to the historic and current align- Designation ments of the New York State Canal System represents an important element of the American heritage for commerce, transportation and recreational purposes. The Erie Canal established the network which made New York the ”Empire State’’ and the Nation’s premier commercial and financial center. The area of upstate New York surrounding the Canal stretching from Al- Location bany to Buffalo with more than 230 municipalities along the waterway. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor encompasses 23 counties Area Encompassed adjacent to the Canal. As set forth in the Erie Canalway’s Preservation and Management plan, the goals of the Canalway include: • The Corridor’s historic and distinctive sense of place will be widely expressed and consistently protected • The Corridor’s natural resources will reflect the highest standards of environmental quality • The Corridor’s recreational opportunities will achieve maxi- Goals mum scope and diversity, in harmony with the protection of heritage resources • The Corridor’s current and future generations of residents and visitors will value and support preservation of its heritage • The Corridor’s economic growth and heritage development will be balanced and self-sustaining • The Corridor will be a “must-do” travel experience for regional, national and international visitors Operations and staff are managed by a Federal Commission and the non-profit Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. The Commission may have Organizational Structure up to 27 members. The nonprofit Board of Directors may have up to 15 members. The four Officers on the Commission also serve as ex-officio members on the non-profit Board of Directors. There are currently 120 formal partners and 670 informal partners working with Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. Partners con- Partners sist of several national parks, corporations, state government agencies, municipalities, museums and non-profit community organizations. The 790 partners consist of 422 organizations and 368 individuals.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 13 Section 1: Introduction

The number of formal and informal partners • Formal and informal partners to be in- shown here were developed using a database of cluded in a partner database partners developed specifically for this project • Financial data on income, grants, and ex- by ARCBridge. This database has been shared penditures with Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor • Annual reports of the managing entity and has encompassed all of the program part- • Details regarding organizational struc- ners identified by Erie Canalway National Heri- ture for the staff, the Erie Canalway Her- tage Corridor since the period prior to NHA des- itage Fund, the Board of Directors, and ignation. the Corridor Commission • Research studies and economic analy- 1.3 Evaluation Methodology ses that had been carried out regarding tourism and economic development The evaluation methodology employed in this along the Erie Canalway project follows the National Heritage Area Eval- uation Guide established by the National Park 2. Early in the project the ARCBridge evaluation Service in 2012 and updated in 2016. team visited Erie Canalway National Heri- tage Corridor for a “meet and greet” session The Guide provides details regarding a three- during June 5-6, 2018. During the visit, the phase evaluation process. In this case the pro- ARCBridge team carried out the following cess involved 1) tailoring the evaluation design activities: to the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, 2) collecting data and an initial review of results • Met Erie Canalway National Heritage and 3) analyzing data and documenting results. Corridor staff and several members of the Corridor Commission and the Board 1.3.1 Tailoring the Evaluation to the Erie of Directors Canalway National Heritage Corridor • Visited several sites (Cohoes Falls Park, Peebles Island, Schoharie Crossing State As part of tailoring the evaluation design, ARC- Historic Site, Saratoga National Historic Bridge Consulting and Training undertook a se- Park) within the National Heritage Area ries of steps including the following: to provide a better understanding of the NHA program. 1. An ARCBridge evaluation team worked with • Held preliminary discussions with key Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor staff to assemble foundational documents staff to provide the basis for drafting a from the National Heritage Area to review logic model to describe the program, its and develop such items as: operations, and its impacts. This discussion focused on identifying program in- • Enabling Congressional legislation puts, program participants, and various • Planning documents such as the NPS types of program outputs and impacts. Special Resource Study of the New York State Canal System (prior to designation) 1.3.2 Site Introduction and Background Re- • The Preservation and Management Plan search (post-designation) • Resource Development Plan for ECNHC As a follow-up to the logic model discussion 2012-2017 during the “meet and greet” visit, the ARCBridge • ECNHC 2011-2016 Strategic Plan team collaborated with Erie Canalway National

14 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 1: Introduction

Heritage Corridor staff to develop a preliminary understand the operations and impact of ECNHC draft of the logic model as well as data collection programs, board governance, and partner views plans for a follow-up data collection visit that of program development. took place in August, 2018. Following the visit, the team carried out a finan- As part of background research, the ARCBridge cial review and held discussions with the Direc- team carried out a series of additional steps pri- tor of Financial Administration to examine the or to returning to the Erie Canalway for the data various investments that the program has made collection visit. This work included requests for and to link those investments with program out- information such as: comes.

• National Park Service funding and expen- In order to assess the impact of the ECNHC pro- ditures, non-Federal matching funds from gram on local communities, the ARCBridge team FY2001 to FY2017 conducted three mini-case studies in the towns • Lists of grants made by Erie Canalway Heri- of Fairport, Brockport and Lockport, New York. tage Fund These mini-case studies involved telephone in- • Data on all formal and informal partners who terviews with the mayor of one town and the have worked with Erie Canalway National Economic Development Directors of two towns Heritage Corridor, the roles they played in to develop a picture of how the presence of the NHA programs, the year they became en- Erie Canal and the ECNHC have influenced the gaged with the program and whether or economic health of the community. These three not they had a formal agreement with Erie towns were selected because they have each Canalway National Heritage Corridor embraced the Erie Canal as an important part of their town’s life and culture and have experi- Part of the preparation for the data collection enced positive economic effects. The aim of the visit involved conferring with Erie Canalway Na- interviews was to better understand how these tional Heritage Corridor program staff to work positive economic benefits came about. out the logistics and timetable for the follow-up data collection site visit. 1.3.3 Stakeholder Interviews

The ARCBridge Team undertook data collection During the site visit, the ARCBridge team carried site visits to ECNHC during the week of August out interviews with the following specific indi- 13th through August 16th with additional fol- viduals and organizations: low-up telephone interviews the following week. During the data collection process, the team con- Current Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- ducted interviews with a series of key stakehold- dor Staff Interviews: ers who had involvement with Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. Interviews includ- • Bob Radliff, Executive Director ed the current Erie Canalway National Heritage • Andy Kitzmann, Assistant Director Corridor Executive Director and staff members, • Jean Mackay, Director of Communications members of the Erie Canalway National Heritage • Rosemary Button, Director of Financial Ad- Fund Board of Directors and the Corridor Com- ministration mission. We also conducted interviews with key • Duncan Hay, Historian,NPS Employee partners of the Erie Canalway National Heritage • Diane Jennings, Director of Administrative Corridor and officials from municipalities along Services the canal. The aim of these interviews was to

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 15 Section 1: Introduction

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Com- • Syracuse City School District—Nick Stamou- missioners: lacatos • Erie Canal Museum—Natalie Stetson • Pieter Smeenk, Chair • New York State Office of Parks, Recreation • Harry Sicherman, Vice-Chair and Historic Preservation—Michael Lynch • Mary Liz Stewart • Rochester Accessible Adventures—Anita • Paul Webster O’Brien • Kal Wysokowski • Erie Canal Boat Company—Peter Abele • John McGlone • Corn Hill Navigation—L.J. Fisher • Brian Stratton (also Director of the New York • Village of Brockport—Bill Andrews (Deputy State Canal Corporation) Mayor) • Rochester Museum & Science Center—Cal- Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. Board of Di- vin Uzelmeier rectors: • Spencerport Canal Depot – Simon Devenish • Lockport Locks Heritage District – David Kin- • Paul Neureuter, Chair yon • Kim Seager, Vice Chair • Brad Packard, Treasurer Interviews with partner organizations provided • Judy McKinney Cherry, Secretary perspectives on the importance of ECNHC and • Tom Blanchard, Past Chair the role that the Erie Canalway National Heri- tage Corridor plays in the community. These interviews with the staff, with Commis- sion members and with Board of Directors pro- Consumer Intercept Interviews: vide perspectives on the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor programmatic directions, their A series of consumer intercepts were carried long-term sustainability efforts, and how these out in Buffalo by the harbor, in Rochester at have evolved over time. the Rochester Museum & Science Center, in the town of Fairport by the canal, in the Town of Interviews with Partner Organizations Pittsford onboard the vessel Sam Patch, and in Lockport on a vessel managed by Lockport Locks Over the course of on-site visits and subsequent & Erie Canal Cruises. The interviews addressed telephone interviews, the ARCBridge team spoke the following issues: with the following organizations and individuals: • How each individual learned about the pro- • New York State Canal Corporation --Brian gram/site and what they had known about Stratton (Executive Director), Sharon Leigh- the site prior to their visit, including the ton (Director of Community Relations), John sources of information they used (e.g. sig- Callaghan (Deputy Executive Director) nage, brochures, website) • National Park Service --Frank Barrows - (for • What they learned from the site mer Superintendent, Fort Stanwix) • Other activities they engaged in during their • Chittenango Landing—Christine O’Neil (For- visit (e.g. shopping, eating at restaurants, mer Executive Director), Theresa Batty (Co- staying in hotels) ordinator) • Likelihood of telling others about their ex- • Madison County Planning --Jamie Kowalczk perience and encouraging others to visit the • RED Group/Syracuse University—Dr. Scott sites Shablak

16 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 1: Introduction

Mini-case studies to understand the Impact of and the leverage that was achieved as a result the Erie Canalway on Economic Activity in Small of obtaining National Park Service Heritage Pro- Municipalities: gram funds.

To better understand how the Erie Canalway has The results of these analyses are detailed in sub- had an economic impact on towns along the ca- sequent sections of this report as follows: nal, ARCBridge conducted interviews in three communities. These included: Section 2--Overview of ECNHC

• Brockport—Margaret Blackman (Mayor) This section describes key characteristics of the • Fairport—Martha Malone (Executive Direc- Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, its tor, Fairport Office of Community + Econom- history, its current organizational structure and ic Development) and staffing, and its track record in developing part- • Lockport—Chuck Bell (former Director of ners within the community. Economic Development for the City of Lock- port). “…utilize these assets to stimulate economic development and improve the quality of life for 1.3.4 Data Analysis the communities that surround the Canalway.” – New York State Governor George E. Pataki, In the final stage of the work, the ARCBridge 3/21/06 team carried out analyses of results focused on the three key questions outlined below: Section 3—Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Fulfillment of the Authorizing Legisla- 1. Has Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- tion and Management Plan dor achieved its proposed accomplishments as outlined in their management plans? This section describes various program - activ 2. What are the impacts of investments in the ities that fulfill the mandate of the authorizing Erie Canalway area? legislation and the management plan and how 3. How does the Erie Canalway National Heri- program activities fit into the larger scheme of tage Corridor’s management structure, part- community impact (via the logic model). ner relationships, and current funding contribute to its sustainability? Section 4--Public/Private Investments in the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor and As part of the analysis, the team assembled their Impact detailed descriptions of the various programs and projects carried out by Erie Canalway Na- In this section, ARCBridge analyzed the sources tional Heritage Corridor and assessed programs of Federal and non-Federal matching funds, the in terms of their sustainability or ability to be level of match that was achieved and the extent self-sustaining over a period of time. of financial leverage provided by Heritage Pro- gram funds made available by the National Park From a financial analysis perspective, the team Service. The analysis also looked at qualitative examined the various sources of income for the impact measures based upon mini-case study program both prior to and since the designation interviews with key officials in three small towns of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor along the Erie Canal. The analysis also includ- Area in October, 2000. The analysis also included discussion of the Tripp Umbach report which ed examination of the level of matching funds documented an input-output model.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 17 Section 1: Introduction

Section 5—Erie Canalway National Heritage External Evaluator Corridor Sustainability ARCBridge Consulting & Training served in the This section of the report describes the concept role of the independent, external evaluator. of sustainability and examines the various ele- ARCBridge is a small, minority owned consult- ments of sustainability that are present within ing firm with over 25 years of experience work- the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor ing on federal government projects. ARCBridge Area of operation. developed the logic model, collaborated with Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor staff 1.3.5 Evaluation Limitations on various aspects of data collection, analyzed the data, and prepared this report. ARCBridge has taken the utmost care and dil- igence to ensure the evaluation methodology National Park Service (NPS) properly addresses the three questions set forth in this report NHA evaluations. While The National Park Service staff provided un- ARCBridge has followed the NPS Evaluation derlying methodology and funding, facilitated guidance, it is understood that every NHA has a contacts with Erie Canalway National Heritage completely unique set of parameters. Thus, ev- Corridor and provided counsel throughout the ery effort has been made to capture the specif- project. NPS staff also provided useful context ic story of the Erie Canalway National Heritage regarding the history of the program. Corridor, and variances have been discussed throughout the process during NPS monthly Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor conference calls. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor staff In this region, the methodology employed was and members of the Board of Directors facili- not always able to directly measure the impact tated the evaluation by providing access to the of specific Erie Canalway National Heritage necessary data and coordinated meetings with Corridor programs on individuals and commu- various individuals and partners who are en- nities. Reasons included the fact that any Erie gaged with the National Heritage Area. Canalway National Heritage Corridor program activity was conducted in partnership with sev- The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor eral other local organizations, so it was some- team provided feedback and insights regard- times difficult to specify Erie Canalway Nation- ing data collection and the meaning of various al Heritage Corridor-specific impacts. For this data elements. While Erie Canalway National reason ARCBridge undertook three mini-case Heritage Corridor was not involved in designing studies to illustrate the economic impact of the the methodology or carrying out the analysis, ECNHC program on towns adjacent to the ca- they served in a fact-checking role throughout nal. The mini-case studies will be described in the project to ensure that the evaluation team Chapter 4 of this report. was provided with accurate information and interpretation of available data and responded to 1.4 Roles queries promptly with transparency and thor- oughness throughout this entire process. There were three participating organizations involved in this evaluation effort—an exter- ARCBridge provided the Erie Canalway Nation- nal evaluator (ARCBridge Consulting & Train- al Heritage Corridor team with opportunity to ing, Inc.), the National Park Service, and Erie review and to fact check the contents of the Canalway National Heritage Corridor. evaluation as it was developed.

18 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Section 2of the Report Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Area

This section of the report provides an overview The Erie Canal was a heroic feat of early 19th of the geography, demographic characteristics century engineering and construction, and at and the development of the Erie Canalway Na- 363 miles long, was more than twice the length tional Heritage Corridor (ECNHC) along with the of any canal in Europe. It was without precedent history of the Erie Canal itself. in North America, designed and built through sparsely settled territory by surveyors, engineers, Included is a description of the Erie Canalway contractors, and laborers who had to learn much National Heritage Corridor (ECNHC), its coordi- of their craft on the job. Engineers and builders nating entity, the Commission, and the ECNHC’s who got their start on New York’s canals went nonprofit Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. (in- on to construct other canals, railroads, and pub- dividually or jointly referred to as “ECNHC”) In lic water supplies throughout the new nation. In addition, the section describes the development addition to cargo, New York’s canal system car- of Corridor’s partners and the role played by ried people and ideas – immigrants to the United partner organizations. Finally, ARCBridge pro- States, and New Englanders, drawn by the pros- vides a chronology of key events associated with pect of rich farmland in upstate New York and the development of the coordinating entity. beyond, along with innovators and manufactur- ers who established businesses along the canal. 2.1 Introduction and History of the Erie The general prosperity and ease of communica- Canal tion along New York’s canal corridors created a climate that fostered a number of nationally sig- The Erie Canal is one of the most successful and nificant social reform and religious movements. influential human-built waterways and one of At the same time, completion of the canal sys- the most important works of civil engineering tem and its accompanying effects severely dis- and construction in North America. It facilitat- rupted the pre-existing Native American culture ed and shaped the course of settlement of the and settlements. Northeast, Midwest, and Great Plains, knit together the Atlantic Seaboard with the area west New York’s canal system has been in continu- of the Appalachian Mountains, solidified New ous operation since 1825, longer than any other York City’s place as the young nation’s principal constructed transportation system on the North seaport and commercial center, and helped to American continent. It can trace direct ancestry forge America’s national identity. to short canals and navigation improvements to the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers built during the New York’s canal system, including the Erie Canal 1790s, and to the network of natural waterways and its laterals – principally the Champlain, Os- that had been used for centuries for travel and wego, and Cayuga-Seneca Canals – opened the commerce by members of the Iroquois Confed- interior of the continent. Built through the only eracy and other native peoples. In 1835 the NY low-level gap between the Appalachian Moun- Legislature approved the first enlargement of tain chain and the Adirondack Mountains, the the canal to a minimum of 70 feet wide and sev- Erie Canal provided one of the principal routes en feet deep. This enlargement was completed for migration and an economical and reliable in 1862. Beyond the canal system’s role in facili- means for transporting agricultural products and tating and shaping the growth of the nation, it is manufactured goods between the American in- the unbroken living tradition of the waterways, terior, the eastern seaboard, and Europe. the communities that line their banks, and the

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 19 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

people who live and work on and near the canals modern-day visitors to connect to the people, and related navigable lakes that make the Erie, places and events that shaped the region, New Champlain, Oswego, and Cayuga-Seneca espe- York State, and the nation. Preservation is what cially significant. protects the integrity and authenticity of physical elements, such as buildings, vessels, or the Today’s successor to the Erie Canal is the New canals themselves, that can be toured and ex- York State Barge Canal, the third phase of the plained; of cultural expressions, such as oral his- canal. It is a state-owned system of canals, can- tories, folkways, and art, that can be shared and alized rivers, and lakes across upstate New York, absorbed; and of cultural landscapes, evolving built 1905-1918 to allow passage of large com- places where the concrete and the ephemeral mercial vessels from the Atlantic Ocean and tid- combine to resonate with the past and the pres- al Hudson River to the upper Great Lakes and ent, that can only be appreciated through im- American Midwest and to Lake Ontario and the mersion and travel. St. Lawrence River, Lake Champlain, and Cayu- ga and Seneca Lakes. It is much larger than the The last decade has seen a marked increase in original Erie Canal and three connecting canals, outdoor recreation and a new focus on the rec- all completed during the 1820s. That develop- reational potential on the New York State Canal ment opened the interior of North America to System. At the same time, heritage tourism has commercial agriculture, settlement and industri- become the recreation of choice for many. The alization, established New York’s role as the Em- many recreational destinations in the Corridor pire State, and confirmed New York City’s status attract visitors to the region and improve the as America’s principal seaport and commercial quality of life for residents. center. In particular, the Erie Canalway Trail currently The Barge Canal system has four principal stretches 348 miles between Albany and Buffa- branches: Erie Canal, 340 miles long with 35 lo, linking the Hudson River and Lake Erie. This lift locks from Waterford on the Hudson River multi-use recreational trail along the canal is to Tonawanda on the Niagara River; Champlain used for cycling, hiking and cross-country ski- Canal, 60 miles long with 11 locks connecting ing. A new initiative of the Governor of New the Hudson at Waterford to the southern end of York State will expand the Erie Canalway Trail Lake Champlain at Whitehall; Oswego Canal, 24 to include a section between New York City and miles long with 7 locks connecting the Erie Ca- Canada. Projected to be completed in 2020, the nal at Three Rivers with Lake Ontario at Oswego, trail will be a continuous route of more than 750 and the Cayuga-Seneca Canal, 17 miles long with miles of non-motorized use trails. 4 locks connecting the Erie Canal near Montezu- ma with New York’s two largest Finger Lakes. The canal currently supports paddlers, kayakers and those wishing to take excursions and cruises In 2016, Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- along the canal. A number of canal towns have dor’s nomination for National Historic Landmark established events centered on the canal, and (NHL) status for the New York State Barge Canal these events have attracted millions of residents System was approved by the Secretary of the In- and visitors to the canal to observe and partici- terior and designated in its entirety as an NHL. pate in a variety of activities. A significant -por tion of these events are sponsored by the Erie The national significance of the Erie Canalway Canalway National Heritage Corridor through National Heritage Corridor relies on the integrity the organization’s Events & Festivals and Small and authenticity of its vast array of historic and Grant programs that seeks to promote the Cor- cultural resources – the qualities that allow ridor as a world-class destination and encourage

20 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

“vibrant communities.” The first of these analyses examines the population of these counties and the extent of pop- 2.1.1 Current Characteristics of the Erie ulation change between the 2000 US Census Canalway National Heritage Corridor and the latest intercensal population estimates. Table 2.1 below reflects the population of each To describe the characteristics of the communi- of the counties in the 2000 Census as well as ties through which the Erie Canalway operates, population estimates from the 2010 Decennial ARCBridge has captured U.S. Census information Census. The table also includes 2017 estimates that describes the population and economic of the population developed by the Census Bu- characteristics of the 23 New York counties that reau. are adjacent to the canal itself. Table 2.1: Census Estimate Population Changes in the 23 New York Counties Compris- ing the Erie Canalway Census Popu- Population Esti- Population Esti- Population lation Estimate New York Counties mate 2000 Decen- mate 2010 De- Change from (as of July 1) - nial Census cennial Census 2000-2017 2017 Albany County 295,106 304,107 309,612 14,506 Cayuga Couny 81,871 79,889 77,603 (4,268) Erie County 949,440 919,224 925,528 23,912 Herkimer County 64,451 64,463 62,240 (2,211) Madison County 69,450 73,440 70,965 1,515 Monroe County 738,979 744,906 747,642 8,663 Montgomery County 49,605 50,299 49,258 (347) Niagara County 219,620 216,486 211,328 (8,292) Oneida County 235,146 234,794 231,332 (3,814) Onondaga County 458,034 467,571 465,398 7,364 Ontario County 100,106 108,165 109,899 9,793 Orleans County 44,178 42,837 40,983 (3,195) Oswego County 122,477 122,143 118,478 (3,999) Rensselaer County 152,684 159,365 159,722 7,038 Saratoga County 201,514 220,109 229,869 28,355 Schenectady County 146,581 154,876 155,565 8,984 Schuyler County 19,232 18,323 18,000 (1,232) Seneca County 33,343 35,264 34,498 1,155 Tompkins County 96,608 101,764 104,802 8,194 Warren County 63,273 65,672 64,532 1,259 Washington County 60,977 63,336 61,620 643 Wayne County 93,791 93,750 90,670 (3,121) Yates County 24,723 25,374 24,955 232 Total 4,321,189 4,366,157 4,364,499 43,310 Sources: U.S. Census Intercensal Population Estimates from the 2000 Decennial Census, from the 2010 Decennial Census and from the 2017 Census estimate.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 21 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

As the table reveals, the current population of Thus, the Erie Canal Corridor counties have the Erie Canalway counties is estimated to be experienced slower population growth in 4.365 million as of July 2017. This reflects a population as compared the rest of the State small growth in population of approximately of New York which has grown by 6.2%.between 1.00% (43,310 persons) between the 2000 2000 and 2017. Decennial Census and the 2017 Census population estimate for the area. The In order to examine economic conditions and population of the canal community has been changes in the economy in the adjacent areas, relatively stable over the 17 year period for ARCBridge undertook an analysis of data from the estimates. the Economic Censuses conducted in 2002, in 2007 and in 2012. These data were obtained By way of contrast, the population of the from the U.S. Census Bureau. Data from the State of New York grew by 4.6% over the Economic Census of 2017 has been gathered, same period with a growth from 18.976 million but has not yet been reported by the Federal persons in the 2000 Census to an estimate of Government. The results of the analysis are dis- 19.849 million persons in 2017. This played in Table 2.2 below. represents a population increase of approximately 900,000 over the period.

Table 2.2: Results from the Economic Census for 2002, 2007 and 2012 Encom- passing the 23 County Erie Canalway Corridor

Value of sales, shipments, Economic Number of Annual payroll Number of receipts, revenue, or busi- Census Year Establishments ($1,000) Employees ness done ($1,000)

2002 87,810 $182,348,353 $38,548,011 1,305,278 2007 85,871 $203,277,543 $43,265,473 1,294,350 2012 92,328 $229,835,275 $55,351,029 1,460,169 % Gain 2012- 2002 5.14% 26.04% 43.59% 11.86%

22 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

The data in Table 2.2 reveals that, despite a mod- • The Mohawk Valley Heritage Corridor estab- est decline in the population, the Erie Canalway lished by New York State in 1994 to protect counties demonstrated substantial economic the region’s natural, historic and recreational growth over the period between 2002 and 2012. resources and promote economic develop- Thus, the number of establishments increased ment in seven of the Erie Canalway Corridor by more than 5%, the value of sales increased counties. by 26% from $182B to more than $229B while • The New York State Canal Recreationway the annual payroll increased by more than 43% Plan which was completed in 1995. (from $38B to more than $55B). At the same time, the number of persons employed in these 2.2.1 Authorizing Legislation and the Erie establishments increased by nearly 12% (from Canalway National Historic Corridor Mission 1.31M to more than 1.46M) over this period. and Vision

2.2 Introduction and History of the Erie “The mission of the ECNHC is to plan for, en- Canalway National Heritage Corridor and courage and assist historic preservation, conser- its Partners vation, recreation, interpretation, tourism and community development throughout the Cor- Public Law 106-554, title VIII, the Erie Canalway ridor in a manner that promotes partnerships National Heritage Corridor Act of 2000 designat- among the Corridor’s many stakeholders, and ed the natural resources of the Erie Canalway, reflects, celebrates and enhances the Corridor’s the New York State Canal System and the com- national significance for all to use and enjoy.” munities along the canal banks as a National Heritage Area. The authorizing legislation desig- In conjunction with the Erie Canalway National nated as the management entity, a twenty-sev- Heritage Corridor Act of 2000, the management en member Erie Canalway National Heritage entity was assigned the following responsibili- Corridor Commission (“the commission”). ties:

To kickstart the development of the Erie 1. To provide for and assist in the identification, Canalway National Heritage Corridor, funds preservation, promotion, maintenance and were appropriated in FY1995 (Public Law 103- interpretation of the historical, natural, cul- 332) for the National Parks Service to prepare a tural, scenic, and recreational resources of Special Resource Study to evaluate the New York the Erie Canalway in ways that reflect its na- Canal System for designation as a National Heri- tional significance for the benefit of current tage Corridor. Advocating for this initiative were and future generations; Congressman James T. Walsh (from Syracuse) 2. To promote and provide access to the Erie and New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Canalway’s historical, natural, cultural, scenic and recreational resources; and This Special Resource Study came on the heels 3. To provide a framework to assist the State of of a number of federal and state-developed ini- New York, its units of local government, and tiatives which focused on the cultural and eco- the communities within the Erie Canalway nomic development of areas surrounding the in the development of integrated cultural, Erie Canal. These included: historical, recreational, economic, and community development programs in order to • The Canal Corridor Initiative from the U.S. enhance and interpret the unique and na- Department of Housing and Urban Develop- tionally significant resources of the Erie Ca- ment to provide $130 million to communi- nal. ties for canal corridor projects

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 23 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Erie Canalway’s comprehensive Preservation & 501(c)(3) designation in 2006 and provides flex- Management Plan was approved by the Secre- ibility in fund-raising such that the organization, tary of the Interior in 2006. The plan outlines six through this vehicle can raise funds in the pri- key goals that enable ECNHC to achieve its vision vate sector. and mission: Erie Canalway currently has five (5) full-time -em 1. The Corridor’s historic and distinctive sense ployees, and two (2) NPS employees (on detail; of place will be widely expressed and consis- 1.6 FTE equivalent). tently protected. 2. The Corridor’s natural resources will reflect The staff includes: the highest standards of environmental quality. Executive Director: Bob Radliff 3. The Corridor’s recreation opportunities will Assistant Director: Andy Kitzmann achieve maximum scope and diversity, in Director of Communications nda Outreach: Jean harmony with the protection of its heritage. Mackay 4. The Corridor’s economic growth and her- Administrative Services Director: Diane Jennings itage development will be balanced and Director of Finance Administration: Rosemary self-sustaining. Button 5. The Corridor will be a “must do” travel ex- Historian: Duncan Hay (NPS employee on detail, perience for regional, national, and interna- Part-time at ECNHC) tional visitors. Community Planner: Hannah Blake (NPS Em- ployee on detail) The vision of the Erie Canalway National Cor- ridor was further refined through the ECNHC The governance structure of the organization 2011-2016 Strategic Plan and consisted of the includes both an Erie Canalway Corridor Federal following vision statement: Commission (up to 27 members) and a Heritage Fund Board of Directors (up to 15 members). Ex- The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, ecutive Commissioners also serve on the Heri- working through a wide range of partnerships, tage Fund Board of Directors. is preserving and interpreting our nation’s past, providing world class recreational and educa- The ECNHC Commission and Heritage Fund tional opportunities, fostering economic revi- Board of Directors includes a diverse team of in- talization, improving quality of life in Corridor dividuals with expertise in a number of key areas communities, and guiding the reemergence of important to Erie Canalway. These areas of ex- the Erie Canalway as a 21st century “River of pertise include: Commerce and Culture.” • Strategic planning and business entrepre- 2.2.2 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor neurship Organizational Structure • Parks and recreation • Architecture Several years after National Heritage designation • Historic preservation in 2000 (2000), the Erie Canalway Commission • Construction, land surveying, project man- established a nonprofit entity, the Erie Canalway agement Heritage Fund, Inc. to help manage the funds, • Finance and investing personnel and programs designed to fulfill the • Real estate mission requirements set forth in the enabling • Federal, state, county and municipal govern- legislation. This non-profit entity received its ment

24 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

• Legal and legislative affairs, public and gov- In order to provide consistency between the ernment relations two groups, the four officers of the Commission • Economic development and community re- serve dual roles as ex-officio members of the lations Erie Canalway Heritage Fund board. These ex-of- • Marketing and cultural tourism ficio members may not hold officer positions on • Fundraising and non-profit management the board. • Higher education A detailed description of Commission member- Commission members have been actively in- ship is shown in Table 2.3 below while a descrip- volved with Erie Canalway for between one tion of the Heritage Fund Board of Directors is year and sixteen years (2 members are current- shown in Table 2.4. These charts outline the ly pending appointments). Ten (10) of the 23 length of time on the board/commission, officer Commission members have been active for six positions, committee assignments, and relevant or more years with the Canalway. Members of areas of expertise. the Heritage Fund Board of Directors have been on the Board for between one year and 12 years (the non-profit organization was established in 2006). Table 2.3: ECNHC Commission (as of 2018) Membership Description ECNHC Commission Time on Office Committees Expertise or Title Members Commission Pieter W. Smeenk 16 years Chair Executive Public policy Vice Executive, Procurement Business, Federal Harry R Sicherman 3 years Chair &Conflict of Interest guidelines Executive, Matton Shipyard, Nominations/Governance, Business, Contract- Barbara Blanchard 6 years Secretary Procurement & Conflict of ing Interest John R. McGlone 3 years Treasurer Executive, Grants, Finance Business Secre- Pending Ap- NPS NER Regional Gay Vietzke tary’s Executive pointment Director Designee Director, Strategic Paul Beyer 2 years Grants Planning, NYS De- partment of State Regional Director NYS Office of Parks, Fred Bonn 2 years NYS Canalway Water Trail Recreation and His- toric Preservation Architect, Historic Clinton Brown 12 years Audit Preservation NYS Department Jacqueline Czub 3 years of Agriculture and Markets

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 25 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Table 2.3 (cont’d): ECNHC Commission (as of 2018) Membership Description

ECNHC Commission Time on Office Committees Expertise or Title Members Commission City government, parks James, R. Farr 7 years Audit and recreation Geologist long-time chair Thomas K. Grasso 16 years of Canal Society of NYS (retired)

Grants, Nominations/ Director, Whitehall State Carol B. Greenough 16 years Heritage Area Governance Recreation, Doug Hamlin 2 years accessibility, multi-day group bike rides University, Econ. Develop- Marilyn R. Higgins 7 years Finance ment Frank Proto 2 years Public policy NYS Department of Trans- Peter Ryan 3 years Finance portation Brian U. Stratton 6 years Director, NYS Canal Corp. Director, Underground Mary Liz Stewart 3 years Grants Railroad History Project of the Capital Region Grants, Nominations/ Alan N. Vincent 16 years Business, Finance Governance Economic Revitaliza- New York State United Paul Webster 1 year` tion, Heritage Devel- Teachers Union, Commu- opment nity Relations Owner, Mid-lakes Naviga- Peter Wiles, Jr. 12 years Audit tion Charters

Development and commu- Fundraising & Devel- Kai Wysokowski 2 years nity relations, Longtime opment Canal Society member

NYS Department of Envi- Pending Ap- ronmental Conservation, Laura DiBetta pointment Director of Outdoor Rec- reation

26 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Interviews with the ECNHC management team, Thus, the Federal Commission makes it evident with Commission members and with members that ECNHC has Federal support and this pro- of the Heritage Fund Board of Directors revealed vides a sense of sustainability for the Canalway. unanimity in support for the concept of a dual This is particularly important given the large foot- board/commission structure. That is, respon- print of the corridor itself. The non-profit Heri- dents indicated that each of the governance or- tage Fund provides the flexibility that is needed ganizations provides unique benefits to ECNHC. to generate new funds from corporations and individuals which would not be possible with a singular Federal entity.

Table 2.4: Heritage Fund Board of Directors (as of 2018)

Heritage Fund Time on Office Committees Expertise Board Members Board Executive, Fundraising & Development, Construction, real Paul Neureuter 7 Years Chair Economic Revitalization Heritage Devel- estate opment

Kimberly M. 12 years Vice Chair Executive Legal Seager

Executive, Fundraising &Development, Judy McKinney Economic develop- 1 year Secretary Economic Revitalization Heritage Devel- Cherry ment opment

Executive, Finance, procurement & Brad Packard 4 years Treasurer Conflict of Interest, Economic Revital- Real estate, finance ization Heritage Development Barbara Matton, Nominations/Governance, Pro- Business, , contract- 4 years Ex- officio Blanchard curement & Conflict of Interest ing Executive, Nominations & Governance, Thomas D. Immediate Economic develop- 7 years Fundraising, Matton, Economic Revital- Blanchard past chair ment, contracting ization Heritage Development Heritage preserva- Kent Barwick 7 years Fundraising & Development tion

Finance & economic Carl Blowers 1 year Finance Finance development

Robert Elliott 7 years Audit

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 27 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Table 2.4 (cont’d): Heritage Fund Board of Directors (as of 2018)

Heritage Fund Time on Office Committees Expertise Board Members Board

Robert Elliott 7 years Audit

Ex officio John R. McGlone 1 year Grants, Finance Business Commission

Ex officio Business, Federal Guide- Harry Sicherman 3 years Commission lines

Pieter Smeenk 2 years Ex officio Nominations & Governance Public policy

Surveying & mapping Peter J. Welsby 7 years Audit (engineer)

2.2.3 ECNHC’s Relationship with Partners

Erie Canalway has made outreach and collabo- Of the 422 organizational partners, 120 have ration with partner organizations, a key element formal agreements with ECNHC. of its overall community development strategy. In order to develop a clear picture of its partner- In order to understand the growth of partnerships, ARCBridge worked with ECNHC to devel- ships, an analysis was carried out to examine op a partnership database that captures data on the rate of partnership development over time each partner with respect to: among organizational and individual partners as well as the length and involvement of part- • Year first active with Erie Canalway nerships. • Years active with Erie Canalway • Type of Partner (organization or individual) Chart 2-1 below displays the percentage • Whether or not the partner was a grantee growth in Erie Canalway partnerships be- • Whether the partner was a source of funds tween 1996 and 2017. for the Canalway • Was the partner relationship formal or informal • In which programs was the partner involved • In how many programs was the partner engaged

Based upon these data, it was determined that Erie Canalway has maintained relationships with 790 active partners. Of these partners 422 were organizations and 368 were individuals.

28 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Chart 2.1: Growth in Erie Canalway partnerships between 1996 and 2018.

The chart shows that the rate of organization Along those lines, ARCBridge sought to under- partner growth increased substantially after stand how long those partnerships have been 2006 which was the year the Erie Canalway in place. Obviously, the longer partners have established its non-profit organization (The been active with Erie Canalway, the more likely Heritage Fund, Inc.). Individual partners did they will be to continue into the future. In addi- not appear to be active until 2011. This is in- tion, the extent of involvement in heritage area dicative of the change in the organization’s programs is also an important indicator of the strategy as it shifted from only having a Fed- sustainability of partnership relations. Those eral Commission to dual organizational gov- organizations that have broader and deeper in- ernance - the Commission and the non-profit volvement with Erie Canalway reflect a deeper board. engagement with the organization’s mission.

2.3 Strength and Sustainability of Erie With this perspective in mind, ARCBridge first Canalway Partnerships analyzed the partnership database to examine the length of the partner involvement or There are a number of aspects of the Erie tenure with the Heritage Corridor as shown in Canalway partner relationships that are rel- Chart 2-2. evant to the strength and sustainability of those partnerships.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 29 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Chart 2.2 Length of Involvement of Erie Canalway Partners

As the chart suggests, nearly 55% of Erie Inc. as well as those organizations which gener- Canalway organizational partners have been ate non-Federal matching funds that have been active with the organization for 10 years or lon- certified as being invested in ECNHC programs. ger. Since the Canalway has only begun devel- These funds do not appear directly in Heritage oping individual partners or donors since 2011, Fund accounts, but are reported as matching nearly 80% of the individual partners have only funds and expenditures in ECNHC audits. been active for a couple of years. Since most of the organizational partners have been active The “funders” included 137 of the 422 organi- for a significant period of time, it is indicative zational partners (or 32% of this partner group). of a particularly long-term commitment to the The majority of individual partners (366 of 368 success of the Erie Canalway Corridor. In fact, indivdual partners) have provided funding for on average, organizational partners have been ECNHC programs. with the Canalway for 8.2 years. To develop a fuller understanding of the develop- A portion of the ARCBridge analysis focused on ment of “funding” partners, ARCBridge analyzed the growth of “funders” for the organization. the development of funding partners over time. These consist of organizations and individuals These results appear in Chart 2-3 and Chart 2-4 who directly contribute to The Heritage Fund, below.

30 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Chart 2.3: Growth in Number of Individuals Who Fund ECNHC 2011-2018

Chart 2.4: Growth in Number of Organizations Funding ECNHC 1996-2018

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 31 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

As shown in the charts above, there has been These results are shown in Chart 2-5 and indicate a dramatic increase in the number of individu- the number of specific programs in which each als and organizations that have chosen to fund of the organizational partners engaged with Erie ECNHC over time.. This growth is particularly sig- Canalway. To perform the analysis, ARCBridge nificant since 2011 when ECNHC began to seek asked ECNHC staff to assess each of the partners individual donors for its programs as well as be- with respect to specific programs in which they ginning a more aggressive effort to cultivate new participated. These programs included: organizational partners. As will be discussed in Chapter 4 of this report, this period of growth in 1. Ticket to Ride new “funders” has also been occasioned by sub- 2. Events and festivals stantial growth in non-federal matching funds. 3. Competitive grants program 4. Heritage Awards program Next, ARCBridge examined the partnership data 5. Signage program to determine in how many programs each indi- 6. Tourism promotion and website program vidual partner and each organizational partner 7. Water trail development was engaged. Among individual partners it is 8. World Canals Conference clear that nearly all individual partners (with 9. Voyage and journeys program. three exceptions out of 368 partners) were engaged in a single activity—that activity was making a donation to the Erie Canalway. That being said, it is therefore proper to label invidual partners as “donors.”

Chart 2.5: Level of Program Participation by Partners

No Activity Listed, 7% Three or More Activities, One Activity, 35% 31%

Two Activities, 27%

32 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

The chart reveals that almost one-third of or- • “The Canalway provided content for a PBS ganizational partners (31%) were only involved documentary which continues to air—the with a single activity while 27% were involved Canalway has to compete with other New in two programs and 35% were engaged in York entities and destinations” three or more programs. • They have an important role as a protector of the Canal image.” 2.3.2 View of Erie Canalway from its Partners • “They are stewards of their role in preserving vessels.” In a general sense, Erie Canalway’s partners view the organization as having a central role in Staff at Chittenango Landing many of the areas of preservation, interpretation and economic development efforts. • “They provide signage to identify the site. They help with PR, provide links to their ECNHC partners reflected on several ways in website and provide national exposure” which the Canalway contributes to the local • “An important issue is the Ticket to Ride communities including: funding. Without this funding school field trip programs to Chittenango could not ex- • Development of promotional materials, ist. As a consequence, they now get schools maps and signage from all over the state. “ • Efforts to maintain and strengthen the Erie • “The Canalway sponsorship of kayaking and Canal brand paddle board supports viability of the old • Grants to communities for events which canal. “ bring tourists to different towns along the • “One of their grants is used to improve wa- corridor ter quality.” • Lending their historical expertise and funding to more effectively and accurately tell Madison County Planning Office the Canalway story • “The Canalway has bought about econom- A number of the Canalway’s partners elaborat- ic change in the towns along the canal, e.g. ed on thesr issues: they have released tour guides every year.” • “The Canalway provided $7,000 to study New York State Canal Corporation specific places for boat launches on the canal.” • ECNHC was described in the following way: • “Their sponsorship of bike rides along the “they are the keepers of the Canal’s story; canal brought business to canal towns— we (the Canal Corporation) are the keepers some communities are doing more than of the infrastructure.” others.” • “The Erie Canalway established good will • “The Canalway has sponsored clean-up with local officials—they are out there with events.” a small, but ubiquitous presence” • “The Canalway provided funding for a 2015 • “They have access to their talent of inter- event for a grand tour of the towpath”. pretation; they are active with many com- • “Canalway funding has enabled the County munity organizations—they increase brand to do more—they have demonstrated that identity.” the trail and waterway is attractive and that • “They are able to leverage the canal brand tourists and residents want to use the trail with the imprimatur of the National Park and waterway. Their grants provided mon- Service.” ey to study the waterway.”

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 33 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

• “They have helped to shift some of the focus 1998: The National Park Service completes a from the barge canal to the old Erie Canal.” Special Resource Study of the Erie Canalway • “The Canalway has created maps and a web- and recommends designation as a National site of the corridor as well as guidemaps for Heritage Corridor. the waterway and trail. For example, they found sunken canal boats which had made it 12/21/2000: December 2000 the Erie Canalway possible to reconnect with a new audience.” National Heritage Corridor Act (PL 106-554, Ti- tle VIII) is approved by Congress. Fort Stanwix 2000 - 2002: First staff hired, includes NPS staff • “The Canalway has supported water trail and a “Temporary Detail” position from NYS planning which has engaged local partners in Office of Parks Recreation, and Historic Preser- the canal communities.” vation. ECNHC’s legislation includes the detail • “More and more they are focused on rec- of two full-time NPS employees. reational opportunities. For example, they have supported setting up a bike-share sta- 2000 - 2002: Gary Warshefski, Superintendent tion at the Fort.” of Fort Stanwix NM was the first NPS Project • “This has opened up the visitor experiences Manager, followed by Michael Creasy, on detail in a way that connects visitors to elements from Blackstone River Valley NHC. of local community programs, not just programs at the Fort.” Feb 2002: Frank Dean hired as ECNHC Project • “The Canalway staff is very proactive. They Manager, then later as Executive Director do the lion’s share of the work. They are always seeking ways to connect to both the 2002: The Secretary of the Interior approves communities and also to other units in the the first slate of Erie Canalway Commissioners. National Park Service.” June 2002: 1st Quarterly Commission Meetings 2.4 Chronology of the Erie Canalway Na- held. Meetings have continued un-interrupted tional Heritage Corridor through to the present.

1992: NYS Legislature establishes a state Canal 2003-2004: Public Meetings to help inform the Recreationway Commission to plan for the Ca- development of the Preservation & Manage- nal’s future and also transfers authority to man- ment Plan are held in the following municipal- age the system through the Canal Corporation ities - Syracuse, Lockport, Glens Falls, Town of from Department of Transportation to the New Colonie, Ithaca, Oswego, Rome, Buffalo, and York State Thruway Authority. Rochester

1995: Public Law 103-332 directs the National 2004: Frank Dean takes on the additional role Park Service to prepare a Special Resource Study of Superintendent at Saratoga National Histor- evaluating the New York State Canal System for a ical Park while also serving as Executive Direc- possible designation as a tor at ECNHC. National Heritage Corridor.

1995: The state Canal Recreationway Commis- sion completes a Canal Recreationway Plan which calls for possible federal designation of the system as a National Heritage Corridor.

34 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

October 2004: The American Planning Associ- 2011: ECHF Board Chair Tom Blanchard reports ation’s New York Upstate Chapter awards the on HF activity at each of the four Commission plan as Outstanding Planning Project Compre- meetings. hensive Planning: For a Regionally Based Plan.) 2011: Tropical Storm Irene floods the eastern 2006: Cooperative Agreement with Parks & most portion of the Mohawk River from Trails New York is established. PTNY manages Schoharie Creek to the Hudson River. ECNHC most financial and administrative services on staff are unable to access the office for three behalf of the Commission including formal em- days, canal locks and other canal structures are ployment of all nonprofit staff. damaged and significant damage is found within the canal system. ECNHC takes a lead role in 5/2006: Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. Ar- communications and outreach with NYS Canal ticles of Incorporation accepted by New York Corporation. State Department of State 6/27/2007 Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, 04/2011: ECNHC Strategic Plan is co-adopted Inc. Bylaws approved by board by the Commission & ECHF Board

12/6/2007: Internal Revenue Service - Erie 4/25/2012: Memorandum of Understanding Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. Advance Ruling signed between the ECNHC Commission and letter for 501(c) (3) status received. ECHF Board of Directors. Commission and board begin holding join meetings. 5/30/2008: Frank Dean leave ECNHC/SARA to take position in Washington as head -of NP 04/2012: Resource Development Plan com- SQuadricentennial Commission. pleted

6/30/2008: Beth Sciumeca becomes the third October 1, 2012: Cooperative agreement with National Park Service employee to lead ECNHC. Parks & Trails New York is ended and all management and administrative duties transition 2009: Public Law 111-11 - Technical Correc- to the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund. tions to ECNHC authorizing legislation included in the Omnibus Lands Act of 2009, extends the 2013: Bob Radliff becomes first non-federal -Ex ECNHC Commission to 2015. ecutive Director. Assumes leadership of both Commission and the Heritage Fund. Beth Sciu- 7/2009: Eric Mower, retires as founding com- meca takes a full time position with the Nation- mission chair. Joseph Callagan is voted in as al Park Service’s Northeast Region. new chair. Jun-10 Judith Schmidt Dean is voted in as chair 07/2014: Russell Andrews is voted in as Chair of the Commission. 2014: 450 miles of the New York State Barge 2011: Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. first Canal System is listed on the State and Na- full board of 15 directors seated, including the tional Registers as a Historic District with Erie 4 officers Canalway NHC writing the nomination and spearheading the nomination process.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 35 Section 2: Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

12/19/2014: Public Law 113-291 extends the The Chapter also discusses ECNHC’s relation- Commission to 2021. ship with its partners, the growth of the partnership group, sustainability of funding from 07/2016: Pieter Smeenk is voted in as chair of partner organizations and the view that part- the Erie Canalway Commission. ners have of th Erie Canalway. Finally, the chapter provides a chronology of the development 12/1/2016: 450 miles of the New York State of the Erie Canalway from its earlier beginnings Barge Canal System is listed as a National His- prior to Congressional designation until recent toric Landmark with Erie Canalway NHC writing activities such as sponsorship the Worlds Canal the nomination and spearheading the nomina- Conference. tion process.

5/5/2017” Public Law 115-31 increases the funding cap from $10 Million to $12 Million.

09/2017: ECNHC takes the lead on hosting the 2017 World Canals Conference in Syracuse, NY

Summary of Chapter 2 - Overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor

Chapter 2 provides a high level overview of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. The overview begins with an introduction and history of the Erie Canal itself (dating back to the 1920s) and also includes current demographic and economic statistics relating to the 23 counties that are adjacent to canal itself. These data show that the overall population has experienced a slight decline between 2000 and 2017. Despite this finding, the data also reveal that there was significant growth in number of establishments (over 5%), value of sales (over 26%) as well as an incrase in the annual payroll (43.6%) and number of employees (11.8%).

The Chapter goes on to describe the authorizing legislation as well as the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor mission and vision. The Chapter also describes the current organizational structure including the staff, the Feder- al Commission that oversees the Erie Canalway as well as the non-profit Heritage Fund and its Board of Directors.

36 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Section 3he Report ECNHC Fulfillment of the Authorizing Legislation and Management Plan

3.1 Goals and Objectives of ECNHC The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act of 2000 (PL 106-554, Title VIII) was formally Summary and History passed in the 106th Congress. The legislation defines the “Erie Canalway” as the 524 miles of The authorizing legislation for the Erie Canalway navigable canals that comprise the New York National Heritage Corridor (ECNHC) was enact- State Canal System from Albany to Buffalo. ed by the US Congress in 2000, which marked the 175th anniversary of New York State’s The legislation stemmed from a 1995 Appro- completion of the Erie Canal for commerce, priations Act directive calling for a National transportation, and recreational purposes. The Park Service special resource study which de- legislation credits the canal network for trans- termined that the New York State Canal System forming New York into the “Empire State” and was of “unparalleled national significance,” the nation’s premier commercial and financial merited federal recognition, and national heri- center. tage corridor designation.

The original 383 miles of the Erie Canal were The congressional act states numerous reasons considered an engineering feat and the mod- for the creation of the ECNHC, including the el for subsequent American canals throughout following historical and cultural implications: the country. The canalway “proved the depth and force of American ingenuity, solidified a 1. The Erie Canalway was instrumental in national identity, and found an enduring place forging strong political and cultural ties in American legend, song, and art.” with the Old Northeast, New England, and Upstate New York, facilitating the exchange Specifically, according to the Congressional Act, of ideas and ensuring that social reforms the Corridor remains an important historic and such as the abolition of slavery and the recreational resource for the advancement of women’s rights movement spread across the United States, having facilitated the move- the country ment of social reform such as the abolition 2. At the time, the Erie Canalway was the larg- of slavery and women’s rights from upstate est public works project ever undertaken New York to the rest of the country. The Erie by a State and was an engineering feat that Canalway played a major role in turning New many other American canals were mod- York City into an international port and provid- eled after ing a permanent commercial link between the 3. The Erie Canalway provided a permanent Port of New York and cities in Canada, a “cor- commercial link between the Port of New nerstone of the peaceful relationship between York and cities in Eastern Canada, providing the two countries.” the cornerstone for the peaceful relationship between the two nations 3.1.1 – 2000 Erie Canalway National Heritage 4. The Erie Canalway solidified American Corridor Act identity and has a historical place in Ameri- can art, legend, and song

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 37 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

The key purposes of the Erie Canalway Na- 2. To foster the integration of canal-related his- tional Heritage Corridor included: torical, cultural, recreational, scenic, economic, and community development initiatives within • To provide and assist in the identification, the Corridor. preservation, promotion, maintenance, and interpretation of the historical, natural, The commission is composed of at least 21 and cultural, scenic, and recreational resources not more than 27 members, appointed by the of the Erie Canalway in ways that reflect its Secretary of the Interior as described in the national significance for the benefit of -cur enabling legislation for the Erie Canalway Na- rent and future generations. tional Heritage Corridor and any subsequent • To promote and provide access to the amendments. Canalway’s historical, cultural, natural, scenic, and recreational resources The Secretary will appoint these members as • To provide a framework to assist the State follows: of New York, its units of local government, and canal communities in the develop- 1. The Secretary of the Interior, ex-officio, or ment of integrated cultural, historical, rec- the Secretary’s designee; reational, economic, and community- de 2. Seven (7) members appointed by the Sec- velopment programs to both enhance and retary after consideration of recommenda- interpret the Erie Canalway’s nationally sig- tions by the Governor and other appropriate nificant resources officials with knowledge and experience of • To authorize federal financial and techni- the following agencies: the New York State cal assistance to the ECNHC Commission Department of State, the New York State to serve these purposes for the benefit of Department of Environmental Conserva- the people of the State of New York and the tion, the New York State Office of Parks, Nation Recreation and Historic Preservation, the New York State Department of Agriculture This legislation formally designated the Erie and Markets, the New York State Depart- Canalway National Heritage Corridor Commis- ment of Transportation, the New York State sion (ECNHCC) as the management entity for Canal Corporation, and the Empire State the heritage area to implement the Canalway Development Corporation. Plan. 3. The remaining members who reside within the Corridor and are geographically The mission and requirements of the commis- dispersed throughout the Corridor shall sion are: be from local governments and the private sector with knowledge of tourism, “Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor economic and community development, works to preserve and share our extraordinary regional planning, historic preservation, heritage, to promote the Corridor as a world cultural or natural resource management, class tourism destination, and to foster vibrant conservation, recreation, and education or communities connected by more than 500 museum services: miles of waterway.” • Two members recommended from 1. To work with Federal, State, and local author- each United States Senator from New ities to develop and implement the Canalway York Plan; • Six members shall be residents of any county constituting the Corridor

38 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

• The remaining members shall be (i) In 2006 ECNHC staff and Commission, with as- appointed by the Secretary, based on sistance, guidance, review, and key inputs from recommendations from each member National Park Service staff, submitted acom- of the House of Representatives, the pleted Preservation & Management Plan to district of which encompasses the Cor- the Secretary of the Interior. ridor; and (ii) persons that are residents of, or employed within, the applicable According to the ECNHC website, the Erie congressional districts Canalway Preservation and Management Plan received the American Planning Association’s Members of the Commission other than ex of- Highest National Award for a Comprehensive ficio members shall be appointed for terms of Plan in 2008. The plan outlines strategies for 3 years. achieving six key goals:

The congressional authorizing legislation also 1. The Corridor’s historic and distinctive sense advocated giving priority to projects that facili- of place will be widely expressed and con- tate the preservation of the significant cultural, sistently protected historical, natural, and recreational resources 2. The Corridor’s natural resources will reflect of the Heritage Area and includes provisions the highest standards of environmental for educational, interpretive, and recreational quality opportunities that are consistent with the Na- 3. The Corridor’s recreation opportunities tional Heritage Area (NHA) resources. will achieve maximum scope and diversity, in harmony with the protection of heritage The legislation and subsequent amendment in- resources cludes a cap on the funding designated towards 4. The Corridor’s current and future genera- the official NHA to be no more than $1,000,000 tions of residents and visitors will value and for any fiscal year and not more than a total support preservation of its heritage of $12,000,000 (per a cap extension granted 5. The Corridor’s economic growth and her- in May 2017), with a 100 percent non-Federal itage development will be balanced and match requirement. self-sustaining 6. The Corridor will be a “must do” travel experience for regional, national, and inter- 3.1.2 ECNHC Preservation & Management national visitors Plan: What ARCBridge finds significant to note The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor about the creation of the ECNHC Preservation Act required that the ECNHC Commission, as & Management Plan is that the core goal of management entity, submit to the Secretary of the ECNHC is focused on serving as an “um- Interior a revised plan that would include: brella” organization among the more than 230 municipalities along the 524 miles of canal. 1. A review of the implementation agenda for Extensive public input into the management the heritage area plan was also sought in a series of meetings: 2. Projected capital costs 3. Plans for partnership initiatives and an -ex pansion of community support

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 39 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

“The National Heritage Corridor will serve as • helping perpetuate canal-related music, an “umbrella” to unite and coordinate exist- art, literature, and folkway traditions; ing federal, state, and local plans and multiple • helping market the Corridor; points of view, focusing on partnerships that • stimulating economic development and cross jurisdictional boundaries and build on community revitalization; and mutual interests. Preparation of the Plan has • fostering cooperative partnerships been informed by extensive public input. Nine public meetings were held in December 2003 After meeting with the Erie Canalway National and January 2004 in order to gather informa- Heritage Corridor staff and board, ARCBridge tion and impressions from the public and- ex has defined ECNHC activities within the fol- plain to local communities the legislated pur- lowing three major themes. A logic model (see pose and mandate of the Corridor. Eight public Figure 3.1 below) was developed to help ARC- review meetings were held in July 2005 in order Bridge summarize ECNHC’s various areas of to introduce the draft Preservation and Man- engagement. The three program areas include: agement Plan and Environmental Assessment and solicit comments from the public. Numer- Preservation: ous additional meetings have been held with tribal representatives, political leaders, and pri- To ensure that natural, historic, and cultural vate or nonprofit stewards of heritage resourc- resources are sustained for future generations es. In addition, information surveys sent to ev- including site studies, preserving the Matton ery municipality in the Corridor, and returned Shipyard, creating the Heritage Award of Excel- by nearly half of them, provided a base level of lence for local volunteer managed sites, offer- information about the current status of historic ing technical assistance and other grants, and preservation, interpretation and economic -re successfully archiving National Historic Land- vitalization activities. The public has been invit- mark/National Historic Register Listing for the ed to all official Commission meetings, and the New York State Barge Canal System Commission has also operated and promoted a public website since January 2004 to solicit in- Tourism/Recreation: put and provide updates. The Commission and the preparers of this Plan value this input and • Support, promote, and provide opportuni- have sought to address in these pages all of the ties for heritage resources to be developed issues and concerns brought to their attention.” in a sustainable way to generate positive economic returns for the region -ECNHC Management Plan • Assist small local businesses and sites with networking and grant opportunities Key operational objectives stated within the • Creating a comprehensive promotion and Management Plan include: outreach program to disseminate newspapers, maps, guides, brochures, posters, cal- • protecting and preserving its historic, natu- endars, a partner directory, and 9 tourism ral, cultural and recreational resources; itineraries across the Corridor • interpreting and educating the public about • Wayside Exhibition Program and Interpre- the story of the canals; tive Guide (37 signs placed at sites across • fostering and promoting recreational op- the corridor to direct boaters from the ca- portunities; nal into communities)

40 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Education/Interpretation:

• To help raise awareness for the preserva- • It is important to note that while there are tion of local landmarks, create and support three distinct themes for Erie Canalway pro- the development of museum exhibits, and grams, many programs overlap as ECNHC educate the general public about the rich attempts to focus on projects that can incor- history of the Erie Canal porate more than a single category. • Provide opportunities for thousands of • The charts on the following pages map out school children to learn about the Erie Ca- the logic model for ECNHC, depicting the re- nal through the Ticket To Ride/Every Kid in lationships between ECNHC goals, resourc- a Park programs es, major programs, supporting programs, • The creation of an Erie Canal Curriculum and inputs and outcomes, as well as a look guide, document based questions, and at the top projects based on funds and serving as a clearing house for other orga- hours spent nizations top quality school based learning materials

Chart 3.1: Logic Model

Outputs Outcomes/Impacts

Inputs/ Activities/ Participants Short Term Longer Term Resources Programs

• Staff • Fundraising • Out of Town • Increased • Sites remain viable • Bd. Of Directors • World Canal Visitors awareness of NHA • Return Visitors • Volunteers Conference • Residents • Awareness of • Continuing • Partners: • Small Grants for • Community history and life in Revenues - Arts Orgs Events/Festivals Organizations 1800’s • Build capacity for - Conservation/ • Canal-related • Historic Sites and • Visitation to sites sites and partners - Planning Orgs museums Museums in the corridor • Distinctivesense - Historic • National Heritage • School Systems • New revenues of place Sites/Museums Landmark • Local Government • Recognition as a • Sustained program - Tourism Orgs • Experiential • Federal and State Federal program awareness - Local Programs Agencies • Builds • STEM education Governments - Ticket to Ride • Students/Teachers interest/raises efforts - Federal and - Water Trails • Elected Officials awareness • Economic impact State Agencies - Bike Tours • Tourism - Small Businesses • Canal - Higher Education Infrastructure Orgs Programs - Community Orgs - Lockport • Regional Funders • Technical • Corporate Partners Assistance • Donors • Grant Funds

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 41 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Chart 3.2: Erie Canalway Program Goals

Erie Canalway Programs Technical assistance InfrastructureCanal Ticket to Ride to Ticket Experiential Programs MuseumsCanal Landmark National Heritage MuseumsCanal Festival Grant World ConferenceCanal Fundraising Program Program s for Events and

Fostering Promotion Program Preservation Vibrant Inform Sustainability Tourism Management Communities

• Museums include a number of programs, include the Rochester Museum and Science Cente, Erie Canal Museum, Erie Canal Discovery • Canalinfrastructure includes Lockport Locks, Chittenango Landing, Matton Shipbuilding • Expected experiential programs include the Sam Patch, Erie Bike Canal Company, Rochester Accessible Adventures, Ticket to Ride, activities and tours of trails and waterways

Table 3.1: Top projects based on time spent and resources (money spent): October 1, 2011 through September 30th, 2017* PROJECT Expenses Staff Time (hours) World Canals Conference** $694,214 2,954 Ticket To Ride & EKIP $399,473 1,909 Matton Shipyard: Preservation & $207,389 1,605 Adaptive Reuse Initiative Grants Program $195,527 1,041 Tourism Promotion & Collaboration $133,593 3,463

* The date range indicated in this question represents the period ECNHC began collecting and quantifying staff time by project via Quickbooks (2011).

**Expenses for World Canals Conference are as follows: • Planning, website, promotion, registration & registration management: $212,716 • Conference planning, implementation & event management: $449,052 • Professional fees, supplies, travel and other conference expenses: $32,446 • Total: $694,214 • Industry standards put the direct economic impact of a conference of this size to the host community at $475,000 with indirect and induced benefits total¬ing over $2 million (source: Visit Syracuse, the city’s tourism promotion agency).

42 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.2 Grants Table 3.2: Grants Overview 2002-2017

Mission Statement: Total Grants Awarded 93 Total Organizations Receiving a Grant 85 “To help accomplish the goals and objectives of the Management Plan, the Erie Canalway Total Amount Awarded $463,082 National Heritage Corridor distributes grants Average amount per Grant $4,926 to community organizations and sites to pro- Average Amount Awarded per year $46,308 vide and leverage funding for new projects that Total individual sites receiving a grant 60 (71%) “plan for, encourage, and assist historic pres- Sites having received more than one ervation, conservation, recreation, interpre- grant 17 (20%) tation, tourism and community development throughout the Corridor in a manner that pro- Sites having received more than motes partnerships among the Corridor’s many three grants 8 (9%) stakeholders, and reflects, celebrates and -en Potential projects or events fall within ECNHC’s hances the Corridor’s national significance for three key programs designated for this evalu- all to use and enjoy.” ation:

-ECNHC Grant Program Guidelines 1. Preservation 2. Tourism/Recreation 3.2.1 Overview of Grants: 3. Education/Interpretation Between 2002-2017, ECNHC has awarded 93 Education and interpretation projects make local grants totaling $463,082 to 60 local or- up more than half of the grants (52), Tourism ganizations and sites. Of the 60 organizations, and Recreation projects contribute to a third 17 (18%) have received more than one grant, of grant recipients (30), and preservation sites while 8 (8%) have received more than three make up less than 15% of the total grants (12). grants. An average of $46,308 is spent annually on grants. The average amount per grant is roughly $5,000. Table 3.3: Grant Awards by Category In 2007 the Erie Canalway launched a pilot grant program that made 13 awards for a total Number % of cate- Total awarded of $200,000 distributed. Since 2009 ECNHC’s of awards gory per category current grants program has made annual dis- Preserva- tributions with total awards ranging between tion 12 13% $57,617 $30,000 and $50,000 per year. The amount of Tourism/ funding that is made available has remained Recreation 30 32% $171,855 consistent. Education/ Interpreta- tion 51 55% $229,009 TOTALS 93 $458,481

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 43 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

The ECNHC separately has awarded 240 spon- 3.2.2 Grant Evaluation Criteria sorship grants to organizations. Sponsorship grants do not need to be applied for and usual- ECNHC evaluation criteria include significance ly are requested on an individual case by case of the heritage resources, public benefit, and basis. A total of $644,837.80 have been grant- sustainability projects that can continue -be ed in sponsorship dollars to 103 local sites. yond the life of the grant.

Table 3.4: Sponsorships Overview Projects must reflect the mission and goals of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Total Sponsorships Awarded 240 Corridor and should fall into one of the follow- Total Organizations Receiving a ing broad categories: Sponsorship 175 • Historic and Cultural Resource Preservation Total Amount Awarded $644,837 • Natural Resource Conservation Average amount per sponsorship $2,675 • Promotion of Recreation Average Amount Awarded per • Interpretation and Orientation year $42,982 • Economic and Waterfront Revitalization Total individual sites receiving a • Tourism Development and Marketing grant 103 (58%) Sites having received more than The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor one grant 43 (25%) considers requests for creative and unique activities and projects. The following Sites having received more than are guidelines but are not inclusive. three grants 29 (17%) • Erie Canal Bicentennial Projects (except festivals & events) Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor • Exhibition design/installation, education, and makes targeted grants to schools to provide collections-based activities resources to cover the costs of transportation • Public and performance art and tour fees for field trips to significant Erie • Tourism based activities Canal museums and sites throughout the Cor- • Planning for historic preservation, exhibition, ridor, as well as to the four National Park Units public programs, or other projects located within the Erie Canalway. Since 2012 • Conservation treatment of objects/artwork more than 35,000 students from 453 schools specific to the story of the Erie Canal have benefited. More than 60% of children at- (special requirements pertain to conservation tend schools with a greater than 50% partici- requests) pation rate in the federal Free/Reduced meal program. Grant Program Goals:

TICKET TO RIDE & EVERY KID in a PARK grants 1. Direct funding for projects or programs Total Amount awarded: $292,833 within the congressionally designated bound- Total actual TTR grants awarded*: 453 aries of the Erie Canalway NHC that serve to Average amount per award: $646 advance the goals and strategies described in *Total number of individual schools having the ECNHC Commission’s Preservation & Man- received at least one award: 230; total New agement Plan York State school districts with participating schools: 110.

44 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

2. Encourage partners to leverage additional Over the life of each grant program, the num- resources for their projects ber of applicants per year has remained the 3. Support projects that meet local goals and same. However, in a typical year approximately priorities and that are managed at the local 30% of applications received represent organi- level zations who have never applied in the past. 4. Encourage collaboration and partnership building amongst grant applicants “Over the years the cumulative effect of these new applicants has been to exponentially grow Grant requests shall be no less than $2,000 the ECNHC database, increase overall usage nor exceed $7,000. An average of 15 applica- of the social media platforms, and to generate tions are received annually for the Competitive increased awareness and interest in the Erie grants program and approximately 50 applica- Canalway National Heritage Corridor and- re tions are received for the ECNHC Events & Fes- lated programs.” tivals program. In each case ECNHC generally approves approximately 50% of applicants per -Andy Kitzmann, Assistant Director, ECNHC year.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 45 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Table 3.5: Top 10 Grants with the Most Impact Top 10 grants in terms of effectiveness in numbers (turnout, scope of project, success)

Corn Hill has received grants from ECNHC to develop curriculum materials to teach STEM based activities aboard the vessel Sam Patch. Materials were created with input from teachers from the Rochester City School District and the Corn Hill Navigation Rochester Museum & Science Center. ECNHC also provided financial support

to offset transportation costs to ensure that students from the Rochester City $16,704 School District were able to pilot the materials. This large district is ranked 791st out of 801 districts within New York State. The average percentage of students from the district participating in the federal free/reduced lunch program is 80%. 19 Rochester City School District schools have participated. The Albany Institute of History & Art has received several grants from ECNHC to develop curriculum-based materials based on the museum’s strong collec- Albany Institute of History tion of canal related art, archives and artifacts found within the museum’s & Art collection. A curriculum guide is one of the resulting projects that incorporated the museums closed-circuit television technology allowing educators to in- $18,896 teract with teachers directly on how to use the materials. Museum educators also traveled to various districts to conduct training workshops on the use of the materials. In 2012 the Public Broadcasting Council of Central New York was provided a grant to create seven 90-second interstitials for television, radio, and web use. These interstitials help New Yorkers understand that the Erie Canal is a Public Broadcasting Coun- strong recreational resources for today’s generation. The interstitials capture cil of Central New York the Canal as it exists today, through interviews with business owners, canal

employees, boaters, bikers and economic development professionals. Over $6,531 the course of six months they aired more than 1,179 times and are available for any PBS affiliate station across the US and continue to be aired periodically today.

Chittenango Landing Canal Boat Museum is the only extant dry-dock from the early period of the Erie Canal. The site was developed by a dedicated core of volunteers who transformed over a period of 30 years from what was an Chittenango Landing Canal unofficial landfill into a thriving community asset. The museum received an Boat Museum ECNHC grant to develop a cultural landscape report of the site to more clearly

distinguish between historic and contemporary features and to better edu- $7,732 cate the board on current preservation standards. The report also included an oral history component that captured the memories of the sites remaining founding members.

46 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

The Preservation League of New York State received grant support from the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund to support a symposium spotlighting the rehabilitation and reuse potential of five vacant and underused historic industrial buildings within the Corridor. The project, called The NYS Indus- trial Heritage Redevelopment Project was a one-year initiative with a goal Preservation League of of jumpstarting the restoration and reuse of a sample of underutilized or New York State vacant historic industrial buildings in the Corridor and to encourage municipal officials and the owners of similar buildings to see this type of struc- $5,750 ture as a developable resource. A consultant team created preliminary development and rehabilitation plans for five buildings in collaboration with the building’s current or potential owners as a way of jumpstarting their rehabilitation and reuse. The symposium had 150 attendees and included local and state officials. The Rochester Museum & Science Center has received four grants from ECNHC for unique projects within the museum’s exhibition spaces. Two grants are for renovations to existing canal related exhibitions, a third re- Rochester Museum & sulted in a hands-on experience in the museum’s Maker’s Space gallery, Science Center and the fourth is an educational curriculum guide intended for teachers taking students on a self-guided tour of the museums canal related exhibi- $19,921 tions. In addition to the three grant funded projects, the museum also has ancillary spaces that tell the story of the Underground Railroad, Women’s Rights, and industry that all have direct connections to the canal story. The National Women’s Hall of Fame is renovating the Seneca Knitting Mill, National Women’s Hall of located on the bank of the Cayuga & Seneca Canal (one of the four branch- Fame es of the New York State Canal System) into a new home for the organization. The mill was an active industrial site during the canal period. Erie $8,575 Canalway’s two grants addressed design elements within the structure’s exhibition spaces and the design of the actual exhibitions. Capital Repertory Theatre is a thriving cultural arts organization located in Albany, New York. Erie Canalway’s grants supported the development of two unique plays for the theatre’s On The Go program, which takes the- Capital Repertory Theatre ater performances into the schools. One dramatized the true-life stories of immigrant laborers who constructed the Erie Canal. The second told the $12,000 true story of tells the story of a free African American who worked on the Champlain Canal, was captured and taken south, and found his way back to freedom in New York. Approximately 80 performances were conducted at schools throughout New York’s capital region.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 47 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Located near Buffalo, New York, Explore & More was selected by the State of New York as the managing entity for a new 20,000 square foot children’s museum. The museum’s location is at Canalside in downtown Buffalo and adjacent to the terminus of the Erie Canal into Lake Erie. Grants to the museum have supported the development of the Explore & More Children’s principal first floor exhibition called Moving Water, which tells the Museum story of the Erie Canal and Niagara Falls. The museum is slated to be opened in the fall of 2019. Additional grant programs to the museum $16,950 have supported the creation of an Erie Canal educational program that is conducted outside at Canalside during the summer months, and is also available as an in-class school program. The Buffalo Ca- nalside holds public programs every day of the week (ice skating in the winter) and attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors annually. The Tour the Towpath program is a jointly managed program between the Town of Dewitt, Village of Canastota, City of Rome, and Madison County. This two-day annual event was inspired by a similar program being managed by the Chittenango Landing Canal Boat Museum called Tuesdays on the Towpath (initial funding provided Friends of Dewitt Parks & by the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor in which the public Recreation met every other Tuesday to take a guided tour of the Old Erie Canal Towpath). Tour the Towpath took this concept and created a two $3,000 day, one night ride of the 29 mile Old Erie Canal State Park. The program, now in its fourth year, includes bike support, transportation, overnight accommodations, free museum tours, food & water, and historic and environmental interpretive stops. In 2017 the program was schedule to coincide with the World Canals Conference.

48 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.2.3 Grant Trends

ARCBridge has observed a great discrepancy ARCBridge believes that while ECNHC has amongst grant categories with 52 grants award- made significant strides in boosting education ed to education projects, 30 to tourism and rec- projects around the community and contribut- reation projects, and 12 grants for preservation ed to a wide variety of events that increase vis- projects. itation to the region, there could be a more targeted approach to solicit interest from smaller After looking through the 93 grant project de- preservation organizations or individuals in the scriptions and interviewing several recipients, future. However, ECNHC partners directly with ARCBridge has found that this is due to the fact the that educational projects like Ticket to Ride and Every Kid in a Park have been the most com- Preservation League of New York State (PLNYS) mon long-term interest of the community orga- to provide funding and technical support for nizations applying, resulting in the most grants two existing and robust preservation focused awarded to educational programs. grants for planning and design. ECNHC staff serve as grant reviewers, but these grants, Meanwhile preservation grants have the least which are re-grants in nature, are not counted amount of grants awarded due to the fact that as part of ECNHC’s grant program. there are simply not a substantial number of organizations in the preservation sector applying ECNHC has also made sponsorship grants to to ECNHC grants program. The grants program PLNYS to develop a Historic Tax Credit publica- is specifically designed to provide small amounts tion and for PLNYS staff to make presentations of support to worthy projects that advance across the Corridor for the use of these credits the ECNHC Preservation & Management Plan by homeowners and municipal leaders. goals. Given the relatively low individual award amounts ($2,000 - $7,000), ECNHC targets sup- It is encouraging to see that nearly 60% of port for projects that have a strong potential for grants have maintained program sustainability, being successfully completed in a timely manner especially given that most grant funding is for (typically a year or less) and that do not over- a single project/event use. The fact that nearly ly burden an applicant with administrative hur- 80% of all projects (74) were started because dles. For this reason, ECNHC staff have said that of ECNHC investment also shows that the her- they choose not to award requests for capital itage area is an enabler of newer projects that projects that would trigger Section 106 reviews. might not otherwise get off the ground. Rather, ECNHC focuses preservation awards on pre-development activities such as planning, engineering, and design, activities that also tend to fit neatly within the funding award amount parameters.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 49 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Table 3.6: Project sustainability from Erie Canalway’s Grants Program

Category Yes No ECNHC Interpretation of the core question ECNHC Grant was initial Was the ECNHC investment the original “seed” fund- 74 18 investment in ing for the project? project

Most ECNHC grants are a single activity, rather than Grantee project supporting an ongoing project. These include preser- was a single 85 8 vation studies, exhibitions, conservation, workshops, activity professional development opportunities for partners, and interpretive wayfinding, among other activities.

Is the project still available to the public (like con- served Erie Canal Maps, bicycle trail maps, or wayfinding materials); or could the organization revive Project or Prod- if they wished (traveling exhibitions, original plays, uct Still Avail- 55 38 workshops, among other materials; or is the organi- able or Active zation still making use of the item (planning resources, education tour guides, or other materials used to engage the public on a daily basis).

ARCBridge has also noted that only 18% of or- experiments to be tested out within. In ad- ganizations or entities who have applied have dition, as the same organizations keep re- received more than one grant, while only 8% applying year after year, ECNHC is able to of all organizations have received more than regularly monitor success rates of previous three grants, which supports the trend that grants and use that information to decide most grant applications surround a single whether or not a program has the potential event rather than an ongoing program. Over to become sustainable and if federal fund- 90% (85) of grant projects awarded are single ing is being put to best use. Also the fact activity based rather supporting an ongoing that 30% of the organizations applying each project. ARCBridge believes the fact that ECN- year are new organizations attests to the HC casts a wide net in terms of grant types is ECNHC’s ability to attract new ideas. Grant beneficial in fostering community trust and giving has allowed ECNHC to further increase respect for ECNHC as a reliable source for its brand awareness and reach throughout funding all types of projects that fall under the community while serving as an incuba- the heritage guidelines. The fact that 50% of tor to test out new ideas and types of pro- applications are accepted allows for more in- grams. ECNHC emblem logo is included on novative ideas to be pitched and ECNHC to all associated project materials, including serve as an incubator for launching new ini- websites, event brochures and handouts, tiatives within existing organizations. It also and press releases to the media and govern- allows a legitimate space for unique micro ment officials.

50 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.3 Preservation es the historic significance and character of the landscape. The report provides priority recommendations on enhancing the landscape’s his- The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor toric character in the context of other museum preservation program encompasses a wide goals and within the National Park Service’s range of activities. These include grant giving standards for historic preservation. to help sustain local heritage sites, preserving the Matton Shipyard near Albany, and facili- Town of Montezuma/Montezuma Heritage tating the listing of the designation of the NYS Park – The Montezuma Heritage Park has de- Canal System as a National Historic Landmark. veloped a comprehensive strategic plan for the The ECNHC also created the Heritage Awards preservation and interpretation of the extant of Excellence to reward local heritage sites and canal resources found within the park. The help them get more regional and national rec- plan is grounded in a preexisting Cultural Land- ognition. scape Report developed by the Park in partnership with Erie Canalway National Heritage 3.3.1 Preservation Grants Programs Corridor and the National Park Service’s Rivers Trails Conservation Association. Over the past decade, ECNHC has made 94 grants to communities and non-profit organi¬za- H. Lee White Marine Museum – The muse- tions that have spurred $1.6 million in additional um is the steward of a Barge Canal era dipper investments in preservation, recreation, and ed- dredge and was awarded funding by ECNHC to ucation that highlight the value of the Corridor’s complete a structural survey report of the ves- historic resources. ECNHC also boosts funding sel. The completed report was critical to secur- for preservation projects in Erie Canalway coming National Register status for the dredge and munities by providing financial support for Tech- identifies a series of priority restoration and nical Assistance Grants (TAG) from the New York preservation actions critical to ensuring the State Council on the Arts (NYSCA) and the Pres- long term viability of the vessel. ervation League of New York State. During 2016 and 2017 rounds, nine of fourteen awards were Preservation League of New York State – The made to projects taking place within the Erie Preservation Leagues secured an ECNHC grant Canalway National Heritage Corridor. to host a symposium and associated written report spotlighting the rehabilitation and re-use Examples of Preservation Grants: of five vacant and underused historic industrial buildings located within the Erie Canalway Na- Chittenango Landing Canal Boat Museum - The tional Heritage Corridor. 120 people attended Chittenango Canal Boat Landing Museum (CL- the adaptive reuse symposium. CBM) provided funding along with ECNHC to develop a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR) for Preservation League of New York State – Erie the museum grounds. The museum is located Canalway National Heritage Corridor has pro- on the site of a former canal side dry dock. Once vided underwriting to support 3-5 Technical ubiquitous along the canal, Chittenango Landing Assistance Grants sponsored by the Preserva- is now the only extant site remaining. Through tion League of New York State and the New historical research and evaluation of existing York State Council on the Arts. Grants are used conditions, the CLR documents the historical to hire a preservation architect to assess his- and physical contexts of the overall canal site, toric structures and create a report detailing describes existing conditions and contextualiz the findings and highlighting recommenda

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 51 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

tions for preservation and improvement of Corri- ECNHC staff spent months researching the dor-based structures. process, bringing together the necessary sup- porters, and filing the application, which was 3.3.2 National Historic Landmark Designation finally granted in January 2017.

The New York State Barge Canal National Histor- “Across the canal people were excited about ic Landmark nomination was approved by the the national designation that ECNHC promot- Secretary of the Interior in December 2016. Less ed. We saw lots of opportunities, including ad- than 3% of the 90,000 places currently listed on ditional federal resources to market and inter- the National Register of Historic Places are des- pret the canal system.” ignated National Historic Landmarks. This status enhances the canal’s stature as a national and in- -David Kinyon, Director of Economic Develop- ternational tourism destination, while also rais- ment at Town of Lockport ing community pride of place. The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor The National Historic Landmark designation made it a key goal to achieve this designation for includes the Erie, Champlain, Oswego, and the NYS Canal System. $21,781.93 was spent in Cayuga-Seneca canals still in operation today. staff salary and 336.25 hours of staff time was It specifically recognizes the canal system for allotted to this project between 2011 and 2017. its role in shaping the American economy and settlement, as an embodiment of the Progres- The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor sive Era emphasis on public works, and as a was the premiere organization to spearhead the nationally significant work of early 20th cen- application of the canalway to become a Nation- tury engineering and construction. The canal al Historic Landmark. system’s 450 miles of navigation channels, locks, lift bridges, dams, power houses, and maintenance shops together represent a significant, distinctive, and exceptional entity.

52 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Table 3.7: Project sustainability timeline from Erie Canalway’s Grants Program

New York’s canals received formal recognition from the State Historic Preservation 1993 Office (SHPO), which affirmed that canal features are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register if they retain historical integrity. Panel of scholars, convened by the National Park Service as part of the Special Re- 1995 source Study, unanimously concluded that New York’s canal system is nationally significant from the 1790s through the Barge Canal era. 2000 Congressional designation of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. Federal Highway Administration, NYSDOT, NYSHPO, and the Advisory Council on 2001 Historic Preservation entered into Programmatic Agreement for identification, evaluation, and treatment of bridges over canals. Erie Canalway Preservation and Management Plan approved by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne and the State of New York, Governor Pataki. Section 2006 9.2 Implementation includes a recommendation for pursuing National Register status for the system. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, NYS Canal Corporation and SHPO agree to 2008 begin the nomination process for National Register listing of the NYS Barge Canal. Historic American Engineering Record of the National Park Service surveys and docu- 2009 ments historic canal features for inclusion in the NR listing. Erie Canalway staff and HAER refine the nomination and begin preparing documen- 2010 tation for over 250 structures- every lock, lift bridge, guard gate, and dry dock on the system. Additional photo documentation, research, maps, and narrative descriptions- pre 2011-13 pared for the nomination. National Register nomination submitted to SHPO for review by the State Board for Historic Preservation. The nomination is scheduled to be reviewed by the State Board 2014 and listed on the State Register. The board then forwarded the nomination to the National Park Service in Washington, D.C. where it was approved and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Erie Canalway NHC begins the process of refining the National Register nomination materials for submission to the National Park Service for consideration as a National 2015 Historic Landmark. Additional photo documentation, research, maps, and narrative descriptions prepared for the nomination. National Historic Landmark nomination submitted to the National Park Service. The 2016 nomination is reviewed by the National Park Service Advisory Council, is approved, and is forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior for final consideration.

Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewel approves the nomination of the New York State 2016 Barge Canal System as a National Historic Landmark.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 53 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Congressman John Katko and representatives a hub for visitors, students, and families to from the NYS Canal Corporation, NYS Historic come learn about our incredible past, and be Preservation Office, and the National Park- Ser inspired to do great things in the future.” vice presented benefits and positive impacts of the prestigious recognition. — NY Senator Kirsten Gillibrand

“I want to first congratulate and salute our part- 3.3.3 Heritage Award of Excellence ners at the Erie Canalway National Heritage Cor- ridor Commission, who have labored incessantly Begun in 2008, the Heritage Award of Excel- to earn first National Historic Register status and lence honors and celebrates historic sites that now the distinction of National Historic Land- make up the Erie Canalway National Heritage mark status.” Corridor and recognizes excellence in advanc- ing the goals of the Erie Canalway Preservation -Brian U. Stratton, Director, New York State Canal and Management Plan. ARCBridge believes Corporation (Comments from the NHL Designa- the Heritage Award of Excellence program is tion Press Conference) an innovative way for ECNHC staff to build relationships with community leaders, promote “Our New York State canals are a standing re- model projects, and inspire others to get in- minder of the pivotal role our state played in volved in heritage development in the hun- our nation’s history. All New Yorkers should take dreds of smaller canal communities. Over the great pride that the canal system, now in its life of the program ECNHC has awarded eight third century of operation, remains as a symbol Heritage Awards and 11 honorable mentions. of ingenuity and progress for many throughout the world. This recognition is also a tribute to Staff and commissioners facilitate an indepen- the dedicated staff and employees of the Erie dent external jury who select finalists based Canalway National Heritage Corridor, the New on written applications and rigorous site visits York State Canal Corporation and the New York involving not only project sponsors, but com- State Office of Parks, Recreation and- Histor munity members, stakeholders, and municipal ic Preservation who work together each day in leaders. Written applications are due in Feb- service to the many canal and river communities ruary. Applications are then reviewed by the throughout our state.” panel of judges who will select up to three finalists to receive a site visit. Site visits occur -Congressman Paul Tonko (Comments from the during March and April. The judges then select NHL Press Conference) final award winners based on the written application and site visit. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand held a press conference in May 2017 with ECNHC, the NYS Canal Benefits of the Heritage Award include: Corporation and Congresswoman Claudia Ten- ney in the canal community of Little Falls to help • Recognition plaque unveil one of 15 bronze plaques that memorial- • Statewide and regional media releases ize the designation. • Development of a written case study that describes the place and the actions taken “With this National Historic Landmark designa- to protect and showcase its significance tion, the New York Canal System will once again • Listing on Erie Canalway website of Best take on that central role in our state, and will be Practices for the Corridor

54 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

• During the second site visit, the ARCBridge ARCBridge met with Brockport Deputy May- team visited two Heritage Award Recipi- or Bill Andrews to hear more about how the ent sites, the Village of Brockport and the Heritage Award of Excellence has affected the Spencerport Canal Depot. ARCBridge has community’s preservation efforts. observed that ECNHC has used the awards program as a way to scout for more localized “We have the finest examples of Victorian partners and has continued to work with streetscape in the area from the 1870’s. It’s these sites after the award was originally giv- been an entire community effort to preserve en, providing site promotion, technical and the history here. The work that it has taken to historical resources and grants. ARCBridge make it a tourism location is dramatic. I wrote believes this awards program showcases a letter in support of the nomination to get the one of the most innovative methods that the ECNHC Heritage Award of Excellence. We are ECNHC has implemented to access and sup- very welcoming and people love our visitor cen- port as much of the canal region as possible. ter and guides that explain all the local history here. There is a lot of competition amongst the Heritage Award Recipient: Village of Brockport canal communities and the award gives us an (2009) extra degree of legitimacy and more visitor interest. I am very pleased.” Against the backdrop of a crumbling manufacturing and industrial economic base facing many -Brockport Deputy Mayor, Bill Andrews upstate New York communities in the 1980s and 90s, Brockporters sought a way forward Brockporters developed a museum without that would capitalize on this small Victorian vil- walls so that residents and visitors would ex- lage’s strengths. Brockport’s multifaceted plan perience Brockport’s heritage as part of the included four major components: revitalizing its fabric of its present village life. This approach canalfront, preserving historic structures, mak- reaches a wide audience, fostering a sense of ing Main Street vibrant, and building community place and instilling a preservation ethic. Brock- pride. port’s living museum includes interpretive signs throughout the village, self-guided walk- Working through a number of volunteer orga- ing tours, public art, rotating displays in public nizations and with the assistance of the College venues, such as the library, supermarket, and of Brockport faculty and students, Brockport cit- senior center, and more than 50 buildings on izens identified, preserved, and built upon the the State and National Register and 37 Historic best elements of the village: its historic architec- Landmarks. ture and Victorian streetscapes, its access to and from the canal, its walkable neighborhoods, and "A long-term, community-wide effort to make the spirit of volunteerism of its residents. the Village of Brockport a more attractive home, workplace, and destination for travelers Brockport’s 1998 Canalfront Master Plan and en- has strengthened Brockport’s economy, while rollment in the NYS Certified Local Government preserving the integrity of this Victorian village program provided guidance and access to finan- on the Erie Canal. Brockport’s emphasis on liv- cial resources. Strategic pursuit of a number of ing its history, rather than simply preserving it, grants and community-wide fundraising efforts led to innovative approaches to heritage devel- enabled the village to rehabilitate its canal wall, opment, benefiting residents and visitors alike. institute a historic home improvement program By living its history, the Village of Brockport and, in 2005, open its Welcome Center along the honors its past and provides Application Jury canal.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 55 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

an outstanding model for canal communities 70 regular volunteers worked for two years seeking to build a strong local economy and to restore and move the depot. The Spencer- community for present residents and future gen- port Depot and Canal Museum now provides erations." amenities for canal travelers, including water, electricity, laundry, Internet access, a lending -ECNHC Application Jury library, information on area attractions, and an inviting place to relax. It also showcases 250 Heritage Award Recipient: Spencerport Depot historic objects and offers educational pro- and Canal Museum, Spencerport (2009) grams to area school children and adult visitors. The Spencerport Depot and Canal Museum, opened in 2006, constitutes a successful adap- The Spencerport Depot has hosted 5,000 vis- tive reuse of a former trolley depot to serve as a itors since 2007 and enabled the Village of visitor center and canal museum on the Erie Ca- Spencerport to become a visitor attraction, nal. Volunteers logged more than 80,000 hours rather than an easily passed port on the Erie to bring the project to fruition, resulting inre Canal. newed community pride and a center for both residents and visitors to gather and celebrate ARCBridge evaluation team members were Spencerport’s canal heritage. able to visit this Heritage Excellence Award Recipient site during the second site visit to The Spencerport Depot and Canal Museum, with the region to see the preservation efforts and its welcoming, “front porch” atmosphere, has results firsthand. ARCBridge met with Depot also become a gathering place for the commu- Director, Simon Devenish, to understand how nity. Its story of success against the odds embod- ECNHC has impacted smaller canal communi- ies the spirit and determination that have long ties. been hallmarks of canal communities. “People love this building. We get 35-40 visitors a day, many who are attracted by the Her- -ECNHC Application Jury itage Award signage and want to know more. We’ve seen people from 45 states and 14 coun- Preservation efforts were quite extensive and tries come through, and the vast amount of included the following obstacles: people don’t know much about the Erie Canal, which we here consider the 8th wonder of the • Acquiring the 1908 trolley depot, which had world. So they love to talk and learn about the fallen into disrepair and been transformed history. We also have boats that come by. The into a house ECNHC is a great partner. We were asked to be • Restoring it to serve as a functional visitor one of their first partner sites after the award center and it’s been most beneficial to have that rela- • Moving the building across town to its origi- tionship with a larger canal advocate. ECNHC nal canalside location provide us signage, an informational histor- • Forming a board of trustees ic pamphlet, and provide historical resources • Chartering the museum an establishing a and connections. Anytime I need assistance or volunteer program don’t know the answer to something, I just give • Furnishing the building and developing ex- them a ring. Reducing funding for the ECNHC hibits and collections would affect us in a lot of ways because their • Raising $140,000 to fund the project staffing is invaluable. The NHA does a great job

56 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation to promote the canal and having an affiliation as 35, which enable today’s canal traffic to climb a Heritage Excellence Award site – without it we the Niagara Escarpment. wouldn’t have as many people come in. It’s given us the opportunity to be part of the NPS stamping Canal Street, a pedestrian and bicycle-only program. Overall it gives us authority and credi- street overlooking the locks, anchors a num- bility, their support helps us to have a better visi- ber of events, businesses and attractions, in- tor base and income stream and visitors.” cluding: the Erie Canal Discovery Center, Lake Effect Ice Cream, Flight of Five Winery, Lock- -Depot Director, Simon Devenish port Caves and Underground Boat Rides, and a weekly Community Market. In addition, Harri- 3.3.4 Lockport Flight of Five son Place, an advanced manufacturing and en- trepreneurship hub, Cornerstone CFCU Arena, ARCBridge believes ECNHC partnership with the a newly opened skating facility, and Lockport Lockport region is a great example of how the Locks and Erie Canal Cruises are important heritage area continues to work with Heritage community assets within the District. Award of Excellence recipients and broaden the heritage area’s scope within the region. The The Erie Canal Discovery Center, located at the area was awarded recognition in 2015 and since top of the Lockport Flight, is an ECNHC Part- then Lockport has received grant funding, tech- ner site and a consistent provider of tours for nical assistance, and historical resources from the Erie Canalway’s Ticket to Ride program. A ECNHC. In 2017, ECNHC awarded a $3,750 grant majority of students taking Ticket to Ride tours for interpretative signage in Lockport. originate from the Buffalo City School District which is ranked 769th of 801 districts in New Lockport’s famous Flight of Five locks are among York State. The Erie Canal Discovery Center ac- the most iconic features and most recognizable counts for approximately 20% of Ticket to Ride engineering feats of the entire Erie Canal and the tours. only place in the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor showcasing five consecutive locks. City ARCBridge visited the Lockport area during planners, working with citizen’s groups and canal a site visit and met with David Kinyon, 2014 champions developed a plan to restore the his- Chairman of the Lockport Locks Heritage Dis- toric Flight of Five and make the locks a show- trict,. Kinyon described how ECNHC opened piece of a larger economic development plan. doors for the local community’s preservation ECNHC has collaborated on these efforts with the efforts. After this interview and observing City of Lockport, Greater Lockport Development public interaction with the locks, ARCBridge Corporation, Lockport Heritage District Corpora- believes that ECNHC’s 2015 Heritage Award of tion, Niagara County Historical Society, Lockport Excellence helped to give the Lockport Flight Main Street Program, NYS Canal Corporation, and of Five Locks project more traction with local local businesses and residents. officials as well as more awareness among statewide partners and national prominence. The Lockport Locks District is today the culmination of many years economic investment, historic “The flight of five locks was considered the preservation, and community revitalization cen- crowning jewel for the Erie Canal – they were tered around Lockport’s iconic locks. The Lock- completed just in time for the opening and port Locks District showcases the remarkable res- were considered an engineering marvel in toration of Locks 69 and 70, originally completed 1825. They enabled the Erie Canal to be com- in 1849. Visitors can see the locks massive wood- pleted all the way to Buffalo. Our goal is the en gates, operated by hand, next to Locks 34 and rehabilitation and reintroduction of the five

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 57 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

locks. So far, with the help of several organiza- Park at the junction of the Mohawk and Hud- tions like ECNHC, we have rehabilitated two of son Rivers, the shipyard is strategically linked the five locks. We are beginning restoration of to several land and water-based recreational the third lock now. All five are in operating con- trails and canal related historic resources. dition. It would be totally unique in the nation to have an operating set of canal locks next to “Like the tugs and barges once built and a resorted set of restarted locks. For visitors in- launched at Matton Shipyard, it has taken a terested in heritage tourism, Lockport offers the mighty effort to initiate the preservation and greatest opportunity to compare and contrast transformation of this historic shipyard in Co- the technology, building materials, and method hoes.” of operation with the previous enlarged locks. -Andy Kitzmann, Assistant Director, ECNHC The Heritage Award of Excellence in recognition of the completion of our phase one rehabilitation Erie Canalway rallied state agencies, municipal project for the locks gave us prominence locally leaders, consultants, and funders to save the and regionally. We were elated. That was a tre- shipyard from further deterioration, while en- mendous signal and accomplishment perceived visioning a vibrant future for the site. by our local officials and allowed us to engage in more partners statewide and help our efforts ECNHC has also initiated an extensive fund- to completely rehabilitate all of our locks. ECNHC raising campaign to support the project. To has opened doors and we immediately estab- date, ECNHC has secured more than $800,000 lished a relationship with the NHA to gain their in grants from the NYS Canal Corporation, the support, to help us market and interpret the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic locks. ECNHC has done a tremendous amount to Preservation, the John E. Streb Fund for New raise the awareness of not only local citizens, but York of the National Trust for Historic Preser¬- people around the state and nation of the heri- vation, the Hudson River Greenway/Hudson tage assets we have here. Historic preservation Valley National Heritage Area, the McCarthy is such a key component of our product, so to Charities, the Albany County Convention and lose any kind of support from them due to fund- Visitors Bureau, and other private and public ing cuts would be a loss.” funds.

-David Kinyon, 2014 Chairman of the Lockport 3.4 Tourism Development Locks Heritage District One of the Erie Canalway National Heritage 3.3.5 Matton Shipyard Corridor’s major program initiatives has been to promote tourism development around the The historic Matton Shipyard is a rare surviving corridor and to support and connect small- example of an early 20th century shipbuilding er canal communities. ARCBridge has found and repair facility. From 1916 to 1983, Matton these efforts are in part to better educate the workers built more than 340 tugboats, barges, public about not only the canal’s historical im- police boats, WWII submarine chasers, and oth- portance, but also its many modern day re- er vessels. sources available along the canal for visitors. These efforts assist in further developing the Erie Canalway is leading a group of state and mu- region’s economic viability and include grant nicipal partners to transform Matton Shipyard giving, preparing maps, guides and other mar- into a hub for recreational, educational, and cul- keting materials, and promoting events and tural activities. Located in Peebles Island State

58 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation festivals. The ECNHC also provides unique ECNHC assists thousands of annual visitors cross-corridor journeys for locals and tourists plan a trip by weaving together heritage, cul- and in 2017, ECNHC hosted the world canal con- tural and recreational highlights and activities. ference, putting a global spotlight on the Erie Ca- These include the creation of nine tour itiner- nal and its importance as a nationally recognized aries, a photo contest, wayside outdoor exhib- historic corridor. its, and distributing Visitor Guides. ARCBridge team members witnessed these materials on 3.4.1 Examples of tourism grants: display at NHA partner sites, museums, as well as on board the Sam Patch tourism boat. Ma- Madison County Planning Department – Mad- terials include: ison County developed a study to determine the feasibility of improving four informal hand- Erie Canalway Map & Guide launch vessel access points for paddlers along the Erie Canal. The study takes place completely With help from 85 visitor centers and cultural within the Old Erie Canal State Park and provides heritage sites, ECNHC distributed 60,000 copies technical assistance needed to transform these of its visitor guide in 2015. The guide highlights sites into safe, visible, and ADA compliant launch new events and ways to enjoy the Corridor, areas. The activity complements the recent work and includes resources for boating and cycling, of Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor in a full Corridor map, and places to explore creating a comprehensive watertrail guide for the entire New York State Canal System. Photo Contest & Calendar

Schenectady County Historical Society – The his- ECNHC’s annual calendar tells a story of the torical society was funded to develop an expe- Corridor’s beauty and history—through the riential activity called Rowin’ the River. Taking lens of photo contest winners. In 2015, ECNHC place on the Mohawk River/Erie Canal this trans- distributed 17,500 calendars in more than 75 portation experience enables visitors to row tra- libraries and museums ditional bateau boats, originally used prior to the Erie Canal to move cargo across Upstate New Itineraries – Find Your Park York. The program includes supervised rowing opportunities for visitors and training for those ECNHC created the itineraries as part of the with little to no experience. National Park Service’s “Find Your Park” campaign, celebrating its 100th anniversary in Montgomery County - The County’s 2017 Story- 2016, and have expanded its selection to telling Along the Erie Canalway app project will include significant partner sites throughout the connect people to places through the power of Corridor. Each itinerary highlights “must see” storytelling. By working withTravelStorys.com sites, as well as dining options and potential the County is creating a hands-free cultural and side trips. The “Get Active!” section provides historic experience along the entirety of the Erie suggestions for cycling, hiking, paddling, and Canalway Trail in Montgomery County. The app other outdoor opportunities to explore. will contain short audio stories, text, photos, and historic information that supports and reinforces and expands existing traditional interpretation.

3.4.2 Tourism Promotional Materials

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 59 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.4.3 Promoting Tourism Events Sponsor and provided critical logistical and outreach support between the Corning Mu- Events & Festivals seum of Glass community and tourism groups throughout the voyage. Over the four month In partnership with the NYS Canal Corporation, period: Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor sponsors statewide and community-based ca- a) 50,000 people attended nal-related events each year. From bike rides to b) 500 sold out shows kayaking, arts and harvest festivals, these com- c) 29 ports of call munity events play a key role in generating $1.2 billion in annual economic impact, driven by Erie Canalway Bicentennial canal-related tourism. More than 400 annual events take place along New York’s canals each Being held between 2016 and 2025 to mark t year, attracting more than a half million people. Celebrations are being held between 2016 and 2025 to mark the 200th anniversary of the Wayside Exhibits construction of the Erie Canal. The bicentennial theme resonated from community to com- A new series of outdoor exhibits are being in- munity and in media outreach that reached stalled at more than 40 community access points millions. Stories in the New York Times, Chi- along the New York State Canal System. The cago Tribune, Time, National Public Radio, and panels will help illustrate how canal towns de- PBS Stations raised awareness of the national veloped, highlight their links to the canal sys- impact of the Erie Canal, while also showcasing tem and heritage corridor, and connect visitors activities on the canal system today. The ECN- to nearby attractions and services. The multi- HC office also serves as an information hub for side kiosks include a full panel map of New York media outlets looking for photographs, facts, State’s canal system. Most sites will also feature timelines, trivia, and travel tips, as well as -ex commu¬nity orientation maps—with points of pert interviewees. Coverage in national and interest within walking distance of the canal. state media invited new audiences to discover More than 20 locations will also feature commu- New York’s legendary canals. nity history panels based on 19th century “bird- seye view” lithographs. 3.4.4 Visitor Surveys and Tourism Research Studies Corning Museum of Glass’ GlassBarge Tour The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor During its four-month journey in 2018 from conducted comprehensive research about cur- Brooklyn to Corning, NY, the GlassBarge trav- rent and prospective visitors to the 524-mile eled north on the Hudson, then westward along Canalway Corridor to help tourism promoters, the Erie Canal, from the Albany area to Buffalo, businesses and heritage sites better attract emphasizing the continued role of New York’s and serve visitors, including boaters, cyclists, waterways in shaping industry, culture, and sightseers and vacationers. More than 1,000 community in New York State. In each port city, people participated in online surveys and 20 Corning Museum of Glass provided free glass- provided in-depth interviews conducted by blowing demonstrations for the public from the Rochester-based Level 7 Market Research on deck of GlassBarge. The tour concluded in the behalf of the National Heritage Corridor. Visi- Finger Lakes, completing the journey by water in tors and prospective visitors who live near the Watkins Glen. ECNHC was a top level Maritime canal system, as well as those from other parts

60 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation of New York and neighboring states, participat- c)21,762 hand-launched vessels used the sys- ed, providing a reliable and geographically-di- tem Level 7 Research 2017 Canal Event Anal- verse research sample. ysis d) 2,775,333 total attendees of events and fes- In addition, the Erie Canalway conducted a study tivals within the ECNHC of the economic impact of events and tours in e) 1,276,653 Vacationers, Overnight Visitors the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. f) 140,117 visitors to Boat Tour Operators The results call attention to the power of tourism g) 8,686 Boat charters & rentals along New York State’s iconic canals. An estimat- h) 7,900 Kayak/Paddleboard rentals ed $1.5 billion annually is generated by events, i) 1,568 bikes rented boat tours, bicycle and paddle-sport rentals and historic site/museum tours along the Erie, Cham- 3.4.5 World Canals Conference plain, Owsego and Cayuga-Seneca Canals. Events and tours drew 3.3 million visitors in 2017. In September 2017 ECNHC hosted the 30th annual World Canals Conference along with Key Findings: the NYS Canal Corporation and site host Visit Syracuse. More than 400 people from three • Recent and prospective visitors were drawn continents, including a dozen European coun- to the history of the area and to exploring tries, five Canadian provinces, and 20 U.S. local canal communities; boat tours/boat- states came together in Syracuse. Held at the ing and attending festivals/events are major restored Hotel Syracuse, now the Marriott Syr- draws among prospective visitors acuse Downtown, the conference showcased • Most recent visitors rated their experience some of the most innovative ideas and proj- high—8 out of 10 ects transforming canals worldwide. • Recent visitors and prospective visitors were both drawn to the history, trail activities, and The varied program included more than 50 exploring local canal communities presenters who shared their experiences • Recent canal visitors tend to be older, travel and insights during conference sessions. Dai- in smaller parties, and have higher income ly study tours showcased innovative projects households compared with prospective vis- taking place along the Erie, Cayuga-Seneca, itors. Most are well traveled, and are three and Oswego Canals. Networking, guest speak- times more likely to travel internationally. ers, local events, and pre-and post-conference • Lack of awareness and knowledge are among tours provided additional opportunities for the greatest barriers to visiting exploration and learning. I Love NY - andNa tional Grid provided major funding support, The research was funded by a grant secured by along with many other businesses and foun- ECNHC from Market NY through I LOVE NY, New dations. Industry standards put the direct eco- York State’s Division of Tourism, as a part of the nomic impact of a conference of this size to State’s Regional Economic Development Council the host community at $475,000 with indirect initiative. and induced benefits total¬ing over $2 million (source: Visit Syracuse, the city’s tourism pro- New York State Canal Corporation 2018 canal motion agency). usage by the Numbers: ECNHC invited smaller partners, grant recipi- a) 3.4% overall increase from 2017 in canal traffic ents, and organizations along the canal to take b) 71,238 motorized vessels used the system part in the conference. ARCBridge sat down

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 61 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

with Rochester Accessible Adventures Executive ARCBridge met with local Rochester Kayaking Director Anita O’Brien to hear about the impact. owner Peter Abele to hear about the impact of ECNHC interest in promoting small recreational operations along the canal. During the visit “My concern is that people with disabilities can- ARCBridge evaluators saw first-hand customers not access recreation. Who is engaged there and with disabilities testing out the kayaks. making the canal accessible for them? ECNHC is truly helping us achieve this – no one else was “We are a clearing house for people coming trying. We have seen 100-year-old women out down the path – and I think of myself as be- kayaking because of these efforts and we want ing an ambassador of the canal. 10 years ago I to share that possibility with the world. Our vi- realized this is a meeting place for families, so sion is to see the canal as a tourism destination how can we get them on kayaks and use the for anyone and whenever Andy Kitzmann of ECN- canal? Being a big proponent of the canalway, HC is at the table, they have an ear out for inclu- ECNHC is the primary source to really work on sion. We were invited and presented at the canal canal projects. There are others, but ECNHC convention and got to be seen on the world stage is the best and most far-reaching. There are - everyone is reimagining their canal systems, smaller local organizations, but they encom- but people weren’t thinking about disability ac- pass the whole canals. We need them because cess. Because of ECNHC including us we are now they are active and promote us. We spent a part of a global network. We were contacted by year on a pilot program to package inclusive Parks Canada and they wanted to find out what kayaking for people with disabilities with RAA. we were doing here!!” We put together a business training manual, volunteer program, and promotional video. Of- -Rochester Accessible Adventures Director Anita ten these smaller villages are overlooked. As we O’Brien embraced inclusion, our business has expanded – now we get more people, 15% growth year- 3.4.6 Recreational Tourism ly. We rent to at least 350 rentals with people with disabilities and 150 additional family and ECNHC has worked with many local groups to im- friends, 450 out of our 3,500 rentals…very siz- prove access to the canals for the general public able for a little community. We get 10% of our and make the canal more accessible for recre- audience from Europe - they google Erie Canal, ational use for locals and tourists. they know it’s in New York and they stop here. We want people to not just go to Rochester or Rochester Accessible Adventures (RAA) – The Buffalo, but go to the small canal communities Rochester Accessible Adventures was awarded because there is a lot of history there but they funding to expand access to recreation opportu- get overlooked. In a similar way to people with nities along the Erie Canalway Corridor to peo- disabilities get overlooked in recreational tour- ple with disabilities and their family and friends. ism efforts, so I think our program is a great fit Over two years RAA has developed and installed to promote both.” adaptive equipment that allows people with disabilities to safely access the Erie Canal in a kayak - Peter Abele, owner Erie Canal Boat Company, or canoe. The program includes signage, training Rochester, NY programs for volunteers, and equipment.

62 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Watertrail Launched Votetilla celebrating the 100th anniversary of women’s right to vote. ECNHC works in close ECNHC made it a goal to have paddling along the partnership with groups and individuals con- NYS Canal System through continued water trail ducting these journey’s to make critical con- development. Paddlers can now find more than nections with local leaders, provide logistical 100 access points and amenities on the new NYS support for understanding the many challeng- Canalway Water Trail website, which includes es of a cross-state journey, to make available sites from Rome to Waterford along the eastern ECNHCS’s vast network of tourism and mar- Erie Canal. In addition, paddlers are participat- keting connections, and to invest targeted ing in the new Facebook group dedicated to the resources that match other state and private water trail, which serves as a forum for sharing dollars raised. advice and information. 3.5 Education Funding provided by Empire State Develop- ment’s Market NY program and the National ARCBridge believes one of the cornerstones Park Service is leading to an expanded website of ECNHC’s mission has been to interpret and the creation of a guidebook and map set the unique history of the canal region and covering the entire NYS Canal System. ECNHC is promote it among the next generation so spearheading development of the water trail in that valuable information is not lost and so partnership with the NYS Canal Corporation, and that children understand the importance of with assistance from the NPS Rivers, Trails, and preserving the canal’s future. To this effect, Conservation Assistance Program. ECNHC has partnered with various historic and preservation organizations to create “It is an incredible experience to paddle back into curriculum for area schools about canal his- the past. As you glide down the waterway so im- tory. The NHC has also sponsored programs portant to the growth of this country, it is impos- that allow local area children to ride on Erie sible not to feel the spirit and strength of those Canal era boats for free and has given grants who traveled so early in our nation’s history also to local museums for canal specific exhibits. by their own power.” More than half of the grants given by ECNHC promote educational projects. One of - ECN -Paul Comstock of Houston, Texas, about his HC’s premiere programs, Ticket to Ride, has travels on the canal system allowed 35,000 fourth graders from over 110 school districts to visit 13 canal-related part- Cross-Corridor Journeys ner sites. ECNHC’s participation in the- Na tional Park Service youth initiative Every Kid Cross-canal journeys link together the more than in a Park resulted in 10,000 4th graders visit- 230 communities found throughout the 524 mile ing four national parks in upstate New York. National Heritage Corridor. Over the years, these The NHA has also sponsored programs that summer-long journey’s have included the Alba- allow local area children to ride on Erie Canal ny Symphony Orchestra’s Water Music NY, Our era boats for free and has given grants to lo- Ability’s Journey on the Erie Canal, Parks & Trails cal museums for canal specific exhibits. More New York’s Cycle the Erie Canal, the Lake Cham- than half of the grants (52) given by ECNHC plain Maritime Museum’s many tours of the focus on educational projects. replica canal schooner Lois McClure, the 2009 tour of the canal motorship Day Peckinpaugh, the Corning Museum of Glass GlassBarge, and

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 63 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.5.1 Education Grants: (ranked 791st of 801 districts within New York State) and Corn Hill Navigation. Today, Corn Capital Repertory Theatre - Capital Repertory Hill is Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- Theatre was awarded a pair of grants to cre- dor’s primary Rochester-area Ticket to Ride ate plays that connect students to the Erie Ca- tour provider. nal story. The first interprets the struggle for freedom that took place along the banks of Rochester Museum & Science Center – The the Erie Canal. With funding provided by Erie Rochester Museum & Science Center, locat- Canalway, 6,400 students from 36 schools in ed in the heart of downtown Rochester, New 16 cities were treated to the performance. A York, is a recipient of several Erie Canalway subsequently awarded grant resulted in the National Heritage Corridor Grants. The muse- creation of a new performance called They um has received four ECNHC grants to support Built America, which tells the story of the con- the museum’s Erie Canal interactive lock mod- struction of the original Erie Canal. More than el exhibit and upgrades to their various Erie 5,000 students from 33 schools experienced Canal exhibits and educational opportunities. the performance within the comfort of their Projects included improvements to a working own schools. Erie Canal lock model and a 1938 diorama of downtown Rochester that includes the Erie Albany Institute of History & Art, The Albany Canal. Institute of History & Art was provided ECNHC grant support to develop a Erie Canal curric- Another grant developed a hands-on experi- ulum guide that makes use of artifacts from ment for the museum’s Inventor Center and the museum’s canal-based collection with the a self-guided tour designed for teachers to aim of helping students explore the story of enable them to explore all of the various ca- the Erie Canal. The program includes the op- nal-related exhibitions within the museum. portunity for museum staff to travel to schools A self-guided educational curriculum guide and work directly with teachers on the use helps teachers link the various canal-related of the curriculum materials. A companion exhibitions and themes found within the mu- grant was also provided in which the museum seum into a cohesive experience tied to the created nine document-based questions for New York State curriculum and includes an use as pre- or post-visit activities for the Erie ECNHC funded hands-on activity found in the Canalway’s popular Ticket to Ride and Every Museum’s Maker’s Space gallery. Kid in a Park programs. In its first 9 months, the Inventor Center en- Corn Hill Navigation - Four inter-related grants gaged more than 13,000 people, the majority have been made by Erie Canalway National of whom were children. The exhibition experi- Heritage Corridor that have resulted in two ence has an observed ration of 52% male and new curriculum guides that reflect the social 48% female participants who spend an aver- studies teaching standards for 4th grade, and age of 30 minutes in the space. place-based STEM activities for middle school students. Grants also provided transportation Annually, school attendance to the Roches- for area students and covered costs for consul- ter Museum & Science Center is estimated at tant activities related to theme development. 171,000 visitors (as tracked through the muse- The projects were conducted in direct part- um’s Altru ticketing system) and Erie Canalway nership with the Rochester City School District National Heritage Corridor funded exhibits are part of the daily experience.

64 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

The museum has also served as a host site for ECNHC partnered with the Fort Stanwix Na- various ECNHC press conferences and for a tional Monument in Rome, Theodore Roos- workshop for Finger Lakes region partner sites evelt Inaugural National Historic Site in Buffalo, to learn more about ECNHC. Saratoga National Historical Park in Stillwater, and Women’s Rights National Historical Park ARCBridge evaluators were able to visit the in Seneca Falls to bring students to these na- museum and witness a large group of school tionally-significant places. children interacting with the Erie Canal exhibit. ARCBridge was able to speak to Sam Patch Ship Captain LJ Fisher in Fairport about the im- “ECNHC has been invaluable in giving us the pact ECNHC has had on exciting and educating support and funding to create canal specific local schoolchildren about the Eric Canal. exhibits. Our museum has a very broad focus and these exhibits allow us to show people “People, especially kids don’t think they care more about the local history of the area. It’s about the Erie Canal. It’s just this thing that allowed us to think of new ways to get into in- runs through the area. But then when they terpretative education around the canal. We learn about it they start to get obsessed – it’s would not have been able to otherwise. so fascinating! 88% of school kids in Rochester are in free lunch programs. Because of ECNHC, - Director of Collections, Dr. Calvi Uzelmeier, they are able to ride on a piece of history in all Director of Featured Content, Exhibition Sup- these small canal towns. ECNHC pays for the port and Special Projects boat ticket and bus transportation. I always tell the students to look around and imagine 3.5.2 Giving Kids a Ticket to History you’re digging this 4 foot ditch in the middle of nowhere, moving trees, building locks, simple Since 2012 ECNHC made 435 grants to 230 but interesting machines, every bit of mechan- individual schools that enabled nearly 35,000 ical apparatus on the canal is so unique. The fourth graders to have visited 13 canal-related basic engineering element, the social move- partner sites. The program provides funding ments - the canal as the Internet of the 1800’s for transportation and educational programs – abolitionism and gender activism originated so that schools could take advantage of these here. My family always tells me to pick anoth- field trips free of charge. In addition, the part- er topic to talk about! But this was the Wild ner sites receive $5 per student to participate West, and it’s here! I live across from the canal in the program. - it’s amazing! The Sam Patch was an impetus for social movements. Through ECNHC funding “My students loved the opportunity to partici- we also did a science lab on the water with 8 pate in a Ticket to Ride” local middle schools to discuss environmental education on the canal. These are kids who – Shelly Crowley, North Broad Elementary, would never be able to do this.” Oneida, NY -LJ Fisher, Sam Patch Captain In addition, more than 10,000 fourth graders have visited four national parks in upstate New York, due to ECNHC’s participation in the National Park Service youth initiative Every Kid in a Park.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 65 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

Program Evaluation & Interpretive Training “What better way to bring history to life and thread past to future than giving chil- With funding from the CNY Community Founda- dren an opportunity to experience the places tion, ECNHC was able to hire the R/E/D Group to where history was made? Thanks to the Erie evaluate three of educational sites in 2017. Canalway’s innovative partnerships and ability to secure financial support, thousands of The year-long evaluations resulted in a report students stood on the battlegrounds of the tailored to each site and included priority rec- American Revolution, witnessed the place ommendations for improved program and visi- where women’s rights were first declared, tor services. After the assessment, ECNHC orga- and have experienced firsthand the innova- nized a two-day interpretive training workshop tion and grit that built the Erie Canal.“ for staff and volun¬teers of Central New York partner sites, led by the International Coalition -ECNHC Executive Director Bob Radliff of Sites of Conscience. 3.6 Marketing & Outreach In addition, ECNHC co-hosted with the Niagara Falls National Heritage Area and the NPS North- Key goals included in the ECNHC Manage- east Regional Office a free three-day interpretive ment Plan are increasing tourism benefits training workshop. ECNHC staff participated on and extending the heritage brand. Marketing the planning team of the National Park Service’s efforts have focused on public relations, so- Harpers Ferry Center to create a wayside inter- cial media and the dissemination of historic pretive sign guide. The publication of the guide brochures and public presentations. Several coincided with a two-day workshop hosted by articles have also been published highlight- ECNHC in Syracuse, NY to provide hands on way- ing ECNHC programs in local, regional, and side training for Corridor based partners. national media publications. Marketing com- Erie Canal Teaching Materials ponents include:

Ticket to Ride and Every Kid in a Park tours are 3.6.1 Website reinforced by a suite of documents based questions and curriculum materials that enhance Visitors, residents, students, municipal lead- learning opportunities and tie together the many ers, preservationists, and journal¬ists are social and cultural stories that make the Erie Ca- just a few of the people who seek out Erie nal an enduring part of the social studies curric- Canalway’s website each day. The new www. ulums across the United State. Nine worksheets eriecanalway.org was updated with new im- were developed by ECNHC in partnership with ages and interactive maps. In 2016 alone, the Albany Institute of History & Art. In addition, more than 100,000 users viewed 350,000 a digital curriculum guide called Erie Canal in the pages on the website. The website is de- Classroom ensures participating students are signed to meet a diversity of needs. It in- fully prepared for their field trips throughout the cludes extensive trip planning resources, in Corridor. Erie Canal in the Classroom is grounded depth information on canal history, and ways in the New York State Education Department’s to preserve and share the Corridor’s wealth social studies standards and serves as a unique of heritage assets. document linking together the various themes and topics presented by ECNHC’s tour providers.

66 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.6.2 ECNHC Social Media Presence - latest • Publications received a 2018 New York numbers for the website, Facebook, Twitter, In- State Tourism Industry Association (NYS- stagram TIA) Tourism Excellence Awards • 3.6.3 Media Coverage Mentioning ECNHC: • Website Page Views FY2018: 198,000; Top • Leisure Group Travel Magazine (feature in Pages: History-Culture, Cycling, Plan Your 2018) Visit • PassageMaker Magazine (feature in 2018) • Facebook: 6,510 page likes • I LOVE NY Travel Guide • Instagram: 1,019 followers (began Novem- • Newspapers: Rochester Democrat and ber 2017, 151 posts through Nov 2018) Chronicle, Buffalo News, Albany Times Union, Syracuse Post Standard. Trip Advi- sor Table 3.8: Professional Development Workshops offered by ECNHC # of # of par- Year Program Name Location Days ticipants Beyond Marketing: Tourism Readiness in the 2006 Geneva, NY 1 60 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. 2008 Enhancing the Visitor Experience Training Corridor-wide 6 100 2008 Heritage in Arts Corridor-wide 1 80 2008 Economic Development Forum Troy 1 250 2008 Developing Interpretive Waysides Syracuse, NY 3 60 continues Guide to Developing Outdoor Exhibits (publi- 2008 NA NA to be cation) available 2009 Underground Railroad: Network to Freedom Corridor-wide 5 100 2010 World Canals Conference Rochester, NY 3 400 25 muse- 2010 Erie Canalway Partner Program launched Corridor-wide NA ums continues 2010 Bicyclists Bring Business (publication) Corridor-wide NA to be available US Travel Association’s International Pow 2010 NYC 3 hundreds Wow 2010 World Travel Market NYC 3 hundreds 2010 FAM Tour (Familiarization tour) Albany 2 32 Geneva, Sylvan 2010 Preparing for the International Market Beach, and Latham, 3 170 NY 2011 National Trust Preservation Conference Buffalo, NY 4 2,500 Closing the Gaps roundtables (Erie Canalway Syracuse, Lockport, 2011 4 75 Trail) Utica, Clyde

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 67 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

US Travel Association’s International Pow 2011 NYC 3 hundreds Wow 2011 World Travel Market NYC 3 hundreds NYS Travel and Vacation Association’s annual 2011 NYC 2 200 conference Low Bridge Everybody Down: An Erie Canal 2012 Syracuse 2 80 Music Celebration Rochester, Cohoes, 2012 Cultural Heritage Tourism Workshops 3 128 Utica 2012 Connecting Canal Communities Five communities 5 130 Brockport and Chit- 2012 Heritage Showcase Workshops 2 65 tenango, NY 2012 Bicyclists Bring Business roundtable Albion, NY 1 50 Putting the Past to Work for the Future: Pres- 2012 Geneva, NY 1 25 ervation Strategies to Save Whole Places 2012 Making Your Place Great (conference panel) Oswego, NY 1 45 National Park Foundation Impact Grant to 2012 Albion, NY multiple 700 launch Theatre on Main Street Project Various professional development grants 2012 13 made to partners five partners invited to join ECNHC staff on conference panels at Mid-Atlantic Association 2012 various varies 5 of Museums, NYS Canal Conference, and Heri- tage Showcase Workshops. 2013 Where Canal Meets Commercial Corridor Schenectady 1 100 Visitor Readiness & Cultural Heritage Familiar- Syracuse, Chittenan- 2014 4 40 ization Tour go, Auburn 2014 Where Canal Meets Commercial Buffalo, NY 1 100 Corridor: Unlocking Entrepreneurial Opportu- nities in Your Downtown. 2015 New York State Canal Conference Geneva, NY 3 160 Downtown Investment Forum: The Lure of 2015 Ithaca, NY 1 80 Local Flavor 2016 Watertrail Public Outreach meetings various 3 50 2017 Matton Shipyard Public Meetings Cohoes 2 100 2017 World Canals Conference Syracuse 5 400 2017 Interpretive Training Workshop Syracuse 2 27 2017 Interpretive Training Workshop Niagara Falls 3 35

68 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.6.5 Community Intercept Surveys Visitors interviewed included locals who had never participated in any canal activities as The ARCBridge team undertook a series of com- well as tourists from France, India, and Mexi- munity intercept interviews over the course of co, who felt the Erie Canal was a critical part of the ECNHC evaluation. Intercepts were conduct- U.S. History and were more supportive of ECN- ed in Buffalo by the harbor (5), Rochester by HC programming efforts. ARCBridge found that the Rochester Science Museum(4), on the Sam visitors, especially those who were internation- Patch boat(4), and in the small canal communi- al, understood the heritage area better when ties of and Lockport(5). likened to the concept of World Heritage Sites, and actually inquired where they could learn ARCBridge attempted to determine: about other heritage areas.

What consumers knew about ECNHC? A few locals ARCBridge spoke to in Lockport • How they learned about the specific site that had encountered the heritage area in its out- they visited? door canal activity and festival promotions • Would they be likely to recommend visiting and had also been to other heritage areas. The the Heritage Area and/or the specific sites to consensus was that the ECNHC was integral to their friends and acquaintances? educational efforts surrounding the canal’s history and an important resource for locals and The ARCBridge team was able to interview mem- tourists alike. bers of the public in various cities and canal communities across the ECNHC. In Buffalo, the eval- 3.7 ECNHC Partners uators surveyed people who were walking near the historic Erie Canal terminus and/or reading The ECNHC Preservation & Management Plan canal history signage that had been created by specifically stated the main mission was to ECNHC. This was a mostly tourist heavy area serve as an umbrella organization uniting the with participants traveling from outside of the numerous non-profits, local government - en state and even outside the country. The con- tities and communities along the canal. ARC- sensus was that they had not heard of the ECN- Bridge has found strong partnerships to be the HC before, but were very interested in learning cornerstone of ECNHC operations. These key about more ECNHC activities they could partake partnerships have allowed ECNHC to spear- in during their trip. They noted that ECNHC sig- head major initiatives in a sizeable heritage nage was the only historical materials they had area including gaining National Historic Land- encountered along the canal and these really mark designation, hosting the 2017 World brought the history of the region alive. Local Canals Conference, preserving the Matton Buffalo residents had more of an idea about the Shipyard and Lockport Flight of Five Locks, re- ECNHC and its contributions to revitalizing the vitalizing the Buffalo waterfront, and educat- Buffalo waterfront. They said that they felt like ing thousands of school children through the tourists in their own town thanks to the multi- Ticket to Ride program. ARCBridge believes year efforts. these partnerships to be invaluable in fulfilling the authorizing legislation goal of providing a Evaluators found similar sentiments among pas- framework to resources as well as extending sengers aboard the Sam Patch canal boat. Every the heritage brand and economic develop- passenger was given one of ECNHC’s quarterly ment and sustainability. newsletters and ARCBridge noticed many people reading it during the voyage.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 69 Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

3.7.1 Top Erie Canalway Regional Partners, ac- Award to ECNHC in recognition of its histor- cording to ECNHC staff ic district nomination as “an outstanding- re search, documentation and recognition project New York State Canal Corporation – The New for a nationally-significant work.” York State Canal Corporation (NYSCC) is the owner and operator of the New York State Canal Preservation League of New York State System. The relationship extends back to 1995 (PLNYS) – As the recognized state-wide ad- when the NYSCC’s Canal Recreation Plan recom- vocate of New York’s built history, PLNYS has mended the creation of the Erie Canalway Na- been a key partner in ensuring that critical tional Heritage Corridor. The director of the New public focus is maintained on the value of Erie York State Canal Corporation is an institutional Canal structures and landscape. ECNHC has member of the Erie Canalway National Heritage provided financial support to PLNYS to support Corridor Commission. The NYSCC supports the the creation of a Historic Tax Credits workshop, programs and projects of the ECNHC through to host an adaptive reuse workshop and pub- fiscal and administrative support. Key programs lication that championed the value of former and projects include the co-hosting of the 2017 warehouses, and incentive grants for technical World Canals Conference (Syracuse), the pro- assistance support for public groups wishing to duction and distribution of an annual calendar, get started on preserving a building or place. annual events and festivals sponsorships, devel- The PLNYS has prioritized the Erie Canalway opment of the NYS Canalway Trail, installation of National Heritage Corridor in their Seven to dockside exhibits, and the nomination of a 450 Save program (in 2018 six of the seven build- mile long NYS Canal System historic district as a ings were located within ECNHC, including the National Historic Landmark (designated by the Erie Canal’s Schoharie Aqueduct), and through Secretary of the Interior in December 2016). “second story” workshops that champion the use of upper floors of historic structures. In New York State Office of Parks Recreation & -His 2018 PLNYS took the lead in a campaign to toric Preservation (NYSOPRHP) – ECNHC’s part- champion the preservation of New York State nership with NYSOPRHP is grounded in a shared Canal System’s historic fleet of vessels, includ- mission for preservation of canal resources and ing the 1901 Tug Urger, considered the flagship the promotion of the value of these resources of the system. as a meaningful part of the state’s landscape. NYSOPRHP has an institutional seat on ECNHC’s Chittenango Landing Canal Boat Museum federal Commission. ECNHC rents office space (CLCBM) – CLCBM provides tours for more from NYSOPRHP at Peebles Island State Park. than 3,000 students per year through the Erie This is the headquarters of the State Histor- Canalway National Heritage Corridor’s Ticket ic Preservation Offices and the art and artifact to Ride program. The relationship has result- conservation laboratories. The NYSOPRHP is the ed in a direct partnership between CLCBM and owner of Matton Shipyard, and plays a key role the Syracuse City School District (ranked 792nd in Erie Canalway’s leadership of the preservation out of 801 New York districts) in which teach- and adaptive reuse of the site. NYSOPRHP also ers and museum staff work together to devel- worked closely with ECNHC and the National op tour themes directly related to the district’s Park Service in listing a 450 mile New York State classroom teaching. CLCBM was awarded an Canal System historic district on the State and ECNHC grant in 2014 to develop a program National Registers (2014) and subsequently as called Tuesdays on the Towpath. The program a National Historic Landmark (2016). In 2014, continues to be offered today and includes the NYSOPRHP presented a Project Achievement opportunity to rent bicycles from CLCBM.

70 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 3: Erie Canalway Legislation

National Park Foundation – The National Park ECNHC is an annual sponsor of the ride and Foundation (NPF) is one of Erie Canalway’s staff take the opportunity to ride along and most consistent funding partners. Since 2012 continue to build partnerships and promote NPF has provided between $8,000 and $10,000 the Corridor. A 2012 PTNY driven economic per year in support of Erie Canalway’s educa- impact study of the Erie Canalway Trail found tional programming. In total, the NPF support that it attracts more than 1.6 million annual accounts for greater than one fourth of the users, and generates approximately $253 mil- more than 40,000 students who have taken lion in annual sales, supporting 3,440 jobs. part in our transportation programs. The NPF PTNY works closely with ECNHC to promote support also provides an opportunity for Erie this, and other events, through traditional and Canalway National Heritage Corridor to take an social media outlets. In the summer of 2018, important leadership role with the four Corri- the National Park Service’s Northeast Region dor-based National Park Service units. Through recorded a podcast of the impact of the Erie the Every Kid in a Park program, ECNHC ad- Canalway Trail and the work of Erie Canalway ministers the NPF transportation grants for and Parks & Trails New York in their continued students attending tours at Saratoga National promotion of this resource. Historical Park (Stillwater), Fort Stanwix - Na tional Historical Monument (Rome), Women’s ECNHC and PTNY also maintained a formal Rights National Historical Park (Seneca Falls), administrative partnership with Parks & Trails and Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural National New York between 2006 and 2013. Through a Historical Site (Buffalo). series of Cooperative Agreements Parks & Trails New York formally employed ECNHC’s non-fed- NYSUT (New York State United Teachers) – NY- eral staff (but staff were directly interviewed SUT is New York State’s second largest union and hired by ECNHC). In April of 2013 all ECN- representing more than 600,000 education HC non-federal staff were migrated from PTNY professionals. NYSUT provides critical support to the fully operational Erie Canalway Heritage for Erie Canalway’s Ticket to Ride and Every Kid Fund, Inc., a 501(c)(3). in a Park programs through full page outreach pieces in their membership magazine NYSUT United (valued at approximately $26,000 annually). NYSUT also holds a variety of state-wide conferences and makes in kind booth space available enabling ECNHC staff to interact directly with the NYSUT membership and generate enthusiasm and awareness for the National Heritage Corridor’s educational opportunities. NYSUT’s director of Community Relations also serves as an ECNHC Commissioner.

Parks & Trails New York (PTNY) – PTNY is a state-wide non-profit dedicated to outdoor recreation and trail use. The annual Cycle the Erie Canal trail ride is PTNY’s signature event and attracts more than 600 riders.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 71 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Section 4e Report Public/Private Investments in ECNHC and Their Impact

The legislation authorizing the Erie Canalway • Other NPS Funds reflects funding for the National Heritage Corridor (ECNHC) is Public work of NPS staff who are detailed to the Law 106-554, the Erie Canalway National Her- Canalway (Duncan Hay, Historian part-time, itage Corridor Act of 2000. This Act provides and Hannah Blake, Community Planner, appropriations to ECNHC under the following full-time). Other NPS Funds also include conditions: monies obtained competitively from the Service-wide Combined Call (1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be ap- • Non-NPS Federal Sources including the propriated to carry out this section $10,000,000, Department of Housing and Urban Devel- of which not more than $1,000,000 shall be opment (HUD) and the Federal Highway made available for any fiscal year. Administration (FHWA) and the U.S. De- partment of Transportation (2) NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—the non-Federal • Other Funds which include state and local share of the cost of any activities carried out monies, foundations and private donations using Federal funds made available under sub- • In-kind Investments from individuals or or- section (a) shall be not less than 50 percent 1. ganizations which provide in-kind services to projects (e.g. donated meeting facilities, It should be noted that the non-Federal share volunteers or labor) of matching funds also includes matching funds that are generated by ECNHC partners and by The table shows that total revenue for in the grantees that have received funding from ECN- program amounted to over $38.5 M over the HC, Inc. as well as in-kind support provided by fiscal year period from 2002 through 2017. other entities. The initial limitation of funding NPS Heritage Partnership Program investments in the legislation was subsequently revised in were $9.74 M. As noted earlier, the cap for May, 2017 through Public Law 115-31 which HPP funds for ECNHC is $12M. increased the funding cap from $10M to $12M. Those funds received from the NPS Heritage 4.1 Investments in ECNHC Activities Partnership Program (HPP) had a 50/50 match requirement. This HPP match requirement re- Table 4-1 shown below outlines the direct in- flects the fact that ECNHC must contribute 50% vestments that have been made in the Erie or more to operate its program since HPP funds Canalway National Heritage Corridor including are only permitted to cover up to 50% of costs. funds from: This means that ECNHC had to raise at least $9.744M from non-Federal sources. • The National Park Service (NPS) which pro- Other NPS monies included National Park vided funds allocated by the NPS Heritage Service Com-mission Funds (for funding NPS Partnership Program (HPP). These funds staff detailed are appropriated by Congress specifically for use to develop and maintain the Na- tional Heritage Area and complete the 1 National Heritage Areas: An Introduction to documentation and match of Federal Funds National Heritage Program Office, management plan for the Corridor. Washington D.C., November 2016.

72 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Table 4.1: Revenue for the ECNHC Program by Fiscal Years FY2002 - FY2017 Including Federal Funds and Non-Federal Matching Funds

NPS/HPP Non-NPS Funds Re- Other NPS Funds Federal Non-Federal Fiscal Year ceived Received Funds Match Funds Total Revenue 2002 $202,823 $250,000 $0 $0 $452,823 2003 $395,002 $249,000 $0 $276,500 $920,502 2004 $589,444 $356,611 $0 $507,772 $1,453,827 2005 $608,788 $271,558 $0 $1,028,692 $1,909,038 2006 $623,553 $339,829 $0 $4,300,000 $5,263,382 2007 $893,330 $261,048 $0 $1,225,000 $2,379,378 2008 $677,061 $294,108 $0 $3,426,258 $4,397,427 2009 $688,567 $251,083 $277,591 $914,903 $2,132,145 2010 $690,406 $261,930 $64,104 $1,396,172 $2,412,612 2011 $616,805 $385,891 $0 $1,582,552 $2,585,248 2012 $696,742 $277,209 $133,000 $1,579,704 $2,686,655 2013 $437,339 $240,000 $9,508 $1,184,055 $1,870,902 2014 $584,824 $255,000 $0 $1,746,819 $2,586,643 2015 $642,508 $272,000 $23,255 $1,420,313 $2,358,076 2016 $709,969 $284,681 $0 $1,098,801 $2,093,451 2017 $687,042 $263,300 $100,100 $2,015,159 $3,065,601 Total $9,744,203 $4,513,247 $607,558 $23,702,701 $38,567,709

to the Erie Canalway) and also included Ser- Several factors appear to be related to this re- vice-Wide Combined Call funds which were sult. First, the ECNHC employees in the first competitively awarded. These “other” NPS year of the program were one Federal employ- monies amounted to over $4.5 million and did ees and one employee from the State of New not have a match requirement. York. As government employees, these staff were not well-positioned to raise matching Table 4.1 reveals that no significant matching funds. In addition, during the first years of the funds were raised during the first year of the program, the Erie Canalway did not yet have a operation. non-profit organization in place which

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 73 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

had the capability to raise monies from the pri- Reported matching funds include funds vate sector. During the first year of operation, from New York State and from various pri- the mission was focused on establishing an vate sources, from in-kind investments and organization and assembling members of the from sub-grantee matching funds. These canal commission and preparing the manda- non-Federal match revenues amounted to tory Preservation and Management Plan. Also over $23.7 million. The 50/50 match require- during that time, the ECNHC team received ad- ment amounted to $9.74M. Thus, the actual ministrative support from staff at the Saratoga match exceeded the match requirement by National Historical Park. nearly $14M.

Over the period between FY2002 and FY2017, 4.1.1 Non-Federal Matching Funds Non-NPS Federal sources provided over $600,000 in funding and included monies from Table 4-2 shows a detailed level of non-Fed- other Federal agencies including the Depart- eral matching funds received year-by-year. ment of Transportation (Federal Highway Ad- ministration) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Table 4.2: Revenue for the ECNHC Program by Fiscal Years FY2002 - FY2017 Including Federal Funds and Non-Federal Matching Funds

NPS/HPP Fiscal Funds Re- Non-Federal Year ceived Matching Funds Total 2002 $202,823 $0 $202,823 2003 $395,002 $276,500 $671,502 2004 $589,444 $507,772 $1,097,216 2005 $608,788 $1,028,692 $1,637,480 2006 $623,553 $4,300,000 $4,923,553 2007 $893,330 $1,225,000 $2,118,330 2008 $677,061 $3,426,258 $4,103,319 2009 $688,567 $914,903 $1,603,470 2010 $690,406 $1,396,172 $2,086,578 2011 $616,805 $1,582,552 $2,199,357 2012 $696,742 $1,579,704 $2,276,446 2013 $437,339 $1,184,055 $1,621,394 2014 $584,824 $1,746,819 $2,331,643 2015 $642,508 $1,420,313 $2,062,821 2016 $709,969 $1,098,801 $1,808,770 2017 $687,042 $2,015,159 $2,702,201 Total $9,744,203 $23,702,701 $33,446,904

74 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

The data in table 4-2 reveal that matching Prior to the formation of the non-profit, the funds yielded revenues of over $23.7M. These governing body of the Erie Canalway National included both cash as well as in-kind contribu- Heritage Corridor was its Federal commission tions. Those sources include cash match funds which was (and remains) unable to raise funds of nearly $18.79 M and in-kind investments of from non-Federal sources. Due to that circum- ($4.91M). stance, matching funds were raised and expenditures were made by Canalway partners. Table 4.3 below shows the extent of matching funds and the match ratio for the ECNHC pro- Based upon data that ARCBridge was provid- gram over the course of its operations between ed, it is estimated that somewhat over 90% of 2002 and 2017. The match ratio is calculated these matching funds and expenditures were as the ratio of HPP funds to the total - invest captured by partners while about 10% of these ment in the NHA project. The requirements for funds came directly to the Heritage Fund (or NHA program is that the National Park Service the Canal Commission). Because of the active cannot contribute more than 50% of program involvement of Canalway Partners in fund-rais- costs. ing, this has long-term and positive implications for the sustainability of the Canalway. Thus, the ratio must be .50 or less. As the table This will be discussed further in Chapter 5 of reveals, the ECNHC has met or exceeded the this report. 50/50 match commitment for every year since its founding except for the first two years of op- 4.1.2 Leveraged Funds eration (FY2002 and FY2003). In FY2003, the yield from match funds came within $120,000 Leveraged funds are meant to include all funds of meeting the 50/50 match requirement. generated by the operating entity during a given year that the entity would not have had Over the course of the entire period of opera- were it not for the Heritage Program funding. tion, the match ratio was .29. As a result, -Na These funds can include monies provided by tional Park Service’s Heritage Partnership Pro- other Federal agencies and any matched funds gram funds accounted for less than one-third associated with Federal grants. Leveraged (29%) of the overall funding for the program. funds for ECNHC are shown in Table 4-4. Other sources of funds (Federal, state, local and private) accounted for more than two- The table reveals that the total leverage across thirds (71%) of funding for the Erie Canalway FY2002-FY2017 is $27.8 Million. This means program. that for every dollar of HPP funds allocated to the Erie Canalway, the Canalway managed On an overall basis, ECNHC has exceeded to acquire an additional $2.66M from various its 50/50 match requirement by generating other sources. These sources included other $23.7M in matching funds relative to the NPS NPS monies, funds from other federal agencies allocation of approximately $9.74M. An inter- as well as state funds (e.g. New York State,), lo- esting element of the development of match- cal government (i.e. Villages and Towns along ing funds for ECNHC is that these funds have the Canal in upstate New York), foundations been captured largely through partner or- and private organizations. ganizations rather than directly through the Erie Canalway itself. This appears to be a ves- tige of the period before the formation of the Canalway’s non-profit arm, the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 75 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Table 4.3: NPS and Matching Funds by NPS Award Year

NPS/HPP Funds Non-Federal Total Revenue for Match Fiscal Year Received Matching Funds ECNHC Ratio 2002 $202,823 $0 $202,823 N.A. 2003 $395,002 $276,500 $671,502 0.59 2004 $589,444 $507,772 $1,097,216 0.54 2005 $608,788 $1,028,692 $1,637,480 0.37 2006 $623,553 $4,300,000 $4,923,553 0.13 2007 $893,330 $1,225,000 $2,118,330 0.42 2008 $677,061 $3,426,258 $4,103,319 0.17 2009 $688,567 $914,903 $1,603,470 0.43 2010 $690,406 $1,396,172 $2,086,578 0.33 2011 $616,805 $1,582,552 $2,199,357 0.28 2012 $696,742 $1,579,704 $2,276,446 0.31 2013 $437,339 $1,184,055 $1,621,394 0.27 2014 $584,824 $1,746,819 $2,331,643 0.25 2015 $642,508 $1,420,313 $2,062,821 0.31 2016 $709,969 $1,098,801 $1,808,770 0.39 2017 $687,042 $2,015,159 $2,702,201 0.25 Total $9,744,203 $23,702,701 $33,446,904 0.29

76 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Table 4.4:Leveraged Funds by Year

NPS/HPP Other NPS Non-NPS Fiscal Funds Re- Funds Re- Federal Non-Federal Total Reve- Year ceived ceived Funds Match Funds nue Leverage 2002 $202,823 $250,000 $0 $0 $452,823 $250,000 2003 $395,002 $249,000 $0 $276,500 $920,502 $525,500 2004 $589,444 $356,611 $0 $507,772 $1,453,827 $864,383 2005 $608,788 $271,558 $0 $1,028,692 $1,909,038 $1,300,250 2006 $623,553 $339,829 $0 $4,300,000 $5,263,382 $4,639,829 2007 $893,330 $261,048 $0 $1,225,000 $2,379,378 $1,486,048 2008 $677,061 $294,108 $0 $3,426,258 $4,397,427 $3,720,366 2009 $688,567 $251,083 $277,591 $914,903 $2,132,145 $1,443,578 2010 $690,406 $261,930 $64,104 $1,396,172 $2,412,612 $1,722,206 2011 $616,805 $385,891 $0 $1,582,552 $2,585,248 $1,968,443 2012 $696,742 $277,209 $133,000 $1,579,704 $2,686,655 $1,989,913 2013 $437,339 $240,000 $9,508 $1,184,055 $1,870,902 $1,433,563 2014 $584,824 $255,000 $0 $1,746,819 $2,586,643 $2,001,819 2015 $642,508 $272,000 $23,255 $1,420,313 $2,358,076 $1,715,568 2016 $709,969 $284,681 $0 $1,098,801 $2,093,451 $1,383,482 2017 $687,042 $263,300 $100,100 $2,015,159 $3,065,601 $2,378,559

Total $9,744,203 $4,513,247 $607,558 $23,702,701 $38,567,709 $28,823,506

As the leveraged funds table indicates, the exis- 4.2 Use of Financial Resources tence of NHA funds from the National Park Ser- vice provides considerable leverage in terms of ECNHC receives funding from the National Park ECNHC’s ability to raise additional monies. Thus Service, other Federal agencies and a variety of between 2002 and 2017, the National Park Ser- funds from state and local organizations as well vice provided $9.774 Million in Heritage Pro- as grants from foundations and from individu- gram funds. As a result of having those funds, al contributions. Table 4-5 provides a break- the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor down of expenditures by fiscal year between has been able to raise an additional $28.8 mil- management/operating expenditures and pro- lion to support the program through non-Fed- gram expenditures. The percentage of oper- eral match monies, monies from other Fed- ating expenditures to total expenditures from eral agencies and other National Park Service FY 2002 through FY2017 ranges from a high of funds. Based upon these figures the leverage 40% (FY2002—the first year of operations) to ratio is 296% of the amount that the NPS/HPP a low of 10% (FY2006) with an average across has invested directly. That is, for every dollar all fiscal years of 24%. As the table below indi- provided from the Heritage Program, ECNHC cates, variability in the ratio of management/ has developed an additional $2.96 to support operational expenses to overall expense has the program. ECNHC has been able to use the narrowed since FY2010 as the program has NPS heritage funds to leverage other financial matured. resources beyond their required match.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 77 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Table 4-5 also indicates that overall, operation- Table 4-6 below reveals that programmatic ex- al expenses reflect nearly a quarter (24.1%) of penditures for FY2002 through FY2017 consist- all expenses, while the largest portion of funds ed of more than $29.255 Million. As indicated (75.9%) were directed into supporting the in earlier discussion above regarding matching Canalway’s programs. funds, a large portion of these funds were obtained and expended by Canalway partners.

Table 4.5: Management/Operating vs. Program Expenses by Fiscal Year Fiscal Operational Program Year Expenses Expenses Total 2002 $178,851 $269,832 $448,683 2003 $191,665 $738,947 $930,612 2004 $367,775 $1,081,223 $1,448,998 2005 $433,912 $1,470,035 $1,903,947 2006 $509,136 $4,752,972 $5,262,108 2007 $741,709 $1,610,731 $2,352,441 2008 $684,994 $3,711,643 $4,396,637 2009 $636,662 $1,244,524 $1,881,186 2010 $745,636 $1,692,517 $2,438,153 2011 $744,931 $1,881,183 $2,626,115 2012 $763,830 $1,915,659 $2,679,489 2013 $525,803 $1,518,389 $2,044,192 2014 $664,963 $1,941,212 $2,606,174 2015 $644,830 $1,696,597 $2,341,426 2016 $730,227 $1,364,082 $2,094,309 2017 $700,387 $2,366,155 $3,066,542 Total $9,265,311 $29,255,701 $38,521,012

78 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Table 4.6: Expenditures by Program Activity for FY 2002-FY2017

Fiscal Year Preserve Promote Foster Total 2002 $163,498 $75,025 $31,309 $269,832 2003 $554,968 $125,811 $58,168 $738,947 2004 $546,883 $430,723 $103,617 $1,081,223 2005 $693,533 $540,267 $236,235 $1,470,035 2006 $1,421,790 $2,333,053 $998,129 $4,752,972 2007 $419,395 $704,298 $487,038 $1,610,731 2008 $257,007 $629,974 $2,824,662 $3,711,643 2009 $271,469 $867,162 $105,893 $1,244,524 2010 $535,497 $1,062,012 $95,008 $1,692,517 2011 $589,136 $1,061,600 $230,447 $1,881,183 2012 $319,085 $1,352,464 $244,109 $1,915,659 2013 $648,697 $842,905 $26,787 $1,518,389 2014 $798,254 $1,111,434 $31,524 $1,941,212 2015 $813,060 $841,772 $41,765 $1,696,597 2016 $431,351 $904,970 $27,761 $1,364,082 2017 $1,209,095 $823,461 $333,599 $2,366,155 Totals $9,672,719 $13,706,932 $5,876,052 $29,255,702

Chart 4.1: Allocation of Program Expenditures by Area

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 79 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Chart 4-1 shows the allocation of these pro- As indicated in the table, the Heritage Fund gram expenditures across different program has generated retained earnings since FY2012. areas. Three areas were highlighted for this At the end of FY2017, those retained earnings analysis including: 1) historic preservation, 2) amounted to nearly $365,000. promotion of various Canalway programs and 3) developing vibrant communities along the 4.3 Impact of Investments canal. It is clear from this report that the investments As the chart reveals, 47% of expenditures were made by ECNHC are in line with the mandate devoted to promotion of Canalway programs, found in the legislation establishing the Heri- 33% was dedicated to historic preservation tage Area. Our analysis of matching funds in- and 20% was focused on the development of dicated that the Heritage Area has exceeded vibrant communities along the Canal. As will the 50/50 match requirement for the invest- be discussed later in this chapter, ARCBridge ment of Heritage Program funds. In fact, on undertook a series of three mini-case studies an overall basis (between FY2002 and FY2017), to better understand how efforts to foster vi- ECNHC’s match funds supported over 2/3’s of brant communities helped bring about positive the program’s expenditures (71%), while the community change and economic develop- National Park Service funds were only needed ment in those affected communities. to supported 29% of the program’s costs.

As with any non-profit entity, there is are- The National Park Service has provided $9.74 quirement to report on the net assets and re- Million in HPP funds between FY2002 and tained earnings generated by the entity. The FY2017. Other Federal agencies contributed non-profit Heritage Fund was fully operational approximately $607,000, while non-Federal in 2012 and was in a position to file the neces- sources contributed $28.7 Million. Clearly, the sary net assets report to the IRS in that year. Heritage Area has managed to leverage the Table 4-7 shows the net assets reported to the NPS funds in a substantially larger amount to IRS by the Heritage Fund beginning in 2012. fund its programs across the area.

4.3.1 Economic Impact of the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Table 4.7: Net Assets reported to the IRS on Form 990 For the Erie Canalway Heritage The economic consulting firm Tripp Umbach Fund has completed comprehensive economic impact studies on 24 of the 49 National Heritage Fiscal Areas (NHAs) over the past five years including Year Assets Liabilities Net Assets Erie in 2015. Tripp Umbach used the IMPLAN 2012 $11,251 $0 $11,251 software which provides analysis based on an input-output modeling approach. These stud- 2013 $62,662 $13,849 $48,313 ies took estimated the number of jobs created 2014 $137,555 $47,292 $90,262 by each of the NHAs on an annual basis and the 2015 $170,156 $31,645 $138,511 Federal taxes generated from employee com- 2016 $335,171 $143,120 $192,051 pensation, proprietor income, indirect busi- 2017 $646,499 $281,601 $364,898 ness tax, households and corporations.

80 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

Tripp Umbach undertook the study of the Erie The towns included, Fairport, Brockport, and Canalway National Heritage Corridor in July Lockport, New York. It is believed that there of 2015 and focused on the impacts over the are vital lessons to be learned from case stud- three-year period from 2012 through 2014. ies in those locations. The team interviewed In specific terms, the analysis used data from each town’s mayor or a senior executive to visitor and tourism expenditures, operational develop insights regarding how the Canalway expenditures and staffing of the Heritage Cor- contributed to the town’s recent development ridor as well as wages, rents, and professional and economic revival. fees incurred by the Canalway during a given year as well as grant making and capital expen- To put the Canalway’s contribution in prop- ditures that circulate through the local econo- er perspective, it needs to be recognized that my. These data were supplemented with qual- ECNHC has provided limited funding for each of itative insights gleaned from interviews with the three towns and that other New York State stakeholders and partners of the Canalway. entities have provided more substantial funding and support. These New York State entities The study estimated that the economic impact include the New York State Canal Corporation of the Erie Canalway Heritage Corridor on the which refurbishes and maintains the Erie Canal regional economy was $307.7M. The bulk of infrastructure for these communities as well that impact was ostensibly due to increased as Regional Economic Development Councils tourism to the area. Other effects included which were established by the State of New the creation of 3,240 jobs and $34.9 million in York to develop priorities for state investment tax revenue. It should be noted however, that in local communities. For Lockport this prior- the results of the Tripp Umbach study are only itization was carried out by the Western New projected results and there is no reported data York Economic Development Council1. For Fair- from the Corridor that can directly isolate the port and Brockport, the prioritization for local economic effects of the Canalway program. investment was developed by the Finger Lakes Regional Economic Development Council2 . Given the limitation of the Tripp Umbach study, ARCBridge decided to undertake a series of The unique contribution of the Erie Canalway three mini-case studies to better understand reflects the “division of labor” between the how the Canalway program influences local New York State Canal Corporation and the Erie communities as the focus on developments Canalway. As was expressed in discussions adjacent to the canal. with the Canal Corporation, “the Canal Corpo- ration manages the infrastructure of the Erie 4.3.2 Mini-Case Studies of Canalway Economic Canal; the Erie Canalway manages, the canal Impact in Three Towns Adjacent to the Canal story.” Thus, ECNHC’s contribution is focused on preservation, interpretation and promotion; A major mission of the Erie Canalway program that is, to say, the focus of the organization is has been to “foster vibrant communities.” Ac- on signage to identify meaningful sites along cordingly, ARCBridge believes that it was im- the canal, interpretative materials to describe portant to develop a tangible understanding those sites as well as marketing materials and of how different towns and villages work with the Canalway website to reach out to tourists the Canalway to have an impact on their local and resident and to attract them to visit specif- community and it economic health. With that ic canal communities and site. The effects goal in mind, the ARCBridge team developed 1 7 Years (2011-2018) of Transforming Our Region: A Strategy mini-cases for three towns in upstate New York for Prosperity 2018 Progress Report. Western New York Re- that are adjacent to the Erie Canal. gional Economic Development council 2 Annual Report & Recommended Priority Projects

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 81 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

of ECNHC’s contribution in these communities 1. They have supported downtown develop- cannot be viewed isolation, since their contri- ment with their grant program and with in- bution is limited in scope, but it is a key part of terpretative signage. The funding for this development activities since it influences -out program amounted to $26,120. reach to visitors and residents and is therefore 2. ECNHC along with Parks and Trails, New a “multiplier” of infrastructure developments. York has supported bike tours with overnight stops in or near the village. This has The three site for mini-cases are below. had a substantial effect on the town 3. The Canalway has provided visitors with Village of Fairport, New York the opportunity to take barge rides or to use the canal for paddling or rowing - The Village of Fairport is located 9 miles east of these opportunities also include programs Rochester, New York and as of 2014 had 5,372 for adaptive recreation by disabled visitors. residents. The median household income in 4. ECNHC has also been a sponsor of events 2016 was $70,833. and festivals.

In the view of the Executive Director at -Fair The combined impact of these programs on port Office of Community & Economic Devel- the local economy has been substantial. For opment, Marsha Malone, the impact of the example, the Village has experienced growth Canalway has been “tremendous”. She felt in recreational businesses focused on biking, that since the 1970s the village has embraced restaurants, and bars. Three or four ice cream the canal and the canal, itself, has “become its shops have sprung up. second Main Street.” There had been a Depart- ment of Public Works site on the canal which In warm weather they have experienced 3,000 was purchased and made available for private to 4,000 people coming into the town on a Fri- development. That led to a private residential day and a Saturday. development of 48 housing units (Canalside) as well as mixed use development. Private de- The New York State Canal Corporation has velopers raised $5.2 M for such development made a number of significant investments in along the canal. and around Fairport that have also contributed to its development. Among these projects are: The Village received a $400K grant from the New York State Canal Corporation for redesign • Development of docks and an accessibility of a promenade and docking facilities along the for kayaks, an information kiosk and an in- waterway. These docks and an accessible kay- terpretive trail ak launch entailed an expenditure of $150,000 • Installation of 8 safety ladders along the ca- on the part of the Canal Corporation. This proj- nal wall, and ect also included installation of an information • Public art installation of a sundial made kiosk, new lighting and a new park and an in- from old Erie Canal stones. terpretive trail. The Village is trying to create areas that can serve as tourist destinations Village of Brockport, New York such as trails, public art projects and signage. They are trying to consolidate development as- Brockport, New York is located about 20 miles sets and improve the south side of the Canal. west of Rochester, New York. In the 2010 Cen- sus, the village had a population of 8,336. Ac- ECNHC has helped Fairport in a number of cording to Mayor Margay Blackman, the Erie ways: Canalway has added visibility to the Canal that

82 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments did not exist prior to its formation. The Village has also been assisted by the New York State Canal Corporation which has recent- The Village is home to SUNY College at Brock- ly undertaken a major embankment mainte- port. As a consequence the college population nance program along the Erie Canal in Mon- is an important audience for any cultural or rec- roe County to include the Village of Brockport. reational changes along the canal in the imme- This work includes removal of trees along the diate area. For example cycling along the canal canal banks along with other vegetation man- has increased markedly as has cross-country agement efforts. This will enhance the canal’s skiing. safety and security.

As part of recognizing this change, the town In addition to the vegetation management built a Welcome Center in 2005 and has estab- program, the Canal Corporation awarded a lished a group of Greeters (100 volunteers) at $57,000 project to the College at Brockport to the Welcome Center to introduce visitors to construct a multi-use trail along the south side various amenities in town. of the canal.

The Village has implemented a number of pro- In specific terms, these developments along grams and celebrations which have a canal-fo- the canal have supported growth of existing cus, these include: businesses to balance out seasonal changes in the area (i.e. snow conditions). These exist- • Craft Beer Festival ing businesses include bars and restaurants in • Low Bridge/High Water to celebrate the town and along the canal itself, the second old- opening of the Canal during the second est movie theater in the country, pizza places, a week in May soul food restaurant, specialty shops, a flower • An art festival that attracted 35,000 attend- shop and an independent book seller. ees • Undertook an effort to bring rowing to the City of Lockport, New York Canal • Fourth Grade poster contest to involve Lockport is a city located between Rochester school age children and Buffalo New York and in the 2010 Census • Composers have created music specifically had a population of 21,165. The largest- em for the Village ployer in Lockport is General Motors and the • The Duncan Stanley Farm grows organic city is located near the largest lock on the Erie vegetables by buying a portion of land ad- Canal. As noted by Chuck Bell (formerly the jacent to the Canal to provide irrigation wa- Director of Planning and Development for the ter. City of Lockport), the city was built around the canal. The area was neglected for many years, These programs, together with other programs but during the past 10 years the City has fo- developed or supported by ECNHC, such as cused on improving the area including improv- bike tours (along with Park and Trails, New ing trails and taking care of the canal locks. York), barge rides and tours, paddling events and other canal-wide celebrations (such as the A concerted effort was made above the locks Canal Bicentennial) have had a significant im- and the city sought to restore the existing com- pact on the local economy. Direct grant funds mercial district, which was renamed Richmond from ECNHC amounted to $10,000. Avenue.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 83 Section 4: Impact of Public/Private Investments

There are a number of restored buildings in the area that are privately owned and now completely occupied. This has drawn visitors to the area and helped establish an office building, an ice cream shop and a coffee shop.

In an area west of the city, the State of New York invested $6M to fill a gap in the canal trail which is being used for cycling and walking. In effect, Lockport has been engaging - inre branding of the town and has created a gazebo and green space which is home to a community market which is open from Memorial Day through September. They have also created a “Locktoberfest” event to draw in visitors.

The city has taken advantage of ECNHC initiative for the cycling events. Because of the activities of the Canalway, this has created greater awareness for marketing of the canal as a system. For that reason, Locktoberfest now has a broader reach than it would have had otherwise. They are participating in the “Reimagine the Canal” effort which makes suggestions for places for visitors to stay after visiting the canal locks and other sites in the city.

84 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

Section 5e Report ECNHC Sustainability

5.1 Defining Sustainability • Program stewardship where the combined investment results in the improved The third question guiding the evaluation, economic value and ultimately long-term derived from legislation (P.L. 110-229), asks, quality of life of that region; and “How do the coordinating entity’s manage- • Outreach and marketing to engage a full ment structure, partnership relationships and and diverse range of audiences. funding contribute to the NHA’s sustainability?” To guide the assessment of sustainability, In the following sections, ARCBridge address- ARCBridge has adopted the definition devel- es each of these components, drawing on oped by NPS, with the assistance of stakehold- data provided in previous sections. ers from a number of National Heritage Areas. Sustainability for an NHA is defined as: 5.2 Honoring the Legislative Mandate of the Erie Canalway National Heritage “…the National Heritage Area coordinating en- Corridor tity’s continuing ability to work collaboratively and reciprocally with Federal, State, communi- Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor was ty, and private partners through changing cir- designated as a National Heritage Corridor in cumstances to meet its mission for resource October, 2000, through Public Law 106-554, conservation and stewardship, interpretation, the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- education, recreation and economic develop- dor Act of 2000. The legislation recognizes ment of nationally significant resources.” Criti- that the 524 miles of navigable canal that cal components of sustainability for a National comprise the New York State Canal System, Heritage Area include, but are not limited to: including the Erie, Cayuga-Seneca, Oswego, and Champlain Canals and the historic align- • The coordinating entity and NPS honoring ments of these canals, including the cities of the legislative mandate of the NHA; Albany and Buffalo are worthy of recognition • The coordinating entity’s management as a National Heritage Corridor. capacity, including governance, adaptive management (such as strategic planning), This was particularly appropriate at that time staffing, and operations; since the year 2000 marked the 175th Anni- • Financial planning including the ongoing versary of New York State’s creation and ability to leverage resources in support of stew-ardship of the Erie Canal for the local network of partners; commerce, transportation and recreational • Partnerships with diverse community purposes. stakeholders, including the heritage area serving as a hub, catalyst, and/or coordi- The establishment of the canal nating entity for on-going capacity building; network made New York the ``Empire communication; and collaboration among State’’ and the Nation’s premier local entities; commercial and financial center; the canals and adjacent areas that comprise the Erie Canalway are a national-ly significant resource of historic and recreational value, which merit Federal recognition and assistance. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 85 Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

The Erie Canal was instrumental in the estab- By providing a permanent commercial link lishment of strong political and cultural ties between the Port of New York and the cities that connected New England, upstate New of eastern Canada, it acted as a cornerstone York and the old Northwest. The Canal facili- of the peaceful relationship between the two tated the movement of ideas and people en- countries. suring that social reforms like the abolition of slavery and the women’s rights movement The Erie Canal proved the depth and force of spread across upstate New York to the rest of American ingenuity, solidified our national the country. identity in terms of engineering and found an enduring place in American legend, song, and The construction of the Erie Canal was consid- art. There is strong national interest in the ered a supreme engineering feat early in the preservation and interpretation of the Erie 1800’s, and most American canals were subse- Canal’s important historical, natural, cultural, quently modeled after New York State’s canal. and scenic resources and partnerships among At the time of construction, the Erie Canal was Federal, State, and local governments and their the largest public works project ever undertak- regional entities. Nonprofit organizations, and en by a state, resulting in the creation of critical the private sector offer many effective oppor- transportation and commercial routes to trans- tunities for the preservation and interpretation port passengers and goods. The Erie Canal of the Erie Canal. The Erie Canalway National played a key role in turning New York City into Heritage Corridor has fulfilled the mandate as a major port and transforming New York State outlined in the enabling legislation. Illustra- into the preeminent center for commerce, in- tive projects meeting these requirements are dustry, and finance in North America. shown in Table 5.1.

86 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

Table 5.1: Programs Illustrative of Key Experiential Themes Stressed by the Erie Canalway -Na tional Heritage Corridor Program Experience/Activities Function of this Activity Taking cruises on the canal, Getting on the Viewing scenic vistas, wildlife and renting boats, paddling the ca- water visiting the more than 230 communities. nal, launching your own boat Visiting local sites, locks, lift Understanding the engineering challeng- Discovering Ca- bridges, guard gates, dams, es facing the canal builders in the early nal Structures power houses, and historic 1800s and through the early 20th century remains. Allow visitors to understand the history, stories and artifacts of the Erie Canal Visiting museums, national Experience Ca- while visiting towns and villages whose parks, national historic land- nal Heritage life and culture was inextricably shaped marks and canal by the development and operation of the communities. canal. This provides visitors with a scenic, off- road method to see various parts of canal Three-fourths of the 365 mile Erie Canalway and the communities adjacent to it. The trail between Albany and Buf- Trail trail has numerous wayfinding signs to falo is complete and off-road. point the way to various historic canal elements and communities. This provides visitors with a fun way to There are hundreds of com- experience various aspects of life in the Events and Fes- munity events and festivals many communities whose existence has tivals in towns and cities along been shaped by the canal since the early the canal. 1800s. The program has exposed nearly 40,000 students to various sites along the Canalway which gives them first-hand This program has provided experience with the canal, its operations access to the canal and its and life along the canal in the 1800s.This Ticket to Ride history through specific tours program is coordinated with the New & Every Kid in a and programs for school-age York State educational curriculum and Park children to experience various supplements academic learning of history aspects of life during the ca- with on-site experiences. The program nals construction and history. also includes a sister version, Every Kid in a Park, which makes tours to the Corri- dor’s four National Park Units possible.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 87 Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

These illustrative projects demonstrate that • Architecture the Erie Canalway has had a continuing focus • Municipal government and parks on the major heritage themes embodied in the • Geology enabling legislation. Much of this program has • NYSUT (New York State United Teachers been experiential in nature and has sought to Union) provide students and visitors with indelible ex- • New York State Heritage Areas periences that communicate key elements out- • Legal services lined in the legislation (i.e., history of the canal, • University (Economic Development) the engineering of the canal, the scenic beauty • New York State Canal Corporation and wildlife along the canal and the commu- • New York State Department of Transport nities that were established because of their • Empire State Development (New York’s connection to the canal). economic development agency) • New York State Department of State It is clear from ARCBridge’s analysis in Sections • New York State Department of Environ- 2 and 3 in this document that the Erie Canalway mental Conservation National Heritage Corridor has developed • New York State Office of Parks, Recreation strong working relationships with multiple lev- & Historic Preservation els of government and private sector organiza- • New York State Agriculture & Markets tions in upstate New York including the state • Charter boat company government, county planning offices and many • Business and finance. of the more than 200 towns and villages located adjacent to the canal. ECNHC has maintained close relationships with many small and large communities and educa- Various governmental and private organizational institutions along the canal. There are tions have had significant representation on several reasons for this: both the Heritage Fund Board of Directors and on the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- 1. ECNHC has provided small grant funding to dor’s Commission. support various canal-related events and celebrations in these communities. For example, the Heritage Fund Board of Direc- 2. Because ECNHC has been a key player in tors, encompasses members with diverse busi- bike tours along the canal mostly organized ness backgrounds in: and operated by Parks and Trails NY, connections have been formed with commu- • Construction nities who have benefitted financially from • Economic development bike tour participants. These tours include • Real estate and finance Cycle the Erie Canal and Erie Canal Bike • Legal services and contracting Tours. • Surveying and mapping 3. The Ticket to Ride program brings school • County government systems into close contact with the ECNHC staff who provide funding for students par- The ECNHC Commission involves several mem- ticipating in the Ticket to Ride program. bers with national, state and local government 4. Communities often reach out to ECNHC background as well as business entrepreneurs. staff for expertise regarding historic arti- Commissioners have backgrounds in: facts and structures in their communities. This technical assistance helps communi- • County legislature ties to list buildings on the National Regis- • National Park Service (Reg. Director) ter of Historic Places.

88 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

5. The population within the entire corridor were shown in Section 2 of this report (See Ta- provides the foundation of the Erie Canalway ble 2-4). National Heritage Corridor, and Corridor staff work hard to champion local and regional proj- The Erie Canalway Heritage Fund’s Board of ects and link these to the goals of the Preserva- Director’s consists of 14 individuals (including tion & Management Plan. the four Commission officers who serve as At Large members). As described earlier, the Erie Canalway has been actively engaged with private institutions, Note that there is a Cooperative Agreement local communities and government agencies between the ECHF and the National Park Ser- to preserve, protect, interpret and develop vice that allows the ECHF to manage the ex- the cultural, historic and natural assets of the penditures of Commission NPS funding. Heritage Corridor. Section 3 of this report describes in detail the efforts initiated by ECNHC 5.2.2 Key Staffing and Operations to accomplish those elements of its mission across the programs that have been launched ARCBridge believes that the Erie Canalway and maintained throughout the organization’s staff is well-suited to the tasks confronting tenure. the National Heritage Corridor. The current Executive Director, Bob Radliff, came to the 5.2.1 Governance, Leadership and Oversight Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor from his position as the Executive Director of the The key to assessing ECNHC management ca- Community Loan Fund of the Capital Region, pacity rests on the performance of the Erie a non-profit financial institution capitalized by Canalway National Heritage Corridor Commis- socially concerned investors. During a portion sion, the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc’s. of his tenure (from 2011-2013) he also served Board of Directors, the Erie Canalway National as the Executive Director of the Albany Center Heritage Corridor Executive Director and the for Economic Success, a small business incuba- staff members in the organization. tor and community development facility. From 1990 to 1995, he was Executive Director of Commission and Board Members the Albany Community Land Trust, a nonprofit corporation holding land in trust while provid- The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corri- ing long-term access for meeting community dor’s Commission consists of a diverse group needs. Mr. Radliff received his MBA from the of twenty-two individuals whose backgrounds University of Albany. , Mr. Radliff’s mix of not- encompass a wide range of disciplines as out- for-profit management and community devel- lined in Section 5.2 above. opment skills makes him well-suited to serve as the Executive Director of ECNHC. Of the 22 members of the Commission, 11 have been active members for at least four years. Andrew Kitzmann is Assistant Director for Thus, ARCBridge has found that the Commis- the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor sion has a mix of long-term members as well where he is responsible for adaptive re-use of as a group of newer members who bring ad- the Matton Shipyard and manages ECNHC’s ditional previously untried ideas and consider- competitive grants program as well as oversee- ations to the planning and governance process. ing the Ticket To Ride and Every Kid in a Park educational programs. Details regarding the length of tenure on the Commission and members respective skills sets

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 89 Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

In addition to these program responsibilities, from the University of Delaware. Mr. Kitzmann actively prepares federal, state and local competitive grants and manages the 5.2.3 Strategic Planning and Adaptive Man- federal commission nomination and appoint- agement ments process. He served as project manager for ECNHC strategic planning process and the In specific terms, management of ECNHC con- creation of ECNHC organizational resource -de sists of the Erie Canalway’s federal commis- velopment plan. He is also currently a board sion and the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. member of the Alliance of National Heritage Board of Directors as well as the ECNHC staff. Areas. Prior to joining ECNHC Mr. Kitzmann This group of professionals has long been in- was curator of the Erie Canal Museum in Syra- volved in planning as and implementing new cuse, New York. He received his MA in Muse- and unique concepts in its programming. um studies from Syracuse University. Illustrative of the ECNHC’s strategic planning Jean Mackay is the Director of Communica- and adaptive management activities are: tions and Outreach for the Erie Canalway Na- tional Heritage Corridor. In that position, she • Erie Canalway Preservation and Manage- has responsibility for communications, mar- ment Plan was approved by the Secretary keting and brand strategy for the organization. of the Interior in October, 20061. This was This work includes the creation of visitor infor- the culmination of years of work including mation publications, maintaining relationships a series of public meetings in municipalities with key stakeholders and partners including along the canal in 2003 and 2004. the National Park Service, congressional - rep • As the Erie Canal Commission began to re- resentatives, state agencies, municipalities and alize that as a Federal entity it could not canal-related museums and historic sites. She raise funds from the private sector and is also responsible for all aspects of website from individuals, the Commission decided development, social media strategy and con- to embark on the formation of a non-profit ference planning. Ms. Mackay received her which would provide greater flexibility in Masters in Environmental Education at Lesley fund-raising. University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. • In 2006, the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc. had its articles of incorporation accept- Dr. Duncan Hay is the Historian for the Erie ed by the New York State Department of Canalway National Heritage Corridor. He is as- State. signed to the Northeast Region of the Nation- • In 2007 the Bylaws for the Erie Canalway al Park Service and is on detail on a part-time Heritage Fund, Inc. were approved by the basis to ECNHC. He played a major role in the Heritage Fund Board of Directors and the designation of 450 miles and 524 structures of IRS approved the organizations 501(c)(3) the New York State Canal System as a Nation- non-profit status. al Historic Landmark District. He prepared the • As discussed in Chapter 2 of this report, or- text and images for 40 interpretive wayside ex- ganizational partner growth substantially hibits for canal sites across New York State. He increased beginning in 2007, which reflect- was program chair for the 2017 World Canals ed the immediate impact of the change in Conference in Syracuse. Dr. Hay worked for the organizational structure to include the for- National Building Museum in Washington, D.C. mation of a non-profit arm to increase flex- and was curator of industrial and maritime his- ibility in fund-raising. tory for the New York State Museum. Dr. Hay 1 earned his Ph.D. in the History of Technology Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, Preservation and Management Plan, 2006.

90 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

• In 2011 the Canal Commission and the Her- partners and to examine the role and value itage Fund Board of Directors published a that each partner plays in their program offer- strategic plan to cover the ECNHC develop- ings. Such data will also be of assistance in ment period between 2011 and 2016 . the examination of the organization’s resource • In 2012 the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, development plan. Inc. worked with West Wind Consulting Strategies in Fund Raising, LLC to develop a 5.3 Partnerships plan for resource development for the ECN- HC. This plan identified strategies and infra- As noted in the beginning of this section, one structure to support donor development and key element of Erie Canalway sustainability the analysis of fund-raising. Data on individ- is the development of partnerships with a di- ual partner development in Chapter 2 shows verse set of community stakeholders, which that there was a substantial increase in the can support ongoing capacity development number of individual donors beginning in across the community. In Section 2 of this re- 2011-2012. port ARCBridge documented the number of organizational and individual partners devel- 5.2.4 Monitoring and Record Keeping oped by ECNHC over the period between 1996 and 2018. These partnerships reflect 790 or- ARCBridge has found that Erie Canalway has ganizations and individuals that have collabo- kept consistent records across the years and con- rated with and funded ECNHC over that peri- tinually makes adjustments to reflect the evolv- od of time and reflect key stakeholders in the ing requirements set forth by the National Park community. Service. The financial record-keeping appears to be in strong and stable condition. The financial Analysis of the partnership data revealed that record-keeping has been maintained consistent 55% of Erie Canalway’s partners have been ac- with financial audits that have been conducted tively involved with the NHA for ten years or each year by independent accounting firms. more. These partner organizations reflect a long-term commitment to the success of ECN- ARCBridge has suggested one area of re- HC. In fact, on average organizational partners cord-keeping which requires some modest in- have been actively involved with the Canalway vestment. This is related to tracking of part- for 8.2 years. nerships. As part of this project, ARCBridge has worked with the Erie Canalway team to success- Among the 422 organizational partners, 137 or fully refine its partner data set. 32% of this partner group provided funding for the Canalway. While the ARCBridge evaluation team recommends that Erie Canalway continue to track part- As might be anticipated, individual partners ner activity in the future, it should be noted that (368), 78% have been actively involved for 3 there have been no guidelines or requirements years or less. This is not surprising given the established by the National Park Service to track more recent focus on individual donors. In fact such information. In the future, if such informa- among individual partners 99% have donated tion is carefully maintained by Erie Canalway, funds to the Canalway. the organization will be better able to determine how rapidly they are able to develop new In section 2 of the report it was also observed 1Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor,2011-2016 Strategic that 35% of organization partners were in- Plan, 2011. volved in three or more discrete Erie Canalway 3A Plan to Guide Resource Development for the Erie Canalway Heritage Corridor, 2012-2017, West Wind Consulting Strate- gies in Fund Raising, 2012. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 91 Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

programs. This group of partners reflects deep There was an additional $4.5M in other NPS involvement with the Heritage Corridor mis- funds which are the National Park Services sion. Commission Funds. These funds support Com- mission activities such as NPS staff on detail to Over the course of interviews with partner or- the Canalway. The category of other NPS funds ganizations, members of the ARCBridge team also includes monies obtained competitively heard a number of revealing comments about from the Service-wide Combined Call Funds. ECNHC’s role in the community. For example, As described in Section 4 of this report the to- • “They are the keeper of the Canal’s story.” tal reported non-Federal matching funds gen- • “The Erie Canalway established good will erated by ECNHC was over $23.7 M. These with local officials; they are out there with matching funds exceeded required match a small, but ubiquitous presence.” levels for NPS funds by nearly $14 M. The re- • “The Canalway brought about economic quired match level for Heritage Program funds change in the towns along the canal.” was 100% for ECNHC (the required match was • “More and more they are focused on rec- $9.74M). Another way to look at this is that reational opportunities.” ECNHC must provide at least 50% of the pro- • “[The Canalway] has opened up the visitor gram’s costs HPP funds cannot only cover up to experiences in a way that connects visitors 50% of program costs. to elements of local community programs.” • “The Canalway staff is very proactive.” The financial data outlined in Section 4 of this • “They are always seeking ways to connect report highlights the importance of Heritage to both the communities and also other Program funds to the overall operation of ECN- units of the National Park Service.” HC. Thus, HPP funds reflect less than one-third (29%) of the total funds received by the Na- 5.4 Financial Sustainability, the Impor- tional Heritage Corridor. tance of NPS Funds, and the Importance of the National Heritage Corridor Desig- Without the NHC designation, HPP funds would nation not have been available to support the Erie Canalway program and the absence of those Table 5.2 below shows the total investments funds would have diminished efforts to revi- and total expenditures of Erie Canalway Na- talize a number of areas along the Erie Canal tional Heritage Corridor from the program’s which had fallen into disrepair. Furthermore, beginning (FY2002) through FY2017. the designation as a National Heritage Corridor The data in Chapter 4 (Table 4-5) shows that provided Erie Canalway with the stature in the total expenditures during the period amount- community that it now enjoys. Such stature ed to $38.52 M while the total funds received has enabled the ECNHC to play critical roles in by Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor a number of preservation and educational -de or by the organization’s partners amounted to velopments in various communities along the $38.57 M (see Table 5.2 below). canal. These developments have also had a positive economic impact in a number of com- These data also show that NPS HPP funds munities as has been reflected in the mini-case amounted to $9.74M over the period. studies that were described in Chapter 4.

92 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

Table 5.2: Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor NPS Funds, Other Federal Funds, Non-Fed- eral Match Funds, Total Funds Received by Fiscal Year

Non-NPS Fiscal NPS/HPP Funds Other NPS Federal Non-Federal Match Total Revenue Year Received Funds Received Funds Funds Received 2002 $202,823 $250,000 $0 $0 $452,823 2003 $395,002 $249,000 $0 $276,500 $920,502 2004 $589,444 $356,611 $0 $507,772 $1,453,827 2005 $608,788 $271,558 $0 $1,028,692 $1,909,038 2006 $623,553 $339,829 $0 $4,300,000 $5,263,382 2007 $893,330 $261,048 $0 $1,225,000 $2,379,378 2008 $677,061 $294,108 $0 $3,426,258 $4,397,427 2009 $688,567 $251,083 $277,591 $914,903 $2,132,145 2010 $690,406 $261,930 $64,104 $1,396,172 $2,412,612 2011 $616,805 $385,891 $0 $1,582,552 $2,585,248 2012 $696,742 $277,209 $133,000 $1,579,704 $2,686,655 2013 $437,339 $240,000 $9,508 $1,184,055 $1,870,902 2014 $584,824 $255,000 $0 $1,746,819 $2,586,643 2015 $642,508 $272,000 $23,255 $1,420,313 $2,358,076 2016 $709,969 $284,681 $0 $1,098,801 $2,093,451 2017 $687,042 $263,300 $100,100 $2,015,159 $3,065,601 Total $9,744,203 $4,513,247 $607,558 $23,702,701 $38,567,709

If one looks at the total NPS allocations to the (i.e. retained earnings in the non-profit organi- Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, it is zation, Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc) since apparent that overall funding from the agen- FY2012. Over an extended period of time, cy has been relatively stable since FY2006. ECNHC has maintained a tight operating- ex From an investment perspective, ARCBridge pense budget. The organization has a net asset believes that ECNHC has effectively managed position of $365,000 as of the end of FY2017. its fundraising in line with investments, partic- These funds have come from non-federal ularly since F2004 when matching funds have sources. continuously exceeded match requirements. While ECNHC has effectively managed its in- ECNHC has maintained a strong financial posi- come and expenses since FY2004, Heritage tion for a number of years through robust rela- Program Funds remain an important part of its tionships with its organizational partners who overall financial picture. Heritage funds could have provided substantial matching funds. The not easily be replaced at this time. The loss of organization has developed methods of finan- this revenue stream would have significant ad- cial sustainability which has allowed them to verse consequences for the operation of the accumulate unrestricted funds Erie Canalway.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 93 Section 5: ECNHC Sustainability

It would dramatically impact staffing, pro- 3. The Erie Canalway has a record of fiscal grams and the organization’s ability to plan for management that has produced $365,000 in the future. non-federally sourced retained earnings since the development of a non-profit organization 5.5 Sustainability Summary and a track record of meeting and exceeding its federal match requirements. The ARCBridge analysis of ECNHC sustainability suggests that the organization has a number 4. Since its designation as a National Heritage of key elements that contribute long-term ca- Corridor, Erie Canalway has made significant pability for sustaining its financial position: progress in focusing on fostering vibrant communities along the canal. The Canalway has 1. The organization has a strong federal Com- invested more than $5.9 M in such efforts. The mission and not-for-profit Board of Directors mini-case studies described in Chapter 4 of this with representation of key elements of the report described how three such communities community (such as state and local govern- have taken advantage of ECNHC programs to ment agencies and private enterprise) as well stimulate economic growth along the canal to as staff that have shown their capability for the benefit of their residents. fund-raising and financial management. The Board of Directors and Commission have been 5. Continuation of Heritage Partnership Pro- heavily involved in planning activities and has gram funding for ECNHC will be essential to shown themselves to be adept at anticipat- the operation of the Erie Canalway. The loss ing the need for a non-profit arm to provide of NPS funding would have a negative impact more flexible approaches to funding. In fact, on staffing, programming and future planning. the non-profit Heritage Fund was created by This funding could not be readily replaced in the Commission and Officers of the Commis- the near-term. sion who serve as ex-officio members of the Heritage Fund Board of Directors. In addition, the Commission, the Heritage Fund Board and professional staff have also been proactive at identifying fund-raising strategies that will serve the organization over the long-term (e.g. the development of a resources plan including donor development and a fund-raising infrastructure).

2. The organization has broadly developed a significant group of partner organizations (totaling 422) and individual partners (368), many of which have undertaken multiple projects with the Erie Canalway and have contributed greatly to the pool of matching funds. This base of long-term partner support offers the potential for numerous avenues for long-term fundraising and volunteer support.

94 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 1

Appendix 1 Evaluation Legislation

Excerpt(s) from Public Law 113-291 (i) Section 107 (110 Stat. 4244; 127 Stat. 420; 113th Congress 128 Stat. 314). (ii) Section 408 (110 Stat. 4256; 127 Stat. 420; An Act To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 128 Stat. 314). 2015 for military activities of the Department of (iii) Section 507 (110 Stat. 4260; 127 Stat. Defense, for military construction, and for- de 420; 128 Stat. 314). fense activities of the Department of Energy, to (iv) Section 707 (110 Stat. 4267; 127 Stat. prescribe military personnel strengths for such 420; 128 Stat. 314). fiscal year, and for other purposes. (v) Section 809 (110 Stat. 4275; 122 Stat. 826; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). NOTE: Dec. 19, 2014 - [H.R. 3979] (vi) Section 910 (110 Stat. 4281; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of Ameri- (C) Section 109 of Public Law 105-355 (16 ca in Congress assembled, NOTE: Carl Levin and U.S.C. 461 note; 112 Stat. 3252) Howard P. `Buck’’ McKeon National Defense NOTE: 54 USC 320101 note. is amended by strik- Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. ing `September 30, 2014’’ and inserting Septem- ber 30, 2021’’. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the `Carl (D) Public Law 106-278 NOTE: 54 USC 320101 Levin and Howard P. `Buck’ McKeon National De- note. (16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended-- fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015’’. SEC. 3052. NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS AND (i) in section 108 (114 Stat. 818; 127 Stat. 420; CORRIDORS. 128 Stat. 314), by striking `2015’’ and inserting `2021’’; and (a) Extension of National Heritage Area Author- (ii) in section 209 (114 Stat. 824), by striking the ities.-- date that is 15 years after the date of enactment (1) Extensions.-- of this title’’ and inserting `September 30, 2021’’. (A) Section 12 of Public Law 100-692 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 102 Stat. 4558; 112 Stat. 3258; 123 (E) Section 157(i) of Public Law 106-291 (16 Stat. 1292; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314) U.S.C. 461 note; 114 Stat. 967) <> is amended by striking `2015’’ NOTE: 54 USC320101 note is amended-- and `2021’’. (i) in subsection (c)(1), by striking `2015’’ and inserting `2021’’; and (F) Section 7 of Public Law 106-319 (16 U.S.C. 461 (ii) in subsection (d), by striking `2015’’ and note; 114 Stat. 1284) <> is amended by striking `2015’’ and inserting `2021’’. (B) Division II of Public Law 104-333 (16 U.S.C. 461 note) NOTE: 54 USC 320101 note. is (G) Title VIII of division B of H.R. 5666 amended by striking `2015’’ each place it appears in the following sections & inserting `2021’’:

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 95 Appendix 1

(Appendix D) as enacted into law by section 1(a) (i) assess the progress of the local (4) of Public Law 106-554 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; management entity with respect to-- 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-295; 123 Stat. 1294) (I) accomplishing the purposes of the <> is amended-- authorizing legislation for the national heritage (i) in section 804(j), by striking `the day area; and occurring 15 years after the date of enactment of this title’’ and inserting `September 30, (II) achieving the goals and objectives of the 2021’’; and approved management plan for the national heritage area; (ii) by adding at the end the following: `SEC. 811. TERMINATION OF ASSISTANCE. (ii) analyze the investments of Federal, State, `The authority of the Secretary to provide finan- tribal, and local government and private entities cial assistance under this title shall terminate on in each national heritage area to determine the September 30, 2021.’’. impact of the investments; and

(H) Section 106(b) of Public Law 103-449 (iii) review the management structure, (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 108 Stat. 4755; 113 Stat. partnership relationships, and funding of the na- 1726; <> 123 Stat. tional heritage area for purposes of identifying 1291) is amended, by striking `2015’’ and insert- the critical components for sustainability of the ing `2021’’. national heritage area.

(2) <> Condition- (C) Report.--Based on the evaluation conducted al extension of authorities.-- under subparagraph (A)(i), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural (A) In general.--The amendments made by Resources of the Senate and the Committee on paragraph Natural Resources of the House of Representa- tives a report that includes recommendations (1) (other than the amendments made by for the future role of the National Park Service clauses (iii) and (iv) of paragraph (1)(B)), shall with respect to the national heritage area. apply only through September 30, 2020, unless [ … ] the Secretary of the Interior (referred to in this section as the `Secretary’’)-- (c) National Heritage Area Redesignations.-- (1) Redesignation of the last green valley na- (i) conducts an evaluation of the tional heritage corridor.-- accomplishments of the national heritage areas (A) In general.--The Quinebaug and Shetucket extended under paragraph (1), in accordance Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Act of with subparagraph (B); and 1994 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 103-449) <> is amended-- (ii) prepares a report in accordance with (i) in section 103--(i) in section 103-- subparagraph (C) that recommends a future role (I) in the heading, by striking `quinebaug for the National Park Service with respect to the applicable national heritage area.

(B) Evaluation.--An evaluation conducted under subparagraph (A)(i) shall--

96 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 1 and shetucket rivers valley national heritage cor- (1), by striking Àutomobile National Heritage ridor’’ and inserting `last green valley national Area’’ and inserting `MotorCities National Heri- heritagemcorridor’’; and tage Area’’; and (II) in subsection (a), by striking `the Quinebaug (bb) in paragraph (2), by striking and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Àutomobile National Heritage Area’’ and insert- Heritage Corridor’’ and inserting `The Last Green ing `MotorCities National Heritage Area’’; Valley National Heritage Corridor’’; and (ii) in section 103-- (I) in paragraph (2), by striking Àutomobile (ii) in section 108(2), by striking `the Quinebaug National Heritage Area’’ and inserting -`Motor and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Cities National Heritage Area’’; and Corridor under’’ and inserting `The Last Green (II) in paragraph (3), by striking Àutomobile Valley National Heritage Corridor established National Heritage Area Partnership’’ and insert- by’’. ing MotorCities National Heritage Area Partner- ship’’; (B) References.--Any reference in a law, map, (iii) in section 104-- regulation, document, paper, or other record of (I) in the heading, by striking àutomobile the United States to the Quinebaug and Shet- national heritage area’’ and inserting -`motor ucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor cities national heritage area’’; and shall be deemed to be a reference to the `The (II) in subsection (a), by striking Àutomobile Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor’’. National Heritage Area’’ and inserting -`Motor Cities National Heritage area’’; and (2) Redesignation of motorcities national heri- (iv) in section 106, in the heading, by striking tage area.-- àutomobile national heritage area partnership’’ and inserting `motorcities national heritage area (A) In general.--The Automobile National partnership’’. Heritage Area Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; (B) References.--Any reference in a law, map, Public Law 105-355) <> is amended-- the United States to the Automobile National Heritage Area shall be deemed to be a reference (i) in section 102-- to the`MotorCities National Heritage Area’’. (I) in subsection (a)-- (aa) in paragraph (7), by striking Àutomobile Approved December 19, 2014. National Heritage Area Partnership’’ and insert- LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3979: ing `MotorCities National Heritage Area Partner------ship’’; and HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113-360 (Comm. on Ways (bb) in paragraph (8), by striking and Means). Àutomobile National Heritage Area’’ each place it appears and inserting `MotorCities National CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014): Heritage Area’’; and Mar. 11, considered and passed House. (II) in subsection (b)-- Mar. 31, Apr. 1-3, 7, considered and passed Sen- (aa) in the matter preceding paragraph ate, amended. Dec. 4, House concurred in Sen- ate amendment with an amendment. Dec. 12, Senate concurred in House amendment.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 97 Appendix 2

Appendix 2 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act Of 2000

98 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 2

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 99 Appendix 2

100 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 2

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 101 Appendix 2

102 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 2

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 103 Appendix 2

104 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 2

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 105 Appendix 2

106 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 2

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 107 Appendix 2

108 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 3

Appendix 3 Evaluation Methodology

Background and Purpose Core Evaluation Approach

In May 2008, Congress passed legislation which Our approach to the NHA evaluation centers requires the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate around three basic principles – stakeholder col- the accomplishments of nine National Heritage laboration, in-depth and triangulated data col- Areas (NHAs) no later than three years before lection, and efficiencies of time and effort. The the date on which authority for Federal funding evaluation will use a case study design, examin- for each of the NHAs terminates. Based on finding each NHA individually. ings of each evaluation, the legislation requires the Secretary to prepare a report with recom- The case study design is appropriate for address- mendations for the National Park Service’s fu- ing the NHA evaluation questions since there are ture role with respect to the NHA under review. multiple variables of interest within each NHA and multiple sources of data with the need for The NHA evaluation process was designed to convergence or triangulation among the sourc- answer the following questions: es. As noted below, data sources in each site will include documents, key informants from the co- 1. Based on its authorizing legislation and gen- ordinating/management entity and partner- or eral management plan, has the Heritage Area ganizations, and community stakeholders. Data achieved its proposed accomplishments? collection will be guided by a case study protocol 2. What have been the impacts of investments outlining the domains and measures of interest made by Federal, State, Tribal, and local govern- using topic-centered guides for extracting data ment and private entities? from existing sources and for interviewing key in- 3. How do the Heritage Area’s management formants (individually and in group interviews). structure, partnership relationships and current funding contribute to its sustainability? The evaluation will incorporate a collaborative approach with project stakeholders to ensure ARCBridge’s methodology for conducting the that it is relevant to all and is grounded in the NHA evaluations includes: our core evaluation local knowledge of the site as well as designed approach; evaluation design; associated data to meet legislative requirements. Therefore, in collection methods, sources, and measures; the design and implementation of each evalua- analysis and reporting plans, and in-depth site tion, ARCBridge will include the perspectives of interviews. The methodology builds upon the NPS and NHA leadership. Working products will methodology and instruments used in previous be developed in close coordination with NPS and NHA evaluations. In addition, the ARCBridge the NHA evaluation sites throughout the evalu- team has included case studies, profiles of key ation process. Involving all key stakeholders and community partners, and photos to further illus- including varying perspectives at each stage of trate the impact on the ground. the process will ensure that the data collection methods and indicators, the analysis, and inter- This document also describes the process ARC- pretation of the findings reflect their views and Bridge will use to tailor the approach for each of concerns. the specific NHA evaluations.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 109 Appendix 3

Core Evaluation Design and Measures Each of these domains and measures are cross- walked with the potential data sources. Many of ARCBridge has developed a core evaluation the domains will be informed by more than one design to be tailored for each NHA evaluation. data source, as is typical in a case study, to pro- Three tools guide the development of the core vide for more valid and complete results through evaluation design: the NHA Logic Model, the triangulation of multiple perspectives. The NHA Domain Matrix (Appendix D), and a com- sources for data collection include: existing NHA prehensive case study protocol. documentation, including foundational and financial documents; interviews with NHA staff The basic structure of the NHA Logic Model is a and key partners; and input from citizens in the visual representation of the: NHA community. A later section of this methodology will provide greater detail about the se- • overarching goal for a NHA lected data sources and process for data collec- • resources and key partnerships available to tion. A brief synopsis of the Domain Matrix and help an NHA accomplish its goals how it guides our approach to addressing the • activities and strategies that are being imple- key questions follows: mented to accomplish the NHA goal • intended short- and long-term outcomes Evaluation Question 1 • the linkages among the activities, strategies, and outcomes Based on its authorizing legislation and -gen eral management plan, has the heritage area NHA Logic Model achieved its proposed accomplishments?

The logic model provides a blueprint for the In addressing this question, ARCBridge will col- case study design, outlining the components to lect data through interviews and documents on examine, the indicators to measure, and the re- the nature of the proposed NHA activities; how lationships to investigate between the various these activities are being implemented by the activities and outcomes . It therefore is a key local coordinating entity/management entity, tool for outlining the data that should be collect- partnership network and/or the local communi- ed as well as the types of analyses that might be ty; and, the impacts of the activities. The mea- conducted. sures also will address whether the NHAs are implementing the activities proposed in the initial In addition, it provides an efficient way to dis- NHA designation, and if not, what circumstances play the underlying logic or framework of the or situations may have led to their adaptation or NHA. For the core evaluation design, the NHA adjustment. logic model has guided the development of the NHA Domain Matrix, which will in turn inform This examination consists of in-depth interviews the development of a case study protocol to with staff to understand what activities have- re conduct the evaluation. sulted from the NHA designation that was initially not intended or expected. Also, in assessing The NHA Domain Matrix is designed to thor- the goals and objectives of the NHA, ARCBridge oughly address the three key evaluation ques- will try to discern if there were mechanisms in tions outlined in the legislation. The left-hand place prior to establishment of the NHA intend- side of the matrix lists the key domains and ed to achieve these goals. measures required to answer each evaluation question.

110 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 3

Evaluation Question 2 Specifically, ARCBridge will perform an analysis of the ratio of Federal funding to other fund sourc- What have been the impacts of investments es and the change in this ratio over time overall made by Federal, State, Tribal, and local govern- and for specific activities. We will also interview ment and private entities? NHA leadership and board staff to understand the extent to which fundraising activities have Addressing this question will begin with gath- been prioritized for specific activities. ering information through interviews with key NHA management staff and a review of financial Based on these analytic and data collection ac- data forms. Understanding what investments tivities, an attempt would be made to determine have been made will involve collecting data on what the likely effects on the NHA would be if both financial and non-financial investments, in- Federal funding was reduced or discontinued; cluding data on the amount, nature, and sources specifically, which activities might have apros- of these investments over time. We will also expect of continuing with reduced or discontinued amine the impact of these investments and how Federal funding, which would likely end with they are helping the NHAs achieve their intend- reduced or discontinued Federal funding, and ed outcomes through data collected from re- therefore, which goals and objectives might not viewing NHA plans and interviews with key part- be reached. ners and local residents of the NHA community. In cases when an NHA has numerous investment The evaluation will also examine if there are sources, ARCBridge will focus on the NHA’s activities that support issues of national impor- “major” sources and whether these sources tance, and thus, should be considered for other are restricted or unrestricted funds . To identify Federal funding. Finally, the evaluation will ad- “major” sources of investment, ARCBridge will dress how other organizations that exist within examine the range of investment sources and the Heritage Area be effected by the sunset of character- ize them by financial or time commit- Federal funds, and if there are mechanisms in ment thresholds. place for these organizations to work toward the Heritage Area goals post-sunset. Evaluation Question 3 Data Collection Methods How do the heritage areas management structure, partnership relationships, and current The planned data collection methods include: funding contribute to its sustainability? topic-centered interviews; topic-centered interviews with the NHA partner network; intercept Data to inform this question will be primarily conversations with community stakeholders; gathered from interviews with key NHA manage- review of the NHA plans and legal documents; ment staff and a subset of NHA partners, and by review of the NHA guides, brochures, websites performing a review and analysis of the NHA and other descriptive documents; and review of financial documents. The definition of sustain- the NHA financial data records. In the sections ability developed by the NPS working group will below, ARCBridge describes each of these meth- be employed in addressing this question . We ods, including how ARCBridge will select the data will examine the nature of management struc- sources, what data to will collect, and the tools ture and partnership network and their contri- we will use to collect the data. For each of the bution to sustainability. We will also assess the methods, ARCBridge will begin by developing financial investments over time and their corre- a “generic” instrument that corresponds to the sponding impact on the financial sustainability key elements outlined in the domain matrix. The of those investments and their future with and process for tailoring the instruments to each of without future Federal funding. the evaluation sites include: Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 111 Appendix 3

Foundation Documents Review • Partnering with diverse community stakeholders including serving as a hub, catalyst and/or A first set of documents will be reviewed to frame coordinating entity for ongoing capacity build- the decisions and actions of the coordinating en- ing, communication and collaboration among tity’s role in implementing the designated NHA’s local entities objectives. These documents provide many of • Program and project stewardship where the the objectives for the NHA and frame expecta- combined investment results in the improved tions for the local coordinating entity. These doc- economic value and ultimately long-term qual- uments include: ity of life of that region; and • Outreach and marketing to engage a full and • Legislation – all Federal, state and/or local leg- diverse range of audiences islation that provides the legal framework for the • Guides – documents designed to define how NHA NHA business operates • Plans – all planning documents, including up- • Annual financial statements and reports – in- dates, developed by the coordinating entity and/ cludes audits, tax returns, budget activities and or partners that are intended to deliver the le- performance program reports gal mandates defined by Congress and/or other • Annual reports – includes reports to Congress, legislative bodies to partners and to the NPS and others • Legal documents – documents signed by the • Organizational structure and operations – how coordinating entity that allow it conduct/pro- the coordinating entity, board(s) and commit- duce routine NHA business tees do NHA work, their roles and functions • Key milestones – a timeline of major events Another set of documents will be obtained and that document the evolution of the NHA to in- reviewed to understand the nature of NHA ac- clude outside influences affecting your planning tivities and their relationship with NHA objec- and implementation process tives. These documents include: The National Heritage Area coordinating entity’s continuing The ARCBridge team will collaborate with each of ability to work collaboratively and reciprocally the NHA coordinating entities and NPS to gath- with Federal, state, community and private part- er these materials. We will also provide sample ners through changing circumstances to meet its table shells to help NHA coordinating entity staff mission for resource conservation and steward- understand evaluation data needs and identify ship, interpretation, education, recreation and relevant documents to share with our team. economic development of nationally significant resources. In reviewing these documents, ARCBridge will abstract information into tables that historically Critical components of sustainability of a Nation- documents NHA activities, such as the number al Heritage Area include but are not limited to: of visitors or number of workshops offered per year. We will also use a case study protocol to • Coordinating entity and the National Park -Ser abstract key information and make use of data vice honoring the legislative mandate of the Na- analysis software, such as NVivo, to meaningful- tional Heritage Area; ly structure the data. This review of documents • Coordinating entity’s management capacity in- will be critical in helping us tailor the specifics of cluding governance, adaptive management (such the evaluation for each site, particularly in- se as strategic planning), staffing and operations; lecting NHA staff and partners to interview. • Financial planning and preparedness, including the ongoing ability to leverage resources in support of the local network of partners;

112 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 3

Financial Data Review Although all interviews will be conducted on site at the coordinating entity, follow-up telephone We will review key NHA financial data records conversations will be conducted as needed to such as audits, tax returns, budgets and perfor- capture additional information. We expect to mance program reports to collect data on the spend one day interviewing up to nine staff in amount and sources of funding for the NHA, each NHA. trends in funding over a 10-year period, and the impact of these resources on the economic sus- Topic-Centered Interviews with Members of tainability of the NHA. the NHA Partner Network

We will coordinate with each of the NHA coordi- Members of the NHA partner network, includ- nating entities and NPS to gather these materials ing NPS, will be interviewed to in order to gain and collect supporting documentation regarding an understanding about NHA activities and in- external matching contributions and use of NHA vestments and their associated impacts, includ- resources according to program areas. We will ing their contribution to NHA sustainability. A use a protocol to guide the review of financial topic-centered, semi-structured interview pro- data needs with each NHA site. tocol will guide these interviews, some of which will be conducted individually, either in person Topic-Centered Interviews with Staff of the NHA or by telephone, and others that will be con- Coordinating Entity ducted through group interviews to maximize the number of viewpoints gathered. If applica- During a follow-up site visit, key staff from the ble for the respective site, ARCBridge expects to NHA coordinating entity will be interviewed. select 15-20 partners from each NHA to inter- The staff will include the Executive Director and view. In determining criteria for selecting part- staff in key roles identified through review of the ners to interview, ARCBridge will review foun- foundational documents. For example, some of dational documents and web site materials for the staff selected for interviews could include each NHA site. These criteria will likely include managers of specific NHA activities (i .e. pro- the level of the partner’s relationship with the gramming or marketing directors), or staff who NHA, the extent to which they participate and/ work in finance, development or partner rela- or support NHA activities, their financial relationship function. A topic-centered, semi-struc- tionship and their geographic representation. tured protocol will be used to conduct each of We will share the list of selected partners with the interviews, obtaining information about the NHA for completeness and will incorporate the background of the NHA, NHA activities and the NHA’s suggestions of other partners who investments, and their associated impacts, in- should be interviewed. Once this list is finalized, cluding their contribution to NHA sustainability. ARCBridge will contact the partners for inter- We will conduct individual interviews with the view scheduling. We expect to have a range of staff with the most history and scope of under- stakeholders and organizations participate in standing of the NHA operations, such as the Ex- these interviews adding to the multiple sources ecutive Director or Finance Manager. Other staff, of data for triangulation. especially those with similar roles such as program assistants will be interviewed in groups to Community Input maximize the number of viewpoints gathered. Each of the topic-centered interviews will be Members of the NHA community will be invited semi-structured, outlining the key areas to cover to provide their input about the nature and im- and probes that are specific to the site. However, pact of NHA activities through intercept conver- as new areas emerge, the interviews will be flexi- sations with a sample of residents in the NHA ble to collect information on these areas. community. These conversations may take place Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 113 Appendix 3

within the community. Conversations will help Results of each NHA evaluation will be communi- the evaluation team gain an understanding of cated in a Findings Document. The findings doc- the community’s familiarity with the Heritage ument will be guided by a modification of the Area and its unique and nationally significant as- outline finalized by the NHA Evaluation Working pects. The intercept conversations will also pro- Group. The Findings Document outline has been vide information about the residents’ awareness streamlined to present key findings in an Exec- of and appreciation for the Heritage Area. ARC- utive Summary, combine sections according to Bridge will work with NHA management to de- the three evaluation questions, and address sus- velop strategies for obtaining community input. tainability questions regarding the impact of the sunset of Federal funds on NHA activities. It is important to recognize the limitations in the data that will be collected through the commu- ARCBridge will first share a draft of the findings nity input strategies. First, as ARCBridge will be document with the Executive Director of the identifying “convenient” groups of individuals, it NHA coordinating entity for a review of- tech is likely that those involved will not be fully rep- nical accuracy. The Executive Director will have resentative of local residents, tourists, and vol- the opportunity to share the findings document unteers. Depending on how they are identified, with other staff and stakeholders as desired, and they have more or less motivation to be interest- can provide comments to the evaluation team, ed in the NHA. In addition, the data collected will either in writing or via telephone discussion. be largely qualitative. We will not be able to de- Finally, if necessary to discuss differences, a velop quantitative indicators of the community joint telephone conversation involving the NHA input, but rather collect more impressionistic in- Executive Director, NPS and ARCBridge can be put that will provide an indication based on each held to discuss the comments and to arrive at respondent’s background, prior involvement, a resolution. Once ARCBridge has incorporated and interest as to how well the NHA is enhancing the feedback, the NHA coordinating entity will community awareness of, appreciation of, and have another opportunity to review the findings involvement in the NHA. document before it is shared with NPS. Once the NHA’s final feedback is reviewed and incorporat- Analyze Data and Findings Document ed, ARCBridge will submit the draft findings documents to NPS for review. The analysis and synthesis of each NHA’s data will be guided by the overall protocol and the Tailoring the Evaluation Design for NHA Evalu- Findings Document outline. Data reduction will ation Sites first begin by summarizing the data within each domain area, first within each source, and then The core evaluation design will be tailored to in- synthesizing the data across sources. Attempts dividual NHAs under evaluation. A preliminary will be made to reconcile any issues or discrep- “Meet and Greet” visit to the NHAs will largely ancies across the sources by contacting the rel- inform how the protocols should be customized evant parties at each NHA. Data will be sum- for each site, including the domains that are rel- marized within each domain and analyzed for evant, the probes that should be added to in- relationships, guided by the logic model. To the quire about each domain, and the specific data degree possible, results will be displayed graph- sources that are relevant for the site. We will ically and in tables. Findings will reflect the tri- work with the Executive Director to determine angulated information – where appropriate and the key staff to involve in individual and group feasible, it will be important to ensure that the interviews during a second site visit, partner results not only reflect the perspectives of the organizations that should be represented, and key informants but are substantiated with data strategies to obtain community input. from documents. 114 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 3

A customized logic model for each NHA will be Evaluation Limitations developed during the initial site visit; detailing the respective NHA’s goals, resources, partner- To the greatest extent possible, ARCBridge has ships, activities and intended outcomes. This tried to ensure this evaluation methodology process will involve a group meeting with NHA thoroughly addresses the three research ques- management staff and NPS partners to get a di- tions. However, there are parameters to this verse range of perspectives and obtain a com- methodology that result in a few limitations on plete picture of the designated NHA. evaluation findings. In some instances, there is a trade-off between maximizing the time and In preparation for this visit, ARCBridge will re- efficiency for the evaluation and the ability to view existing documentation for the NHA sites. thoroughly collect information from a range of We expect these preliminary Meet and Greet stakeholders. For instance, to obtain input from visits and logic modeling sessions to involve community stakeholders, a survey is not possi- about two days of travel and meeting time . ble within the current evaluation due to OMB Paperwork Reduction Requirements. Therefore, Once the tailored logic models are finalized for the data received from intercept conversations each NHA evaluation site, ARCBridge will then will be a more qualitative assessment of the adapt the NHA Domain Matrix and the com- community’s perceptions of the NHA. prehensive case study protocol that were developed as part of the core evaluation design. As noted, limitations to the community input These tailored tools will still address the evalu- include convenient, rather than representative, ation research questions identified by - theleg samples of tourists, local residents, and volun- islation, but will ensure that the questions are teers, and impressionistic rather than quantita- geared toward the specific aspects of each NHA tive data on the impact of the NHA on stakehold- site. er knowledge, attitudes, and involvement in the NHA. Therefore, the data obtained will have to Interview data collection for each NHA evalua- be viewed with these limitations in mind. tion will occur during a second visit to each NHA site, and is expected to last three to five days depending on the scope of the site.

We will use memos to keep the NHA Executive Director informed of our evaluation activities both pre- and post- site visits.

ARCBridge will also work with each NHA during the second site visit, and with email and phone communications post site-visit, to collect and analyze information for the financial review. The financial data protocol will provide the NHA coordinating entity with an understanding of the data needs to address the second evaluation question guide these conversations in identifying years in which there is audit information pertinent to the evaluation and will help NHA coordinating entity staff to identify other data sources that will support the financial analysis.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 115 Appendix 4

Appendix 4 Domain and Source Crosswalk

Evaluation Q.1: Has the Reps for Partner NHA Canalway achieved the the Com- Strategy Interviews/ Guides, purposes of the autho- NHA Man- munity, plans, staff and Brochures, Financial Partner rizing legislation and agement elected Marketing data from Web Sites, Data Data achieved the goals and Interviews officials plans, Legal program reports and objectives of the manage- and on-site Documents sites statistics ment plan? visits

Nature and scope of BR- NHA activities Description of preservation, interpretation and x x x x education activities Do programs cover the full range of anticipated x x x x x x x programs?

· Implementation of activities/programs · Role of Erie Canalway x x x x x · Role of admin staff x x x x · Role of partners x x x x x · Role of community x x x x Is there strong involvement from all anticipated x x x x x parts of the community? Assess Impact of activities Development that is successful in meeting objec- x x x x x x tives Increased awareness x x x Heightened visibility of Eric Canalway resources and x x x stories Economic Impact / Job x x x x x creation

Table A.4.1: Q1 Domain Matrix

116 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 4

Partner Reps for NHA Evaluation Q.2 What have Network the Com- Strategy Guides, been the impacts of invest- NHA Man- Interviews/ munity, plans, Brochures, Financial Partner ments made by Federal, State, agement staff and elected Marketing Web Sites, Data Data Tribal, and local government Interviews data from officials plans, Legal reports and and private entities? program and on-site Documents statistics sites visits Consistency of donor support x x x x

Expansion of base of donors x x x x over time

Economic Impact / Job cre- x x x x ation Describe Other types of investment Partnership contributions (e.g., x x x x x time, staff, resources) Community contributions x x x x x (e.g., volunteerism) Other In-Kind donations x x x x Assess Impact of other investment sources Educational impacts x x x Marketing and promotional x x x x x Staff enhancement and reten- x x x x tion Land/facilities acquisition x x x x Economic Impact / Job cre- x x x ation

Table A.4.2: Q1 Domain Matrix

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 117 Appendix 4

Partner Reps for NHA Evaluation Q.3 How does the NHA Network the Com- Strategy Guides, management structure, partner- NHA Man- Interviews/ munity, plans, Brochures, Financial Partner ship relationships and current agement staff and elected Marketing Web Sites, Data Data funding contribute to its sustain- Interviews data from officials plans, Legal reports and ability? program and on-site Documents statistics sites visits

Growth and development of part- x x x x ner networks Transparent and effective communication channels with gover- x x x x nance, staff, volunteers, partners, etc. Established and consistent communication mechanisms with x x x x x x partners, members and local resident Erie Canalway has leadership role x x x in partnering Describe Nature of partner net- x x . x x work List of partners x x x Purpose of each partnership x x x Partners’ involvement with Erie x x x Canalway Resource commitment from x x x x partners Assess Partner network’s to sus- x x x x tainability

Broad base of partners representing diverse interests and expertise x x x in the Erie Canalway

Partner collaboration and combi- nation of investments to accom- x x x x plish Erie Canalway objectives

Table A.4.3: Q3 Domain Matrix

118 Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings Appendix 5

Appendix 5 Community Intercept Survey

Hello!

I am working on an evaluation project for the 9. What did you learn from these materials? Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor, part of the National Park Service. We are speaking with 10. How likely are you to tell others that you a few visitors in the ECNHC area to develop an know about this location? What would you tell understanding of what consumers know about them? the ECNHC. Do you have a couple of minutes to talk with me? Thank you. 11. Would you encourage people you know to come here? Why? 1. Are you from the local area or are you from somewhere else? Where are you from?

2. How did you find out about this program? Ad- vertising, hotel, on the local news or the news- paper? Word of mouth? The Internet? ECNHC signage?

3. Did you learn about this program when you arrived in town or before that?

4. Is this your first visit or have you been here before?

5. What have you learned from this site? • Historical info • Cultural or artistic information • About nature

6. Had you previously known about the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor? If so, what did you know?

7. Have you visited other NHAs?

8. Did you look at: • Brochures, • Signage • The National Heritage website • Themes of the NHA • Role of the NHA in the community?

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Evaluation Findings 119