National Sea Grant Advisory Board Spring 2021 Virtual Meeting April 13-15, 2021 Briefing Book

______

Virtual Meeting Tips and GoToWebinar Hints

Virtual Meeting Tips for Board Members To help keep us on track during the webinar, please follow the below tips.

● Board members are asked to log-in 20 minutes before the meeting’s start time to get settled and address any connectivity issues. ● This webinar is not recommended for telephone-only participation. If you have to use a telephone-only connection, please make sure that you know how to mute and unmute yourself. If you need to step away from a telephone-only connection, please do not put your call on hold; it may broadcast your phone system’s background music. ● Plan to connect from the strongest internet connection you have (ideally a grounded, ethernet cord if feasible). ● Please connect from a quiet space with as few distractions as possible. ● Please close any non-essential computer programs during the meeting to help with internet connection speed. ● Turn away from email for the short duration of the meeting. ● Headphones or a headset are recommended to reduce background noise and feedback, if available. ● Remember to use your mute/unmute button. Please mute yourself during the meeting unless you are verbally sharing with the rest of the Board. We may mute you from our end if we are having noise issues. ● We would like to recreate as much as possible an in-room presence, so we encourage you to share your video at all times. ● Say your name before you speak. ● When you are speaking, please speak loudly and clearly. ● This is a public meeting, so be aware of your background surroundings that will be viewed from the video. ● The questions box will be available if you are having technical issues that need to be addressed. ● Please do not conduct side conversations in the chat or question box. Due to FACA rule requirements for capturing meeting minutes we ask that you refrain from side conversations in the chat or question box.

GoToWebinar Quick Reference Guide and Testing Your System Please find attached a GoToWebinar Quick Reference Guide that provides a layout of the system and functionality. Please let me know if you would like to test out your system prior to our June meeting. I can work with you to schedule a time to make sure your system is working properly.

PANELIST QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE

JOIN A WEBINAR Joining a Webinar as a panelist requires an invitation from a Webinar organizer. The panelist invitation email will have a Join Webinar link which can be used to join both practice sessions and the live Webinar.

X To join a Webinar 1. Open the Webinar invitation email. 2. Click the Join Webinar link provided in the confirmation email. 3. If prompted, click Yes or Grant to accept the download. 4. If requested, enter the Webinar password provided by your Webinar organizer. You will be entered into the Webinar, and the Panelist Control Panel and GoToWebinar Viewer Window will appear. Note: When joining a Webinar, remember to join the audio portion using the information provided in your Control Panel.

CONTROL PANEL FEATURES Once you have joined the Webinar you will see the Panelist Control Panel and Grab a Tab. The Control Panel contains four panes that can be expanded or collapsed by clicking the expand/collapse button on b the left side of each pane.

• Grab Tab – Click arrow to open/close Control Panel. Click square to toggle Viewer Window between full screen/window mode. Click mic icon to mute/unmute your audio (if organizer has enabled) (a) c • Audio pane – Select audio format. Click Audio Setup to select Mic & Speakers devices (b)

• Attendee List (viewable only if organizer has enabled) (c)

• Questions pane – Enables panelists d to answer questions forwarded to them by organizers (d)

• Chat pane – Will not be available for Advisory Board Meetings (e) • Webinar Information pane – Provided for quick reference (f)

PANELIST QUESTIONS PANE If an organizer has turned on the question and answer feature, attendees can submit questions and review answers. Panelists can only respond to questions forwarded to them by an organizer.

Note: In the Panelist Control Panel, the Questions pane cannot be undocked and expanded until an organizer forwards a question to the panelist.

X To answer a question

1. In the Question and Answer pane, click the question you want to answer. 2. In the answer field, type your answer and click Send Privately.

• Check to show answered questions (a) • Type in answer. Click Send Privately (b) • Right-click any column header to show/hide columns (c) • Icon indicates answered questions (d) • Click to set priorty (d) • Click to snap the Question and Answer pane on and off of the Control Panel (e)

a b c d e

PRESENTING AT A WEBINAR When a panelist becomes a presenter, the Control Panel adjusts to incorporate the Presenter Screen Tools pane and the Audience View pane. Presenters can show their complete desktops, a clean screen – with no icons or taskbar – or a specific application window to all Webinar attendees. The Audience View pane provides a thumbnail view of what the audience is seeing.

• The broadcasting Status field notifies presenters of the status of the screen sharing (a) • The Show My Screen button displays a the presenter’s entire desktop to attendees (b) b • The Screen drop-down button allows the presenter to share specific application windows or a clean screen with attendees (c) c • The Give Keyboard & Mouse button grants shared mouse and keyboard control to another attendee (d) • The Change Presenter button passes d e the presenter role to another attendee (e)

PRESENTER CONTROL PANEL GRAB TAB The Control Panel Grab Tab enables presenters to minimize the Control Panel to the side of their screens to display their full desktops to attendees and still access Presenter Tools.

• Click and drag to move Grab Tab up 1. No attendees 2. Attendees 3. Attendees 4. Attendees or down (a) have arrived, arrived, arrived, arrived presenting presentation presentation • Click to hide or display Control desktop paused stopped panel (b) • Shows On Air status (c) a • Displays desktop to attendees. b Right-click for additional screen- sharing options (d) c • Stops desktop display (e) d

• Grants shared mouse/keyboard e control to another organizer or panelist (f) f • Passes presenter role to another organizer or panelist (g) g • Allows presenter to use drawing tools like the pen, highlighter or h spotlight (h) • Mutes or unmutes your audio (i) i

National Sea Grant Advisory Board Bios National Sea Grant Advisory Board 2021-2022

Brian Helmuth, Ph.D., (Chair) Marblehead, MA Current term (2nd) ends 10/4/2023 Dr. Brian Helmuth is a Professor at the Marine Science Center at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, with a joint appointment in the Department of Marine and Environmental Sciences and the School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs. Helmuth’s research and teaching focus on predicting the likely ecological impacts of climate change on coastal ecosystems, and on the development of products that are scientifically accurate, understandable, and useful by a diverse array of stakeholders. He has authored or co-authored over 70 peer-reviewed journal articles in the areas of climate change and marine ecology. Helmuth is a Fellow of the Aldo Leopold Leadership program, which trains select scientists to interact with policy makers, journalists and the public and in 2011 was named a Google Science Communication Fellow in the area of climate change. He also served as a lead author on the Technical input document for the inaugural Oceans chapter of the US National Climate Assessment.

Deborah Stirling (Vice Chair) Columbia, SC Current term (1st) ends 9/3/2022 Ms. Stirling is a researcher in the Burroughs and Chapin Center for Marine and Wetland Studies at Coastal Carolina University in South Carolina. She manages the Southeast Atlantic Econetprogram (SEA Econet), which is the National Weather Service’s presence in the Southeast for the National Mesonet Program. In addition, she is CFO of Infinite Habitat @ Innovista, an engineering design and sustainability company which offers consulting particularly in renewable energy, and other aspects of the built environment. Ms. Stirling is a retired SC attorney specializing in science, engineering, technology, environment, and climate research. In addition, she was a legislative advisor to the National Academy of Sciences for several years. Ms. Stirling spent 10 years as Subcommittee Counsel for Oceans and Atmosphere for the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. She currently serves as a Commissioner on the South Carolina Floodwater Commission. Ms. Stirling has a J.D. from the University of South Carolina Law School.

Amber Mace, Ph.D., (Past Chair) Sacramento, CA Current term (2nd +1) ends 3/3/2022 Dr. Amber Mace is the Executive Director of the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST). In addition to advancing CCST organizational goals, Mace leads the California Science, Technology and Policy Fellows program. Concurrently with her position at CCST, Mace maintains her affiliation with the UC Davis Policy Institute for Energy, Environment and the Economy as a Policy Fellow. Dr. Mace previously served as the Executive Director of the California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) and Assistant Secretary for Coastal Matters at the California Natural Resources Agency and in dual roles as the Executive Director of the California Ocean Science Trust and the Science Advisor to the OPC. Mace worked as a Sea Grant fellow for the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in 2006, and as a California Sea Grant state fellow at the Ocean Resources Management Program in the California Natural Resources Agency in 2005.

Dale Baker Ithaca, NY Current term (2nd +1) ends 3/3/2022 Dale Baker worked with Sea Grant for over 36 years and served as a Sea Grant Extension Program Leader for 34 years. His major programmatic responsibilities were in the areas of commercial fisheries, ports and harbors, aquaculture and coastal climate change. Mr. Baker retired from Cornell University in January of 2009, but continues to do work for Sea Grant and the Cayuga Lake Watershed Network.

Peter Betzer, Ph.D. St. Petersburg, Florida Current term (1st) ends 6/25/2021 Dr. Peter Betzer currently serves as the President of the St. Petersburg Downtown Partnership focused on expanding the cluster of technological businesses that are associated with St. Petersburg’s extensive marine and medical research complex. Prior to joining the partnership in 2008, Dr. Betzer served as Founding Dean and Professor of The University of South Florida’s College of Marine Science. Dr. Betzer is the author of over 60 scientific publications in journals and books and in 1985 was a co-recipient of a Distinguished Authorship Award from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Dr. Betzer was appointed to the Ocean Sciences Advisory Panel for The National Science Foundation (NSF), was elected to The University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) Council for which he served as Vice-Chair. In 2005 Dr. Betzer was appointed to the Ocean Research and Resource Advisory Panel (ORRAP) a 15-member group that formulates recommendations about ocean research to federal agencies. Dr. Betzer has a Ph.D. in chemical oceanography from the University of Rhode Island's Graduate School of Oceanography, and a B.A. in geology from Lawrence College.

Paulinus Chigbu, Ph.D. (Member-at-Large) Fruitland, MD Current term (2nd +1) ends 3/3/2022 Dr. Paulinus Chigbu is the Director of the NOAA Living Marine Resources Cooperative Science Center, Director of the National Science Foundation Center for Research Excellence in Science and Technology: Center for the Study of Coastal Ecosystem Processes and Dynamics in the Mid-Atlantic Region and a professor of marine environmental science at the University of Maryland. Chigbu has been involved in many programs to bring diversity to marine science including projects and partnerships with NOAA, Jackson State, University of Mississippi, Office of Naval Research and the Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation. Dr. Chigbu has been the recipient of a Fulbright scholarship, an Excellence Fellowship from the University of Washington and served as Chair of the Mississippi Academy of Sciences.

Carole Engle, Ph.D. (Member-at-Large) Strasburg, VA Current term (1st) ends 9/3/2022 Dr. Engle is a nationally recognized and highly-respected aquaculture and natural resource economist. She served as a Professor of Aquaculture Economics and Marketing at the University of Arkansas – Pine Bluff (UAPB) and created and directed UAPB Aquaculture and Fisheries Center. Dr. Engle has produced numerous economic and market analysis oriented peer-reviewed, extension and grey literature papers, book chapters and books to the benefit of commercial fish and shellfish farmers, prospective farmers, government agencies, and the public. She also has shared her expertise, research, and experience in a wide variety of capacities as an officer or member of several professional associations and as chair or member of numerous public and private advisory groups. Dr. Engle has a Ph.D. and M.S. in Aquaculture Economics from Auburn University and a B.A. in Biology/Rural Development from Friends World College.

Rosanne Fortner, Ph.D. Oak Island, NC Current Term (2nd +1) ends 3/3/2022 Dr. Rosanne Fortner is a retired professor of environmental science education from The Ohio State University. At OSU she taught environmental communication, education to undergraduates and graduate students on campus, and Great Lakes interdisciplinary sciences for educators at the Stone Laboratory. As project investigator she coordinated the Ohio Sea Grant Education Program. Dr. Fortner was the Director of the Center for Ocean Science Education Excellence [COSEE] Great Lakes, a collaboration of the seven Sea Grant Education programs in the region, assisting in the development of the Great Lakes Literacy Principles. Fortner is the author of over 80 research and education-based publications, has advised 15 PhDs and 50 MS programs to completion, and served as a Fulbright Senior Scholar in Cyprus. She is currently Co-Chair of the Oak Island Beach Preservation Society at her retirement home in North Carolina.

E. Gordon Grau, Ph.D. Kaneohe, HI Current term (2nd) ends 2/6/2024 Dr. Grau is a Professor Emeritus at the Hawai’i Institute of Marine Biology of the University of Hawai’i’s School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology. Although a Maryland native, Professor E. Gordon Grau has lived in Hawai‘i for 37 years. He served as the director of the University of Hawai‘i Sea Grant College Program as well as interim director of both the University’s Water Resources Research Center and the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology. Dr. Grau was also Commissioner on the Honolulu Charter Commission. Dr. Grau holds a B.S. from Loyola University in Maryland, a M.S. from Morgan State University, and a Ph.D. from the University of Delaware. Professor Grau has mentored more than 50 postdoctoral associates and graduate students, as well as numerous undergraduates, and is the author of well over 200 papers in peer-refereed journals.

Judith Gray Block Island, RI Current term (2nd) ends 10/4/2023 Judy Gray retired in 2011 after a 33-year career as a meteorologist with NOAA. Judy started her career as a commissioned officer with the NOAA Corps. Her civilian career began at the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle. She served as the Acting Deputy Director of NOAA’s 12 Environmental Research Laboratories, and was the NOAA Program Manager for the Coastal Forecast System. Ms. Gray served as Deputy Director of the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory and was Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research Programs and Administration. Judy continues her mentoring of NOAA scientists in developing leadership skills. She is the Vice President of the Block Island Maritime Institute, whose mission is to provide educational programs and maritime activities for residents and visitors on Block Island.

Jim Murray, Ph.D. Naples, Florida Current term (2nd) ends 1/24/2024 Dr. James Murray retired in 2011 as Deputy Director of the National Sea Grant College Program. He spent his entire 37-year career with Sea Grant including Sea Grant Scholar at SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Extension Specialist at Minnesota Sea Grant, Extension Leader at New Jersey and North Carolina Sea Grant Programs, National Sea Grant Extension Leader and finally Deputy Director of the National Sea Grant College Program. Murray was the recipient of the President’s Award, Sea Grant Association, and the Wick Award for Visionary Career Leadership by the Sea Grant Extension Assembly. Currently he is a member of the Florida Sea Grant Extension Program Advisory Committee and volunteers at Everglades National Park and at NOAA’s Rookery Bay Estuarine Research Reserve.

Kristine Norosz Petersburg, AK Current term (1st) ends 10/9/2022 Ms. Noroz is currently an Alaska Salmon Fellow with the Alaska Humanities Forum. Early in Ms.Norosz’s career she has worked as a soil scientist, carpenter, and herring technician before spending a decade as a fish biologist and fish technician for the Alaska Department of Fish & Game. She then spent another decade as a commercial fish harvester, serving as crew in the halibut, sablefish, southeast salmon seine and drift gillnet fisheries and as owner/operator of a southeast Dungeness crab operation. Ms. Norosz also worked as Executive Director of the Southeast Alaska Seiners Association and Executive Director of the Petersburg Vessel Owners Association. Ms. Norosz has served on a number of boards and committees, including current roles with the Alaska Sea Grant Advisory Committee, Maritime Works, the Marine Conservation Alliance Board, Foraker Group, Rasmuson Foundation, and Alaska Airlines Community Advisory Board. Prior to her current fellowship, Ms.Norosz served as the Director of Government Affairs for Icicle Seafoods. Ms. Norosz has a B.S. in Soil Science from California Polytechnic State University.

Agenda National Sea Grant Advisory Board Spring 2021 Meeting Draft Agenda April 13-15, 2021 Virtual Meeting

Day 1: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 Open to the public 1:00 pm - 5:00 pm eastern 12:00 pm- 12:45 pm Ethics Briefing National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board members only)

1:00 pm - 1:15 pm Welcome, Roll Call, Susan Holmes - New Leadership Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Board

1:15 pm - 1:30 pm Board Chair update Brian Helmuth - Board Chair

1:30 pm - 2:00 pm Independent Review Panel Jim Murray Update

2:00 pm - 2:30 pm Break Brian Helmuth

2:30 pm - 3:30 pm Information Services and Gordon Grau, Dale Baker Publications Review Sub- Committee Report Out

3:30 pm - 4:00 pm Review Committee for the Brian Helmuth 40% Competitive Research and Education Policy for Base Funding

4:00 pm - 4:30 pm Review Committee for Guam Brian Helmuth Sea Grant Institutional Program status

4:30 pm - 5:00 pm Discussion and Next Steps Brian Helmuth

Public Meeting recessed until 1:00 pm, Wednesday, April 14

Day 2: Wednesday, April 14, 2021 Open to the public 1:00 pm - 5:00 pm eastern 12:15 pm - 12:45 pm Business Meeting National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board members only)

1:00 pm - 1:15 pm Call to order and Agenda Brian Helmuth Review

1:15 pm - 1:45 pm National Sea Grant Jonathan Pennock - Office update Director, National Sea Grant College Program

1:45 pm - 2:00 pm Sea Grant Association Susan White - (SGA) update President, Sea Grant Association (SGA)

2:00 pm - 2:30 pm Break Brian Helmuth

2:30 pm - 3:30 pm NOAA and NOAA Research Craig McLean - Update NOAA OAR Assistant Administrator Ko Barrett – NOAA OAR Deputy Assistant Administrator

3:30 pm - 5:00 pm Strategic directions for Brian Helmuth, Jonathan Sea Grant Pennock

Public Meeting recessed until 1:00 pm, Thursday, April 15, 2021

Day 3: Thursday, April 15, 2021 Open to the public 1:00 pm - 5:00 pm 1:00 pm - 1:15 pm Call to order and Agenda Brian Helmuth Review

1:15 pm - 1:30 pm Board Executive Committee Brian Helmuth, Deborah Nominations Stirling

1:30 pm - 2:15 pm Biennial Report Hill Virtual Judith Gray Visits 2:15 pm - 2:30 pm Public Comments Susan Holmes

2:30 pm - 2:45 pm Break Deborah Stirling

2:45 pm - 3:15 pm Education Discussion Rosanne Fortner

3:15 pm - 4:45 pm Resilience and Social Justice Invited Speakers: Discussion Dionne Hoskins-Brown - NOAA NMFS Mona Behl - GA Sea Grant

4:45 pm - 5:00 pm Discussion, next steps Brian Helmuth

5:00 pm Adjourn Brian Helmuth

Fall 2020 Board Meeting Draft Minutes National Sea Grant Advisory Board Virtual Meeting November 13, 2020 Draft Meeting Minutes

Participants:

Board - Mr. Dale Baker, Dr. Peter Betzer, Dr. Paulinus Chigbu, Dr. Carole Engle, Dr. Rosanne Fortner, Dr. Gordon Grau, Ms. Judith Gray, Dr. Brian Helmuth (Chair), Dr. Letise LaFeir, Dr. Amber Mace (Past Chair), Dr. James Murray, Ms. Kris Norosz, Ms. Deborah Stirling(Vice Chair) Dr. Jonathan Pennock – (ex officio) Director of the National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP), Dr. Fredrika Moser – (ex officio), President, Sea Grant Association (SGA) and Director, Maryland Sea Grant

National Sea Grant Office - Ms. Susan Holmes (alternate DFO), Ms. Donna Brown – Executive Assistant, NSGO, Ms. Elizabeth Rohring – Designated Federal Officer (DFO), National Sea Grant Office (NSGO)

Friday, November 13, 2020

OPEN TO THE PUBLIC – 1:00pm – 5:00pm

1:00pm – 1:05pm - Welcome, Call to Order, Roll Call, Approval of Agenda and Minutes - (Susan Holmes – Acting Designated Federal Officer (ADFO) for the Board, National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), Brian Helmuth, National Sea Grant Advisory Board Chair)

Ms. Holmes (Acting Designated Federal Officer (ADFO)) read an official federal statement explaining her role to the group, discussed the ground rules of the meeting, and welcomed everyone to the meeting. She thanked the Advisory Board for their time and diligent work on the board and stated that the next meeting will be held in February or March.

Ms. Holmes turned the meeting over to Dr. Helmuth who called the meeting to order.

Roll Call Ms Holmes took roll call of the members of the Board Dr. Helmuth reviewed the agenda and asked for a motion to approve it.

Motion to approve the November 13, 2020 agenda:

Dr. Amber Mace 2nd Ms. Judith Gray Vote: All in Favor

Dr. Helmuth asked for a motion to approve the June 2020 meeting minutes.

June 2020 Meeting Minutes Motion to approve the minutes from the June 23, 2020 Board meeting:

1 Dr. Amber Mace 2nd Ms. Kris Norosz Vote: All in favor

Dr. Helmuth introduced Dr. Moser.

1:15 – 1:45 – Sea Grant Association Update – (Dr. Fredrika Moser, Maryland Sea Grant Director and Sea Grant Association President)

Introductory Remarks:

The Sea Grant Association (SGA) meeting was held virtually for the first time this fall. Most Board members attended the virtual SGA meeting, so this will be an update on what's been going on since that meeting.

Black Lives Matter:

The events of the last few months have further focused Sea Grant’s attention on Black Lives Matter and systemic racism against black, Indigenous and people of color. We can and must do better to acknowledge and dismantle our systems that allow racism and inequality to persist and to work together to increase sustainability and resilience of our communities. I thank the Sea Grant network for their commitment to work together for a just, equitable, diverse and equitable future. Sea Grant is doing an amazing job, finds it quite brave of the Sea Grant office to post a Values Statement on the website, and is talking about doing the same on their website. Believe it’s important to make acknowledgement of their place in colonialism and respectfully acknowledge that they are on a good path.

Sea Grant Program Director Updates:

Ginny Eckert, is the new Alaska Sea Grant Director. Rick DeVoe of South Carolina Sea Grant is retiring, but staying on for now at the request of the state. Dennis Nixon, Rhode Island Sea Grant is retiring. Dr. Moser presented a Sea Grant directors tenure distribution chart. The chart is unchanged since Spring 2020. There are 22 male and 13 Female SGA Delegates (70 – 30% break). About ~50% of the Directors have a tenure of ≤ 4 years. This is very exciting and is so promising for the growth and success of Sea Grant. Dr. Moser provided an update on Sea Grant Association shifts in positions, including announcing that Susan White will be the Sea Grant Association President starting on January 1st.

Congressional Updates:

Congressional Updates: Two virtual Congressional briefings: Resilience during COVID. FY 2020 Budget currently stands at: $67M base, $13m aquaculture and $7m for director spending. FY2021 House marks – Base $71m, $13m aquaculture and no direct spending. Senate marks are due Nov 10. The FY2022 Ask is $127.5m. Therefore, as you can see the Sea Grant Association has been active. The House will vote on the Senate reauthorization bill, which is very similar to the House version, so the SGA is optimistic that this will pass.

2 Aquaculture Liaison Update:

LaDon Swann will continue to support the aquaculture liaison. Network Advisory Council:

Lots of work on Covid 19 responses – finding ways to deliver the incredible services even though the programs are not able to do things in person. The Programs are still very much focused on Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (JEDI) and this has really helped in expanding our network.

Program Mission Committee (PMC):

The PMC has been focused on professional development needs and programs for the Network; is looking to track all they have done in COVID-19; and finding ways to improve the Sea Grant and Knauss alumni networks. Sea Grant alumni network. Through these, the PMC is trying to continue to work on improving evaluation and efficiency and extension activities and education.

The Sea Grant Association meeting this past fall was focused on Covid-19 and JEDI Safe Meetings and language will be brought back up in future meetings. Key concern is if there is a way to strengthen the language in the grant award statement to give more awareness on issues of harassment, etc. within our institutions.

Resilience:

The Sea Grant Resilience concept paper is out now and in discussions with IOOS, NERRS, CSO, CZM, and OAR to work on a collaborative approach to resilience across NOAA programs.

Dr. Moser shared highlights of things that the Sea Grant programs have been working on: many grants, great proposals that the visioning groups put together, JEDI-Internships, shoreline flooding and erosion, coastal tourism, west coast seafood alliance, visioning- community of practice, liaison positions, and aquaculture Meeting Evolution – The SGA is looking at options for meetings in the future and considering some type of hybrid model.

Sea Grant Week – The SGA held a virtual awards ceremony. There is a summary on the SGA website.

The extension meeting for the SGA is Monday Nov. 16th. The discussion will be about Ethics By-Laws change and Code of Conduct.

Dr. Moser acknowledged that this would be her last meeting as SGA president and thanked the Board for their time working together. Dr. Susan White, Director of North Carolina Sea Grant, will start on January 1stas the next SGA President.

Dr. Moser then introduces Dr. White to the Board.

Discussion:

Dr. White mentioned that she does not have any comments prepared, but looks forward to working with the Board and looking forward to learning from everyone.

Dr. Helmuth thanked Dr. Moser for everything she had done as SGA President and he is looking forward to working with Dr. White going forward.

3 Dr. Murray mentioned that he would love to have the talking points that were sent to SGA, but he did not recall seeing them, and he would like to write a letter to local congressional representatives over the weekend.

Dr. Moser replied that she would send it to everyone and thanked everyone.

Dr. Mace mentioned that she was grateful for working with Dr. Moser and appreciates everything Dr. Moser has done in leadership, and how Dr. Moser is keeping things moving forward.

Dr. Moser mentioned that she is also grateful that Dr. White is now taking the baton. The national Sea Grant Board is here because of all your hard work.

1:40 – 2:15 – Biennial Report Final Approval - Judith Gray (Board Biennial Report Committee Chair)

Ms. Gray mentioned that the biennial report this year is a bit longer than usual, but hits the established targets that were previously set. A few sections went a bit over, but the report length overall is fine.

There were some changes to the report since the last update to the Board. Ms. Gray received several comments from Mr. Craig Mclean and Dr. Ko Barrett and have integrated them into the report. They noted that there was not a section on climate change and Sea Grant’s involvement and plans for the future. The Biennial Report writing team has now added this section to the report. They also suggested that the report focus on how the 2018 recommendations interplayed with the 2020 recommendations. The writing team added a section to the NSGO’s response to the 2018 recommendations. This helped to highlight the role of the Board and the report in moving the National Sea Grant College Program forward. Another change based on the reviews was that the report needed to clarify that the JEDI recommendation was not geared only to minority serving universities. Finally, they also recommended that the report really highlight how Sea Grant is an economic engine for the communities it serves - and for the country overall.

Other changes in the report:

● Recommendation on Social Justice, Equity and Inclusion - and that the program overall should support and amplify efforts to institutionalize social justice.

● Emerging Opportunities Section – moved education write up here and not as a separate recommendation.

The report is extension oriented this time around, with a focus on the delivery of products rather than the research that went into past reports for so many years. So, next year we will ask for research accomplishments.

Dr. Moser also had the opportunity to review the report and provided feedback on changing language, like feeding and pipeline and other more inspirational language. Dr. Moser also wanted to make sure we were not putting unfunded mandates in the report.

4 Mr. McLean again said that every Sea Grant program should be a weather ready ambassador, but Dr. Moser’s pushed back on that, therefore replaced it with language that will hopefully satisfy OAR leadership and NOAA.

Ms Gray acknowledged everyone’s help in pulling together the report, including adding new sections to the report to address the response to pandemic, language on partnerships, references to DEI, and research documents.

Dr. Helmuth asked for a motion to approve the final Biennial Report to Congress.

Judith Gray 2nd Jim Murray Vote: All in Favor

Ms. Norosz thanked everyone who put so much effort and time into this report and in the future, it would be helpful to know those comments before their final review, which could have maybe, provide better feedback had she known this information before reading the report. Ms Norosz mentioned that she is always thinking about things that are more proactive so the statement should include “support and initiate” instead of “support and amplify”.

Dr. Moser mentioned that there is a balance to maintain, there is a deep commitment to improve who our service organizations are reaching and we need to reach a diverse audience, which is a two-way street. There needs to be a better definition of what the Board means here and some type of metrics to measure success?

Dr. Helmuth – the goal is to integrate lessons learned by the programs, for their communities, so there needs to be a middle ground.

Dr. LaFeir suggested that we look to commit to decision-making or partnership endeavors or approach rather than what the outcome should be. Consider saying that we want to “institutionalize” these efforts.

Ms. Gray - The report is trying to say more of WHAT should be done vs. HOW it should be done.

Ms. Norosz mentioned that it’s about National Sea Grant programming and moving the needle in the programs. Support and Amplify – looking for someone else to lead instead of us leading. There are other ways to measure that as we see employees being more diversified and inclusive and who we’re partnering with- we’re doing a lot more and our goals are higher – so this should be open for discussion.

Dr. Engle added that the word promote, to an economist, is more like advertising, it is a well-crafted statement -very forward looking in a positive way, instead of complaining about what was done in the past. The word “amplify” implies or recognizes what Sea Grant has done in the past – SG has been more open than many other agencies – “amplify” is the intent to move things forward and build upon it.

Ms. Gray mentioned that the whole effort is to reduce words, therefore suggested to maybe take out words like “support” and leave in “amplify”?

5 Dr. Helmuth - Does this mean that everything is done? Maybe we should add “further support”.

Ms Gray – Add in “Continue to Support and Amplify”?

Dr. Pennock – Some may see this and think it is just a political statement but it is not. It is important for us to include and represent our communities.

Dr. Grau suggested that it should read, “serve and amplify efforts”.

Ms.Norosz - Leaving support in means, someone else is supporting the work and we don’t want to minimize it, so if folks want to take out the word support she’s fine with it.

Dr. Mace mentioned that she likes Letises’ point to institutionalize – reframed it to reduce!

Dr. LaFeir – Institutionalize means to take it and make it your own in many of the communities we’re trying to serve – so what we’re really trying to do is commit to what we are trying to do. The goal is that we are TRYING TO DO MORE BETTER – institutionalize can have negative connotations.

Ms Gray - Replaced institutionalize within the report.

Dr. Engle - Instead of “commit to use” we can say “incorporate”? In the legal world, it could be a way of getting around something. However, if you incorporate it, it means that you plan to make things happen.

Ms. Gray suggested the final statement for the JEDI recommendation:

● The National Sea Grant College Program should continue and amplify efforts to incorporate social and environmental justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in its organizational structure and programming.

Ms. Gray asked that the Board accept the Biennial report as submitted for this meeting with the DEI changes.

Vote to approve the Biennial Report:

Judy Gray 2nd Jim Murray Vote: All in Favor

Ms Gray – We need to discuss when and how we should submit this report to Congress. Things are very hectic on the Hill right now, and we have time to wait.

Dr. LaFeir – Is there a deadline per statute?

Ms. Rohring - there is not a deadline in the authorizing language.

Ms Gray – The report should be completed by December, so that it can be distributed in January. The SGA will be putting their packages together for their new delegation and may want to have the report part of that package. In terms of the Board rolling out a cover letter from Dr. Helmuth, suggest working with NOAA and the national office as to how we get that sent out.

6 Dr. Helmuth – Need to make sure it does not get to congress before the Board releases the report officially.

Dr. Engle – Suggest going to congress simultaneously, so that the reception is as positive as possible. Suggest waiting until January to roll out to the hill – the latter part of January may be a good time to get it out and placed in the hands of folks who are in transition.

Dr. Helmuth – Is everyone in agreement with the roll out plan?

Dr. Murray – This is an opportunity to not just roll out electronically – a small group beating the pavement with the transition going is an opportunity to showcase an awesome report and I wouldn’t miss the opportunity to do so. Dr. Murray asked who is responsible for the printing of the report.

Ms Rohring – NOAA print shop will print copies.

Dr. Pennock – Everyone agrees with Dr. Murray but there are no hill committees meeting face to face right now, so we have to be flexible because we do want that information to go out – but it could be six months from now before people start meeting face to face, so we don’t want to wait.

Ms Holmes reminded the Board of the agenda and time and suggested to take a shortened break in order to give Dr. Pennock time to present.

2:36 – 2:41pm – Break

2:43 – 3:00pm – NSGO Updates – (Dr. Jonathan Pennock, NSGCP Director)

Dr. Pennock thanked everyone for being present today and thanked Dr. Moser for her time.

Dr. Pennock reviewed highlights from the National Sea Grant Office and NSGCP.

Knauss Fellows - 54 executive fellows were successfully placed– Thanks to Maddie Kennedy in the NSGO, placement week was a virtual operation.

Funding Opportunities - Aquaculture and Economic Markets competitions are complete and at the Grants Management Division at NOAA. The National Federal Partnership Liaison competition is complete and on its way to the Grants Management Division.

There have been a number of administrative issues. The 2018-23 strategic plan with updates for 2022- 23 was released. Revised Sea Grant National Competition Policy was released and the 2022-23 Omnibus Guidance will be released next week.

There has been significant ongoing effort on how to better capture extension and education accomplishments. Preliminary results from the great red snapper count (10 million) was released to congress. Within OAR, out of 16-17 Divisions – Sea Grant “won” the award for the highest FY20

7 obligation rate in OAR. 99.79%. It’s really a testament to the work Jon Eigen does. It is a complicated business so to be able to come in for a landing of where we are expected to be is great.

Advisory Board membership: Dr. Mace, Dr. Chigbu, Dr. Fortner and Mr. Baker are all coming to the end of their 2nd four year terms, but we are working on extending for one more year.

Budget Marks: FY 20 base is $74M, $13M in aquaculture totaling $87M. FY21 House, $71M base, $13M in aquaculture totaling $84M and FY21 Senate (draft) $76M base, $13.5M aquaculture totaling $89.5M.

Two Additional Charges for 2020-21 – Dr. Pennock shared new charges with the Board for their consideration - one is the issue around what percentage of competitive research the programs should use from their core funding, and the other is to do a status review for a Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program.

3:00 – 3:30pm – Update from NOAA – (Craig McLean, Assistant Administrator, NOAA Research)

Mr. McLean mentioned that he had been with NOAA since 2006. Mr. McLean went on to mention that he was acting temporarily as Chief Scientist for a while, as well as being an Assistant Administrator, and he doesn't plan to go anywhere in the immediate future. Covid-19 has added an unnecessary vindictive transaction of leadership, I personally have never seen anything like it, but we’re doing the best we can to give Sea Grant the advice needed during this transition.

Mr. McLean commended the Board by mentioning that the quality of recommendations coming from the board is outstanding. The concerted recommendations and advice that Dr. Pennock is able to receive, are needed and necessary. It is so worthwhile to be receiving recommendations from caring, interested and motivated people and Mr. McLean expressed his sincere gratitude.

Budget and Status – The president’s budget zeroed out Sea Grant again, but there are House and Senate marks.

Mr. McClean thanked Dr. Helmuth and Dr. Stirling for their attendance at the Senior Research Council meeting and welcomed an opportunity to sit down and speak with each of them regarding new initiatives and ideas, but what the new leadership will bring is yet to be seen. Mr. McLean went on to mention that there are opportunities with climate. With climate, we need to ask ourselves what will it be like 5 years or 10 years from now? What will the future hold? That is where we want to focus. Mr. McLean asked, how do we provide that service and information? Doing best we can of what’s in NOAA’s reach. There is a bill in congress, on the house side, for scientific activity that will hopefully one day see the light.

Craig McLean opened the floor for questions:

Dr. Helmuth asked Mr. McLean to talk a little about the decade of the ocean and where Sea Grant can help, as well as the Board?

8 Mr. McLean mentioned approaching it at different levels – oceanographic programs, down to funding one at a time and want to get back to that for Sea Grant. Sea Grant is a wonderful integrator and would be looking at coastal resilience and what we can do for climate. He said that he is going to find a future international component of Sea Grant to gain the advances needed to unify the coastal community.

Dr. Murray thanked Mr. McLean for all of his hard work in reminding the country that NOAA functions with scientific integrity.

Mr McLean said that perhaps there should be a recommendation to public administration that would be to create more clarity and allow NOAA to take care of NOAA’s own house.

Dr. Murray – Are you planning to resume plans to pursue policy with the next administration?

Mr McLean said that a good plan is to routinely get in a cab and go up to the Hill to continue having these conversations in order to have a stronger appearance.

Dr. White stated that she really appreciates the authentic nature of this conversation. The Sea Grant programs have been hearing concerns regarding the impacts of COVID restrictions on salmon, nutrition rates, etc. has NOAA started conversations about this?

Mr McLean replied that NOAA has included writing for the coming year to be more about people. NOAA is currently under the equivalent of an evacuation order – you can work from home, take up to 20 hours a pay period, and not be distracted. It is amazing that all the pressure our employees are under, that they can still do their jobs and do better for ourselves –We are inclined to define the most productive way to get our jobs done. You do not need to be in labs and can produce quality work working from home. We have many women who are role models of how to juggle family, work, etc. so we would like to lighten their workload so that they are able to continue doing great things, but we are definitely trying to do things differently in the future.

Dr. Pennock mentioned looking at the coming year or two with the transition of things. What we need to do as an office and NOAA with transition plans. Is there a space in between these two with the talented folks on this call now that can help you or Sea Grant and can be filled in important ways?

Mr. McLean stated that Feds are locked in tracks and it is hard to break out of the norm. Therefore, a board like this is helpful in trying to break us out of that norm.

Dr. Helmuth asked what mechanisms NOAA is considering in in regards to white papers, etc for the transition teams

Mr. McLean suggested that if anyone has an idea then share it – transitions are times of opportunity and NOAA is trying to make the most of it.

Mr. McLean thanked the Board for their hard work and for providing him with the opportunity to talk with them.

The meeting was then turned over to Dr. Helmuth and Dr. Pennock to resume discussions on the two remaining charges to the board.

9 Dr. Pennock - opened the discussion for questions. How do we pique people’s interest and it would be nice before February’s meeting as to who will stand up with regards to the two new committees and where we can deal with those issues.

Ms. Rohring said that the Board Executive Committee could discuss the two committees during their calls and have the Board vote on membership during the spring meeting.

Dr. Pennock said that the NSGO would prepare background information for the committees and move forward from there. Any questions from new members?

Dr. Murray said that it is important to have a balanced committee.

Dr. Pennock said that he will touch base with Ms. Rohring and Dr. Helmuth and talk about Dr. Murray’s interest to participate on a committee.

Ms. Gray mentioned that virtual reviews are not the same as in person reviews, but that she had a great in person review with Guam, so we owe it to Guam and the process to move things forward.

Dr. Briggs wanted to make sure that the Board understood that the charge to the Board on information services was not to address data research and products from research product awards.

Dr. Pennock mentioned that he had thought about it and decided not to put in charge. Moving forward we would have to do something specifically around data management.

3:45 – 4:30 –Strategic Directions for Sea Grant – (Dr. Brian Helmuth and Dr. Jonathan Pennock)

The topic of strategic direction has been a topic of interest to the Board for a while now, particularly around resilience. Having the discussion now, may be better than later, due to the administration transitions. The SGA supports resilience, but what can the Board do to help this process?

Dr. Pennock mentioned that his discussions with folks on the Hill have been positive.

Ms. Stirling said that the transition team was published today and advised folks to look at the list because there is clearly opportunities regarding resilience and other issues that the Board can take advantage of in playing a future role of this agency.

Dr. Helmuth said that the primary role the Board can play is planning the role that Sea Grant is doing right now.

Dr. Mace suggested that there are more official ways that the Board can set recommendations for the transition, and suggested that the Biennial Report with cover memo can transmit something more formally.

Dr. Engle suggested that the Board would have to wait until the transition is in effect and maybe after inauguration. Therefore, the Board will have to play it by ear.

10 Dr. Grau mentioned Nancy Targett, who’s very well placed in Delaware and interacting with the President elect, and who is unconstrained with having an official role in Sea Grant. He asked if someone might have a conversation with Nancy, who is a wonderful liaison with people within this administration.

Dr. Helmuth asked Ms. Rohring, if she was in some way involved in National Climate Assessment?

Ms. Rohring responded only on the USGCRP social science committee and trying to get Sea Grant involved with authors and reviewers. She suggested encouraging anyone interested in being an author to sprinkle Sea Grant in because there is very important messages to relate.

Dr. Murray suggested that the next step would be selling it and promoting it and so on. This poses an opportunity for the Board to weigh in on advice to position Sea Grant – market it – and to get that mark in our re-authorization.

Dr. Pennock mentioned that the SGA has done that – the Resilience Concept Paper with initiatives in it.

Dr. Murray responded that there is a need, and Sea Grant and the national office should think about a supporting role to give them – this is an opportunity for the national office and SGA to think about creative ways to promote this – formal advice not just from the national office but NOAA and Commerce.

4:35pm - Susan Holmes paused the conversations and asked if there were any public comments received. No public comments were received so the meeting resumed.

Dr. Helmuth asked if we would work with the commercial aquaculture growers shorter term or longer term strategy?

Dr. Engle responded that it’s already happening and Sea Grant is doing the same thing but there has to be some conversation that Sea Grant is not only pushing upcoming competitions. The catfish and shellfish industry is powerful in so many ways in Congress and elsewhere.

Dr. Murray said that the aquaculture industry is very powerful on the Hill. Making sure that Sea Grant is involved at the national level is critical for success in the long run.

Ms. Rohring reminded the Board of FACA rules and that we need to be careful as to whom the Board is advising to make sure it is not in violation of FACA – only the board can provide advice to Sea Grant and NOAA – the only way we can legally do that is making a subcommittee of the Board.

Dr. Helmuth replied with thanks. He said that the Board needs to be cognizant of the areas of priority that we should be talking about.

Dr. Pennock mentioned that there have been some discussions on aquaculture and training, but could go beyond that as the broader side of our education. The programs need to think about the message that Sea Grant wants to have... What is our focus?

Dr. Helmuth provided an example, the Living Shorelines bill. Interesting that there has not been discussions of JEDI in that bill at all.

11 Ms. Norosz suggested an interest in workforce development with marine trades. There is no sense in having an aquaculture industry if we do not have trade people to keep things going.

Dr. Chigbu mentioned that what was previously said about workforce development, the need for training to help in processing shellfish, would be great for workforce development.

Dr. Pennock Asked if for other suggestions of main focus for Sea Grant in the coming transition.

Dr. LaFeir wanted to talk about timing of the Biennial Report again – thought that mid-January/end January may be tight – so getting in early may be key and suggested Biden connections in Delaware The living shorelines bill has strong connections – there are so many opportunities that Vice President-elect Kamala Harris brings to this administration – conservation policies and other things – sothe Board should think of ways to get close to the Vice President and supporting her agenda might be a good idea. She also has a strong presence in the natural infrastructure as well.

Dr. Betzer mentioned that a couple of years ago when the biennial report came out, he and Ms. Gray went to the Hill and visited seven senators' offices. They highlighted the aquaculture work that Sea Grant was participating in, and the report and Sea Grant’s efforts were very well received.

Ms. Rohring clarified that the board can go to the Hill to share the report with the Congress– but partaking in other visits is not in line with FACA rules.

Dr. Murray talked about the right time to go to the hill, and that the 2020 report is a great mechanism to support Sea Grant. He suggested that the Board Executive Committee should discuss who will be doing the visits and that some stakeholders could be good spokespeople for the program.

Dr. Helmuth agreed that the Executive Committee will discuss to look for opportunities and support for the visits.

Dr. Moser said that her office will be getting training on Hill visits in December and it could be an opportunity for the board to listen in.

Dr. Pennock suggested that if Dr. Moser were able to extend an invite, most of the board would like to participate in those.

Ms. Gray mentioned that the Board really needs to focus on getting the report completed ASAP, so that it is ready to go to the hill when needed.

Dr. Helmuth asked how it is officially delivered to congress?

Ms. Rohring reminded the Board that it was officially sent by email in the past. There would be text in the body of the email and have a pdf of the report attached, and would be sent to key committees, members, and staff on the Hill. We are waiting to make sure we find the ideal time to send it, rather than have it going to people on the Hill who are leaving or having it arrive before the new people are in place. However, because of what is going on now we do not want to send it somewhere and create red flags. We get a list, email to them, and then set up meetings from there.

12 Dr. Moser mentioned that there was some uncertainty about joining the training, but she will ask Dr. Darren Lerner about it and let you know what he says.

Wrap-up:

Dr. Helmuth said that we are at the end of our time and asked if anyone has any other topics. None was suggested, therefore Dr. Helmuth thanked everyone for their participation and stated that he will come up with a time in February for our next discussion and adjourned the meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 5:00pm

Evaluation Committee Independent Review Panel (IRP) Update National Sea Grant Advisory Board Spring 2021 Virtual Meeting

Agenda Item: Evaluation Committee Independent Review Panel (IRP) Update

Purpose Informational - Update on the Board Evaluation Committee Independent Review Panel (IRP) and Schedule

Three Things You Must Know 1) The Independent Review Panel (IRP) will meet virtually from May 3-7 to assess the overall effectiveness and impact of the National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP) and the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO). 2) The IRP will be similar in format to a program Site Review, and will include information on both the NSGO and NSGCP management, engagement, and impacts. 3) The IRP will develop a report with their findings and any recommendations to enhance the process. This report will be presented to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board for review and vote for approval. Once approved, the report will be transmitted to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, the OAR Deputy-Assistant Administrator for Programs and the OAR Assistant Administrator, and shared with the state Sea Grant program directors.

Background ● The IRP members are Dr. Nancy Targett (chair), Dr. John Cortinas, Ms. Mary Erickson, Dr. James Hurley, Mr. Don Kent, Dr. Amber Mace, and Dr. James Murray ● The charge for the Evaluation Committee is to help coordinate the quadrennial evaluation of the state programs and the National Sea Grant College Program as a whole. To achieve this, the Evaluation Committee will 1) assign a Board member for each of the 34 site reviews; 2) review the site review reports and associated materials to verify that each program is held to the same standards; and 3) identify individuals to serve on the Independent Review Panel. This panel will provide an external evaluation of the effectiveness of the NSGO and the National Sea Grant College Program overall.

Red Flags/Comments ● None

NSGAB Action Items ● This is an informational session

Links ● Evaluation Committee and IRP Guidance (attached) ● PIE Policy Evaluation Committee Guidance As we complete the 2014-2017 Quadrennial Review cycle, the Evaluation Committee of the Nationals Sea Grant Advisory Board (NSGAB) is being asked to address three tasks: (1) to conduct a review of the Site Visit findings of all the programs to ensure that the program’s Site Visits were conducted in a consistent and equitable manner and that the reports fairly represent the findings of the Site Visit teams; (2) to assemble and lead an Independent Review Panel (IRP) to assess the overall impact of the National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP) and the practices and effectiveness of the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO); and (3) conduct a survey of participants involved in the 2014-2017 Site Review process and provide recommendations as to how the process can be improved for future review cycles. These tasks should be viewed as stand-alone activities, although there are connections between them that will warrant coordination of their timelines.

The sections below describe in more detail the timeline, process, roles and responsibilities, and composition of the Evaluation Committee and Independent Review Panel, and the evaluation criteria and materials used during the review.

Independent Review Panel (IRP)

Summary The Evaluation Committee will convene an Independent Review Panel (IRP) to assess the overall effectiveness and impact of the National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP) and the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO). The timing of this review is intended to benefit from the information and assessments conducted by the recent SRTs and provide a review for the NSGCP and NSGO that parallels the SRT reviews. The ultimate goal of this review is to provide an assessment, with suggestions and recommendations for improvement when applicable, of the NSGCP and the management of the program by the NSGO.

Members The Evaluation Committee will convene an Independent Review Panel (IRP) comprised of 7-10 members from the NSGAB, NOAA, SGA, leaders from academia/industry, and State/Federal Agencies.

Dr. Nancy Targett (Chair, academia/industry/partner rep) Dr. Amber Mace (co-Chair/Board rep) Mr. Don Kent (academia/industry/partner rep) Ms. Mary Erickson (NOAA rep) Dr. John Cortinas (NOAA/OAR rep) Dr. James Hurley (SGA rep) Dr. James Murray (Evaluation Committee Chair/Board rep)

Materials ● Briefing Book (developed by the NSGO) ● Summary Metrics and Select Impacts and Accomplishments for PIER (developed by the NSGO) ● Evaluation Committee Report

Review Process The main purpose is to evaluate the NSGCP in its entirety (i.e. all the individual programs as well as the NSGO at least once every 4 years). This approach allows external reviewers to move beyond evaluating recertification and ratings, challenges, and progress being made in individual programs, to consider the composite impacts of Sea Grant by evaluating the management of the NSGO and the overall impact of the NSGCP.

These include identifying: ● Areas for growth or improvement. ● Exploring ways to strengthen the NSGCP network relationships. ● Examining the nature of the individual program’s relationship with NSGO. ● Effectiveness and credibility of annual evaluation (to support findings about the ‘state’ of the individual programs as well as the network overall). ● Identify areas of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats (risks or challenges). ● What are recommendations for the overall program to improve, how/who do we implement these recommendations?

Final IRP Report Once the IRP completes their overall assessment of the effectiveness of the National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP) and the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), they will develop a report with their findings and any recommendations to enhance the process. This report will be presented to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board for review and vote for approval. Once approved, the report will be transmitted to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, the OAR Deputy-Assistant Administrator for Programs and the OAR Assistant Administrator, and shared with the state Sea Grant program directors.

Charge for the Sea Grant Independent Review Panel (IRP) Review of the National Sea Grant Office and National Sea Grant College Program

Context: The National Sea Grant College Program (NSGCP or Sea Grant) is a partnership between the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), the 34 place-based Sea Grant programs and the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (NSGAB). Together they work to achieve the following objective (33 U.S. Code § 1121),

“… increase the understanding, assessment, development, management, utilization, and conservation of the Nation’s ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources by providing assistance to promote a strong educational base, responsive research and training activities, broad and prompt dissemination of knowledge and techniques, and multidisciplinary approaches to environmental problems.”

The authorizing language gives the NSGO responsibility for ensuring that Sea Grant meets the objective by positioning it as a strategic leader, a network coordinator/connector, and impact aggregator for the NSGCP (33 U.S. Code § 1123).

While the NSGO is assessed annually by the Office for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) as part of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Operations & Management Reviews and the 34 place-based Sea Grant programs are reviewed every four years as part of Sea Grant’s Planning, Implementation and Evaluation (PIE-II) process, the NSGO has had only periodic external evaluation. In 2019, the director of the NSGO and NSGCP, working through the NSGAB, requested an external review of the NSGO to assess its effectiveness in fulfilling its roles within the mandates described in its authorizing legislation and provide feedback on what the NSGO could do to become even more effective. The intent is to have this evaluation, that has become known as the IRP, on a quadreniel basis. As the first of its kind evaluation, this IRP will not only provide an evaluation of the NSGO on the success and impact of the NSGCP, but will serve to define and improve the review process.

Charge to the IRP: In undertaking a review of the NSGO, the IRP will assess the leadership, management, and organization of the NSGO in its role as defined in the authorizing language. The review will be guided by the Standards of Excellence used to evaluate the 34 place-based Sea Grant programs modified to reflect the broader mission and mandate of the NSGO (see attached). The outcome is expected to provide an evaluation of the leadership and management within the NSGO and its role as NSGCP network coordinator. This will necessarily include an evaluation of NSGO connections to, and collaborations with, the place- based Sea Grant programs, the NSGAB, NOAA partners, and other external stakeholders to understand how NSGO works to better achieve programmatic impacts at the national level.

2014-2017 Post-Quadrennial Review Survey

Summary The Evaluation Committee will oversee a survey of NSGAB, NSGO and state program directors who participated in the 2014-2017 Site Reviews to gather input on what worked well and what could be improved for future SRT and Quadrennial Reviews. This survey should occur as soon as possible after the last SRT to maximize individual memories. Results of this survey will be transmitted to the National Sea Grant College Program Director and shared with the state Sea Grant Program directors.

Members The Evaluation Committee will identify 1-2 NSGAB members to work with a representative from the NSGO and the Sea Grant Association (SGA), to design and implement a survey to identify what worked well and what could be improved for future SRT and Quadrennial Reviews.

Final Survey Report Once the Survey Team completes their survey they will develop a report with their findings and any recommendations to enhance the process. This report will be presented to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board for review and vote for approval. Once approved, the report will be transmitted to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program, and shared with the Sea Grant state program directors.

Timeline

This timeline provides a summary of critical dates/windows associated with the above activities and when materials should be provided to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program.

March 4-6 2020 Evaluation Committee Meeting to review Site Visit findings and reports and survey results; Draft report

March 9, 2020 NSGAB Meeting to Review and Approve Site Visit Review Report

March 2020 NSGAB Final Recommendations sent to National Sea Grant College Program Director

May 3-7, 2021 IRP Meeting

June 2021 IRP Provides Draft Report for Approval and Transmission to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Sea Grant College Program 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282

April 27, 2018

Dr. Amber Mace Chair, National Sea Grant Advisory Board via email

Dear Amber,

As you know, every four years, each of our Sea Grant programs undergo a site review to determine if the program meets the requirements of our legislation 33 USCS § 1121, and the Standards of Excellence per Sea Grant Federal Regulations (15 CRF 918). In order to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and the suggested changes to our Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation (PIE) process, I would ask that you create an Evaluation Committee of the Board to oversee these evaluative activities.

The charge for the Evaluation Committee is to help coordinate the quadrennial evaluation of the programs and the National Sea Grant College Program. To achieve this, the Evaluation Committee will 1) assign a Board member for each of the 34 site reviews; 2) review the site review reports and associated materials to verify that each program is held to the same standards; and 3) identify individuals to serve on the Independent Review Panel. This panel will provide an external evaluation of the effectiveness of the NSGO and the National Sea Grant College Program overall.

Elizabeth Rohring, the Designated Federal Officer for the Board and Susan Holmes, the NSGO PIE Coordinator will oversee the process and work with you and the other Board members to provide support and answer questions.

Sincerely,

Jonathan R. Pennock Director, National Sea Grant College Program

cc: Susan Holmes Elizabeth Rohring

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Sea Grant College Program 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282

Memorandum to: Amber Mace, National Sea Grant Advisory Board Chair From: Jonathan Pennock, National Sea Grant College Program Director Date: April 27, 2018 Subject: Charge to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board) to create an Evaluation Committee

Purpose: The charge for the Evaluation Committee is to help coordinate the quadrennial evaluation of the state Sea Grant programs and the National Sea Grant College Program.

Background: As part of the Sea Grant Planning, Implementation, and Evaluation program (PIE) every four years a Site Review is conducted to assess if the Sea Grant state programs meets the Standards of Excellence per Sea Grants Federal Regulations (15 CRF 918.3). Due to recommendations from the PIE II Committee and an evaluation of our current process, quadrennial evaluation of the National Sea Grant College Program and state Sea Grant Programs will take place in three parts.

1) The site reviews will serve as a retrospective evaluation of a program’s overall impact on society as guided by their state program strategic plan, and as well as their achievement meeting the Sea Grant Standards of Excellence. Each Site Review Team (SRT) will be Chaired by a Federal Program Officer and Co-Chaired by an Advisory Board member. 2) The Evaluation Committee will review consistency and equity of the SRT process through a review once all site visits are completed and all directors have had the opportunity to comment on their report. The Evaluation Committee will make recommendations to the National Sea Grant College Program Director for revisions should they deem any necessary. 3) An Independent Review Panel will be created by the Evaluation Committee to review the NSGO and the National Sea Grant College Program as a whole. The Evaluation Committee will identify Board members and external experts to serve on the Independent Review Panel.

Charge to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board: Create an Evaluation Committee that is charged with: 1) Identifying one Board member for each of Sea Grant program SRTs. Should a sitting Board member not be available, former Board members will be asked to serve in an emeritus Board member capacity as SRT Co-chair. 2) Reviewing the SRT reports for consistency and equity and reporting those findings to the Advisory Board.

3) Creating an Independent Review Panel (IRP) for the National Sea Grant College Program to provide an external evaluation of the effectiveness of the NSGO and the National Sea Grant College Program overall. The Evaluation Committee will provide all findings of the SRTs and the IRP to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board at the Fall 2019 Advisory Board meeting. The Board will send their reviews and any recommendations for changes to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program.

Participants: Due to the number of site visits required, it is expected that all members of the Advisory Board will participate. No Advisory Board member who serves on a state Sea Grant program advisory board or steering committee may be involved in that state’s SRT or portions of the IRP that involve that state. The SRT members will serve as individual subcommittees for the Evaluation Committee and report their draft findings to the Evaluation Committee, who will report to the full Board. The National Sea Grant Advisory Board is the only group who can provide recommendations to NOAA and the SRT reports shall not be considered final until they have been reviewed and voted on by the Board. The SRTs should include a Board member, a Sea Grant Director, a Federal Program Officer, and other external experts. The NSGO is prepared to provide staff support and travel funds as necessary to facilitate the Evaluation Committee and SRT work.

Tentative Schedule:

Activity Timing

Site Visits Begin October 2018

Site Visits End May 30, 2019

SRT Reports to Evaluation Committee July 30, 2019

Evaluation Committee Convenes August 2019

IRP Convenes August, 2019

IRP Findings due to Evaluation Committee September 30, 2019

Evaluation Committee presents to Advisory Board Fall Board Meeting 2019

Information Services and Publications Review Sub-Committee Report Out National Sea Grant Advisory Board

Agenda Item: Information Services and Publications Review Subcommittee

Purpose Decisional – This session is to discuss and vote on the “Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review” report.

Three Things You Must Know 1) Jon Pennock charged the Board to create a “Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Sub-Committee”. 2) The subcommittee has met and developed a report on two important issues: 1) the current and future information services Sea Grant will need to support its mission; and 2) meeting NOAA’s Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) requirements and publication policy. 3) The Board needs to review the report, vote on accepting recommendations in the report, and forward to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program.

Background ● There are tremendous opportunities to improve the ability of scholars and the public alike to access information, tools, and products created by Sea Grant. Sea Grant must make certain that research and educational materials are accessible to as wide an audience as possible, and that the archive and history of the Sea Grant program is not lost during any digital translation. To achieve this goal, Sea Grant needs to identify future management solutions and develop a vision of how to evolve and best advance the creation, dissemination, and preservation of knowledge supporting Sea Grant’s mission. ● Currently the National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) is the digital library and official library archive for all Sea Grant documents and publications. The NSGAB is asked to assess how the Sea Grant program utilizes the information services and catalog of the NSGL and provide recommendations and management solutions related to several aspects of the NSGL including the archive, the active digital library catalog, and the reporting and programmatic services provided by the staff at the NSGL. ● Sea Grant is required to make federally funded peer-reviewed publications publicly available in accordance with the NOAA Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) and publication policy. NOAA’s Institutional Repository (IR) was created to fulfill the requirements of PARR and all peer-reviewed materials (journal articles and NOAA series publications) are required to be included in the repository. The NSGAB is asked to assess how Sea Grant can implement the requirements of PARR to archive peer-reviewed publications with NOAA IR, and identify the roles of the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), NSGL, State Sea Grant programs, and funded researchers in meeting this federal requirement.

Red Flags/Comments ● It should be noted that this charge does not include a request to make recommendations about data management.

NSGAB Action Items ● This is a decisional session. The Board must vote on accepting the subcommittee report “Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review” and forwarding the to the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program.

Links ● Charge to the Board attached below ● The National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) ● NOAA Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (NOAA PARR) ● NOAA Public Access Policy for Scholarly Publications ● the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Memorandum Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Sea Grant College Program 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282

From: Jonathan R. Pennock, Director National Sea Grant College Program

To: Amber Mace, Chair National Sea Grant Advisory Board

Date: 13 June 2019

Subject: Information Services and Publications Review Sub-Committee

I am writing to formally request recommendations from the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board) to address programmatic needs in collecting, managing, and archiving the Sea Grant research, education, extension, and communication information, tools, and products.

Across the world, libraries today face reduced budgets, increased expectations, and competition from digital information services. The means by which researchers and scholars collect, access, and disseminate data, information, and research results continues to transform rapidly in the digital age.

There are tremendous opportunities to improve the ability of scholars and the public alike to access information, tools, and products created by Sea Grant. Sea Grant must make certain that research and educational materials are accessible to as wide an audience as possible, and that the archive and history of the Sea Grant program is not lost during any digital translation. To achieve this goal, Sea Grant needs to identify future management solutions and develop a vision of how to evolve and best advance the creation, dissemination, and preservation of knowledge supporting Sea Grant’s mission.

I charge the Board with creating a Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Sub- Committee to review and provide recommendations on two important issues: 1) the current and future information services Sea Grant will need to support its mission; and 2) meeting NOAA’s Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) requirements and publication policy.

Background: ● The National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) is the digital library and official library archive for all Sea Grant documents and publications. The NSGAB is asked to assess how the Sea Grant program utilizes the information services and catalog of the NSGL and provide recommendations and management solutions related to several aspects of the NSGL including the archive, the active digital library catalog, and the reporting and programmatic services provided by the staff at the NSGL. ● Sea Grant is required to make federally funded peer-reviewed publications publicly available in accordance with the NOAA Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) and publication policy. NOAA’s Institutional Repository (IR) was created to fulfill the requirements of PARR and all peer-reviewed materials (journal articles and NOAA series publications) are required to be included in the repository. The NSGAB is asked to assess how Sea Grant can

implement the requirements of PARR to archive peer-reviewed publications with NOAA IR, and identify the roles of the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), NSGL, State Sea Grant programs, and funded researchers in meeting this federal requirement.

It should be noted that this charge does not include a request to make recommendations about data management.

The NSGO will provide the sub-committee with points of contact for the NSGL, the NOAA Library, NOAA IR, and the NOAA National Library Advisory Committee to gather additional information as needed from these partners. We encourage the Board to utilize representation from a university library system, a federal library, and the Sea Grant Association. The NSGO will provide a staff point of contact for the sub-committee to support its efforts.

We request that the Board begins review after the sub-committees members are approved by the full Board during the Fall 2019 meeting in Puerto Rico. We would like to see a full report with recommendations presented to the Board no later than the Fall 2020 meeting. Once the Board reviews and votes on the report, they can forward their recommendation to me for consideration.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review A subcommittee of the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (NSGAB) March 17 2021

Committee Members: Mr. Dale Baker (NSGAB co-chair), Dr. Gordon Grau (NSGAB co-chair), Dr. Kristen Fussell (Ohio Sea Grant), Ms. Anne Moser (Wisconsin Sea Grant), Ms. Sarah Whitney (Pennsylvania Sea Grant)

National Sea Grant Office (NSGO) Staff Support: Dr. Rebecca Briggs, Ms. Brooke Carney Introduction A formal request for recommendations was given to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (NSGAB) from Dr. Jonathan Pennock, director of the National Sea Grant Program (Sea Grant). The request for recommendations was specifically to address programmatic needs in collecting, managing, and archiving Sea Grant research, education, extension, and communication information, tools, and products. The charge to the NSGAB was to create the a Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Committee to review and provide recommendations on two important issues: 1) the current and future information services Sea Grant will need to support its mission and 2) meeting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) requirements and publication policy. Specifically, the NSGAB was asked to assess 1) how the Sea Grant programs utilize the information services and catalog of the National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) and provide recommendations and management solutions related to several aspects of the NSGL, including the archive, the active digital library catalog, and the reporting and programmatic services provided by the staff at the NSGL and 2) how Sea Grant can implement the requirements of PARR to archive peer-reviewed publications with the NOAA Institutional Repository (IR) and identify the roles of the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO), NSGL, state Sea Grant programs, and funded researchers in meeting this federal requirement.

The Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Committee created by the NSGAB developed this recommendation document. Members of the committee are Dale Baker and Gordon Grau (NSGAB), Anne Moser (Wisconsin Sea Grant, Senior Special Librarian), Kristen Fussell (Ohio Sea Grant, Assistant Director of Administration and Research), and Sarah Whitney (Pennsylvania Sea Grant, Director). Rebecca Briggs and Brooke Carney (NSGO) oversaw the committee meetings.

From October 2020 to February 2021, the committee met numerous times. Committee members compiled and read numerous reports from the NSGL, the NOAA Library, and the NOAA IR, as well as additional background information. A survey was carried out with state Sea Grant programs on their use of, and how they valued the NSGL. The committee also had conversations with Jan Voogd (NSGL), Dee Clarkin (NOAA Library), Sarah Davis (NOAA Library-Bibliometrics), and Jennifer Fagan-Fry (NOAA IR). This final report was written in January-February 2021.

History and Overview of the National Sea Grant Library The National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) was established in 1970 and is the digital library and official archive for all Sea Grant documents and publications. According to the library’s integrated library catalog, the holdings of the NSGL include more than 57,000 unique records. The digital collection includes as many as 80,000 documents that may be downloaded directly from the library catalog. The print collection includes the following types of documents: journal reprints, books, technical reports, maps, proceedings, newsletters, advisory reports, handbooks, curriculum guides, videos, CD-ROMs, computer programs, and other miscellaneous types of documents.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 2

The NSGL is the only comprehensive collection of Sea Grant-produced documents from across the country, and it supports Sea Grant program goals by ensuring that Sea Grant information and publications are broadly accessible to researchers, students, teachers, policy makers, concerned citizens, and other audiences.

During the annual reporting period each year, all state Sea Grant programs are required to submit publications to the NSGL. Programs submit one or two hard copies of documents as well as digital copies of all publications. The state Sea Grant staff responsible for publication reporting fill out online cataloging forms for each submission. At the end of the reporting period, after verification and upload of all documentation, the NSGL provides reporting period statistics to the NSGO for each state Sea Grant program by publication type.

The NSGL is currently housed at the University of Rhode Island’s (URI) Narragansett Bay Campus at the Ocean Science and Exploration Center. The staff currently includes a full-time credentialed librarian and a full-time library technician, positions funded by the NOAA grant, and a part-time assistant, funded by the URI. The NSGL was awarded ~$300,000 in federal funds (with waived match requirement) per year for the past two years, and the current grant cycle for the NSGL ends 2/29/2022.

The National Sea Grant Library Today The current mission of the NSGL is the organization, access, and preservation of all documents created that have been funded by Sea Grant. With the rapid rate of technological advancement, however, it has become necessary to recognize that the landscape of research custody has changed and will only continue to change further. The current role of the NSGL is to archive and circulate the print collections, maintain a digital collection and provide library services such as research and reference services.

The archival role of the NSGL includes collecting and providing access to a comprehensive collection of print and/or digital materials including reports, publications, documents, and all types of media, gray literature, ephemera and other historical assets that reflect the more-than- 50-year history of Sea Grant. These holdings include: 1) Peer-reviewed literature - the results of Sea Grant’s research investment. 2) “Gray” literature - documents and materials published outside of traditional commercial or academic publishing and often not archived elsewhere. Examples of Sea Grant’s gray literature collection may include reports, fact sheets, curricula, manuals, etc. 3) Ephemera and historical materials - historical materials may include photographs, correspondence, memos, etc., and are the primary sources that tell the history of Sea Grant. Ephemera may include items such as bookmarks or marketing materials that also contribute to the historical record of Sea Grant.

The NSGL attempts to collect all Sea Grant-funded publications, adding an average of 1,500 annually, with current total holdings of nearly 60,000 items.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 3 The collection includes three categories: 1) Digital – approximately 80% of the print collection is digitized; the number of digital-only publications continues to increase. 2) Archival – a non-circulating print copy of every publication, held for posterity. 3) Circulating – a set of all print Sea Grant publications, available for borrowing.

The NSGL was once the sole home for Sea Grant research results but now many consortial digital repositories host digitized versions of Sea Grant work. Each state Sea Grant program uses the libraries and digital repositories of their home institutions in different ways, which may include a policy of depositing research results into these collections. In addition, most of these home institutions participate in consortial agreements with collections such as HathiTrust and WorldCat, making thousands of Sea Grant documents readily available. However, there is no consistency across the Sea Grant network for making research results available at home institutions and because of this the NSGL is the only complete repository of materials across the Sea Grant network. When the architecture for creating digital format information was first described in 1993, digital repositories were few. In fact, the NSGL was once on the forefront of digitizing research products for posterity and access, and it served the dispersed locations and activities of Sea Grant programs well. Time moves on, however, and the “silo” model of research custody represented by the NSGL is no longer a best practice, having been edged out by the “consortial” model, such as HathiTrust or WorldCat, both of which transcend geography as well as institutional affiliation. This is a fundamental and positive change for researchers because the fewer places researchers have to look for the information they need, the better served they are. Currently, for researchers to find NSGL holdings, they must look in the NSGL catalog. This is quite easily done, as long as researchers know to look there, but even so, it is yet another place for the researcher to remember to look. An associated extra step for the researcher, from the opposite direction, is the two-part requirement for submitting their work: to the NSGL and to NOAA.

The NSGL was once a groundbreaking enterprise, but today others have superseded many of its activities. This is a critical juncture for the NSGL. The question we face is whether the NSGL continue to do the following: • Acquire, process, and maintain copies of all Sea Grant-funded research publications? • Manage and expand the digital collection, and coordinate receipt of all born-digital documents supplied by the individual programs? • Enhance the visibility of Sea Grant documents and provide access to Sea Grant information? • Serve as the archival home for Sea Grant publications?

Do all these activities, as they are now, or if improved upon, best serve the Sea Grant programs, researchers, and the public?

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 4 Survey Responses from Around the Sea Grant Network The Sea Grant Association sent a survey to every program in the Sea Grant network asking the following questions: 1) Does your network currently access and actively use the library resources? 2) What is the most valuable resource/service(s) the library provides to you? 3) Are there valuable services not currently provided by the library that would make this service more useful to your network? 4) Do state programs archive/store much of the information currently submitted to the library? What roles are repeated? 5) Does Sea Grant need a national collection of topically focused Sea Grant materials? Is this service currently being met by another group or entity for your topical area?

Twenty-five responses were received from 20 of the 34 national Sea Grant programs including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois/Indiana, Lake Champlain, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi-Alabama, Minnesota, MIT, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pacific Islands, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Washington.

Survey results are included in appendix A.

The survey results indicated an almost unanimous agreement about the importance of the archival value of the NSGL collection. Several programs mentioned that the library was possibly the only place to find all their program publications since inception. Throughout the responses, the difficulty of using the current library both for locating publications and for submitting publications was mentioned and reflects its antiquated system. Many mentioned the value of gray literature (which this committee has defined as program reports and other documents outside of published literature) and of historical ephemera, such as bookmarks, signage, pamphlets, etc.

In question three, programs listed services and collections currently missing from the NSGL. Their responses include suggestions for new features and best practices in library and archives that would possibly result if Sea Grant made a full investment to upgrade and maintain NSGL or another archival collection. (See the appendix A for the full range of suggestions.) Responses to question four indicate a lack of standardization with individual program archives and publication management across the 34 Sea Grant programs. Because each program handles publications archiving differently, publications may be difficult to locate or even unavailable to the public. Some programs prefer to manage and retain their historical materials, which can make locating historical materials challenging. The responses to question five indicate a strong interest in topical pages.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 5 Library Services Currently Available Within NOAA The NOAA Central Library (https://library.noaa.gov) provides scientific, technical, and legislative information to all NOAA scientists, administrators, and others working in related disciplines in support of NOAA’s programs. The NOAA Central Library is part of NOAA’s Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) Office of Science Support. Some of the programs that are part of the NOAA Central Library could benefit Sea Grant, specifically their institutional repository and their research and bibliometric services.

The NOAA Central Library provides NOAA researchers access to the resources of the NOAA Library and Information Network (which consists of 20 other NOAA libraries located across the United States) as well as access to scholarly publications. The NOAA Central Library collects materials in a wide variety of formats on a large number of subjects related to NOAA research, including environmental science, ecology, fisheries, geosciences, marine and freshwater biology, meteorological and atmospheric sciences, oceanography and limnology, and more. These include over 1,000 peer-reviewed journals and electronic databases. However, access to the electronic journals and databases requires a noaa.gov email address.

The NOAA Central Library’s Institutional Repository (IR) (https://library.noaa.gov/Research- Tools/IR/IR-FAQs) is a digital library of scientific literature and research produced by NOAA. It was created in response to a White House Office of Science and Technology policy memorandum increasing access to the results of federally funded scientific research and the subsequent NOAA-authored plan to increase access to scholarly research carried out with NOAA funding titled “NOAA Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results” (PARR Plan). The NOAA IR ensures that NOAA-published research is preserved and made available for all present and future researchers, and allows for better assessment of the current and future impact of NOAA research. The NOAA IR is crawled by Google, which means that its publications show up in Google and Google Scholar searches. This makes it much easier for the public to find NOAA publications. It is also crawled by Unpaywall, which is a browser extension used by academics, students, and researchers who want a simple way to locate open-access publications.

The NOAA Central Library’s Research Services (https://libguides.library.noaa.gov/research) allows every NOAA employee and authorized contractor to request in-depth customized research products. This service was launched in 2018 and has since completed 100+ unique research projects for over 50 NOAA offices. The research team works closely with each customer to define and scope out research needs for the project. All services are provided at no additional charge as the library is partially funded through NOAA’s Direct Bill.

Bibliometrics (https://library.noaa.gov/Services/Bibliometrics) are the quantitative analysis of academic publications. Using academic publications as a data source, bibliometric analysis attempts to provide a better understanding of how research is produced, organized, and interrelated. It also attempts to evaluate academic publications and sets of publications based on the number of citations these publications have received. Bibliometrics and citation analysis

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 6 is one way the NOAA Central Library is able to illustrate NOAA's status as producer of world- class research.

Committee Recommendations Based on the information reviewed, the committee looked at three possible options for the future model for the NSGL: 1) Maintain the current NSGL and bring it into the 21st century. 2) Merge the current NSGL into the NOAA Library and the NOAA IR. 3) Develop a hybrid model which maintains the NSGL but merges it to the extent possible with the NOAA Library and NOAA IR. Each of the three options has its pros and cons. Nevertheless, we judge that current software at the NSGL is inadequate and cumbersome, and it thereby reduces the NSGL’s use and value. The NOAA Library and IR infrastructure is cutting edge and user friendly. Independently updating the NSGL’s software to the level already available within NOAA would come at a substantial cost and most likely be prohibitive. The PARR requirement means that all NOAA authors and grantees must submit their publications to the NOAA IR. At present, Sea Grant is not in compliance.

The committee recommends, at least for the near term, a hybrid model for the NSGL (number 3). That is, merging the NSGL with the NOAA Library and IR to the extent possible. This would include all digital publications and holdings that are compatible with capabilities and practices of the NOAA Library/IR.

We further recommend the following:

1) The National Sea Grant director delegate responsibility, authority and appropriate resources to an individual reporting to the director who would manage personnel involved in day-to-day operations of the NSGL and who would liaise with the management of the NOAA Library/IR. At present, it is unclear with whom responsibility lies. Is it with a program officer in the NSGO or someone in the NSGL or with the national director? This uncertainty is likely a major reason for the NSGL’s current state of affairs. 2) The National Sea Grant College Program should continue to employ (a) professional librarian(s) to be responsible for strategic direction of the NSGL and its information portfolio and to undertake day-to-day NSGL operations. The committee recognizes that different advantages exist for locating this individual in the National Sea Grant Office, the NOAA Library/IR or a different site within the network. Employing two librarians, one for digital collections at the NOAA Central Library Silver Spring, and another in a site in the network for physical holdings is an option if financial resources are available. Holdings that are currently in archive form that may not be easily transferable, such as such as photographs and outreach ephemera, should continue to be held at the NSGL for their considerable historical value.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 7 3) We recognize the proposed changes, specifically the transfer of the large database of holdings in the NSGL into the NOAA IR, will incur an initial upfront cost, including additional personnel expense for a limited period to ensure a successful transfer. 4) All “gray literature,” including a variety of extension and other outreach materials, should be digitized and made accessible. Among multiple benefits, this would avoid duplication of work and would provide a historical perspective on Sea Grant strategic directions. 5) Given that the NSGL is currently underused, a major effort marketing the new and up- to-date catalog of Sea Grant holdings within NOAA should be directed to the Sea Grant network and its stakeholders and partners. A side benefit would be acquainting audiences with the high impact of the network’s scholarship and outreach in delivering NOAA’s mission. 6) The NSGL/NOAA information services enterprise should be reviewed on a regular basis. The review could proceed over the same interval and concurrently with that of the network programs. 7) Streamline and clearly identify the process and requirements for reporting by Sea Grant programs to the NSGL/NOAA information services, including streamlining procedures for curation of materials into the NSGL collections, and specify consequences for non- compliance. 8) The NSGL should consider taking the lead on providing training for Sea Grant personnel across the network on issues related to collecting, managing, and archiving the Sea Grant portfolio of research, outreach and education publications. Topics might include an orientation for Sea Grant new personnel, Sea Grant’s obligation under PARR, open-access publishing, copyright, managing and using digital identifiers such as DOIs and ORCIDs, managing bibliographic resources and measuring research impact using Bibliometrics, and altmetrics. 9) Establish an advisory group for the NSGL and its associated information services. This advisory group should have meetings on a regular basis with the goal of assisting library staff with strategic planning and guidance on its operations in order to make the NSGL as effective and efficient as possible for Sea Grant programs.

The committee sees a number of advantages of merging NSGL with the NOAA Central Library. The large number and quality of NSGL holdings will demonstrate to NOAA the scholarly productivity and outreach capabilities Sea Grant brings to NOAA. NOAA IR publications are also discoverable in Google searches. This will greatly increase the discoverability and visibility of Sea Grant’s research investment and its deep portfolio of documents and publications for all Sea Grant audiences, including the public.

The inability of the NSGL to keep abreast of changing Library technology, primarily because of the high cost, will be eliminated. Addressing any federal rules changes would also fall to the NOAA Library. Sea Grant will benefit from the cutting-edge technology available with NOAA Library/IR whose costs are shared NOAA-wide. Redundancy of data input by network programs may also be able to be reduced by a centrally located database.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 8

Executive Summary The Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Committee was created to provide recommendations on how to meet current and future Sea Grant information needs as well as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Plan for Increasing Public Access to Research Results (PARR) requirements and publication policy.

The National Sea Grant Library (NSGL) was established in 1970 and is the digital library and official archive for all Sea Grant documents and publications. The NSGL was once a groundbreaking enterprise, but today many of its activities have been superseded by others and its technology has become seriously outdated. A survey sent to all Sea Grant programs found almost unanimous agreement about the archival value of the NSGL collection but also agreement about the difficulty of using its antiquated system.

NOAA provides many resources, including a central library, institutional repository of publications produced by NOAA, research services and bibliometrics – all within a system that is cutting edge and user friendly.

The committee determined that current software at the NSGL is inadequate and cumbersome, and independently updating the NSGL’s software to the level already available within NOAA would come at a cost that is most likely prohibitive. Therefore, the committee recommends, at least for the near future, merging the NSGL with the NOAA Library and IR to the extent possible.

The inability of the NSGL to keep abreast of changing library technology, primarily because of cost, will be eliminated. Addressing any federal rules changes would also fall to the NOAA Library. Sea Grant will benefit from the cutting-edge technology available with NOAA Library/IR whose costs are shared NOAA-wide. Redundancy of data input by network programs may also be reduced by a centrally located database.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Page 9 Appendix A

Information Services and Publications Review Sub-Committee Summary of responses from the Sea Grant Network January 18, 2021

Twenty-five responses were received from 20 of the 34 national Sea Grant programs including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois/Indiana, Lake Champlain, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi-Alabama, Michigan, MIT, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Pacific Islands, South Carolina, Texas and Washington.

For the purposes of this summary, an archive is defined as a comprehensive print and/or digital collection of materials including reports, publications, documents, all types of media, gray literature, ephemera and other historical assets that reflect the more than 50-year history of the National Sea Grant College Program. A repository is a narrower term defined as a centralized collection of documents, reports, publications, data and other resources, primarily in digital format.

Summary This survey of Sea Grant programs around the entire network indicates an almost unanimous agreement about the importance of the archival value of the NSGL collection. Several programs mentioned that the library was possibly the only place to find all their program publications since inception. Throughout the responses, the difficulty of using the current library workflows is mentioned and reflects its antiquated system. Many mentioned the value of gray literature (which this committee has defined as program reports and other documents outside of published literature) and of historical ephemera, such as bookmarks, signage, pamphlets etc.

In question three, programs listed services and collections currently missing from NSGL. Their responses include best practices in library and archives that would possibly result if SG makes a full investment to upgrade and maintain NSGL or another archival collection. Responses to question four indicate a lack of standardization with individual program archives and publication management across the 34 Sea Grant programs. This raises concerns for programs wanting to manage and retain their historical materials as well as to provide access to current publications. The responses to question five indicate a strong interest in topical pages.

Note about question five: In this editor’s experience, topical collections are a discoverability question and would be a product that could be a valuable result of the investment in a fully- funded Sea Grant archive. The first step in creating a robust topical collection is assigning permanent URLs (such as DOI numbers) to assets that would be included in the collection. With those permanent URLs, topical pages can be created without worry of broken or outdated links. With an investment in an archive of materials for Sea Grant, this becomes a much easier task and could easily be managed by library or information professionals.

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Appendix A Page 1

DETAILED SUMMARY

QUESTION ONE - Does your network currently access and actively use the library resources?

Of the 25 respondents, two did not answer this question. Of the remaining 23 responses, two said they do not use the library and one replied not sure. Of the 20 users of library resources, several included their purpose in accessing the library collections: • for exhibit development (1) • for archiving our program reports and publications (7) • for researching the origins of their state program (2) (including an anecdote about locating unknown history and a new date for the founding of their program) • for researching publications on a topic across the national Sea Grant network (6), including a retrospective about funded research

Note: One program said that they did not feel they received the expected results in their search of the library catalog but noted they were unsure of the reason and mentioned the possibility of operator error.

QUESTION TWO - What is the most valuable resource/service the library provides to you?

Of the 25 respondents, three did not answer this question. The twenty-two respondents mentioned the following resources/services of value: • Search capability [of the library catalog] (3) • Archival function of the library collection (17) with these notes: o Valued having permanent, central, open source repository across programs (3) o Especially inclusion of extension/education publications (1) o To avoid duplication (2) o That provides access to Sea Grant investment back to the 1970s (1) o Valued having access to older print collection (5), to digital collection (2) o One small SG program is dependent on the library for its archiving (1) • The ability to provide access to the copyrighted materials to the public (2) • Library reporting to national office (1) • Expertise of library professionals (2)

QUESTION THREE - Are there valuable services not currently provided by the library that would make this service more useful to your network?

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Appendix A Page 2

Of the 25 respondents, three did not answer this question and one said it was “beyond my position to comment.” The 21 responses to this question suggested the following services (and collections –ed.) would be useful. Some of these suggestions are not services provided by the library but rather procedures for using and managing the library and for other publication-related workflows: • Video storage (2) • An oral history collection (1) • Full digital repository (2) • A more up-to-date, innovative library infrastructure including (4) o Better metadata/keywords and search functionality (3) o Citation and usage metrics (4) o Data on library usage and document downloads for their state program (1) . Ability to integrate library search button into state program website (and more broadly integrate with state programs… for example, using library repository for local pubs warehouse (3) • Better marketing of the library, which may include (2) o Spotlight on new pubs, social media, webinars, branding • Have library staff attend Sea Grant week (1) • Have library handle numbering: assign DOIs, use ORCID nos., Google school nos. and reconcile numbering system between local programs and library (why are there two different systems?) (1) • Better coordination between NSGO and library (1) • Ability to edit own library records (1) • Library training on such issues as how to cite publications, how to store digital and print documents on site, etc. (1) • Properly fund publications across SG – fund both the library function and publication management at the local level (1) • Create publications working group (1) • Include a data repository in library (1) • Difficult to respond to this question because only understand archival purpose and don’t understand how the library is used (5) • None that I can think of (4)

QUESTION FOUR - Do state programs archive/store much of the information currently submitted to the library? What roles are repeated?

Of the 25 respondents, three did not answer this question. The twenty-two responses were: • Yes (18) with the following comments o At our institute archives (1) o We assign more metadata than the library (2) o Seems to be some redundancy – no additional details (1)

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Appendix A Page 3 o We store both print and digital (2). o PIER and metrics reporting seems redundant (1) o Two different numbering systems (1) o Repeated roles include numbering, database input, hard copy storage, two different databases (1) o Has a print collection and an external hard drive for electronic publications. The NSGL submittal provides their program their only complete program archive. (1) o Yes but their publications are not public facing. Repetition: storage of publications (1) o Appreciate ability to post dissertations, theses, manuscripts to NSGL (ed note: copyrighted materials?) (1) o A variety of practices over time. Older materials sent to state library but are not digitized and are not very discoverable. Some are found in NSGL and not in home library. Since 2000 program working with institution library to improve this. Since 2017 using institution library to store digital files of program materials for back up. (1) o Has some materials online but it appears to mostly be a citation list. Their pdfs are in folders on a server. They did a redesign and their website now reflects their program, not a dump of all their work, historical and current. Internal pubs database only holds title, authors, etc. (1) o Historical materials are not stored locally. (1) o Some publications but not all and not public. No repeated roles. Their home institutions don’t necessarily support Sea Grant program. o Historical materials may only be stored in the NSGL (or There are singular copies of older documents in the NSGL (2) o Storing less and less of older materials as time moves on and space becomes an issue. (1) o One program framed their response so it sounded like “records” – not exactly sure how to capture (1) • No (2) • Not sure (2) o One program mentioned the recent loss of an archivist. No details. Note: Two responses included the important of the NSGL librarians.

QUESTION FIVE - Does Sea Grant need a national collection of topically focused SG materials? Is this service currently being met by another group or entity for your topical area?

Of the 25 respondents, two did not answer this question and one said it was “beyond their role.” The twenty-two responses included: • Would be a nice feature and not sure if this is currently available (3) o Does Bridge serve this purpose for education publications? Side question: I am retiring – where do I send my publications and personal archive? (1)

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Appendix A Page 4 o Make sure it is marketing internally and externally • Would be helpful (8) o …expand to include oral histories and history of Sea Grant (1) o And library could create topical lists o One stop shop for finding materials, increased discoverability beyond state/region (2) • Absolutely and no one else is doing this (7) o Must include upgrade library website (1) o If not NGSL then who? Better than 34 random configurations, need standardization. . Uses journal databases for research publications but what about SG publications and gray literature? (1) o Would foster communication across programs, this is the SG resource collection o If you can’t access our work, it is wasted o • Seems useful but more for extension staff (1) • Seems like this is already possibly by NGSO using computer program to pull from 34 program websites (1) • Depends upon commitment to the resource. Needs to have better submittal processes. Shared several examples of topical collections all across Sea Grant network. (1) • Could be phenomenal but the process is so burdensome that staff have given up. Mentioned that some home universities are eliminating storage space, making a central storage for SG a better option. (1)

Note: One program added a comment about accessibility rules. “We had to drop a document from our website because it doesn't meet new accessibility rules being enforced by our U. It is a document the tribes use for guidance on collecting scientific data on wild rice. We had archived this with the library and so were able to simply provide the link to the document on library website. So it is still available to them while we work to make the document meet accessibility rules.”

Sea Grant Information Services and Publication Review Appendix A Page 5

Review and Vote on Committee Nominations National Sea Grant Advisory Board Spring 2019 Meeting - Silver Spring, MD

Agenda Item: Committee Nominations

Purpose Decisional - The Board needs to nominate and vote for representation on the committees for 40% Competitive Research and Education Policy for Base Funding and for Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program status.

Three Things You Must Know 1) The Board must nominate and vote for chairs and/or members of new or existing subcommittees. 2) Committees for action are: 40% Competitive Research and Education Policy for Base Funding and for Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program status. 3) The Board has solicited nominations for these committees from the SGA, NSGO, and Board itself.

Background ● Sea Grant’s legislation allows for subcommittees, including subcommittees that have external members. ● These committees are formal subcommittees of the National Sea Grant Advisory Board who must report any information to the full Board before it advises NOAA or other federal agencies

Red Flags/Comments ● None

NSGAB Action Items ● These items are decisional and require a vote during the public meeting

Links/Attachments ● Board Charter with language for the Executive Committee (Section 12) and subcommittees (Section 13) ● Charge for 40% Competitive Research and Education Policy for Base Funding ● Charge for Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program status

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Sea Grant College Program 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282

From: Jonathan R. Pennock, Director National Sea Grant College Program

To: Brian Helmuth, Chair National Sea Grant Advisory Board

Date: November 12, 2020

Subject: Review Committee for the 40% Competitive Research and Education Policy for Base Funding

Background: Competitive investment in research and education projects have been a central and prominent part of the Sea Grant model’s focus on research, extension and education. Historically, the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO) has set targets on competitive investments to ensure that an impactful balance of research, extension and education is part of each program’s investments. Over the past 20 years, there have been numerous discussions regarding an appropriate level that Sea Grant programs should dedicate from their base budget towards competitive research and education projects, often referencing that “at least 40% of base funds should be invested in competitive research”, although there have been slight wording differences in policy and guidance documents. In addition, the mechanisms by which Sea Grant programs garner funds to support a robust competitive research and education portfolio have evolved. Many Sea Grant programs now derive a significant portion of support to address their strategic priorities from non-Sea Grant base funds.

Charge: The Sea Grant Director (Director) requests that the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (the Board) establish a committee of the Board to review Sea Grant’s 40% competitive research and education policy for base funding. This language is contained in the Sea Grant Policy “National Sea Grant College Program Policy for the Allocation of Funds, FY 2014 and Beyond,” and other documents.

Important aspects of the review should: • Assess existing and historical NSGO policies and the Board reports, which discuss the proportion of base funds focused on competitive research; • Examine the different ways that Sea Grant programs receive and commit funds from their varying funding streams (e.g., base, state, national competition, pass through, and other sources) and how that impacts attaining the most impactful balance between research, extension and education that is core to the Sea Grant model; and, • Develop clear recommendations providing guidance that defines the boundaries for how Sea Grant programs should allocate competitive funds to ensure that they maintain an appropriate balance of research, extension and education (the Sea Grant ‘model’) while providing a proper level of flexibility to accommodate differences between programs.

Further Details and Timeline: • The NSGO will provide background information on the current policy documents. • The Board should plan to initiate this review after the committee members are approved by the full Board during the Spring 2021 meeting. • The committee should plan to present findings to the Board no later than the Fall 2021 meeting after which the recommendations will be forwarded to the Sea Grant Director.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Sea Grant College Program 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282

From: Jonathan R. Pennock, Director National Sea Grant College Program

To: Brian Helmuth, Chair National Sea Grant Advisory Board

Date: November 12, 2020

Subject: Review Committee for Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program status

Background: On June 12, 2020, Guam Sea Grant notified the National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant) of their interest in applying for institutional status. Guam Sea Grant has been a Coherent Area Program (CAP) for eight years. The most recent Site Review Team supports Guam Sea Grant’s request to be reviewed for Institutional status.

Charge: The Sea Grant Director (Director) requests that the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board) establish a committee of the Board to oversee a review process for the potential establishment of an Institutional Sea Grant program for Guam.

The review will be based on the necessary qualifications of Sea Grant Colleges laid out in regulation 15 CFR 918.3(b) (see attached). As directed by Section 209 of the Sea Grant Act of 1976, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq. (b)(l)(B) "In General - The Board shall advise the Secretary and the Director concerning the designation of sea grant colleges and sea grant institutes."

The committee will submit their letter of recommendation for approval to the Board. If approved, the final recommendation from the Board will be sent to the Director who will determine whether to forward the recommendation to the OAR Assistant Administrator (delegated from the Secretary of Commerce). Upon approval, Congressional notification is required not less than 30 days before designation.

Further Details and Timeline: • This charge is pending approval by the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere. • The official review process will commence with a Federal Register Notice (FRN) for all eligible universities to submit an application to host the Guam Sea Grant Institutional Program initiated by the National Sea Grant Office (NSGO). The NSGO will set up a mechanism to receive a formal application for institutional program status and provide the necessary background information. • The Board should plan to initiate this review after the committees members are approved by the full Board during the Spring 2021 meeting. • The formal review will preferably include an in-person site visit; however, given the recent site visit as part of the 2014-2017 Site Review Team evaluation, this may be virtual given travel restrictions associated with the continuing COVID-19 pandemic.

• Along with FRN approval, application timeline and review, the process can take up to, or more than, a year.

------

15 Code of Federal Regulations 918.3(b)

(b) To be eligible for designation as a Sea Grant College, the candidate institution or confederation of institutions must meet the qualifications set forth above as evaluated by a site review team composed of members of the Sea Grant Review Panel, NOAA's Office of Sea Grant, and other experts named by NOAA. As a result of this review, the candidate must be rated highly in all of the following qualifying areas:

(1) Leadership. The Sea Grant College candidate must have achieved recognition as an intellectual and practical leader in marine science, engineering, education, and advisory service in its state and region.

(2) Organization. The Sea Grant College candidate must have created the management organization to carry on a viable and productive Sea Grant Program, and must have the backing of its administration at a sufficiently high level to fulfill its multidisciplinary and multifaceted mandate.

(3) Relevance. The Sea Grant College candidate's program must be relevant to local, State, regional, or National opportunities and problems in the marine environment. Important factors in evaluating relevance are the need for marine resource emphasis and the extent to which capabilities have been developed to be responsive to that need.

(4) Programmed team approach. The Sea Grant College candidate must have a programmed team approach to the solution of marine problems which includes relevant, high quality, multidisciplinary research with associated educational and advisory services capable of producing identifiable results.

(5) Education and training. Education and training must be clearly relevant to National, regional, State and local needs in fields related to ocean, Great Lakes, and coastal resources. As appropriate, education may include pre-college, college, post-graduate, public and adult levels.

(6) Advisory services. The Sea Grant College candidate must have a strong program through which information, techniques, and research results from any reliable source, domestic or international, may be communicated to and utilized by user communities. In addition to the educational and information dissemination role, the advisory service program must aid in the identification and communication of user communities' research and educational needs.

(7) Relationships. The Sea Grant College candidate must have close ties with Federal agencies. State agencies and administrations, local authorities, business and industry, and other educational institutions. These ties are: (i) To ensure the relevance of its programs, (ii) to give assistance to the broadest possible audience, (iii) to involve a broad pool of talent in providing this assistance (including universities and other administrative entities outside the Sea Grant College), and (iv) to assist others in developing research and management competence. The

extent and quality of an institution's relationships are critical factors in evaluating the institutional program.

(8) Productivity. The Sea Grant College candidate must have demonstrated the degree of productivity ( of research results, reports, employed students, service to State agencies and industry, etc.) commensurate with the length of its Sea Grant operations and the level of funding under which it has worked.

(9) Support. The Sea Grant College candidate must have the ability to obtain matching funds from non-Federal sources, such as state legislatures, university management, state agencies, business, and industry. A diversity of matching fund sources is encouraged as a sign of program vitality and the ability to meet the Sea Grant requirement that funds for the general programs be matched with at least one non-Federal dollar for every two Federal dollars.

(c) Finally, it must be found that the Sea Grant College candidate will act in accordance with the following standards relating to its continuing responsibilities if it should be designated a Sea Grant College:

(1) Continue pursuit of excellence and high performance in marine research, education, training, and advisory services.

(2) Provide leadership in marine activities including coordinated planning and cooperative work with local, state, regional, and Federal agencies, other Sea Grant Programs, and non-Sea Grant universities.

(3) Maintain an effective management framework and application of institutional resources to the achievement of Sea Grant objectives.

(4) Develop and implement long-term plans for research, education, training, and advisory services consistent with Sea Grant goals and objectives.

(5) Advocate and further the Sea Grant concept and the full development of its potential within the institution and the state.

(6) Provide adequate and stable matching financial support for the program from non-Federal sources.

(7) Establish and operate an effective system to control the quality of its Sea Grant programs.

National Sea Grant Office Update

Jonathan Pennock, PhD

Director, National Sea Grant College Program

Dr. Jonathan Pennock is the director of the National Sea Grant College Program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Prior to joining NOAA, Jon was the director of the New Hampshire Sea Grant Program and the deputy director of the School of Marine Science and Ocean Engineering at the University of New Hampshire. Jon is a nationally-known coastal scientist with expertise in oceanography and estuarine sciences. His research has focused on understanding human impacts on coastal marine food webs. Jon has a Ph.D. in oceanography and master's in marine studies from the University of Delaware and a bachelor's in biology from Earlham College.

Sea Grant Association Update

Susan White, PhD President, Sea Grant Association Director, North Carolina Sea Grant

Susan White is the executive director of North Carolina Sea Grant, the North Carolina Water Resources Research Institute and North Carolina Space Grant. All three programs engage in research, outreach and education that address important topics within the state and the region. Sea Grant, with funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and WRRI, with funding from the U.S. Geological Survey, focus on coastal, ocean and water resource topics. Space Grant, with funding from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, focuses on STEM topics to support the next generation of aerospace professionals.

White also is president of the Sea Grant Association, a nonprofit organization that supports the Sea Grant Network. In fall 2017, White was named chair of the N.C. Sediment Control Commission by Gov. Roy Cooper. She previously was director of NOAA’s Hollings Marine Laboratory in Charleston, S.C. Formerly the national research coordinator for NOAA’s Estuarine Reserves Division and National Estuarine Research Reserve System, White has served on national and regional steering committees on topics including technology transfer, integrated drought monitoring and early warning, and climate’s connections to health. White earned a doctorate from the University of Georgia and a bachelor’s degree from Duke University.

NOAA Research Update Craig McLean NOAA Acting Chief Scientist Assistant Administrator for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Craig McLean is now serving as the Acting Chief Scientist and will act as is the senior scientist for the agency providing direction for science and technology priorities. He also serves as the Assistant Administrator for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.

In his role at Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, he is responsible for overseeing, directing and implementing NOAA’s research enterprise including a network of research laboratories and the execution of NOAA programs including the Climate Program, National Sea Grant, Ocean Exploration, to name a few. Among a number of formal international engagements in science and technology, Mr. McLean serves as the U.S. Representative to the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), and as the Co-chair of the U.S. European Union Marine Working Group.

Mr. McLean has previously served in NOAA as Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator of the National Ocean Service, was the founding Director of OAR’s Office of Ocean Exploration and Research and served in uniform for nearly 25 years in NOAA's Commissioned Corps, attaining the rank of Captain. Mr. McLean served aboard hydrographic, oceanographic, and fisheries research ships and was the first commanding officer of the NOAA Ship Gordon Gunter. Craig led NOAA's innovation and planning for the Smithsonian Institution's Sant Ocean Hall, and achieved a National Ocean Action Plan goal of securing a permanent, dedicated ship for the National Ocean Exploration Program, the NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer.

Craig is also an attorney and has practiced marine resource law for NOAA. He has been awarded the Department of Commerce Silver and Bronze Medals, the NOAA Corps Commendation Medal, and Special Achievement Medal. Mr. McLean is a Fellow of the Explorers Club, and of the Marine Technology Society, and a past-president and chairman of the Sea-Space Symposium.

Ko Barrett Deputy Assistant Administrator for Programs and Administration NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Ms. Ko Barrett is serving as the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Programs and Administration for Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.

She comes to this position from seven years of serving as Deputy Director of OAR’s Climate Program Office (CPO), which oversees and coordinates climate activities across NOAA addressing climate observations and monitoring, research and modeling, and the development and delivery of climate services.

For over fifteen years, Ms. Barrett has represented the U.S. on delegations charged with negotiating and adopting scientific assessments undertaken by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). She is widely recognized as an expert on climate policy, particularly on issues related to climate impacts and ways to help society to adapt. She has won multiple awards for her contributions to both NOAA and the nation, notably the U.S. Department of State Meritorious Honor Award in 2011, the NOAA Administrator’s Award in 2010, and in 2007, she shared in the Nobel Peace Prize granted to members of the IPCC.

Prior to joining NOAA in 2005, Ms. Barrett was the Director of the Global Climate Change program at USAID, overseeing climate activities in over 40 countries. While at USAID, she initiated its Vulnerability and Adaptation Program.

Ms. Barrett has a B.S. degree in Environmental Science and was named Distinguished University Scholar as well as Distinguished Research Scholar through Sigma Xi Scientific Research Society from the University of North Carolina in Asheville.

Board Executive Committee Nominations National Sea Grant Advisory Board 2021 Spring Virtual Meeting

Agenda Item: Board Executive Committee Nominations

Purpose Decisional - The Board needs to nominate and vote for representation on the committee for determining Executive Committee membership.

Two Things You Must Know 1) The Board must nominate and vote for chairs and members of new or existing subcommittees. 2) The Board will solicit nominations for creating a nominating committee, who are tasked to fill Executive Committee positions that will be opening up in January of 2022.

Background ● Executive Committee Positions include: Current Chair, Past Chair, V.Chair, and 2 Members at Large. ● Nominations for Advisory Board Officers are proposed to the full Advisory Board by a Nominating Committee consisting of the Advisory Board Chair and two members of the Advisory Board chosen as result of an Advisory Board voted motion. ● During the next Board meeting the nominating committee will send out a call to fill positions for Chair, V.Chair, and one Member at Large position for 2 yrs term starting in January 2022. ● The Board will vote on nominations for the Board’s Executive Committee open positions during the fall Board meeting. ● No member of the Nominating Committee may be considered for nomination unless any such member (including the current Chair) shall be recused from the Committee during such considerations.

Red Flags/Comments ● none

NSGAB Action Items ● These items are decisional and require a vote during the public meeting

Links ● Board Charter with language for the Executive Committee (Section 12) and subcommittees (Section 13)

Biennial Report Hill Virtual Visits National Sea Grant Advisory Board Spring 2021 Virtual Meeting

Agenda Item: 2020 Biennial Report Virtual Hill Visits

Purpose Discussional - This session is to discuss and determine the 2020 Biennial Report to Congress Virtual Hill Visits.

Two Things You Must Know 1) The 2020 Biennial Report to Congress is a review of the National Sea Grant College Program’s (Sea Grant) performance and impacts over the years of 2019-2020, including recommendations for the program. The final draft of the report was presented to the National Sea Grant Advisory Board for approval during their fall 2020 public meeting. 2) The report was sent to Congress electronically the week of March 15, 2021 followed by emails to NOAA leadership and other Line Office partners. 3) During this meeting the Board will be discussing setting up virtual briefings with select Congressional committees in the near future and which Board members will be in attendance. Specific committees and Congressional offices will be determined by availability, however the Board will focus on the Senate Commerce committee, House Resources committee, House Science committee and Appropriation committees.

Background ● Every two years, the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board) is required to submit a report to Congress on the State of Sea Grant. The report shall indicate the progress made toward meeting the priorities identified in the strategic plan. ● The 2020 Biennial Report was developed by a subcommittee of the Board that included members of the Board, representatives from the Sea Grant Association, and staff from the National Sea Grant Office (list on inside back cover). Information in the report was created based on metrics, impacts, and accomplishments from the Sea Grant state programs’ 2020 annual reports, as well as a collection of highlights sent in by the Sea Grant program directors and insights from the committee members.

Red Flags/Comments ● None

NSGAB Action Items ● Discussional session to determine timing of Hill virtual visits and which Board members will be in attendance.

Attachments ● Final 2020 Biennial Report to Congress (attached) THE STATE OF SEA GRANT 2020 BIENNIAL REPORT TO CONGRESS

October 2020 Sea Grant Knauss fellows, NOAA employees, and others plant taro in Hawai’i while attending the SACNAS conference Credit: Bill Jones (NOAA) 2019

16 Sea Grant by the Numbers Contents 17 Sea Grant COVID-19 Responses/Activities 3 Letter from the Board Chair 18 Featured Issues 4 Sea Grant Programs and Map 20 Organizational Excellence 5 Executive Summary 24 2020 Recommendations 6 Response to 2018 Recommendations 26 Emerging Opportunities 8 Sea Grant Model 28 List of Sea Grant Programs and Highlights 9 Focus Areas 34 References and Citations

2 Letter from the Chair

Dear Members of the United States Congress:

On behalf of the National Sea Grant Advisory Board (Board), I am pleased to share with you The State of Sea Grant 2020 Biennial Report to Congress, developed by the Board as directed by the 2008 Sea Grant Act (PL 110-394). The State of Sea Grant 2020 provides an update on the National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant) over the past two years and is the sixth such report to Congress.

This year, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to create major health, economic, and social disruptions across the globe, as do the ongoing and accelerating impacts of climate change. These challenges highlight the critical need for collaboration and communication among Dr. Brian Helmuth federal, state, and local governments working together with the private sector and academia. National Sea Grant They have further shown the indispensable value of trust and long-standing relationships, Advisory Board Chair, while applying the best-available science and an understanding of the needs and priorities Northeastern University collaborative approach in coastal and Great Lakes communities across the nation. This report of the American public. Sea Grant has long been a trusted arbiter that exemplifies this actionable science with extension and education. is filled with examples of how the program creates a culture that connects cutting edge, This year has also witnessed a reckoning of this country’s legacy of racial injustice. This report highlights Sea Grant’s ongoing efforts in Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, but also recognizes that this work is far from completed.

diversitySignificantly, and theinclusion report in acknowledges all its forms. that the needs of coastal communities—and Sea Grant’s mandate to address those needs—can only be met when justice and equity for all citizens is realized, and why resilience is enhanced through Committed to continuous improvement, Sea Grant completed an extensive self-evaluation in 2020, overseen by the Board. The review highlighted extraordinary program accomplishments and best practices resulting from the tireless dedication of Sea Grant staff members, extension agents, and partners. For instance, the John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship Grant’s most impactful efforts, facilitating effective, science-based decision making. The review culminated in actionable recommendations, which places to further graduate-level strengthen fellows Sea Grant. in executive The best and available legislative practices offices that for emerged one year, from continues the evaluation to be one will of Sea be shared throughout the Sea Grant network, across NOAA, and more broadly throughout the federal government via a series of cooperative, cross-agency liaison positions.

The pandemic and other recent adversities have shown that healthy, functioning, diverse coastal and Great Lakes communities and ecosystems are vital to the health, livelihood, and well-being of all Americans. The year 2021 marks the beginning of the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, during which the U.S. has the opportunity to show leadership as the global community works together to face challenges ranging from climate change

to feeding a protein-hungry planet. The Board finds that Sea Grant is uniquely positioned to play a leading role in the theimplementation face of administrative of the Decade budget of thecuts Ocean’s as well prioritiesas for reauthorizing by continuing Sea itsGrant commitment through 2025 to scientific (P.L. 116-221). integrity We and look its forwardfocus on topartnerships. continuing our The work Board with also you recognizes to address and critical appreciates needs theof the U.S. nation. Congress’ We lookunflagging forward bipartisan to continuing support our for work Sea with Grant you in to address critical needs of the nation.

Sincerely,

Brian Helmuth, Ph.D. Chair, National Sea Grant Advisory Board Sea Grant Programs

Sea Grant is a national network of 34 university-based programs and the National Sea Grant Library.

• Alaska • Massachusetts Institute • Pennsylvania • California of Technology • University of Puerto Rico • Connecticut • Michigan • Rhode Island • Delaware • Minnesota • South Carolina • Florida • Mississippi- Alabama • Texas • Georgia • National Sea Grant • University of Southern • University of Guam Law Center California • University of Hawai’i • New Hampshire • Virginia • Illinois- Indiana • New Jersey • Washington • Lake Champlain • New York • Wisconsin • Louisiana • North Carolina • Woods Hole • Maine • Ohio • Maryland • Oregon Executive Summary

The State of Sea Grant 2020 illuminates Sea Grant’s contributions to the nation in 2019-2020 and offers recommendations and opportunities for continued advancements to serve America’s coastal and Great Lakes communities.

646 extension staff and educators, 488 researchers, and at least 2,700 partners are funded and leveraged to cooperatively reach program goals. SeaWithin Grant’s Sea Grant,mission 20 is national to address office the staff, needs 34 of university-based America’s coastal state and programs, Great Lakes communities using the best available science, beginning with an understanding of the needs of diverse stakeholders. In the past two years, Sea Grant has been at the forefront of actionable science addressing priorities of national importance: environmental literacy and workforce development. Sea Grant has coordinated efforts to solve problems locally andsustainable regionally, fisheries emphasizing and aquaculture, partnerships, resilient meeting communities stakeholder and needs, economies, and using healthy feedback coastal from ecosystems, end-users and to inform research, with a $412.4 million economic benefit from an $80 million federal investment in 2019. groups, and individuals to ensure thriving coastal and Great Lakes communities. Just as it has done in response toSea hurricanes, Grant’s locally oil spills, based and staff other and environmentalspecialists collaborated and economic with governments,challenges, Sea academia, Grant in 2020industries, learned non-profit how to draw from past experiences to use its strengths to support its constituents during the COVID-19 pandemic. communities around the nation by providing online resources to enhance at-home STEM education, assisting theSea seafoodGrant’s credibilityindustry and in scientificother coastal and disasterbusinesses communications with direct marketing was an advantage of their products, to coastal navigating and Great the Lakes with and support their stakeholders. complexities of federal and state assistance programs, and working quickly to find innovative ways to connect All recommendations made in The State of Sea Grant 2018 were addressed. Sea Grant (1) supported the development, integration, and implementation of visions generated by interdisciplinary Network Visioning Teams; (2) continued enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) so that its workforce, audiences served, programming conducted, and materials produced are more representative; (3) expanded the Sea Grant expanded its capacity and continued to build greater awareness of the network’s substantial role in coastal disasterevaluation and process emergency to include preparedness the National as well Sea asGrant (5) itsOffice substantial (NSGO) roleand thein aquaculture. Sea Grant program overall; and (4)

In 2020, the Board recommends that Sea Grant expand its capacity and continue to (1) support implementation of its Network Visioning; (2) amplify efforts to incorporate social and environmental justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in its structure and programming; (3) seek opportunities and collaborations to leverage Sea Grant’s and recommendations of the Independent Review Panel and Board Evaluation Committee. unique strengths in building coastal community resilience; and (4) make improvements based on the findings

5 Responses to 2018 Recommendations

The following recommendations were made by the Board in The State of Sea Grant 2018. Responses under each recommendation note the ways in which each one was addressed by Sea Grant in the succeeding biennium, and were compiled from NSGO, data from programs, and site visits. Follow-on recommendations for 2020 comprise the Board’s response.

Recommendation One Sea Grant should further support the development, integration, and implementation of emerging visions generated by interdisciplinary teams begun with the 2017 Network Visioning effort. Support for implementing the vision outcomes will optimize Sea Grant’s investment and enhance Sea Grant’s future program initiatives with aspirations, ideas, innovations, and expertise from both within and outside the network. Response In 2019, the NSGO provided a $1.4 million competitive funding opportunity to the Sea Grant programs to advance Network Visioning plans developed in 2017-18 and enhance each program’s capacity to address their 2018-2023 strategic plan. Additionally, the NSGO has established liaisons within the NSGO to support each ofpriorities the 10 communities identified in theof practice that formed as a result of this effort.

Recommendation Two Sea Grant should continue efforts to enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) throughout the network so that its workforce, audiences served, programming conducted, and materials produced are more representative of the nation. A working group has examined the current status of diversity within Sea Grant, and the Board is looking for continuous progress toward goals for DEI. Response As part of the network vision implementation investment noted above, Sea Grant programs were required to focus at least 25% of the awarded funds on DEI and Traditional and Local Knowledge (TLK). Programs were further encouraged to incorporate DEI and TLK concepts in the remaining 75% of activities. The result was a suite of internal and external efforts to integrate DEI and TLK across programs. Additionally, the DEI and TLK communities of practice, which formed during the 2017-18 visioning process, are providing professional development opportunities to Sea Grant peers. A primary outcome of this investment has been the development of a new Community-Engaged Undergraduate Internship Program to broaden participation in marine and coastal professions by providing training and mentorship to the next generation of scientists, decision makers, and citizens. The program recruits, engages, and retains diverse students in place-based research, extension, education, and communication that respects and integrates local knowledge. Also, the NSGO is taking steps to improve the diversity of applicants to the Knauss fellowship and staff positions in the NSGO.

Recommendation Three The Sea Grant evaluation process should include an assessment of the NSGO and the Sea Grant program overall. Bringing review of the NSGO into a broader program assessment will lead to consistency with how all program elements of Sea Grant, including the NSGO, are reviewed. Response

an Independent Review Panel (IRP) to assess the overall effectiveness and impact of the Sea Grant program as well As the National Sea Grant College Program finished its quadrennial review of the 2014-2017 cycle, the Board organized Review Teams (SRTs) and to move beyond evaluating individual programs, to provide an assessment with suggestions as the NSGO. This review was intended to benefit from the information and assessments conducted by the recent Site 6 and recommendations for improvement of the overall Sea Grant program and the management of the program by the NSGO. The IRP comprises seven members from the Board, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Sea Grant Association (SGA), and leaders from academia/industry, and State/Federal Agencies. The IRP is currently in the process of completing its charge.

Recommendation Four Sea Grant should expand its capacity and continue to build greater awareness of the network’s substantial role in coastal disaster and emergency preparedness including its ability and resources at the local level. Sea Grant can help communities become more sustainable and resilient through enhanced planning, recovery, and adaptation programs. Sea Grant has the local perspective, a national talent pool, and a reputation for assisting communities in adapting to coastal changes quickly. Important government investments in resilience, adaptation, and community planning over the next 50 years will affect all Sea Grant constituencies. Response The Sea Grant Network has long been a leader in disaster and emergency preparedness through nationally coordinated efforts implemented locally. In 2019 and 2020, Sea Grant funded research and engagement customized to local communities in community planning, green infrastructure, coastal inundation, and hazard mitigation and adaptation. Sea Grant programs worked with stakeholders to identify community needs and gaps, and to respond with information, tools, and services to help stakeholders adapt to changing conditions. Sea Grant has invested in working across NOAA and with external partners to leverage existing preparedness, response, and recovery efforts and build awareness of Sea Grant program capabilities. At the national level, the NSGO is forging relationships with the National Weather

Management Agency (FEMA) to share Sea Grant’s programs, products, and uniquely community-based role in disaster andService, emergency National preparedness. Ocean Service, The Climate Sea Grant Program Network’s Office, trusted and is focusing relationships on opportunities help it reach with and theserve Federal vulnerable Emergency or marginalized groups to assess capacity and integrate cultural awareness into information and tool designs, training, and resources.

Recommendation Five A leader in aquaculture research and development, Sea Grant should expand its capacity and build greater awareness of the Sea Grant network’s substantial role in aquaculture. Through its locally based research and extension programs, its national perspective, and its longstanding history in developing aquaculture, Sea Grant is ideally positioned to play an expanded role in helping the Department of Commerce and NOAA achieve their goals to lower the nation’s seafood trade

deficit by boosting domestic production. Response In 2018, Sea Grant initiated support of a academic national aquaculture liaison to strengthen aquaculture coordination and knowledge-sharing across federal, university-based, and industry professionals. In 2019, Sea Grant committed

programs aimed at advancing sustainable aquaculture in the U.S. through three targeted programs: 1) Advanced Aquacultureto investing $16 Collaborative million of aquaculturePrograms, 2) appropriations Exploring New over Aquaculture three fiscal Opportunities, years to support and 3) research Social, Behavioral,and collaborative and Economic Research Needs in Aquaculture. Sea Grant is also investing $15 million of Sea Grant base and aquaculture appropriations over two years to support local and regional aquaculture activities. These nationally-driven investments are over and above local investments by individual Sea Grant programs. In response to the effects of COVID-19, Sea Grant quickly provided $2.5 million in support of the U.S. aquaculture industry in rapid response projects. Continuing to support the university-based professionals within its network, Sea Grant’s recent efforts and investments have positioned the aquaculture industry for a strong future.

Blue crabs in a crab pot from the Chesapeake Bay, where blue crabs are a major resource. Credit: Aileen Devlin, 2019 Researchers funded through the Sea Grant American Lobster Initiative prepare to deploy a larval tow. Credit: Maine Sea Grant The Sea Grant Model

In 1966, Congress passed the National Sea Grant College and Program Act, which charged the federal government to develop a network of Sea Grant Colleges modeled after the Land Grant College system. This model combines research with public engagement through its extension services and education programs. Sea Grant extension

wascan beanticipated defined as that the the delivery three ofpillars scientific (research, research extension, and knowledge education) to fishers,and the communitynetwork of leaders,cooperating and universitiesother Sea wouldGrant stakeholders, be mutually supportive. as well as the Time collection has shown of their that needsthe vitality to inform of coastal new scientific and Great inquiry. Lakes communities, From the beginning, their it habitats, and their ecosystems, together with the marine resources upon which these communities depend, have

Centralbenefited to fromthe power Sea Grant’s of the programsSea Grant farmodel more is profoundlythe synergistic than interplay even Sea of Grant’s goal-directed founders research could have conducted imagined. by

problems and making better informed choices. Sea Grant’s use-inspired research agenda is informed through stakeholdermany of our inputnation’s and finest is directed scholars toward with thesolving rapid both and local sustained and national delivery coastal of that and knowledge Great Lakes toward issues. solving The

both Sea Grant’s research and extension activities. A balanced investment in research, extension, and education iseducation the commitment and development of a multitude of new of generations individuals inof academia,human resources government, in diverse and industryfields is intimately through the integrated Sea Grant into network. Their contributions support the economic and environmental vitality of our nation’s oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes and the communities that depend on them.

8 Focus Areas

Sustainable Fisheries & Aquaculture

While the global supply of wild-capture fisheries reached its limit decades ago, demand for seafood continues to increase. Currently, over 90% of seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported, resulting in an annual domestic seafood trade deficit approaching $20 billion (NOAA Fisheries). Sea Grant has been supporting wild fisheries and aquaculture for nearly its entire 54-year history by investigating science based, sustainable production methods; transferring techniques and technologies to stakeholders; and educating consumers on how responsibly farmed aquaculture products can complement our nation’s robust wild fisheries.

Sea Grant Creates Tools to Advance Ecosystem-Based Management

in the ecosystem including humans. For decades, Sea Grant has conducted research and created tools Ecosystem-based management is a holistic approach to managing fisheries that accounts for all species abundance in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium) and data visualization that managers use to better manage ecosystems, such as new experimentalMIT designs Sea Grant to ).estimate reef fish

and analysis tools to better inform fisheries and resource management ( Sea Grant Responds to the Needs of Fishers Texas Sea Grant and increase compliance for bycatch reduction devices. Such best practices lower incidental takes of promotes new materialsOregon Seaand Grant’s technology for the shrimp fishery to reduce fuel expenses with decision making regarding ocean conditions such as bottom temperature and salinity. Florida Sea Grantendangered sea turtles and fish. Seacast forecasting tool assists commercial fishers

(National’s Florida Marine Friendly Fisheries Fishing Service, Guide 2018 certification.) program increases the sustainability of recreational fishing, which contributed an estimated $100 billion to the U.S. Gross Domestic Product in 2016

Sea Grant Assists with Siting of Aquaculture Farms Woods Hole Sea Grant and its partners helped create an online GIS-based mapping tool called MA- Maine Sea Grant

managersShellfAST touse support high-resolution siting and satellite permitting images for nearshoreto evaluate shellfish suitable aquaculture. sites for lease applications. Connecticutsupported researchers Sea Grant to launch web-based tools to help shellfish farmers, researchers, and resource

sewage treatment plant and met its public partners health established standards. an 800-acre commercial shellfish farm in the Mystic River after first-of-its-kind testing verified that water quality near a recently upgraded municipal

9 Sea Grant Assists with Aquaculture Business Development A partnership led by the South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium gave triploid oyster seed to growers across

attributable to the Consortium for 2018 and 2019 was over $4 million. Wisconsin Sea Grant advises and assiststhe southeast Superior region Fresh, to thesupply world’s the rapidlylargest emergingon-land aquaponics oyster-farming operation industry. that Theemploys total moreeconomic than benefit70 people and produces about 4,000 pounds of salmon per week. When New Hampshire Sea Grant’s AquaFort is deployed, it will increase investment and employment opportunities in offshore aquaculture with an annual potential of 20-tons of fresh, local seafood. AquaFort is a multi-trophic, open-ocean aquaculture system that supports steelhead trout, mussels, and kelp.

Sea Grant Works on Seafood Safety and Marketing As in many Sea Grant programs, Maryland Sea Grant has been a leader in adapting the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) program for seafood and continues to provide training for certifying seafood specialists. Virginia Sea Grant helped rewrite safety plans to allow a major supplier to sell steamed crabs, shrimp, and lobster to military commissaries in the Washington, DC area. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Louisiana Direct. Sea Grant has expanded direct marketing vital to commercial fishers and aquaculture, such as

“In creating the Long Island Sound Blue Plan with Connecticut Sea Grant, “I was afforded every opportunity to offer my input, through a collaborative process that considered current and historic data as well as fishermen’s direct observations and opinions. I, and the fishermen of Connecticut, wanted to be involved in order to give an accurate first-hand account of the resources we rely on, the nature and scope of our activities, and our concerns for the future.”

– Joe Gilbert, Owner of Empire Fisheries

Local seafood cooked during a Louisiana Sea Grant seafood demonstration. Credit: Louisiana Sea Grant, 2018 Amber Morris, the fish buyer for Local Ocean’s restaurant and fish market in Newport, Oregon, fillets a Chinook salmon. Credit:Tiffany Woods, 2019 10 Sea Grant Assists with Aquaculture Business Development

Resilient Communities and Economies In 2016, 127 million people, or approximately 40% of the nation’s population, lived in coastal counties Sea Grant Works on Seafood Safety and Marketing employing 56.8 million people, earning $3.5 trillion in wages, and producing over $8.6 trillion in goods. Next to petroleum extraction, tourism and marine shipping-associated industries are the dominant contributors to our coastal economy, with the leisure and hospitality sector employing ~6.7 million people and adding $366 billion to the gross domestic product (NOAA Report on the Ocean and Great Lakes Economy). The growth of coastal communities and economies increases their vulnerability to extreme weather, tsunamis, and catastrophic events such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Sea level rise poses risks for low-lying communities and exacerbates the impacts of storms and other hazards. Development ordinances have generally not accounted for the increasing risks of coastal flooding, the resulting impacts to natural and built environments, or the unintended consequences of the actions of one community on nearby communities. Sea Grant’s research, extension, and education build capacity at the local level to assess and reduce risk to local communities.

Sea Grant Addresses Coastal Flooding South Carolina Sea Grant Consortium, working with the City directly and through the Charleston Resilience Network, secured moreIn 2018, than the $1 mayor million of inCharleston, competitive SC, funding made addressing from NOAA severe and the flooding U.S. Department his first priority. of Homeland The Security to

North Carolina Sea Grant support mapping, community engagement, and planning to eliminate or reduce flooding impacts. When flooding from Hurricanes Florence and Michael impacted coastal shellfisheries, documented the damage and assisted in accessing disaster benefits. Sea Grant Trains Future Adaptation and Resilience Professionals Rhode Island Sea Grant’s Senior Capstone Studios is an example of how Sea Grant trains the next generation of professionals in adaptation and resilience design for coastal communities. Undergraduate students gain real- world experience working for coastal clients on projects to help communities plan for the effects of climate change on their natural and built infrastructure. Participating students reported receiving job offers before graduating, while communities are using student ideas to jumpstart planning for vulnerable areas.

11 Sea Grant Brings Water Quality and Quantity into Urban Planning Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant assisted the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning to research, develop, and integrate water management into their regional comprehensive plan guiding funding, regulations,

waterand planning resources. options. The plan continues to influence how seven counties and 284 communities in the Chicago area grow, benefiting over 8 million residents by ensuring planning for abundant and high-quality Sea Grant Provides Tools for Adapting to Sea Level Rise University of Hawaiʻi Sea Grant played a key role in developing the State Sea Level Rise Vulnerability

The report was incorporated into the Fourth U.S. National Climate Assessment. The Mayors of Honolulu and MauiAdaptation directed Report all departments endorsed by to the consider Hawaiʻi sea State level Climate rise risks Commission in future planningand adopted and by decision the Governor. making including environmental assessments. For the Washington Coastal Resilience Project, Washington Sea Grant and partners used data and visualizations to produce easy-to-use, updated probabilistic sea level rise projections for the entire coastline of Washington State.

“The Washington Sea Grant team has been instrumental in helping Metro Parks Tacoma forecast sea level rise, open a dialogue with the public around climate change, and incorporate the emerging scientific data into our planning and construction projects.”

— Andrew Austin, City of Tacoma, Metro Parks Tacoma Healthy Coastal Ecosystems

Sea Grant collects, translates, and applies scientific information to maintain and restore healthy coastal ecosystems. Sea Grant Advances Restoration of Coastal Habitats The New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium, with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and local academic institutions, produced a Dune Manual that the NSGO recognized as a Best Management Practice in 2019. Designed for groups seeking to build or restore dunes along beaches, topics include permits/permissions, preparing dunes for plants, increasing success of plantings, and sources of native plants. Virginia Sea Grant research informed a plan to stabilize and reduce erosion of marshes behind barrier islands. A local planning district commission is using their maps of marsh thickness, marsh change, and island stability to ensure the best possible use of dredge spoils in stabilization projects. Pennsylvania Sea Grant worked with private property owners, local land trusts, and state agencies to conserve 28.55 acres of environmentally sensitive land and improve recreational access to 1,931 linear feet of stream.

Sea Grant Reduces Pollution and Improves Water Quality in Local Waterways Maryland Sea Grant researchers discovered hundreds of new chemical tracers to identify septic-system

Maryland’s nearly half a million documented septic systems. They showed that septic waste is the primary sourceeffluent of in pollution streams, inproviding some streams managers and withproduced new toolstools toto trackevaluate and the measure best places improper to improve functioning septic among systems or prioritize which should be converted to public sewer. Georgia Sea Grant trained community scientists to monitor the abundance and distribution of microplastics along the Georgia coast, and partnered with local Riverkeepers to incorporate microplastics sampling protocols in Georgia’s Adopt-A-Stream program. Coastal zone managers and municipalities use the data to identify microplastic abundances, types, and contamination 12 hot spots for future planning and decision making. Volunteers participate in a beach cleanup in South Carolina Sea Grant Tracks and Mitigates Harmful Algal Blooms to Reduce Their Impacts on Coastal Ecosystems and Communities Sparked by the 2014 Toledo water crisis, when treatment of Lake Erie drinking water for 500,000 residents was shut-down due to Microsystis, the State of Ohio created a research initiative, co-managed by Ohio Sea Grant, that brought policy changes and research to water treatment plants to quickly mitigate the harmful algal bloom (HAB) problem and restore drinking water. Texas Sea Grant funded research on a new early-warning

Florida Sea Grant helped lead the response to red tide and other HABstool to that predict negatively and mitigate impacted HABs, Florida’s helping wildlife officials and determine human health when in HABs recent near years. oyster The harvests program necessitate served on the Floridafishery closuresHABs Task to avoidForce; shellfish convened poisoning. a HABs State of the Science Symposium; created a HABs liaison position with NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science; published a HABs website; and educated local municipalities and residents about potential impacts.

Sea Grant Identifies, Predicts, and Prevents the Spread of Invasive Species Minnesota Sea Grant conducted outreach that helped decrease the rate of non-native species invasions in

Michigan Sea Grant funded research in 2018-2019Minnesota lakes on new from models 12% to 6%predict per potentialyear, protecting habitat recreational for two species fisheries of invasive and shoreline Asian carp property in Lake values. Michigan. This Theoutreach models provided suggest about there $6 may million be more in economic suitable habitatbenefits than to Minnesota. previously predicted, providing essential information for natural resource managers and policymakers seeking to understand and combat the threat of Asian carp.

13 MIT Sea Grant hosted a marine technology interactive experience at the Cambridge Science Festival. Credit: MIT Sea Grant, 2019.

Environmental Literacy and Workforce Development

Sea Grant is committed to building a diverse and skilled workforce and an informed public engaged and enabled to address critical local, regional, and national needs, and able to thrive in a changing environment. Environmental literacy and workforce development are key to building the environmental story of the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes, and taking that story to others in tangible, proactive ways.

Sea Grant Builds Knowledge of Marine Resources and Awareness of Career Paths within Diverse Populations of Coastal Communities Lake Champlain Sea Grant’s Watershed Alliance engages directly with K-12 students, trains their teachers, and mentors undergraduate interns and graduate students. It connects communities to higher education by bringing youth into the university and sending university students into communities. Anecdotal examples abound in Sea Grant programs to demonstrate how early environmental literacy can translate into a skilled workforce. Community science programs raise public awareness of issues and contribute needed data for science and management decisions. They combine public environmental literacy with workforce development. For example, New Hampshire Sea Grant’s Coastal Research Volunteers participated in researchers’ projects including oyster restoration, glass eel monitoring, horseshoe crab surveys, and sand dune restoration.

Sea Grant Trains the Current and Next Generation of Fishers and Aquaculturists New York Sea Grant’s annual Seafood Summit, Ohio Sea Grant’s Ohio Charter Captains Conference, Maine Sea Grant’s Aquaculture in Shared Waters Professional Training Program, and Alaska Sea Grant’s Alaska Young Fishermen’s Summit continue to provide mechanisms to build networks, identify mutual goals, and enhance business success through training in business management, regulatory requirements, and environmental stewardship.

14 PreK-graduate Courses, Internships, and Informal Education Opportunities in Sea Grant Increase Experience in Science and Management Georgia Sea Grant worked with the City of Savannah and Delaware Sea Grant worked with Delaware Technical Community College students on green infrastructure projects that could lead to “green jobs.” Projects built

in programs across the network, California Sea Grant’s State Fellowship program nurtured 44 fellows in 2018- 19,resilience many of for whom the coast are planningand estuaries careers such in aspolicy, urban resource tree nurseries management, for low-lying, private flood-prone industry, and neighborhoods. academia. In As order to increase the number of trained professionals in an area of national need, Sea Grant partners with the

Ecosystems Dynamics Workshops. National Marine Fisheries Service and the NOAA Office of Education to sponsor Undergraduate Population and

After participating in Minnesota Sea Grant’s (Sea Grant Center for Great Lakes Literacy) Bioblitz on iNaturalist, “I pay so much more attention to my surroundings and notice so many more differences among varieties of plants and animals. I just can’t think of a more effective way of harnessing technology to bring us close to nature,”

– student at K3-K5 Dual Language Montessori, J.W. Riley School, Duluth, Minnesota

Michigan SG Extension Educator Meaghan Gass helps a participant release a lake sturgeon

fingerling into the Cass River. Credit: K.O.Reilly, 2018 New Partnerships and Collaborations Support Educational Goals Woods Hole Sea Grant partnered with Earthwatch on a week-long, residential Girls in Science program to

Participants worked with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution researchers and educators on marine foster high school girls’ skills and confidence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematicsSouth Carolina (STEM). Sea Grant Consortium’ informalmammal educators.bioacoustics. The Palmetto Environmental Education Certification program is s first environmental education professional certification designed for both formal and

Other Focus Area summaries include examples of workforce development as well as those highlighted here. Sea Grant education benefits from the input of industry, university, non-profit, and government workers and returns a qualified and committed workforce to support the nation’s coastal and Great Lakes communities, economies, and ecosystems. 15 Sea Grant by the Numbers

Fall 2020

For over 50 years, the National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant) has supported coastal and Great Lakes communities through research, extension, and education. 34 University-based 998 programs businesses created or sustained Sea Grant’s mission is to 1,825,793 enhance the practical use and Acres of habitat conservation of coastal, marine, restored or protected 10,404 and Great Lakes resources in jobs created or sustained order to create a sustainable economy and environment.

In 2019, a federal 252,047 investment in Sea Grant of Volunteer hours $80 million resulted in $412.4M RESEARCH ECONOMIC BENEFIT

1,224 EXTENSION Resilience training events provided to communities 646 SEA GRANT EXTENSION AGENTS are stationed in communities across the country to advance 897,729 understanding of EDUCATION K-12 students reached coastal and fisheries

Metrics are direct results of Sea Grant work between February 1, 2019 and January 31, science for communities 2020 as reported by Sea Grant programs in Summer 2020. Economic benefit = market and economies that are and non-market value of Sea Grant's work; value of jobs and businesses ($316.2M) as well as total leveraged funds ($89.1M) and value of volunteer hours ($7.1M). more resilient. Photo credits: Virginia Sea Grant, Oregon Sea Grant, Georgia Sea Grant 16 COVID-19 Response

1,825,793

Teens and adult family members explore the tide pools at Seal Rock during a day camp organized by Oregon Sea Grant. Credit: Lindsay Carroll

The health, economic, and social disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic highlight the need for collaboration and communication among federal, state, and local governments working together with the private sector, non-

stakeholders in addressing the impacts of the pandemic on coastal communities and economies. profits, academia, and communities. As in other emergencies, Sea Grant remained nimble and pivoted to assist its At the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak, Washington Sea Grant

was among the first organizations in Nationalthe state Sea to reachGrant Lawout to Center the shellfish, in partnership industry, with providing the Mississippi-Alabama an online webinar, Sea creating Grant Legal webpages Program, and acreated social mediaa webpage campaign, to serve and as a clearinghouseproviding COVID-19 of reliable resources information to the fishingon CARES and Act shellfish programs industries, and other educators, issues associated and families. with The COVID-19 for the

the CARES Act funding including information for self-employed individuals, tax credits, and returning to work. fishing, aquaculture, and seafood industries. These resources include webinars and fact sheets to better understand

direct marketing their products. Sea Grant’s Seafood Information and Resources webpage for both wild harvest andSea Grantaquaculture programs professionals across the providescountry engaged information right on away news with and assisting updates, fishers aid and and relief aquaculturists assistance programs, with distribution and marketing resources, and human health resources. While content is currently focused on challenges related to COVID-19, it is hoped that this page will serve as a valuable resource to the U.S. seafood industry well into the future.

Sea Grant’s Education at Home webpage now shares coastal and marine science home learning activities from 26

RecentSea Grant events programs. have shown These the include indispensable live and recorded value of events,trust and virtual long-standing field trips, relationships interactive games, to effectively and more. confront global challenges, while applying the best-available science and an understanding of the needs and priorities of the American public. University of Guam Sea Grant created a Public Service Announcement about behaviors that will help Guam’s population survive the pandemic, while encouraging activities to enhance Guam’s long- term sustainability. University of Puerto Rico Sea Grant, which has been helping citizens recover from devastating hurricanes in 2017 and earthquakes in 2019, provided remote meetings and working arrangements during the pandemic to allow staff and clients to securely access virtual communications, technologies, and platforms, building resilience to future emergencies, both in infrastructure and in the fabric of society.

17 Featured Issues The Blue Economy

The Blue Economy is the sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods and jobs, and ocean ecosystem health (World Bank). Growing and sustaining a Blue Economy will require research, development of new technologies, collaborative approaches, and implementation of integrative and resilient practices. With an

essential component of the economic engine driving the U.S. Department of Commerce and NOAA’s leadership roles ineconomic the Blue benefit Economy. of $412.4 Sea Grant million provides supporting direct 10,404partnerships jobs between with our February nation’s 2019top universities, and January and 2020, Sea Sea Grant Grant staff is are an viewed as trusted collaborators with our coastal communities and stakeholders, enabling two-way communication on needs assessments, support for pressing needs, job creation across the economic spectrum from trainees to business owners, dispute resolution, and delivery of results to help build resilient ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes economies.

hallmark of Sea Grant’s research and outreach. Though diverse in program breadth, the nimbleness of Sea Grant Support for our nation’s fishing and aquaculture industries, with the goal of sustainable seafood production, is a for Atlantic salmon aquaculture production in New England and the Great Lakes, while supporting wild salmon allows flexibility to strengthen local and regional investments. For instance, Sea Grant supports research and outreach

Mexico.production on the Alaskan and Pacific coasts. Sea Grant was also asked by Congress to lead a stock assessment, utilizing the latest technological advances, for key finfish species under multiple fishing pressures in the Gulf of Sea Grant has long been invested in coastal community resilience, a key to establishing a sustainable Blue Economy. With increasing storm intensities, rising sea levels, and increased coastal inundation, it is even more important to develop plans and ordinances that enable rapid economic recovery. In planning for future economic resilience,

interdisciplinary approach utilizing Sea Grant’s link with university partners enables engagement of top academic Sea Grant provides scientific support for offshore renewable energy endeavors, such as proposed wind farms. An landscape architecture, economics, and social justice. researchers to work with states and municipalities in diverse fields such as coastal engineering, ecological modeling, Understanding the economic and environmental roles of tourism and recreation on our coasts is important in building a resilient Blue Economy. For example, Sea Grant has been at the forefront of establishing tourism-related trails for

regional levels. It offers training and professional development courses for tourism for professionals such as charter captains,paddlers andecotourism kayakers, operators, fostering tour understanding guides, and ofother fisheries partners. heritage, Sea Grant’s and promoting investment seafood in the at Clean the local, Marina state, program and

Seaencourages Grant brings sustainable together practices research, while extension, promoting education, a marketable and communications certification. experts to ensure that the best decisions are being made to build and sustain the nation’s Blue Economy. A Weather Ready Nation (WRN)

NOAA NCEI). The coastal zone experienced unprecedentedIn 2016, the U.S. impacts had more during floods the than 2017, any 2018, year 2019,on record, and 2020and in hurricane 2019 the seasonsMississippi including River BasinHurricanes experienced Harvey its (Texas/Louisiana,longest flood, 223 Augdays 2017), duration, Irma exceeding (Florida/Puerto the Great Rico, Flood Aug–Sep of 1927 2017), ( Maria (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands, Sep 2017), Florence (North Carolina/Georgia/South Carolina, Sep 2018), Michael (Florida, Oct 2018), Dorian (Puerto Rico/Bahamas/Florida/Georgia/North and South Carolina, 2019), Isaias (North Carolina, Aug 2020), Laura (Louisiana and Texas, Aug 2020), and Sally (Alabama/Florida, Sep 2020). Improved forecasting for response

to communities across these coastal zones, helping to save lives and protect property. Sea Grant’s actions have demonstratedto and mitigation the of critical such eventsimportance reduced of combining the potential improved impacts forecasts of severe and flooding warnings and withdangerous trusted storm ambassadors surges from place-based organizations like Sea Grant to reduce negative economic impacts and increase public safety. 18 Sea Grant enhances the mission of the National Weather Service (NWS) by informing, educating, and communicating with the public. At the national level, Sea Grant supports the external engagement strategy of the National Water Center by building linkages to the Sea Grant network, and Sea Grant has placed ten extension specialists in liaison positions to improve NOAA’s contact with its user communities. At the state level, the Sea Grant network provides local resources to several components of the WRN program for diverse weather events

Twentyincluding Sea hurricanes, Grant programs droughts, currently snow and serve ice as storms, WRN Ambassadors, floods, tsunamis, and lightning all are encouraged strikes, and to tornadoes, consider this as well valuableas rip current partnership. awareness, Using improved their trusted visualization reputation of hazard in local forecasts, communities, and handbooks Sea Grant extends to improve NWS flood messages resilience. of potentially life-saving information among a broader and more diverse suite of stakeholder groups. Sea Grant messaging, information, and methods directly impact the goals of the WRN Ambassador Initiative with, for example, university partnerships that promote innovative, resilient coastal design projects. Sea Grant programs have launched studies to understand climate change and adaptation strategies to broaden and enhance WRN impacts by improving storm-warning communication, using social science research to improve storm warnings and preparedness.

This challenge to Sea Grant will increase in years to come. The number of extreme weather and climate events causing at least $1 billion in economic losses has increased roughly 400% since the 1980s (Uccellini and Ten Hoeve, 2019). There is growing evidence that extreme weather, water, and climate events are increasing in frequency and severity, while the impacts of coastal storms are also exacerbated by rising sea levels related to our changing climate. Sea Grant is well positioned to meet these challenges. Climate Adaptation and Mitigation: Protecting and Responding to Climate Impacts

Coastal and Great Lakes communities are increasingly concerned about climate-driven impacts on coastal ecosystems and infrastructure including follow-on social and economic impacts. However, many communities available to address their local vulnerabilities. Sea Grant works closely with partners to conduct climate-related research,require technical co-develop support products to employ with affected the breadth stakeholders, of scientific, and technical, provide services and decision-making that lead to more information resilient and coastal tools and Great Lakes communities and economies.

Sea Grant leads multidisciplinary efforts supporting climate adaptation and mitigation planning, providing information. This approach facilitates the ability of states, counties, and local governments to prepare for current andlocally projected relevant vulnerabilities research, guided through by the policy needs and of stakeholders,regulatory changes, that leads natural to scientifically resource protection, sound and structural actionable and non-structural intervention and investment, and adaptive management. For instance, Sea Grant is helping states research and map climate-related impacts such as storm surge and extreme precipitation on private homes, public infrastructure, wetlands, and other resources, with the goal of creating permitting processes that require applicants to consider the impacts of current and future hazards. Since 2008, Sea Grant has invested $16 million* isin advancingresearch funding understanding to increase of how understanding coastal and of marine the effects ecosystems of ocean sequester acidification carbon and in associated sediment impactsand biomass, on so calledcoastal “blue and Greatcarbon,” Lakes which communities, helps mitigate ecosystems, climate change. fisheries, and other industries. As another example, Sea Grant

Sea Grant informs the public and bolsters climate literacy by bringing together experts and affected communities; array of stakeholders and students; and distributing relevant information through a range of media and online platforms.developing scientifically sound products that are reliable, understandable, educational, and useful to a diverse

*Sea Grant investment is total of federal plus match

19 Organizational Excellence

Local residents enjoy kayaking on Mill Creek in Hampton, Virginia on Jun 27, 2020. (Photo by Aileen Devlin | Virginia Sea Grant)

To achieve its research, extension, and education goals, Sea Grant seeks organizational excellence by investing in the following:

Sea Grant Rigorously Plans and Evaluates Sea Grant is committed to careful planning and rigorous evaluation to ensure the program has local, state, and national impacts. Strategic plans are developed for each program, consistent with the plans of NOAA and the U.S. Department of Commerce. Quadrennial reviews are based on the goals and objectives in each program’s approved Strategic Plan and comprise site visits to assess performance, management, scope and success of engagement with stakeholders, and degree of collaboration. Results, along with an assessment by an Evaluation Committee to

fromensure the consistency Board, Sea across Grant expandedthe network, its evaluationsare used by tothe include NSGO tothe determine NSGO and whether Sea Grant each overall. program is: 1) qualified for recertification as a Sea Grant program, and 2) eligible for merit funding. In response to a 2018 recommendation

Sea Grant Assesses Economic Benefits and Impacts Due to Sea Grant’s matching requirement, there is at least one dollar of state and local funds for every two federal

partnership in 2017 with Eastern Research Group, Inc. to increase the network-wide capacity to more reliably dollars spent. Sea Grant has collected economic benefits and impacts data since 2010 and began a public-private 2020, this partnership created more than a dozen tools and best practices that can be used by non-economists in theand form more of consistently methodology value guides the economicand other benefitsjob aids, thatto help Sea Sea Grant Grant programs economically provide value their its coastal work. communities. By

20 Sea Grant Ensures a Strong Legal Framework The National Sea Grant Law Center is a nationally recognized and respected resource on ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes law. In 2019, Sea Grant designated the Law Center a “coherent area program,” elevating it from a temporary project, in recognition of its excellence. The Law Center has conducted critical law and policy research, translated

strategies that address emerging community needs. The Sea Grant Legal Network (scientificAlabama information , Louisiana for, Mississippi policy makers,, North and Carolina reduced, legaland Rhode barriers Island to the) andadoption attorneys of innovative working withmanagement Sea Grant has programs in five states to develop and expand the industry. In response, in 2019-2020, the Law Center and four members of the Sea Grant across the country. For example, as the shellfish aquaculture industry grows, legal conflicts can arise as states seek policy changes that reduced permitting barriers. Legal Network examined legal impediments to shellfish aquaculture. Resulting research and outreach informed

Local residents enjoy kayaking on Mill Creek in Hampton, Virginia on Jun 27, 2020. (Photo by Aileen Devlin | Virginia Sea Grant)

2019 Knauss fellows pose for a photo while volunteering at the 44th annual NOAA Fish Fry. (Photo: Audrey Maran)

Education is Enhanced through Sea Grant’s Experiential Fellowships On Capitol Hill and among federal agencies, Sea Grant’s national fellowship programs are well known. Since 1979, the John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship program has provided opportunities for students with advanced degrees to work at the forefront of marine science and policy. The collaborative National Marine Fisheries Service- Sea Grant Fellowship program has, since 1999, been placing individuals in research positions focused on either population and ecosystem dynamics or marine resource economics as a step towards workforce leadership. The Coastal Management Fellowship

coastal zone management programs. program In addition fostered to by national Sea Grant fellowships, for NOAA’s individual Office for Sea Coastal Grant Management programs provide within opportunitiesthe National Ocean through Service over enables20 state postgraduate fellowship programs students. to work on projects identified by individual state

21 Sea Grant Addresses Program-Wide Challenges through Visioning Since 2017, the NSGO has funded Network Visioning to increase the capacity of Sea Grant programs to work and plan together on priority topics. The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Network ensures that Sea Grant continues to infuse DEI principles into its leadership and culture and has led several state and national initiatives. In collaboration with the NSGO and external partners, the DEI community of practice organizes professional development opportunities for Sea Grant employees.

The Capitol Hill Ocean Week event “Increasing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Coastal, Marine and Ocean Science Workforce,” hosted by the Women’s Aquatic Network and Sea Grant, brought together panelists from across aquatic sectors for a discussion on workforce DEI. Credit: Audrey Maran, 2019 Two-Way Communications are Fundamental to Sea Grant Every Sea Grant program is committed to building strong two-way communications networks that bring together Sea Grant’s extensive resources with the needs and expertise of coastal businesses and communities. Delaware Sea Grant’s recent Coastal Resilience Design Studio brought together educators, students, scientists, science volunteers, engineers, designers, artists, and other academic institutions to develop a large-scale green infrastructure project along a tributary to the Chesapeake Bay that provided habitat, pollution reduction, biodiversity, and recreational opportunities. Bringing together diverse groups, USC Sea Grant organized and facilitated a regional workshop on

programs and the National Academies of Sciences Gulf Research Program. Louisiana Sea Grant’s Louisiana Discovery, Integration,improving oil and spill Application preparedness (LaDIA) and programresponse builds in Santa better Barbara, connections CA as part among of a workshopresearchers, series extension with five personnel, Sea Grant and constituents to: increase awareness of the sophistication of local knowledge, better target their investigations, and share results, producing more robust research and outreach plans that include input from local partners.

22 Sea Grant Leads National and Regional Partnerships Sea Grant partners with other NOAA programs to bring NOAA’s research to the network and its stakeholders through Sea Grant Partnership Liaisons. In addition to leveraging funds, the liaisons provide a pathway between new research and community audiences. Sea Grant currently hosts 10 liaisons in NOAA labs and programs and announced an opportunity to fund additional liaisons with federal science and service agencies. The Mississippi- Alabama Sea Grant Consortium is a regional and national leader in multi-state, multi-region strategic initiatives,

University of Hawaiʻi and Alaska Sea Grant programs, Washingtonmanaging $15.8 Sea Grant million is leadingin projects a three-year covering agrant broad to rangeadvance of topicssustainable related indigenous to fisheries, aquaculture oil spills, hurricanes, practices and flooding, waterways, and restoration. Working with the

fromenhance across seafood the globe. production The immediate in the Pacific outcome region. is sharedThe first practices, summit highlightedshared communications, traditional Hawaiʻian and a long-term aquaculture commitmentpractices and totechnologies integration andof traditional included representatives and local knowledge from 13with Pacific research, Northwest extension, tribes and and education. many more

“...Work with underserved communities serves all of the community.” – Arthur Lawrence, Historic Charleston Foundation Oral History Project

Alaska Sea Grant extension agent presents an

Sea.” Credit: Alaska Sea Grant, 2019 Alaska fisher with the book, “Fishers Changing the 23 2020 Sea Grant Recommendations

Coastal flooding is a major issue for many communities, such as this water overtaking a roadway in Hawaii. Credit: University of Hawaii Sea Grant

further recommends the following. The Board has no further follow-up on 2018 Recommendation Five on Aquaculture,The Board finds which that is Sea now Grant well-funded has made and excellent meeting progress or exceeding in addressing the Board’s the 2018expectations. Recommendations and

Recommendation One: The National Sea Grant College Program should continue to support the implementation of the Network Vision Plans. Building on the recommendations from the 2016 and 2018 State of Sea Grant reports, the Board further recommends that the National Sea Grant College Program continue the network vision plans created in 2017 and support their implementation. The vision plans effectively drive action on emerging opportunities and help Sea Grant collaborate with NOAA and other partners by highlighting Sea Grant’s role in critical and shared goals. Now that the process is established, the Board recommends, where visioning clearly reinforces program goals, that vision plans be incorporated into Sea Grant’s planning processes to support the continued implementation of these visions.

Recommendation Two: The National Sea Grant College Program should continue and amplify efforts to incorporate social and environmental justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in its organizational structure and programming.

Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, income, etc. with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The needs of coastal communities, and Sea Grant’s mandate to address those needs, can only be met when justice and equity for all people is realized. Community and economic resilience are enhanced when diverse voices make informed decisions about our collective future. Over the last six years, Sea Grant has developed a national community of practice across its programs to facilitate peer learning and promote leadership on justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. This effort should be pursued until justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion move beyond being a separate priority/practice and are integrated into all other priorities. 24 Recommendation Three: The National Sea Grant College Program should continue to actively seek opportunities and collaborations to leverage Sea Grant’s unique strengths in building coastal community resilience.

There continues to be a gap between the nation’s forecasts of extreme events and public preparedness and response to these events. Sea Grant, together with its diverse partners, provides university-based research, extension, and

and ecological resources. Sea Grant’s strength in facilitating communications and promoting community equity by bringingeducation together programs scientists, to fill this managers, gap, thereby decision enhancing makers, community and residents preparedness builds strong and andreducing safe coastal the loss and of life,Great property, Lakes communities by providing them with the basic knowledge and understanding of the interconnectivity between their lives and the environment. This is achieved by building community capacity to recognize problems and solve them through improved local planning that accomodates the features of local habitats and ecosystems. Sea Grant programs have been conducting resilience-related research and outreach programming for many years, however, impacts to our coasts are increasing and Sea Grant funds to support resilience efforts have not kept pace. Adequate funding would enable Sea Grant, as a network, to get to every coastal community with tailored information and assistance. This capability will continue to be built through partnerships. The resilience of our coastal communities depends on federal,

collaboration opportunities, and to clarify roles and expectations. state, local, non-profit, and private organizations all working together with communities to identify synergies and

Recommendation Four: The National Sea Grant College Program should make adjustments based on the findings and recommendations of the Independent Review Panel and Board Evaluation Committee.

In the 2018 State of Sea Grant report, the Board recommended that the Sea Grant evaluation process include an assessment of the NSGO and the National Sea Grant College Program overall. Reports from the latest evaluation period by the Board Evaluation Committee found (1) the site review process is working well and has matured to a level that is accepted by most of the Sea Grant community, (2) from a government accountability standpoint, the Sea Grant evaluation system is one of the more robust in the federal government, and (3) the most recent iteration of Sea Grant evaluation has continued to improve the evaluation system. Nevertheless, the Board offered a number of recommendations designed to make a good system even better, building a stronger and more effective National Sea Grant College Program and supporting its long-term commitment to continual improvement. The Independent Review Panel is currently in the process of completing its charge.

25 Emerging Opportunities

Sea Grant programs quickly adapted to offer audiences distance learning options when the COVID-19 pandemic hit. Credit: Woods Hole Sea Grant

Responding to Unanticipated Challenges While a public health emergency does not normally fall within its purview, Sea Grant’s strength in two-way communications and ability to respond to natural and human-made emergencies was essential during the COVID-19 pandemic. Being a trusted source of information and options, a leader in education and outreach, and a facilitator of effective partnerships enabled Sea Grant to address the immediate needs of our partners and coastal communities. During this critical time, Sea Grant advanced new ideas while reinforcing appropriate activities and long-held standards that preserve the sustainability of our nation’s oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. Sea Grant responded to challenges related to the pandemic by providing online resources to enhance at-home STEM education; assisting the seafood industry and other coastal businesses with direct marketing of their products; navigating the complexities of

stakeholders. Sea Grant has proven its ability to be nimble in order to meet the science needs of constituents as they andfederal our and country state faceassistance new challenges. programs; and working quickly to find innovative ways to connect with and support their

Educating the Next Generation Critical thinking, problem solving, and mastery of new technologies have become increasingly important to most trades and businesses. Education programs from kindergarten to college are challenged to provide experiences and resources that entice students to choose courses and consider careers in STEM. A STEM education teaches students how to solve emerging problems using critical thinking and blending traditional knowledge with new technologies.

Sea Grant’s Environmental Literacy and Workforce Development efforts across the network are addressing exactly

encouragingthis challenge them by bringing to pursue students STEM careersinto the that real integrate world of scientifictheir traditional inquiry knowledge with lessons with at school,new technologies. in the field, Inat 2019, Seaworkshops, Grant communities in laboratories, of practice and in offices.in DEI and Of particular TLK worked interest together to Sea to developGrant is reachingCommunity-Engaged underserved Internships populations (CEI). and Interns in Alaska feed models for predicting salmon futures. In North Carolina, Sea Grant coordinated with conservation organizations to host students ofmeasured color for professionaltemperature development and flow in streams and networking suggested with by tribes employment based on pathways salmon populationsin mind. to

26 The Sea Grant Educators Network strives to strengthen Sea Grant’s impact on education for all students at all levels: K-12, trade, undergraduate, graduate, post-graduate, and informal. Suggestions from the Sea Grant Educators Network include internal steps to build support and visibility for the education network at the national level and within individual programs: • researching the effectiveness of Sea Grant education approaches and programs, to strengthen program support and illuminate areas in need of expansion or improvement; • branding of network-wide education efforts to enhance visibility and promote new partnerships; and • reviewing the Education Network’s role in program input and management at the state level.

Sea Grant’s education programs are essential for creating a workforce pathway that inspires people curious about the natural world to connect to STEM careers and learn how a marine science workforce can serve people and coastal communities.

Linking to International Goals and Initiatives The international community is increasing attention to protecting and restoring ocean health, particularly as impacted by Earth’s ever-changing climate. Recent international reports, negotiations, and conventions have acknowledged the need for an ocean literate society, proactive decision makers, and a comprehensive, science-based approach to ensure a robust planet capable of supporting the safety and survival of people. science, while serving and closely partnering with coastal and Great Lakes communities across America. Sea Grant is already doing its part—and has been for decades—by remaining at the forefront of actionable In 2017, the United Nations declared that 2021-2030 would be the Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, to ensure ocean science provides a foundation for better ocean and coastal management around the world. NOAA personnel have played a pivotal role in the U.S. involvement in the U.N. initiative, and Sea Grant is actively engaged in supporting the effort. Sea Grant is particularly poised to advance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14, Life Below Water, to conserve and sustainably use marine resources, as well as the goals of the Decade of the Ocean focused on facilitating “the science we need for the ocean we want.” SDG 14 is one of 17 SDGs adopted in 2015 toward attaining a more equitable, peaceful, economically vibrant, and environmentally sustainable world by 2030. For example, the High- Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy brought together 160 experts from 47 countries to highlight the inextricable link between ocean protection and economic prosperity. The panel has produced a series of resources that could guide relevant actions by global leaders from local to national levels. “Blue Papers” on specific topics since November 2019 and will release a final report by the end of 2020, as Sea Grant works at the science-policy interface, provides a trusted source of information, conducts effective outreach and stakeholder engagement, and drives valuable partnerships across a range of ocean, coast, and Great Lakes issues. These attributes are core to Sea Grant’s mission, making Sea Grant an important asset for fully achieving SDG 14, the Decade of the Ocean, and related initiatives.

27 Program Listing and Highlights

ALASKA • Research includes community science to develop resilience to coastal change caused

• Alaska Young Fishermen’s Summit trains the next generation of commercial fishersby flooding, erosion, and other hazards associated with a warming planet. • career opportunity in marine science/policy, to be successful attracting and help top turn talent the tide in state on Alaska’s and federal “graying agencies. of the fleet.” State Fellowship gives graduate students their first CALIFORNIA • Lead an effort to inform climate adaptation planning for central California, informing CA’s climate assessment, estimating an economic impact of $2.4 million in costs avoided. • Real-time ocean chemistry monitoring protect oyster larvae by understanding the role of healthy eelgrass beds. • State Fellowships recognized as leaders in workforce helps Humboldt development Bay shellfish, leading producers to careers in policy, resource management, industry, and academia.

CONNECTICUT • marine spatial plan input to guide development in the estuary, while protecting traditional uses and users. • Co-lead the first for Long Island Sound, with significant stakeholder plant, resulting in 800 acres in the Mystic River being open to commercial shellfishing. • InFirst a course of its kind developed testing and verifies taught water by Sea quality Grant meets and UConnstandards Extension, near an students upgraded help sewage treatment communities deal with real-life, local impacts of sea level rise and other climate effects.

DELAWARE • Establish a Coastal Resilience Design Studio for educators, students, scientists, engineers, artists to provide habitat, pollution reduction, biodiversity, and recreation. • Fund novel research to evaluate the distribution and risk of microplastics and identify “hot spots” in Delaware Bay. • Administer a workforce development program on professional design/construction skills for coastal green infrastructure, with Delaware Technical Community College.

FLORIDA • Educate local municipalities and residents about recent harmful algal blooms that negatively impacted coastal and wildlife populations as well as humans. • Train more than 200 community scientists since 2019 to identify, monitor, and report the spread of Stony Coral Tissue Loss Disease, which is devastating Florida Keys Reefs. • reduce impacts Togther with partners, create a Fishing Guide Certification Program for sustainable boating and GEORGIAfishing methods and environmental ethics to on fish stocks and habitats. • Legal program works with a team of experts and students to help coastal municipalities in FL, GA, SC, NC prepare for vulnerabilities based on likely sea level rise. • Engages community scientists in research to monitor the type, abundance, and distribution of microplastics along the Georgia coast for future planning. • Leverages partnerships to provide training in landscape design and green infrastructure 28

to decrease flood risk, beautify barren space, and build resilience in Savannah. UNIVERSITY OF GUAM • Champions justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in STEM by training, recruiting, and retaining a diverse workforce and by serving all of the island’s communities. • Hosts traditional navigation courses to preserve Native identity and traditions, and solve problems in import dependency, urbanization, climate change, and unemployment. • Create a Public Service Announcement on practicing sustainability at a time when families are vulnerable to limited food, supplies, and income during the COVID-19 pandemic.

UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI’I • Create the free Homeowner’s Handbook to Prepare for Natural Hazards. Eleven other Sea Grant programs have adapted the handbook for their state or territory. • Play a key role in developing the State Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report, leading to both Honolulu and Maui to include sea level rise risks in future planning. • Create the weekly television series, Voice of the Sea, which highlights positive impacts of researchers, cultural experts, community leaders, and federal, state, and local partners.

ILLINOIS-INDIANA • Assist the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning to integrate water management into the region’s comprehensive plan to guide funding, regulations, and planning. • Install rain gardens during their Rainscaping Education Program workshops in Indiana, which have the capacity to reduce annual runoff by nearly 320,000 gallons. • Collect and properly dispose of over 235,000 pounds, or 118 tons, of medicine through sea Grant-supported community programs in four Great Lakes states.

LAKE CHAMPLAIN • Inform stormwater management policies as Vermont experiences more intense precipitation events, e.g., green infrastructure, rain gardens, and pervious paving. • As a result of learnings from conferences and workshops, municipalities and the private sector apply less road salt to improve water quality in Lakes Champlain and George. • With UVM Extension’s Watershed Alliance, connects students and teachers with real-world field science and stewardship. LOUISIANAchallenges and scientific research via hands-on • A comprehensive, integrated design center with Coastal Sustainability Studio and LASG’s Law & Policy Program is a model for a cohesive multidisciplinary approach to resilience. • Port of Delcambre to build economic resilience through direct marketing of seafood. • DevelopFacilitate and the implementBayou Carlin Louisiana Cove Project, Discovery, a $4 millionIntegration, fishing and infrastructure Application whereinfacility for Faculty the Fellows and Graduate Student Scholars learn sophisticated local knowledge.

MAINE • The Aquaculture in Shared Waters training program builds capacity in the aquaculture

• Aquaculture research results in three new web-based tools researchers,workforce, stimulates and resource new managers business development,with site selection, and diversifies as well as thenew seafood course sector.materials. • Partner with economists and geo-spatial specialists to develop, to pilot, help and shellfish launch farmers, a publication and training to estimate the economic impact of local working waterfronts.

29 MARYLAND • streams, providing new tools to track and better measure septic system impact. • SeafoodResearchers technology find hundreds training of new helps chemical certify tracers 71 seafood to identify specialists septic in system safe handling effluent ofin seafood under the protocols for Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point, or HACCP. • Students and teachers in an international partnership with Europe share innovative instructional strategies, data, and website tools to compare harbor biodiversity.

MICHIGAN • Expand the popular Sustainable Small Harbors program to help small coastal communities plan for a resilient and sustainable future. • Graduate student’s new models predict more suitable habitat for two species of invasive Asian carp in Lake Michigan than predicted, essential information to combat the threat. • Partner with the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians on activities for sixth-grade students highlighting culturally and economically important species and careers.

MINNESOTA • Research is leading to a product to protect marine infrastructure and boats from biocorrosion and biofouling more effectively, with fewer environmental consequences. • Outreach helps decrease the rate of non-native species invasion in Minnesota lakes from 12% to 6% per year, protecting recreational fisheries and property values. • Developing the Great Lakes Aquaculture Collaborative to assess activities in the Great sustainable domestic aquaculture remain.

Lakes, where significant barriers to MISSISSIPPI-ALABAMA • Serve as a leader in promoting regional cooperation in FEMA’s Community Rating System to raise flood hazard awareness • Lead the development of a red snapper experimental design to estimate reef fish abundance in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. and reduce local flood insurance premiums. • Lead multi-state, multi-region strategic initiatives, managing $15.8 million on topics related to fisheries, oil spills, hurricanes, flooding, waterways, and restoration.

MIT • Develop an autonomous surface vessel to collect samples for ocean acidification

• ofmodeling resource in management support of healthy of fisheries, fisheries, aquaculture, aquaculture, and and coastal coastal ecosystems. ecosystems . • Develop Bayesiandata visualization intelligent ocean and modeling analysis and tools acidification prediction systems in support

to better inform fisheries and resource management in support of healthy fisheries, aquaculture, and coastal ecosystems. NATIONAL SEA GRANT LAW CENTER • Participate in the Michigan at a Crossroads Policy Brief Series for the incoming governor on invasive species, crude oil transport, and water diversions to Great Lakes. • knowledge and inform policy changes in order to reduce permitting barriers. • CreateExamine a webpage legal impediments clearinghouse for shellfish of reliable aquaculture information across on CARES the United Act States and COVID-19to increase

rules and potential funding for the fishing, aquaculture, and seafood industries. 30 NEW HAMPSHIRE • Improve safety and accuracy of aquaculture monitoring with new genetic techniques

• Expand their integrated multi-trophic aquaculture system by design and construction ofto AquaFortconfirm cases, to symbiotically trace causes, support and prevent trout, introductionmussels, and ofkelp infectious in the open micro-organisms. ocean. • Coordinate volunteers providing research and education services to local marine science organizations and monitoring health and restoration of coastal ecosystems.

NEW JERSEY • Produce a Dune Manual with partners to guide successful building or restoring dunes including permits, permissions, preparation, what, when, where, and how to plant. • Host annual “State of the Shore” media event to advance marine and coastal science literacy and encourage widespread, sustainable use of the state’s coastal resources. • Support coastal stewardship by K-12 students experiencing real-world science and connecting their lives to the shore, as they restore critical Delaware Bay oyster habitat.

NEW YORK • Release the Coastal Resilience Index to identify vulnerabilities to high-water levels

• Design and implement, with partners, the Jamaica Bay Community Flood Watch Program foraround residents Lake Ontario,to document allowing nuisance communities flooding and individuals to visualize flooding. • Lead annual summit for professionals in the NY seafood industry to build networks among the various sectors and to promote and protect, to refine seafood models resources. and impacts.

NORTH CAROLINA • Help mariculture growers assess losses after Hurricanes Florence and Michael and, with partners, lead efforts to gain state-funded disaster relief for the industry. • Expand the utility and accuracy of wave and storm-surge forecasts predictions with other geospatial data to guide evacuations and resource deployment. • Fund joint fellowships for graduate-student projects in Reserves to understand, combining the flood ecology, nutrient cycling, geomorphology, and effects of invasive species and climate.

OHIO • Co-manage a research initiative bringing universities and agencies together to address the issue of harmful algal blooms affecting the safety of Lake Erie drinking water. • Use hands-on learning activities to educate thousands of students about Lake Erie, stimulating interest in science and a stewardship ethic for the Lake Erie ecosystem. • The Ohio Charter Captains Conference helps Lake Erie charter businesses be more successful through training in business, regulations, and the environment. OREGON • Create the Oregon Coast Quests Book and Workshops to teach residents how to respond to an earthquake or tsunami and practice evacuations. • Train students through the Oregon Applied Sustainability Experience internship program who, in one case, helped a local business win a national award for pollution prevention. • Support researchers to work with Fishers to improve coastal ocean forecasting; SeaCast is part of the NW Association of Networked Ocean Observing Systems.

31 PENNSYLVANIA • Help the Stormwater Authority of Chester with green stormwater infrastructure techniques and strategies to improve water quality, the economy, and human health. • Expand to other states in the region the popular Pennsylvania Field Guide to AIS, for preventing spread and averting long-term ecosystem damage of invasive species. • Work with partners to conserve in perpetuity 28.55 acres of environmentally sensitive land for passive recreational uses and 1,931 linear feet of stream for public fishing.

UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO • Deploy Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV’s) to assess and create a baseline of coastal erosion in Western Puerto Rico; and after Hurricanes Irma and Maria, for recovery. • Implement three peer-reviewed coastal and marine ecosystems curriculum education guides to teach students the importance of preserving marine and coastal resources. • Develop a climate change curricular guide that is being integrated into public school science curricula to foster a better informed and more resilient generation of islanders.

RHODE ISLAND • Facilitate the development of a Shoreline Change Special Area Management Plan, the nation’s sea level rise on a state’s entire coastline. • offshore wind farm. firstResearch climate now change shows plan thriving to address sea life for anglers and boaters, and more tourists. • FacilitateProvide real-world the planning experience process that ledto undergraduate to erecting the studentsnation’s firstworking with coastal communities to help plan for the effects of climate change on the natural and built environment.

SOUTH CAROLINA • Provide assistance to the City of Folly Beach to improve its CRS Rating from Class 7 to 4, identifying ways to improve flood resilience and saving local insurance holders $444 thousand. • Provide South Carolina Triploid Oyster Seed to oyster growers throughout the South Atlantic growing oyster-farming industry. • forregion both for formal the first and time nonformal to supply educators the to promote environmental literacy. Launch a first statewide Professional Environmental Education Certification program TEXAS • Develop a new early-warning tool to predict and mitigate harmful algal blooms, which

• technologyhelps state andthat federal saved them government money, increasedofficials protect compliance human health, and with reduced safe seafood.by-catch. • LeadTrain TexasTexas Mastershrimp Naturalist fishers to chapterspromote bestthat, practicesin 2018 alone, in the contributed use of new materials68,297 volunteer and hours valued at $1.7 million across Texas coastal communities to restore coastal habitat. USC • Facilitate a report on climate vulnerability for the Los Angeles metropolitan region with stakeholder meetings to gather local knowledge and perspectives on climate change. • Develop and administer the only comprehensive, longitudinal assessment of coastal adaptation in the country by assessing the needs of coastal professionals. • Facilitate a West Coast regional workshop on improving oil spill preparedness and response in Santa Barbara, CA, including stakeholders and emergency responders.

32 VIRGINIA • Through the Resilience Adaptation Feasibility Tool, extension partners work with more than 12 coastal states to improve environmental, economic, and social resilience. • Incorporate research on barrier islands into a plan for the best use of dredge spoils to stabilize marshes, helping control rapid deterioration due to erosion. • Rewrite relevant plans to comply with new national seafood safety laws, allowing a major supplier at military commissaries to continue serving steamed seafood.

WASHINGTON • Create, with partners, a website for the Coastal Hazards Resilience Network that features sea level rise. • industrya site-specific and to interactive increase awareness Risk Reduction of sustainably Project Mapper harvested for WA seafood. • AdministerCreate COVID-19 a volunteer-based resource webpages early for detection, WA families, monitoring, educators, and and removal the shellfish program to pre- emptively prevent the settlement of invasive European green crab in the Salish Sea.

WISCONSIN • Provide coastal engineering outreach to citizens, businesses, and communities to protect homes, coastal structures, and utility infrastructure from record high water. • Develop a green infrastructure guidebook to control stormwater. All stormwater permit applicants in Milwaukee are now required to consider green infrastructure. • Advise and assist the world’s largest on-land aquaponics operation, Superior Fresh, that employs more than 70 people and produces 4,000 pounds of salmon a week.

WOODS HOLE • Install, with partners, sea level rise markers at two Massachussetts Audubon sites, engaging visitors in informal education programs. Lesson plans are freely available. • Work with partners to create an online GIS-based mapping tool called MA-ShellfAST to support siting and permitting of nearshore sites for shellfish aquaculture. • Create and host, with partners, a week-long, residential Girls in Science program for ten STEM education and career.

students, to develop skills and confidence to pursue a

“The Sea Grant Community-Engaged Internship program (CEI) offers a great opportunity for someone like me to gain real-world experience in marine and coastal professions, including science communication. What I love about science communication is that it provides the opportunity to raise awareness about conservation work and environmental issues that normally might not be as accessible to

grateful that my internship with Sea Grant will give me the chance to developpeople who more are skills outside to help of the me scientific pursue this community. career, so I’m that excited I can continue and on this path I’ve found.” - Logan Bilbrough, 2020 Sea Grant CEI intern, Maryland Sea Grant, Salisbury University

Logan photographing birds along the Millstream Park trail in Centreville, Maryland. Photo courtesy of Laura Wood, 2020 Works Cited and Other Information Links National Sea Grant Advisory Board: https://seagrant.noaa.gov/About/Advisory-Board

John A. Knauss Marine Policy Fellowship Program: https://seagrant.noaa.gov/Knauss-Fellowship- Program

United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development: https://www.oceandecade.org/

State of Sea Grant Biennial Report to Congress 2018: https://seagrant.noaa.gov/Portals/0/Documents/About/NSGAB/Reports/BiennialReport-2018-Approved- May292018-Accessible.pdf

Sea Grant Network Visioning: https://seagrant.noaa.gov/insideseagrant/Implementation/Network- Visioning

National Marine Fisheries Service/Sea Grant Fellowship: https://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/NMFS-SG- Fellowship

Coastal Management Fellowship: https://coast.noaa.gov/fellowship/coastalmanagement.html

Sea Grant Fellowship Opportunities: https://seagrant.noaa.gov/graduate-fellowships

Sea Grant Liaison Program: https://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/liaisons

Sea Grant Environmental Literacy and Workforce Development: https://www.seagrant.noaa.gov/Our- Work/ELWD

NOAA Living Marine Resources Cooperative Science Center: https://www.umes.edu/lmrcsc/

Citations

National Marine Fisheries Service. 2018. Fisheries Economics of the United States, 2016. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-187, 243 p. Available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ resource/document/fisheries-economics-united-states-report-2016

https://coast.noaa.gov/data/ digitalcoast/pdf/econ-report.pdfNOAA, Office for Coastal Management, 2019. “NOAA Report on the U.S. Ocean and Great Lakes Economy”. Charleston, SC: NOAA Office for Coastal Management. Available at: NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters (2020). https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/, DOI: 10.25921/stkw-7w73

Uccellini, L. W., and J. E. Ten Hoeve, 2019: Evolving the National Weather Service to Build a Weather- Ready Nation: Connecting Observations, Forecasts, and Warnings to Decision-Makers through Impact- Based Decision Support Services. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 100, 1923–1942, https://doi.org/10.1175/ 34 BAMS-D-18-0159.1. The National Sea Grant Advisory Board is the National Sea Grant College Program’s Federal Advisory Committee. The Board advises the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Sea Grant College Program on strategies to address the nation’s highest priorities for understanding, assessing, developing, managing, utilizing, and conserving ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources.

Board Members Brian Helmuth, Ph.D., Chair Deborah Stirling, Vice Chair Amber Mace, Ph.D., Past Chair Dale Baker Peter Betzer, Ph.D. Paulinus Chigbu, Ph.D. Carole Engle, Ph.D. Rosanne Fortner, Ed.D. Gordon Grau, Ph.D. Judith Gray Letise LaFeir, Ph.D. James Murray, Ph.D. Kristine Norosz

Ex-Officio Members Jonathan Pennock, Ph.D., National Sea Grant College Program Director Fredrika Moser, Ph.D., Maryland Sea Grant Director, Sea Grant Association President

Contributors to this Report Board Members Judith Gray, Committee Chair, Rosanne Fortner, Ed.D., Gordon Grau, Ph.D., Brian Helmuth, Ph.D., and Letise LaFeir, Ph.D.

Sea Grant Association Member Liaisons James Hurley, Ph.D., Wisconsin Sea Grant Director; Robert Twilley, Ph.D., Louisiana Sea Grant Director; and LaDon Swann, Ph.D., Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Director and National Aquaculture Liaison

Editing, Layout, and Design

Ruben Stemple, Alicia Cheripka, Brooke Carney (National Sea Grant Office)

Nikola Garber, Ph.D., Susan Holmes, Alison Krepp, Mark Rath, Elizabeth Rohring, Charles Weirich. Ph.D. National Sea Grant Office Staff On the Cover: “As an undergraduate at Hampton University, I was funded by the NOAA Living Marine Resources Cooperative Science Center, which provided me with several summer research experiences for undergraduates, research assistantships, and conference presentation opportunities. More recently, I was awarded the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program Grant in 2018, which supports my dissertation research at North Carolina State University on coral reef soundscapes and habitat complexity in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.” - Kayelyn Simmons, 2021 Knauss Fellowship Fellow, North Carolina Sea Grant, North Carolina State University A car drives through flood waters as high tide creeps into the streets during a nuissance flooding event in Norfolk, Virginia in May of 2020. Photo: Aileen Devlin, Virginia Sea Grant

Public Comments

Education Discussion 4/6/21

Agenda Item: Education Discussion

Purpose Informational – to discuss a possible recommendation from the NSGAB to the National Sea Grant College Program.

Three Things You Must Know 1) Sea Grant has historically referred to its structure as a “three-legged stool” with Research, Extension and Education as the legs. By almost any measure, Sea Grant’s Education “leg” is not equivalent to the other two. 2) K-12 and community education (Environmental Literacy components of ELWD) are key foundations of workforce development, an informed electorate and environmental stewardship. A Program-wide assessment of support for Environmental Literacy would illuminate needs and strategies for strengthening this leg of Sea Grant. 3) PMC and SGEN surveys of SG Educators show low investment in education programs, educator professional development and other indicators of support.

Background • NOAA Sea Grant’s 10-Year Environmental Literacy Vision: Sea Grant’s integration of natural and social science research, education, and outreach will foster an environmentally literate citizenry that makes informed decisions regarding ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resilience (Environmental Literacy Vision Plan). • Individual SG programs vary widely regarding the position of individuals who conduct EL activities within the program structure. • Program modifications related to the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated how educators responded creatively to challenges, yet without sustained funding, some EL programs were not offered because of limited admission or program fees or grant support. • Education programs provide the essential foundation to increase equity for all communities, building environmental literacy for resilient communities and diversifying the coastal workforce.

Red Flags/Comments • SG programs’ inclusion of educators in overall program planning, as well as expectations of education self-funding, are equity issues within Sea Grant that need to be addressed.

NSGAB Action Items • Recommend a Program-wide assessment of support for Environmental Literacy (K-12 and community education) efforts, including FTE, omnibus allocation, travel, input on state programs and other measures of support.

Links and Attachments Sea Grant Education (current web materials) Environmental Literacy Vision Plan PMC:NAC Professional Development Survey Results 4/6/21

(https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ptpb1taa0s9qh2m/AACabsK79nQ7CfCwK4rvCRXnz?dl=0) SGEN Strategic Plan 2018-2022 Spring 2018 SGEN Survey Results

Resilience and Social Justice Discussion National Sea Grant Advisory Board 2021 Spring Virtual Meeting

Agenda Item: Resilience and Social Justice Discussion

Purpose The purpose of this session is to discuss and explore the interface of coastal resilience and social justice (and strategies for ensuring that social justice is included in resilience efforts through the Sea Grant program) in preparation for setting up a panel later in the year. This is an informational session only.

Three Things You Must Know 1) Discuss with the board the interface of coastal resilience and social justice and come to a common understanding on how the Board would run a panel later in the year. 2) The goal of this initial conversation is to: a) Get all of the NSGAB members “up to speed” on the topical area, highlighting major issues or gaps in understanding that need to be addressed. b) Determine primary topical areas for discussion in future panel c) Outline an effective panel format d) Explore how ideas discussed can be implemented, working in cooperation with NSGO and SGA. 3) Invited to join the Board’s discussion are: a) Dionne Hoskins-Brown, Ph.D., Fishery Biologist, NOAA Fisheries; Director, NOAA Sponsored Programs, Savannah State University; Chair, Gullah Geechee Cultural Heritage Corridor Commission (An NPA National Heritage Area) b) Mona Behl, Ph.D., Associate Director of Georgia Sea Grant;and co-lead for Sea Grant DEI Network

Background ● Since 2017, the NSGO has funded Network Visioning to increase the capacity of Sea Grant programs to work and plan together on priority topics. The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Network ensures that Sea Grant continues to infuse DEI principles into its leadership and culture and has led several state and national initiatives. In collaboration with the NSGO and external partners, the DEI community of practice organizes professional development opportunities for Sea Grant employees. ● The Sea Grant Network has been enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) so that its workforce, audiences served, programming conducted, and materials produced are more representative. ● DEI and TLK are increasingly important to our communities and stakeholders, therefore the board would like to encourage deeper conversations and actions to help foster a common understanding of the interface between resilience and social justice.

Red Flags/Comments ● This is not a decisional session; it is only to enrich the Board's understanding of coastal resilience and social justice.

NSGAB Action Items ● This session is informational only

Links and Attachments ● Dionne Hoskins-Brown Bio (pending) ● Mona Behl Bio

Mona Behl, PhD

Associate Director, University of Georgia’s Sea Grant Program

Mona Behl serves as associate director of University of Georgia’s Sea Grant program, where she holds public service and academic appointments. In her current role, she provides administrative and financial oversight to Georgia Sea Grant, directs its research and fellowship portfolios, and ensures the quality, relevance and impact of Sea Grant activities in Georgia. She is also a non-residential policy fellow with the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Behl is passionate about improving access, engagement and leadership development of people from marginalized groups in geosciences. She co-led the development of Sea Grant's 10-year diversity; equity and inclusion vision plan, Sea Grant’s community-engaged internship program, and AMS’ Early Career Leadership Academy. She serves on the leadership board of Earth Science Women’s Network, an international non-profit for women in Earth sciences; and on the executive committee of NOAA’s Grays Reef National Marine Sanctuary. Behl is a national award-winning educator who believes in the scientific underpinning of decisions, and is committed to instill love for problem-solving through scientific research and public service. She earned her bachelors and master’s in Physics (Honors) from Panjab University (India), and doctorate in Physical Oceanography from Florida State University.

Link to the National Sea Grant Office Bios