Reporting the Results of Monitoring
The broad-based, scientifically sound information obtained through
natural resource monitoring has multiple applications for management
decision-making, research, education, and promoting public understanding
of park resources. The primary audience for the results of vital signs
monitoring is park management: provide superintendents, park resource
chiefs, and other managers with the data they need to make and defend
management decisions and to work with others for the benefit of park
resources. However, other key audiences for monitoring results include
park planners, interpreters, researchers and other scientific collaborators,
the general public, and Congress and OMB. To be most effective, monitoring
data must be analyzed, interpreted, and provided at regular intervals to
each of these key audiences in a format they can use, which means that the
same information needs to be packaged and distributed in several different
formats.
The scientific data we need to better understand how park systems work and
to better manage the parks will come from many sources. In addition
to new field data collected through the I&M Program, other data to help
us assess and keep track of the condition of park resources will come
from other park projects and programs, other agencies, and from the
general scientific community (Figure 1). To the extent that staffing
and funding is available, the vital signs program will collaborate and
coordinate with these other data collection and analysis efforts, and
will promote the integration and synthesis of data across projects,
programs, and disciplines.
Figure 1. Scientific data for assessing and keeping track of the
condition of park natural resources will come from multiple sources,
and will be managed, analyzed, and distributed to multiple audiences
in several different formats in order to make the results more
available and useful.
The vital signs monitoring program can be viewed as an information
system, with each of the steps involved in designing and implementing
long-term monitoring (e.g., develop monitoring objectives, design
monitoring program, collect field and lab data .) being like pieces
of a puzzle (Figure 2). The approach for collecting, managing,
analyzing, and reporting monitoring data must be planned and
implemented as a package in order for the pieces to fit and
the overall program to be effective. Communication, collaboration,
and coordination with other projects, programs, and agencies is
needed to efficiently and effectively reach the overall goal,
which is to understand, protect and restore park resources.
Contributions of expertise and funding from parks, other
programs, and other agencies through partnerships are needed
to build an integrated monitoring program. In the process of
carrying out these steps, the program helps to build institutional
knowledge: ensuring that the results are available for future park
staff and collaborators.
Figure 2. The monitoring program can be viewed as an
information system, with the various steps seen as pieces
of a puzzle that must be designed to fit together for the
program to be most effective. The monitoring program promotes
communication, collaboration, and coordination with other
programs and agencies to reach the overall goal of understanding,
protecting, and restoring park resources.
The content and amount of detail included in the various
products of the monitoring program will differ depending on
the intended audience for each report. At the local level,
park managers and natural resource staff and collaborators need
to have available the detailed, complex scientific data
relevant to the park's issues and resources. At the
national level, however, a different scale of analysis and
reporting is needed to be most effective. To report on the
status and trends in the condition of natural resources in the
National Park Service, the NPS is developing a Natural Resource
Scorecard that will involve the integration and evaluation of
detailed scientific data for each park and resource category by
experts. For effective communication, the overall assessment of
resource status and trends (the "highly aggregated indices" zone
at the top of the information pyramid shown in Figure 3) will be
presented using a simple, clear public message, but the results
will be supported by the large amount of detailed, complex
scientific data and information depicted as the lower levels
of the information pyramid (Figure 3).
Figure 3. The information pyramid. The amount of detail
and scale of analysis of scientific data will differ depending
on the intended audience for the various reports and presentations.
National-level reporting to the American public and to Congress will
involve assessments by experts and presentations of data using simple
graphical messages, but the results will be supported by a huge
amount of detailed, complex scientific data that is available
at the park and network level.
A
Summary of Reports, Presentations and
Websites that will be produced by the monitoring networks, along
with their purpose and intended audience, are summarized here.
Websites developed and maintained by each network will be a key outlet for
distributing results to key audiences. In addition to the
various kinds of written reports and presentations at
scientific meetings and symposia, many networks will coordinate
annual "Science Day" briefings targeted at park managers,
where scientists from a number of programs will provide
briefings to managers and other staff on key findings and
potential action items for their particular project or discipline.
These "Science Day" briefings will also promote integration and
synthesis across programs and projects by allowing various
scientists and managers to hear what is going on with other
projects and programs in the park.
Download an Overview of
Reporting the Results of Vital Signs Monitoring
Guidlines for publishing reports in the NRPM National Report Series
