Project Name: International Conservation GIS Capacity ...
International Conservation GIS
Capacity Building Partnership
YEAR 2
STATUS REPORT
to the
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
(GBMF)
Society for Conservation GIS (SCGIS)
The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI)
Report comprises these documents:
• 2006 Moore Yr 2 Intl Grant Report Finl.doc (this file)
• 2006 Moore Statmt of Activities Apr06cc.xls: (Financial Report)
• 2006 Moore Yr 2 Budget Summary Finl.doc (Explanation of variances)
• 2006MooreScholarReports.zip (Full text of scholar status reports)
• 2006 Leader Reports.zip (Full text of Leader status reports)
• 2006 Internship Reports.zip (Full text of Intern status reports)
Prepared by:
Society for Conservation GIS International Committee and International Networks Committee
Charles Convis & Sasha Yumakaev, Environmental Systems Research Institute
(Graphic Logo Designs in this report are all by the ESRI Graphics Staff and Mr. Convis as an annual donation for use in fundraising campaigns for SCGIS i.e. posters, clothing and brochures)
Reviewed, edited and submitted by: Susan Miller & Heidi Wilson-Flannery, The Nature Conservancy
[pic]
(Above: Map of relative SCGIS membership by Country for 2006)
2006 Selected Program Participant Comments
"It’s amazing how the SCGIS scholarship goes beyond the GIS training and creates an experience for life. I was talking with Socorro about her experience as scholar and I just can share her motivation and gratitude for such a great program. She was already an enthusiastic Conservation GIS practitioner but now I can see in her that spark that develops during the SCGIS scholarship, that little seed that grows inside you and encourages you to keep working hard and better, to volunteer and to share your experience with others. You have been exposed to the world in one place, and you have that strong feeling of being part of it."
Jose M. Beltran, SCGIS Chapter Leader, Pronatura Noroeste, MEXICO
“It's difficult to explain exactly how much this means to someone from Madagascar but; in addition to making a valuable contribution towards his practical training which he already really appreciated, the friendly interactions of the SC_GIS over e-mail and this surprise offer of additional assistance is making him feel really valued. I should add that I've also had a lot of pleasure just from witnessing his reaction. “
Alison Cameron (Internship Host, UC Berkeley Department of Environmental Science & Policy)
"It is different between learn by doing and learn by instructor and practice. I feel the SCGIS training had brought me deeply to GIS concept."
Bonie Adnan, Scholar, Indonesia
"The courses were brilliant and changed the way I see GIS forever. It will surely help me to better support conservation efforts in Southern Africa."
Willem van Riet, Scholar, Peace Parks Foundation South Africa
"This program enabled me to reinforce my capacities in the field of conservation activities, training, and the protected areas management."
Appolinaire Nankam, Scholar, Cameroon
"I was already an SCGIS Scholar for the second time and I know that with the experience I gained in both visits helped a lot in understanding SCGIS, building a supportive community (this takes time) and also in being able to help other people with experience and knowledge.”
Dejan Gregor, Leadership Intern, SCGIS Slovenia
"The face-to-face communication or ‘brain storming’ of ideas concerning the WDPA redevelopment project whilst at ESRI HQ was hugely beneficial. It gave us an insight to how ESRI works, how its products are developed and it was great to see the enthusiasm of many staff in applying ESRI technology to our ideas for the new WDPA system. I believe it also benefited ESRI in gaining an understanding into how non-profit organizations like UNEP-WCMC work to balance limited resources against increasing demands for high quality conservation datasets and biodiversity reporting tools."
Lucy Fish, Leadership Intern, UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, UK
Partnership Goals
The founding goal of the International Conservation GIS (Geographic Information Systems) Partnership is to "increase the capacity of conservation organizations, governments, and individuals to make effective use of geographic information systems to support biodiversity conservation, by developing and supporting a global community of conservation GIS practitioners." This partnership between The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the Society for Conservation GIS (SCGIS) and the Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) consists of 3 Outputs:
A. Conservation GIS Training Scholarship Program brings dozens of individuals to the United States each summer to receive advanced GIS training and attend the Annual SCGIS and ESRI Conferences.
B. Conservation GIS Leadership Program will support a select group of international individuals with demonstrated leadership and technical skills who can assess needs and build GIS capacity and networks in their home countries.
C. SCGIS International Program Support involves a range of activities needed to manage, support, and sustain the SCGIS Capacity Building Program.
Summary of Progress for Year Two
The second year of the Conservation GIS Capacity Building Partnership has been both successful and challenging. We set out to try to quadruple the size of the program over 2004, in the face of loss of staff and partner support. The compelling reason for this was to attempt to "start the avalanche" that we are sure is waiting to fall in terms of a vital global conservation GIS community. Through 10 years of doing these activities prior to GBMF funding and our evaluation of results from our first year under GBMF we felt that if several critical people from each critical country could be brought together within the program then we could jump-start sustainable communities in dozens of countries in just one year. Normally, we have only been able to bring 1-2 people from each country each year and experience showed that it typically takes ten years and many return visits for a strong leader to emerge and commit, and for a new local community to take root. However, the rapid changes in technology, web GIS, and environmental and social awareness drove us to push beyond any rational boundaries to try to start that avalanche in 2006. In addition, we had an extraordinary response and demand from nearly 160 prospective applicants, many of whom were of exceptionally high quality, and it seemed right to try at least once to accept as many of them as possible.
As a result, we funded 63 international scholars from 35 countries, including 8 or so native, first nations and US resident foreign students. We organized 2 conferences, 3 months of training, 2 international workshops and 7 advanced long-term interns. With the loss of some in-kind support staff, the 2 core program staff at ESRI averaged 150% overtime to pull off this expansion, which proved to be an unsustainable level of effort that we will not be able to repeat.
Altogether, we obtained almost 2 million of in-kind matching funds, resulting in better than a 17/1 leverage for the GBMF investment
63 scholars from 29 Countries represented in 2006:
Argentina, Australia, Belize Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Slovenia, Thailand, Uganda, UK, USA
6 new Countries represented for the first time in 2006:
Armenia, Kazakhstan, Japan, Puerto Rico, Tanzania, Rwanda
In addition to the increased numbers and increase in the quality of applicants, we strove to improve our visa support program so that we could maintain the 100% visa approval rate we were able to achieve in 2005 that allowed every scholar to attend. Despite those improvements, we had many visa rejections in 2006. Assessing these failures, a great deal of overseas US visa office decisions appeared to be capricious and petty, perhaps in response to the immigration reform fever that seemed to overtake the USA that year. This is curious compared to the post-9/11 years where no such effects were seen. We were banned from even talking to one applicant who had ties to Cuba! Successful scholars received customized packages of training, hardware, software, and books, valued at over $18,000 per scholar, which are currently being put to use in their home countries. Qualified applicants who didn't quite make it into the expanded scholar pool were supported with many grants of self-paced training materials and books
The Leadership Program continued, with positive status reports from Mexico, Kenya, the Philippines, and Russia. New proposals were received for expansion and evolution of these chapter-building programs, and from new candidates and new countries. Each proposal defined objectives and programs aimed at GIS community building in each home country. Most leaders also attended the summer conferences in California and received customized training programs and packages of hardware, software, and books. In continuing to refine guidelines and procedures for the Leadership Program, we incorporated requests from Nature Conservancy to include specific biodiversity impact and assessment protocols and more rigorous requirements for workplans and reporting. As a result, only 3 proposals qualified for funding in this program year. We intend to return to the original less rigorous guidelines used in 2005 so as to be able to provide grants in a manner that leadership candidates can qualify for.
An experimental Internship program was begun in 2006 to help build a stronger bridge from Scholars to Leaders and to encourage more scholarship recipients to begin SCGIS chapters and support activities back home. 7 advanced scholars stayed an extra 1-6 weeks in this program at carefully selected host institutions. As a prototype not part of the original GBMF grant, it was funded entirely from ESRI and outside sources in 2006, but it's results have had a powerful effect with new chapters begun right away from first-time scholars who were given the chance to participate as interns. The benefits from this internship program were integrated completely into the other GBMF programs and a more detailed report is included as a new section below.
An experimental Conservation Missions program was also begun in 2006 which sought to send the best experts on Biogeography and GIS out to field researchers and activists in other countries to teach local courses and work closely with local experts who could benefit from senior Gis analytical support and advice. Because this was initially funded by ESRI, we began our search among the 200 or so PhD staff at ESRI who had specific background, publications and international recognition in conservation or ecological science. We sought to find the best match for their knowledge with active SCGIS chapters possessing researchers and activists in those same specific areas. ESRI donated $20k of in-kind resources to begin this program.
In terms of Support and Strengthening of SCGIS Operations, we are pleased to have secured funding and commitments from an additional 4 institutions and a growing number of private donations. This includes the Trust for Mutual Understanding, Christensen Fund, US Fish & Wildlife Service, Birdlife International/BP Conservation Program, and Scholar and Private contributions. The $64,000 raised from these additional donors is a significant fraction of the core annual GBMF donation and represents a significant broadening of the “SCGIS Mission” to other donors and supporters. Combined with the hundreds of thousands in ESRI in-kind support we are well over our three year goal of raising $100K to support SCGIS operations.
The new partnership between SCGIS and the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) resulted in a joint SCB/SCGIS Conference in 2006 in San Jose, CA. SCGIS courses and trainers were also supported at the 2005 SCB Conference in Brazil and the 2007 SCB Conference in South Africa. The benefits to SCGIS thus far have been exposure to and funding by a new group of SCB donors interested in expanding the international reach of the best Conservation Science techniques in collaboration with SCB. Joint conferences with larger organizations also offers the promise of a much larger pool of potential new members and this has indeed begun with SCB albeit more slowly.
What follows is a detailed description of program activities, open issues, and lessons learned in year two.
A. International GIS Training Scholarship Program
[pic]
(Above: Second group of scholars at the James Reserve Training Site)
Overview of Activities:
We funded 63 international scholars from 35 countries, and another 8 native, first nations and US resident foreign students. We organized 2 conferences, 3 months of training, and 7 advanced interns who stayed longer periods. Altogether we leveraged over 2 million of in-kind funding, over a 17/1 leverage ratio for the GBMF
63 finalist scholars attended our second year program, 5 times the number who were able to attend in years prior to GBMF funding. Scholars were organized into 2 groups corresponding to the 2 conferences. SCGIS and the Society for Conservation Biology held the first ever joint conference in San Jose, California June 25-19, 2006. SCGIS held a second conference at the 2006 ESRI International Conference in San Diego August 7-11 in collaboration with the US National Park Service and the NativeView Tribal Colleges Consortium. Scholars represented 35 countries: Argentina, Australia, Belize Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Slovenia, Thailand, Uganda, UK, USA, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Japan, Puerto Rico, Tanzania and Rwanda.
A custom training program was designed for each scholar with courses beginning in June and extending through August 2006. The increased program capacity and outreach ability allowed us to include 6 countries for the first time in our 10-year program history: Armenia, Kazakhstan, Japan, Puerto Rico, Tanzania and Rwanda. 8 "domestic" scholars funded from the SCGIS Domestic Scholarship Program were also allowed to participate, including Canadian “First Nations” scholars and Americans and resident foreign students from US and Global NGOs.
The expanded size of the program meant that we continued to bring in many scholars from the same region or country, which allowed significant, meaningful discussions to occur about starting local SCGIS chapters and communities. Normally only one scholar from a region is present each year, therefore it takes many years to build up the kind of excitement and motivation in enough people to get a local chapter going.
The following lists each activity proposed for this output, grouping them into related activity areas as in the original proposal. Detailed sub-activities, tasks and procedures are outlined for each activity, and progress or open issues within each of these subcategories is summarized.
Progress toward 3-year program activity goals:
• Design program and organize annual logistics for Scholar visits to US
• Host Scholars during annual visits to US
• Deliver annual GIS training to Scholars
• Recruit 75 SCGIS Scholars (average of 25 per year)
• Organize annual progress reports from Scholars
• Work with Leadership program grantees co-located with Scholars to monitor/support progress
Goal- Design Program and Implement Training Scholarships
(Includes all of: Design program and organize annual logistics for Scholar visits to US , Host Scholars during annual visits to US, Deliver annual GIS training to Scholars)
The design of a training scholarship program is complete. The following subactivities are now identified as distinct tasks with program management procedures that are complete and operational. We will report on each in detail:
-Scholar Recruitment, Publicity and Marketing
-Scholar Selection
-Scholar Preparation & Visa Negotiations
-Scholar Training Program
-Scholar Conference Program
-Training/Conference Equipment Logistics
-Scholar Travel logistics
-Scholar Food/Lodging logistics
-Scholar Technology Grants
-Scholar Collaborations, Sharing of Scholar Data
-Growth paths for Scholars to Leaders
Scholar Recruitment, Publicity and Marketing
Scholarship announcements were sent out via dozens of discussion groups, affiliated websites, and growing networks of prior scholars. Incoming applications increased to 156, more than 200% increase over 2004, prior to GBMF funding.
Scholar Selection
During review it became apparent that the quality of the applications had increased dramatically, coupled with the dramatic increase in applicants, accepting 63 scholars meant that 93 were rejected, many of whom were well qualified and would have been accepted in any prior year.
Scholar Preparation & Visa Negotiations
Visa problems have been a significant source of loss of finalist scholars in prior years. After losing only one person to visa denial in 2005, we experienced a dramatic increase in denials in 2006, despite intense lobbying and embassy communications. Looking at the case by case reasons yielded no pattern other than capricious and petty bureaucratic decisions, such as denying a married parent of children a visa because they were labeled to be at risk of not returning home after their visa expired.
Scholar Training Program: (Deliver annual GIS training to Scholars)
A custom training program was organized for each scholar, based on their specific needs and capabilities. Thanks to extensive donations of courses, materials and trainers from ESRI, we were able to provide a total of 630 student-days of GIS training in a wide variety of courses from basic to advanced (see appendix 2 for a list of courses). ESRI donated all of the course fees, representing an in-kind donation of $285.5k in the "Training & Misc Fees/Expenses" budget category
Scholar Conference Program
Scholars attended one of two different conference venues. The annual SCGIS conference attracts about 300 Conservationists worldwide in a small conference with a focus on building communities of sharing, support and relationships. For the first time this group was invited to join the Society for Conservation Biology annual conference in June, a more academic venue of about 3,000 attendees. SCGIS Scholars presented papers in both formal SCB science sessions and separate SCGIS sessions. Despite the loss of intimacy typical of a smaller conference, all scholars and SCGIS members felt that the merger was a success and plan to repeat it whenever possible. In 2007 the SCB Annual conference will be in South Africa and many SCGIS members and local African chapter members will be in attendance.
The second group participated in the annual ESRI User Conference in August. This conference attracts about 15,000 GIS practitioners worldwide for the largest software industry conference of its kind. ESRI's conference focuses on advanced technical issues and user applications in GIS across all sectors. ESRI also organizes a special sub-venue where SCGIS sessions, meetings and events occur. In 2006 this program was coordinated with a conference of US National Park Service GIS staff and an annual meeting of Native/First Nations GIS scholars from the NativeView tribal college consortium. The interactions led to valuable opportunities for the scholars to begin building relationships with other networks of conservation GIS practitioners. Scholar presentation subjects covered topics from Indigenous Village Programs and Sustainable Development to National Conservation Policy to Patch Analysis, Endangered Species and Fire Ecology.
Training/Conference Equipment Logistics
The expanded size of the Scholar pool meant that we could not rely solely on the pro-bono training facilities used previously. We found pro-bono locations but had to organize all of our own training equipment and hardware for 4 different venues. That meant obtaining loaner training equipment pro-bono and finding systems engineers able to prepare equipment, travel to set it up and maintain it, and take it down. We were able to find 2 people who provided a total of 30 person/days of support, paid for in part by ESRI and in part from personal donations, for a total in-kind benefit of $40.7k. We were able to obtain an equipment loan from ESRI for 60 computers and projectors spread across 3 months. ESRI also paid for shipping. There was no charge to GBMF for any equipment items or labor in this category.
Scholar Travel logistics
Following the guidelines of the review and qualification process, almost $30k in Airfare support was offered to the Scholars. 100% of the scholars were able to attend from their grants, thanks to supplemental support from other donors including the Trust for Mutual Understanding and US Fish and Wildlife Service. For Ground transportation, about 40 bus-van trips were organized to cover all of the airport, training and conference venue transportation needs. $15k of vehicle rentals and charter buses was donated by ESRI, amounting to about 20 bus & van trips. Volunteer Drivers from SCGIS covered all of the driving needs but that still left about $2k in fuel, van rental and travel expenses that were assigned to GBMF.
Scholar Food/Lodging logistics
Again, following the guidelines of the review and qualification process, $65k in food and lodging was distributed for the 12 week program, representing over 1500 paid person-nights of lodging at courses and conferences and lodging with SCGIS volunteers and the University of California. 350 donated person-nights of lodging in Redlands with ESRI and SCGIS volunteers represents a $20k value if these students had to be housed within walking distance of the ESRI courses they attended. The 1000 person-nights of lodging donated by the University of California James Reserve represented a retail value of $50k if students were to be housed near the Reserve.
Scholar Technology Grants (Hardware and Software)
This continued to be a large activity because of our goal of providing ALL program participants, not just leaders, with their most critically needed hardware. It includes both Hardware and Software budget line items as listed in the initial proposal because the two must be managed together to best assess and meet grantee needs, skills and resources. Our GBMF budget expanded from $7k to $15k in 2006, allowing much greater flexibility in leveraging donated hardware because better upgrade funding allowed a broader range of hardware to be useable. As a result, Laptop grants almost doubled to 60 representing a street value of $28.5k, with the following additional equipment included:
Technology Item Expenditures included the following:
• 31 GPS-fitted field Compaq palmtop units
• 38 laptop upgrade costs (covered by GBMF)
• 16 Large external hard drives to support large GIS data sets
• 2 portable flash drives
• 8 advanced Garmin GPS units
• Total cash technology expenses: $18,454
Technology Matching In-Kind grants secured included the following:
• 63 laptops donated by ESRI street value $450 each, total $28,350
• over 200 new software bundles donated by ESRI, avg. $2730 each, total value $546,000
• over 400 GIS books donated by ESRI, avg. $125 each, total value $50,000
• 8 advanced Garmin GPS units (discounted by $125/unit, for total Garmin subsidy of $1000)
• Total in-kind technology grants: $610,350
Leverage for GBMF technology support: >40:1
In 2005 we were able to leverage the $7,000 GBMF Hardware budget over tenfold to obtain a total of $91,700 in matching hardware & software grants from ESRI and Garmin. In 2006, our expanded GBMF budget of $15k allowed us much greater latitude and flexibility so that we were able to leverage it over forty times for a total of $628,804 in hardware and software grants and subsidies from ESRI, Garmin and others, including the book donations featured below.
Book donations
• Total in-kind ESRI grants: $50,000 (included in technology support figure above)
Books are often mentioned as a part of our grant program and this should be singled out. Books permit conservation activists to learn important theories and methods of spatial analysis and mapping even if they don't have access to a computer. Books include the category of self-paced GIS lessons and tutorials, with a functioning classroom GIS program to permit independent learning for the many who lack internet access. Thanks to the generosity of ESRI Press, their complete catalog of over 100 GIS and Science titles is available by grant to our scholarship recipients. Each year Scholars are allowed to select as many books as they can carry home, typically around a dozen books at an average retail value of $50 each, representing a grant value of $37,500 in 2006 alone. In addition, because of the extraordinary response of qualified candidates that we were not able to select as finalists, we offered donations of their choice of any 5 books to another 50 applicants who did not make it to the final round, representing an additional ESRI donation of $12,500
[pic]
(Above: SCGIS 2005 Scholar James Muyambi teaches GIS/GPS course after returning home)
Scholar Collaborations, Sharing of Scholar Data
The issues surrounding data sharing are complex, but central to conservation GIS work. This program has a strong goal of promoting a community of individuals and organizations that develops, integrates, enhances and shares data to improve local, regional, and global conservation actions. ESRI helped fund the development in 2006 of the Conservation Commons Geoportal, under the leadership of The Nature Conservancy and the National Geographic Society () . With its completion, all SCGIS scholars will be trained in its use and required to post their project information to it as a condition of receiving their grant.
Goal - Recruit 75 SCGIS Scholars (average of 25 per year)
In the 2005 and 2006 Program years, we funded and trained 100 scholars. We have met our target of 75 and by the end of the program will exceed it by a large margin.
Goal -Organize Annual Progress Reports from Scholars
-Guidelines for Scholar Status Reporting: 100% complete
-Collection of Scholar Status Reports over all 3 program years 66% complete
Status reporting and feedback is integrated into all communications with the scholars, before, during and after their experiences. From experience, this has turned out to be more reliable and more successful in encouraging scholars to be mindful of the long-term perspective of SCGIS throughout their experiences here.
Reporting guidance has also been sought from academicians and graduate student programs to determine how schools and their donors evaluate and monitor their own scholarship programs. A very important measure of success in the university scholarship community is whether a program causes an individual to make a fundamental change in life direction, causing them to devote the rest of their lives to the mission or goals of the scholarship program. Because devotion to conservation seems to be a fundamental and deeply rooted belief in the people who hold to it, we felt that this was an appropriate goal for us to include. Unfortunately, the university had no guidance on how to measure and evaluate beliefs up front. Their documentation of a major life change was based solely on anecdotal evidence over many decades following a scholarship. We felt that getting some sense of a person’s beliefs and goals was worth trying, and so we continue to include opportunities for our scholars to talk about this before, during and after the program.
Thus far, we have received the following 2006 reporting products:
-Pre-program reporting products: 100% of the Scholars
-During program and conference presentations: 100% of the Scholars
-Post program scholar Status Reports: 50% of the Scholars
-Leader status reports: received from all 2005 grantees (see below)
General Guidelines for Scholar reporting at all times:
Don't ask more than what people are capable of; otherwise they will feel they have failed in what was asked of them. Most scholars are extremely grateful and want to do whatever they can to help SCGIS. Giving them reporting and community building tasks they can handle helps maintain their motivation. Giving them tasks beyond their ability and availability discourages them and detracts from community building.
Keep requirements informal. When a scholar or leader feels overwhelmed by what is being asked of them in reporting or workplan, they will typically fall silent and instead spend time on other activities more comprehensible and rewarding to them. Know how much they are able to provide and don’t ask them to do things you know they won’t have time or ability to do.
Allow for a wide variety of reporting styles and options. Some individuals and/or cultures may be more comfortable presenting only a written paper rather than a live conference presentation; some may prefer a map composition to a narrative report. For the sake of training, try to encourage or require all scholars to try their hands at all forms of expression, but be prepared to gracefully accept that some may only be comfortable in one form.
Guidelines for Scholar reporting prior to each year's program:
Try to collect each scholar’s vision of their next year as it exists prior to program participation, in the application itself. About 6 months after the training, enough time for them to incorporate their new ideas with the hard realities of home, have them re-describe what they think the next year will bring.
Try to collect both personal & professional goals of each scholar as an individual, as well as their program goals within their institution. The primary expression of change due to a program based on training and community is likely to first appear in personal and career changes.
Request photographs of scholars at work. Photographs often offer a view of conservation work that is hard to put into words, and they are an important component of any report that seeks to qualitatively describe what conservationists do and how it may be changing.
Try to get a baseline idea of their GIS capacity and their involvement or effectiveness with local NGO's.
Guidelines for Scholar reporting during that year’s program:
Try to collect scholar experiences, thoughts, feelings, discoveries as close to the event as possible, using some sort of daily diary requirement that won’t take too much time out of the day.
Allow for a wide variety of reporting styles and options. Some individuals and/or cultures may be more comfortable presenting only a written paper rather than a live conference presentation; some may prefer a map composition to a narrative report. For the sake of training, try to encourage or require all scholars to try their hands at all forms of expression, but be prepared to gracefully accept that some may only be comfortable in one form.
Guidelines for Scholar reporting after that year’s program:
Always encourage scholars to think like leaders, ask them to think about how SCGIS can be useful in their home areas, what it can bring to their colleagues who were not able to attend.
Scholar and leader assessment will be mostly similar in quality, just different in level. A key difference is the institutional goals of a leader will always be SCGIS rather than their “day job”, and leaders will have the specific responsibility of reporting on financial disposition of program funds in their care.
Request photographs of scholars at work. Photographs often offer a view of conservation work that is hard to put into words, and they are an important component of any report that seeks to qualitatively describe what conservationists do and how it may be changing.
Request finished map compositions that scholars produce, to evaluate both their raw GIS and geographic abilities, and their abilities to tell their story and communicate their mission on the printed page.
Implementation:
To implement these guidelines, we require and request a great deal of reporting from our scholars, both before, during and after their training experiences. We find that complex lists of specific formatted reports is usually beyond the ability of most scholars, because the demands of the training classes while they are here require their full attention at all waking hours. Although it would probably be beneficial to have an off day once or twice, the fact of the matter is that we challenge them so much that nearly all of them work full days, 7 days a week throughout the entire 4 weeks of their program. Fatigue is therefore a very real issue in considering status reporting and feedback requirements. The same limitation applies once they have returned home, because GIS staff in any NGO are typically badly overburdened and very limited in resources and support. The ability of Sasha to stay in regular contact with them once they return home has proven to be very important as the program grows.
The following is a somewhat formal format for pre-program reporting we tried in 2006, which resulted in responses of varying quality from nearly all scholars.
- Please describe the history of your local work in conservation and GIS:
- Please describe how you work in your local conservation community
- Please describe how your work involves cooperation with any international groups:
- Please describe what is the most unique and the most challenging about the conservation/GIS work that you do:
- Please provide a 1-year plan for how you hope to apply the skills you will learn under the SCGIS scholarship, and what you expect to be able to achieve in your conservation GIS work over the next year:
The following is the format for post-status narrative reporting Sasha implemented in 2006. We were able to get a response from 36 out of 63 of our scholars.
Dear SCGIS scholars,
It was a great pleasure to meet all of you this past summer! Now that the summer dust has almost settled, I keep thinking about the great, frantic, bright, overwhelming, and fantastic days and nights that I had. Being a little too busy, I might have not been able to enjoy and appreciate that time to the fullest, but, thanks god, the memory still serves, and all the memories are still remarkably vivid!
As the year approaching its end, we need to start shaping up the Scholarship Program 2007, and for this we need to better understand the results of our work this year. I would like to ask all scholars to provide reports about your experience. There are several major things about which we need to hear from you:
- your general reflections about the SCGIS Scholarship Program
- any suggestions and thoughts on what works good or what needs what improvements in the Program
- apart from your experience during summer, how helpful was the Program to your work? how did you continue with your projects at home? how did you utilize the knowledge, software/books/hardware and all experience that you received?
- since you are competent members of SCGIS now - any new ideas on how SCGIS can gain further outreach in your region, or what local shape SCGIS can take in your region?
It would be great to receive such reports as early as possible, but we expect to hear back from everybody no later than the end of November. I’m really counting on everybody’s input!
Thanks in advance, and I hope to hear from you soon!
Best regards,
Sasha
Goal- Work with Leadership program grantees to help Scholars
(see "Leader support to Scholarship Program" subactivity in the "Conservation GIS Leadership
Program" report below)
B. Conservation GIS Internship Program (New)
[pic]
(Map: "Re-Design of the World Databank on Protected Area", Intern Lucy Fish)
Overview of Activities:
A new internship program was begun in 2006 to allow selected scholars a longer period of study and work with institutional hosts closely matched to the scholars’ interests, needs and skills. The primary goal was to establish additional pathways and opportunities for leadership growth due to the lack of available candidates in the leadership program. A primary strategy was to combine and coordinate Leader internships and Scholar Internships so that scholars and leaders could work more closely together.
A particular need identified by our 2005 scholars was the chance to do applied GIS work with mentoring organizations following their intensive training program. So much training is crammed into such a short time that this would have the benefit of helping scholars digest and apply what they had learned. It also has the benefit of introducing them to new technical resources and skilled practitioners who can teach them the additional skills needed to make their technical work back home a success.
Additionally, the ESRI Conservation Program itself hosted several interns, specifically to help them build up SCGIS leadership and chapter skills, with the result that new chapters were begun by some of these ESRI interns more quickly than was previously the case.
In its first year, the Internship program was offered as an additional grant of living expenses that scholars would apply for. At the same time, candidate hosts drawn from the nearly 5,000 organizations who are members of the ESRI Conservation Program were approached and solicited to match contributions and host a practical work program of 2 weeks minimum for each potential scholar.
Review for internship was limited only to those scholars who finished at the top of the standard scoring, and for whom there was an excellent match with an internship host in terms of their professional affiliations and GIS program needs. The following lists the interns selected in 2006 and their hosts:
Program activity goals:
• Design additional pathways to encourage scholars to become leaders
• Design a Conservation GIS teacher training program
The table below lists the interns who were funded in 2006 to pursue advanced GIS and Leadership training at the host institutions indicated. Lucy Waruingi was the one previously funded Leader who was able to attend and work with scholar interns such as Lucy Fish. As a result, Lucy Fish has successfully gone on to begin establishing an SCGIS chapter in her home country, holding initial SCGIS meetings and discussions, and beginning the leadership grant application process.
|Hayk Yeritsan |Ramaswamy Hariharan UC Irvine Geology Dept. and GISCorps Volunteer |
|Armenian National Academy of |PROJECT: “Web-based Interactive Map of Volcanoes in Armenia” |
|Sciences | |
|& Third Nature NGO | |
|Andrew Scanlon, |Joe Meyer, GIS Dept, Yosemite National Park |
|Jiuzhaigou National Park |PROJECT: “National Park GIS Management Principles and Practices |
|China | |
|Lucy Fish |Charles Convis, ESRI Conservation Program |
|UNEP World Conservation |PROJECT: “Re-Design of the World Databank on Protected Areas” |
|Monitoring Centre, UK |PROJECT: "Creation of a global support chapter for SCGIS in the UK" |
| Janna Rist, |Christopher Kernan and Juan Carlos Bonilla |
|Equatorial Guineau Forest |Conservation International Centre for Applied Biodiversity Science |
|Inselbergs Bushmeat Project |Washington DC |
|Lucy Waruingi |Charles Convis, ESRI Conservation Program |
|African Conservation Centre, |PROJECT: “Planning of the First Kenya National Conference on Conservation GIS” |
|Kenya | |
|Nono Gonwouo |Theodore J. Papenfuss, Ph. D. |
|Cameroon Herpetology Project |Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, UC Berkeley |
| |Project: "CAMHERP Cameroon Herpetology Project" |
|RAZAFIMPAHANANA |Alison Cameron, UC Berkeley Department of Environmental Science, Policy & Management |
|Andriamandimbisoa, Wildlife |PROJECT “Biodiversity Network for Madagascar Project” |
|Conservation Society Madagascar | |
In addition to the internships, we identified a specific need for Leadership grantee support of the summer Scholars. Recipients and Chapter Leaders in the Leadership grant program were all encouraged to attend the conferences so that they could obtain leadership experience with the scholars, learn how to organize training and conference events, and meet with the grant program management for detailed consultation and planning on their various leadership and chapter-building proposals. Most of them were also in advanced GIS training courses so in total this placed a very stringent time demand upon them that excluded any other activity outside sleep and meals. Nevertheless, it was dedication and a strong work ethic that we were hoping to see demonstrated in our leadership grantees and we were not disappointed. Leadership Grantees who participated in 2006 to help support the scholars and learn better how to organize their own conferences included Jose Beltran – Mexico, Lucy Waruingi – Kenya and Trina Galindo – Philippines.
Goal- Design Conservation GIS Teacher Training Program
ESRI currently provides an "Authorized Trainer Program" which consists of 4 weeks of study and high-level testing that result in private individuals able to offer ESRI-Certified training independently of ESRI, with formal certification for students. ESRI is willing to help SCGIS develop a stripped-down version of this which will train teachers of Conservation GIS in 1-2 weeks and allow the offering to students of a formal certificate in Conservation GIS. Our intent is to make this a standard offering of the extended internship placements at ESRI and to encourage all leadership candidates to participate. Eventually we hope we can offer it as a road program that can be operated in other countries. If time permits, this program can be operating by summer of 2008.
C. Conservation GIS Missions Program (New)
[pic]
(Above: ESRI's Kevin Johnston (background right) with some of the local SCGIS wildlife and conservation workers he helped to train during his 2006 conservation mission)
In 2006 ESRI also initiated a "Conservation Missions program, that supported advanced analytical staff to conduct Conservation GIS training workshops and provide specialized development support to senior scientists in Nairobi over a 2-week period in the fall of 2006. This workshop was co-organized by SCGIS Kenya. We hope to expand this type of advanced training program in 2007. A full report from the first such Mission is attached as "Conservation Mission Kenya report 2006" Feedback from this mission has been consistently positive, with many of the senior scientist claiming that the short visit with an ESRI senior developer changed analytical methods and scientific assumptions they had held for decades. Tangible models produced during this mission are being used in management decisions right now.
Unlike other NGO's or Academic efforts, ESRI is both a research institute and a private software development firm. ESRI's survival is dependent upon building geographic software tools and applications that function in practical and business settings, so we are forced by necessity to build reliability, flexibility and consistency into many kinds of geographic applications. Academic and NGO institutions are funded by other models and don't have quite the same survival pressure upon their ability to produce software and applications. Unfortunately, because ESRI is a private firm, our expensive development and PhD consulting staff are only available thru billable contracts and large governmental or commercial projects. Those projects provide the time and resources to be able to develop complex and powerful software applications like Arc/INFO itself. Our goal with this "Mission" program was to find no-cost methods to engage those same staff with non-profit conservation so that NGO users could benefit from ESRI's commercial development work, and their needs could find a channel back to ESRI's developers.
D. Conservation GIS Leadership Program
[pic]
(Above: Scholars and several future chapter leaders gather at the James Reserve Training Site)
Overview of Activities:
The Leadership Program received 7 more funding proposals in 2006. At the request of TNC, a stricter selection and reporting criteria, that included many biodiversity metrics, was imposed that year. As a result, only 3 proposals were funded and even these did not meet all of the new criteria. We were therefore able to award only $30k of our $50k leadership budget for 2006.
We feel that the original core program concept should be restored, that it is up to each leader to propose the method and metric for building SCGIS leadership and support programs in their area that best matches their culture and abilities. We think that the results show a loss of interest when substantial additional "top-down" requirements are imposed that may have little to do with how a local person addresses the problem of conservation and supporting local colleagues and NGO's. We intend to return to our original program guidelines for the remainder of the program.
Because the leadership program year begins and ends in May, Leader status reports and the review time required does not allow for them to be included in the grant report of that same year, based on the calendar year cycle of the Scholarship programs.
Status reports for all 4 leadership grants made in the first program year of 2005 were received between August 1, 2006 and Feb 21, 2007. Proposals for Program Year 2006 were received between August 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006. Of the 7 proposals received, 3 were funded by Feb 2007 and the remaining 4 are still pending.
Of the first group of 4 leaders funded, 3 were able to make it on their own resources to the SCGIS 2006 conference. Misha Paltsyn from Siberia was the only one who could not come, in part because the field season for ecological conservation work in Siberia is very short and most field staff cannot afford to lose even a couple weeks of time during that period. Of the second group of 3 leaders funded, all 3 were able to send representatives to participate and help lead at the 2006 Scholarship and Conference Programs.
Progress toward 3-year program activity goals:
• Design Conservation GIS Leadership Program
• Develop work plan, timeline and deliverables for each grantee
• Administer work plan
• Recruit 21 Conservation GIS Leadership Candidates
• Evaluate grantee work and improve/modify program
• Evaluate Impact on Local Conservation Ngo's
Goal- Design Conservation GIS Leadership Program and Execute
(Includes all of: Design Conservation GIS Leadership Program, Recruit 21 Conservation GIS Leadership Candidates, Develop work plan, timeline and deliverables for each grantee, Administer work plan
Design Leadership Program 100% complete
Execute Leadership Grants over 3 program years: 50% complete
The sub-activities for this task are listed and detailed below. Sub-activities needed for this task have been refined with feedback and evaluation from the year 1 program.
Conservation GIS Leadership Program Subactivities
-Define Program guidelines
-International Funds Transfer procedures
-Leader Selection
-Leader work plan, timeline and deliverables
-Leader Training Program
-Leader support to Scholarship Program
-Leader Agreements for sharing maps, data, photos
Define Program guidelines
The primary guideline of our leadership program is that Leaders determine for themselves what is the best way to achieve progress in Conservation GIS support and community-building in their countries. We are very concerned that no developed-country assumptions or biases creep in, because GIS is already a difficult technology and very challenging to apply and adopt in developing country circumstances. It is therefore essential to allow each leader the freedom to exercise their judgment in creating a new community. To be sustainable, a new organization devoted to conservation NGO service must be intimately engaged in and grown from the local conservation communities. A sign of the success of our approach so far, is that all of our chapters consist exclusively of members from the local community.
[pic]
(Above: Inaugural meeting of the SCGIS Philippines Chapter, 2006)
Based on these policies and our experiences with the first year, we developed explicit guidelines to be able to evaluate and select candidates that we believe will have the greatest ability to create locally-appropriate GIS support institutions and have the best chances of conservation GIS success. We also want to ensure that Leaders are setting achievable, realistic objectives that they can report on at the end of each year. However, the good leader with both the social skills to get a new chapter going and gain the trust of colleagues and with deep mathematical, analytical and scientific skills needed to address a complex series of outcomes evaluations and statistical measures appears to be very rare, and no one even approaching that level of capability has surfaced thus far in our applicant and membership pool.
The review and selection of leadership candidates is currently based on the following guidelines:
1. Ability to write a detailed workplan and understand the tasks and costs associated with mounting a successful GIS technology project.
2. Ability to express themselves as conservation activists and both exemplify and communicate the SCGIS values of service to one another and commitment to nature conservation.
3. Ability to gain the trust and cooperation of their colleagues in their home region and to work collaboratively with them and facilitate collective projects such as conferences, workshops and courses.
4. Ability to secure the support of other donors. For the most part they must also have a “day job” because as yet the SCGIS grants are not enough for someone to support themselves full time, so they need to have a generous host institution who will allow them time away from their day jobs to do SCGIS projects.
5. Persistence: the ability to demonstrate a life-long commitment to the cause of conservation.
[pic]
(Above: Inaugural Meeting of the SCGIS Kenya Chapter, 2005)
International Funds Transfer direct Procedures
Thus far all new SCGIS chapters have been able to establish their own bank accounts. Wire transfer to these accounts has proven to be simple and inexpensive. Reliance on the judgment of our chosen chapter leaders to select the best way to set up an accountable financial system for each new chapter has proven satisfactory.
We do not have central procedures for how to form and govern a chapter because countries differ in how non-profits are defined. Each leader or collaboration has set up the structure that best fits how they wish to work together.
Most of the first four leadership grantees have established local bank accounts. There are no central procedures yet defined for how to do this because countries differ in how non-profits are defined and how bank accounts are set up. We had to rely on each leader to use their best judgment and adhere to all applicable laws and regulations.
The first round of funding was disbursed to each leader in person, in cash, so as to allow maximum flexibility while maintaining the security of direct contact. US-based support organizations exist for the purpose of supporting and simplifying cash grants to non-profit conservation groups in other countries without the need for bank charges but with full security and accountability. Many of these are US-based offices of existing country-based conservation support groups. We plan to find more of these and work with them as partners to help set up no-cost secure funding disbursement mechanisms for other countries.
Leader Selection
We received 7 proposals, defining activities in the following 4 general areas:
• Program Continuation of successful year 1 programs that achieved very good results
• Direct GIS community building: workshops, conferences, meetings, fundraising and classes in Conservation GIS for local NGO's and scientists
• Indirect GIS community building: Focused Technical Activities that would support a worldwide community but not specific to local Conservation GIS users.
• Direct Conservation: Focused Conservation Programs that work with specific local communities or stakeholders, but which do not have a primary goal of supporting other Conservation GIS users in the area generally.
2006 Funded Leadership Program Proposals: (Full proposals are in a separate zip file) $29,155 total
Kenya: Promoting Application Of GIS To Conservation In Kenya Phase II
Project Lead: Lucy Waruingi SCGIS Kenya, African Conservervation Centre
Project Budget Total$10,515 Initial Grant Awarded: $10,515
Cameroon: A Proposal To Facilitate The Development Of A Society For Conservation Gis Chapter In Cameroon
Project Lead: Nsoyuni Ayenika Lawrence Coordinator, Global Forest Watch – Cameroon
Project Budget Total: $5,000 Initial Grant Awarded: $5,000
Philippines: A Proposal for the Activities of Society for Conservation GIS
Philippine Chapter: SCGIS Pilipinas
Project Lead: Collaboration
Project Budget Total: $13,550 Initial Grant Awarded: $13,640
2006 Leadership Pending Proposals, (unable to meet the changed, more rigorous 2006 guidelines)
(Proposals are in a separate zip file)
Mexico: Conservation GIS: Society for Conservation GIS Chapter in Mexico, connecting to Latino America.
Project Lead: Pronatura A.C. Noroeste, Jose M. Beltran, GIS Manager for PNO
Project Budget Total: $10,000
Brazil: GIS Community Building in Brazil: a proposal to the Society for Conservation GIS Project Lead: Adriana Paese, Conservation International Brazil
Project Budget Total: $19,340
South Africa: Proposal for an Africa-wide community of Conservation GIS
Project Lead: Craig Beech, Peace Parks Foundation
Project Budget Total: TBD, expected to be around $5k
England: Proposal for a Global Support Center for SCGIS based at the UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre
Project Lead: Lucy Fish, UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre
Project Budget Total: TBD, expected to be around $3k
Leader work plan, timeline and deliverables
Every proposal was required to provide a timeline and budget. In meetings with each finalist leader, proposal activities were identified and prioritized for the initial funding phase. Because the initial funding provided to each was less than requested, each grantee had to modify their initial budget and timeline to reflect the 2-phase funding process. Budget and timeline revision also resulted from other circumstances, such as when proposed program staff were no longer available. Finally, a midterm status report was due from each leadership grantee by Dec 31st, detailing the progress made with the initial funding stage and presenting a new revised budget, timeline and formal request for second phase funding.
Leader Training Program
All four of the finalist leaders were able to attend the 2005 scholarship training program and fully participate in the advanced GIS courses they required. Frequent additional meetings with partnership staff helped to train them on the documentation, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, as well as resolving specific political and social issues about formation of a new organization in their countries. Email and Instant Messaging communications with the program managers have continued on a daily basis since then, with plans to expand this to conference calls and/or Skype conferences.
Leader support to Scholarship Program
All four leaders worked closely with the 2005 Scholars, serving in formally-designated positions of responsibility according to their abilities and interests. This included living with them at the reserves, serving as food coordinators, hardware coordinators, on-site liaisons, and conference & workshop coordinators. They gained valuable experience in the specifics of managing a training and support program. More importantly, they gained socialization about SCGIS community values and principles, and how to behave in a way that exemplifies the support, competence and inclusiveness that SCGIS strives for.
(Photo: Kenya Chapter Head Lucy Waruingin teaches GIS to local conservationists)
Leader Agreements for sharing maps, data, photos
Data sharing issues for Leaders are the same as for Scholars, please see detailed discussion under "Scholar Collaborations, Sharing of Scholar Data" discussion earlier.
Goal-Recruit 21 Conservation GIS Leadership Candidates
Of the initial 25 leadership candidates identified in 2004, 6 leaders have been funded to date for SCGIS chapter development and NGO GIS Service Projects. An additional 4 leaderships are still pending for 2006.
We are therefore failing to offer a grant program attractive enough and compelling enough to attract the kind of leadership talent we thought we would find. The internship program was offered this year to see if another channel for leadership development might create more candidates and it seems to help.
The primary reason for lack of candidates as we have found is that good Leaders are typically more high-achieving than scholars, typically earning more in their "day" jobs, with more responsibilities. They are therefore less able to take time away from their current NGO jobs to start up a new conservation group or external project. We are certain that a big part of this inability is simply the value of their time and the concurrent inability to find others to help with their normal responsibilities. We are certain that being able to offer larger and more ongoing grants, capable of replacing their current NGO salary, would open up the chances for them to take sabbaticals or other medium-term leave from their current NGO jobs in order to focus their full time and attention on building these new communities. The key philosophical discussion that must precede this, however, is whether global conservation is better served by them staying in their current capacities providing GIS support to a specific NGO, or acting more as a coordinator building a community of GIS support among many NGO's. We suspect there is no ready answer and that this issue needs to be defined and included as part of any future leadership funding review.
Goal-Evaluate grantee work and improve/modify program
The design of an evaluation and improvement program is 75% complete. The following sub-activities are now identified as distinct tasks with program management procedures that are complete as indicated:
-Organize Leader Status Reports
-Evaluate Reports and Improve/Modify Program
-Organize Leader Agreements for sharing maps, data, photos
-Leadership Program Risk Assessment and Mitigation procedures
-Organize Leader Status Reports
Initial results indicate that it will take much longer to get reports and materials back from grantees than initially thought. The problems associated with starting new programs in developing countries indicate that it is more reasonable to expect status reports about 18-24 months after startup. Setting realistic objectives and accurate and timely reporting of progress are important components of leadership and management. However, our attempts to create tighter formal guidelines for reporting did not have the desired effect so we intend to return to a more collegial approach of regular, open communications and simple requests for reports and information when they are needed and when the leadership grantees can make time available. Until we can afford to support them more substantially we have to balance our needs against the often-pressing demands of their conservation GIS "day job".
[pic]
(Above: Siberian Leadership grantees conduct field conservation research and NGO support in Siberia)
2005 Grant Reports Status (Detailed Reports for each program are in separate file)
Mexico: Conservation GIS: Information for Conservation in the Northwest of México.
Project Lead: Pronatura A.C. Noroeste, Jose M. Beltran, GIS Manager for PNO
Project Budget Total $20,000 Initial Grant Awarded: $5,000
STATUS REPORT RECEIVED: Nov 25, 2006
Siberia: GIS support for Biological and Cultural Diversity Conservation in Altai-Sayan Ecoregion
Project Lead: Mikhail Paltsyn, ARKHAR NGO, Altai Republic, Russia.
Project Budget Total: $15,000 Initial Grant Awarded: $4,000
STATUS REPORT RECEIVED: Sept 9, 2006
Kenya: Promoting Application Of GIS To Conservation In Kenya
Project Lead: JG Nasser OLWERO & SCGIS Kenya, Mpala Research Centre
Provisional Budget $7,995 Initial Grant Awarded: $2,000
Provisional Chapter Budget $8,000 Chapter Grant Awarded: $4,000
STATUS REPORT RECEIVED: Aug 31 2006
Philippines: Report and Proposal to Establish the Society for Conservation GIS
Project Lead: Sabino Padilla and the Philippine Chapter: SCGIS Pilipinas
Project Budget Total: $29, 233.21 Initial Grant Awarded: $2,000
STATUS REPORT RECEIVED: Feb 21, 2007
-Evaluate Reports and Improve/Modify Program
By necessity, this activity must take in all of Scholarship reporting, Leadership Reporting and the new Internship program Reporting. This is because the needs and experiences of these grantees overlap completely and no one category can be evaluated without the context of the others.
The design of an evaluation and improvement process is complete. As described in the "Organize Annual Progress Reports from Scholars" goal above, all scholar and leader status reports are reviewed and discussed in a year-round schedule of review meetings of the entire SCGIS international committee and officers to determine how country programs are going and what specifically needs to be encouraged or supplemented in each case. In addition, scholars and leaders are in daily communication with Sasha Yumakaev, program coordinator. In 2006, Mr. Yumakaev was elected to the board of directors of the Society for Conservation GIS along with several former international scholars. ESRI and GBMF travel funds are used to send training staff and coordinators to other countries where needed for chapter support, courses and SCGIS coordination.
In addition, scholars have spontaneously set up internet discussion groups, internet messaging groups, and internet phone (skype) groups, which appear to be getting steady use in the 6 months following the 2006 program. Depending on how these are able to persist and be useful to the local groups we are considering several forms of support to them,
Yahoo! groups created and used by SCGIS scholars:
Scholars 2003:
Scholars 2004 (California group):
Scholars 2005:
Scholars 2006 (SCGIS conference group):
Scholars 2006 (ESRI conference group):
Chapter Websites, Blogs and Forums:
SCGIS Kenya listserv: SCGIS-KENYA@listserv.uri.edu
SCGIS Kenya website:
SCGIS Slovenia website:
SCGIS Russia, forum at the web resource GIS Lab:
SCGIS Russia, online form for SCGIS Scholarship Program applications submission:
SCGIS Brazil listserv: ? (exists, but address unknown)
SCGIS Philippines (SCGIS Pilipinas):
[pic]
-Organize Leader Agreements for sharing maps, data, photos
The issues here are the same as with Scholars, many of whom possess more developed and more capable data sets than the leadership grantees (community leadership abilities, not data holdings, are the key qualification for leadership grantees). As with the Scholars, ESRI Internships and ESRI funding for the Conservation Commons Geoportal (above) will provide the foundation from which we will build more collaboration and data sharing, and ESRI and GBMF funds will be specifically utilized for training leaders in data collaboration and metadata skills so that they can do a better job expanding use of these tools in their home countries.
-Leadership Program Risk Assessment and Mitigation procedures
Lessons Learned regarding project risk assessment strategies:
• Risk 1. Providing money to Leaders who do not accomplish the intended program goals
• Risk 2. Funding a Leader who does not positively benefit local NGOs
• Risk 3. Funding a Leader who takes much longer than anticipated to achieve a result
The initial round of reports and on-site inspections by program staff show that so far there have been no failures to deliver or perform on events and projects proposed.
In our initial meetings with leaders and our initial selections, it became clear that most of the projects we are looking at are by necessity multiple-year projects. We will need to account for some sort of ongoing funding to help these projects continue to move along, or request proposals that are limited to one year outputs. Fortunately, the amount of this ongoing funding is low so we expect to be able to still support the same number of startup programs each year, with a fraction of the overall grant budget being devoted to continuation funds of already-started programs. As mentioned above, we will request that objectives and workplans be structured in achievable one year blocks.
In practice, each leadership grant was based on candidates submitting a formal proposal to fund specific projects related to building SCGIS capacity in their home region. The proposal had widely varying needs and schedules for funding, so it was not possible to apply a specific % distribution rule. Now that some of these are repeat requests, the risk mitigation rule that appears to work best is as follows:
Repeat grantees with a good track record of performance: Receive 100% of funds requested up front.
New grantees with new programs: Receive 25-30% of funds requested up front and are invited to submit a new proposal at the conclusion of those funds for the remainder of their project or new projects.
[pic]
(Above: Returning SCGIS scholars conduct community mapping training)
Goal - Evaluate Impact on Local Conservation NGO's
Anecdotal evidence from status reports indicates a high and growing level of involvement in the new SCGIS chapters by other local NGO's. Attendance at new SCGIS chapter events is in the dozens to hundreds of local conservation activists. Local chapter memberships are reported to be in the hundreds.
There is a great deal of anecdotal and project description data in our detailed applications which could be harvested for all kinds of qualitative or even quantitative work. However, we know that it is possible to build a more rigorous GIS-based dataset that will integrate donor expenditures, national policy, land use changes and conservation NGO ground activities. We feel this would provide a potent tool to aid in the assessment of grant effectiveness, more direct linkages to grant outcomes and more capable visualizations of conservation problems in relation to NGO activities. We have been unsuccessful thus far in building this foundation primarily due to shortages in resources and time. This program is being operated without any core funded staff, instead it relies on ESRI and TNC's ability to allow staff time off of their other duties to work on this program. As you can see, ESRI is already providing the equivalent time of more than 2 full time employees and even at that rate we are barely able to keep up with the core basics of operating the scholarship program and annual reporting. Any new development of databases, analyses and quantitative assessments of the type described here are currently out of the question.
[pic]
(Above: New Elephant Movement Analysis Tools, Jake Wall, Save the Elephants, 2006 ESRI/SCGIS intern)
E. SCGIS International Program Support
Overview of Activities:
General program support was somewhat limited in the first year due to the demands of the expanded Scholarship program and initiation of the Leadership program. In our second year we had notable success in the areas of fundraising and partnership development. We are pleased to have obtained over $60,000 of in-kind labor, equipment, and transportation resources from ESRI, as well as a cash grant of $18,000 from the US Fish and Wildlife Service to fund Latin American scholars in 2006. These grants bring us 80% of the way to reaching our three year goal of raising $100K to support SCGIS operations. Other support included sending a representative to the first GIS user group meeting held in mainland China.
We are especially pleased about a new partnership between SCGIS and the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB), which resulted in SCGIS sending trainers and recruitment materials to the 2005 SCB Conference in Brazil, and organizing a joint SCB/SCGIS Conference for 2006 in San Jose, CA. We are hopeful that this partnership will lead to increased membership and support from this larger, more established, and complementary sister organization.
Progress toward 3-year program activity goals:
▪ Support and strengthen SCGIS operations, coordination and International training through increased SCGIS Membership by 50% and-Increased membership renewals by 50%
▪ Raise additional $100,000 (or FTE equivalent) to support SCGIS capacity building programs
Goal - Support and Strengthen SCGIS Operations
(Reports show that membership has increased over 100% internationally. Membership Renewal breakout data has thus far been impossible to obtain from the SCGIS membership volunteers.)
Although there was significant membership growth, as listed below, the primary focus of this area was in finding formal logistical support for the annual SCGIS international conference. This conference has grown from 30 to 300 people relying solely on one volunteer coordinator (Susan Miller, TNC) and a host of volunteers. The growing size of the SCGIS conference and its international scholar activities has required finding additional dedicated conference support staff. ESRI provided such staff as an in-kind grant in 2005 but was unable to repeat that in 2006. SCGIS volunteers are able to fill in for odd jobs but cannot handle the overall coordination and management tasks that now require 2 people in the 6 months leading up to the conference itself. In addition, the SCGIS conference workload doubled as 2 different conferences were offered, at the beginning and end of the summer.
A secondary focus was supporting Prashant Hedao, the SCGIS international networks coordinator, to take advantage of any strategic conference presentation and chapter networking opportunities that might be appropriate.
A third area was the support for Conservation GIS training at the Society for Conservation Biology annual meetings in Brazil, US and South Africa. With help from the SCGIS and ESRI, trainers were arranged to teach GIS classes at these meetings, and SCGIS materials were handed out. ESRI donated all of the support costs in this case, at a total estimated value of $36k.
ESRI also supported advanced analytical staff to conduct Conservation GIS training workshops in Nairobi over a 2-week period in the fall of 2006. This workshop was co-organized by SCGIS Kenya. We hope to expand this type of advanced training program in 2007.
ESRI also supported Sasha Yumakaev to go to Brazil in 2006 to help start a Brazil SCGIS Chapter. Adriana Paese of Conservation International Brazil, is our candidate to start an SCGIS Brazil Chapter. She contacted a group of approximately 40 people who have shown great interest in becoming part of this chapter. Most of them are members of conservation groups, non-profit organizations in Brazil, who are working in different states (Rio de Janeiro, Pará, Mato Grosso do Sul, Tocantins, São Paulo, etc) in all Brazilian biomes.
With ESRI's support, all of these Brazilian NGO's were invited to the GeoBrasil Summit in July of 2006 to benefit from the technical courses and to hold initial meetings to discuss the details of forming a new chapter.
As Adriana explains, "The main objective is to extend SCGIS ideals (and also benefits) of building community, capacity building and providing infrastructure to conservation groups in Brazil. As a scholar in 2005, I witnessed the support SCGIS has been given to people using GIS as a tool for conservation all over the world. This way, I think I have a clear idea of what these ideals are. Our main targets are small conservation groups, working locally in the field, that are mostly in need of support. This way we also hope to be able to promote biodiversity conservation in Brazil.
Growth in Membership:
As of May, 2005: SCGIS International Membership = 271
This date is close to the commencement of the program, as far as the other members of the SCGIS are concerned, and is suitable as a baseline for measuring achievement over the 3-years of the program.
As of February, 2006: SCGIS International Membership = 383-
This is normally when membership is at it's lowest point of the year so a good time to count core members.
As of February, 2007: SCGIS International Membership = 746-
63 new members were added from the 2006 Scholarship Program, and the 4 international chapters are now reporting that they have anywhere from 50 to 250 members each. It is not possible to verify these numbers in person so we are adjusting them to an average of 75 members per each of 4 operating chapters, not counting the 40 individuals who are active in Brazil but whose formal membership status is unverifiable.
Goal - Raise Additional $100k or Equivalent
In 2005 we were able to raise a total of $100k in combined cash and in-kind support. With the expanded program in 2006 we were able to increase this substantially, by raising $68,900 in additional cash grants alone and $1.2m in in-kind and material grants from ESRI. We are well over our goal of raising an additional $100k to support SCGIS International Operations. The focus in 2006 continued to be the needed in-kind support from ESRI to cover the greatly increased demand for products and services. In this, we were quite successful, as indicated below. Our third party donor efforts also succeeded as listed below:
Value of Non-ESRI Cash Grants from third party donors for 2006 program year
Trust for Mutual Understanding $8,000
Christensen Fund $1,500
US Fish & Wildlife Service $18,000
Birdlife International/BP Conservation Program, $1,150
Private contributions. $555
SCGIS contributions: $24,082
Scholars contributions: $15,615
Total $68,902
The Nature Conservancy has long been a supporter and leader of SCGIS programs and operations, including the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) time of two past presidents and two committee chairs (Annual Conference and Communications). Through this grant, TNC is providing substantial support in terms of grant administration and oversight, as well as program design and evaluation. This support was on the order of approximately $20,000 this year.
Value of Non Labor (Cash and Material) Grants from ESRI to Program for 2006 program
ESRI Hardware Grants $28,350
ESRI Software & Book Grants $596,000
ESRI Publications/Printing Grants $5,300
ESRI Training and Misc Grants $285,500
ESRI Transportation Grants $28,280
ESRI A/V equipment Grants $6,500
ESRI Other conference support Grants $9,000
Total $958,930
E. Summary
As large as our fundraising figures are becoming, it is important to note that without exception, it is the presence, name and prestige of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation that is instrumental in gaining the interest, trust and support of these third party donors. It is undeniably the keystone upon which all of these other donor's involvement appears to depend.
As we enter into our third and final year of our program, we feel there is ample evidence to justify continued interest and involvement by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and we look forward to formal talks about what we might do next in the summer of 2007.
LIST OF GBMF SCHOLARS FOR 2006
[pic]GROUP 1: JUNE 2006 SCGIS/SCB Conferences
Andrew Scanlon
Science Department
Jiuzhaigou National Park
623402 China
Tel. (0837) 7737690
Mobile (86) 1399 042 5842
Fax (0837) 7739310
scanlonandrew@
Andriamandimbioa Razafimpahanana
WCS Madagascar
Madagascar
razafimpahanana-wcs@iris.mg
Aventino Kasangaki
Institute of Tropical Forest Conservation
Mbarara University of Science & Technology
P O Box 44, Kabale, Uganda.
Phone (office) +256-392-709753 mobile +256-772-586873
email: kasangaki@ or aventinok@
website:
Carissa Joy Klein
University of California, Santa Barbara
USA/Australia
carissa.j.klein@
Christine C. Shepard
The Nature Conservancy- Global Marine Initiative
USA
cshepard@ucsc.edu
Dolly Priatna, MSi.
Project Co-Manager
Zoological Society of London (Jambi Tiger Project)
C/O PT. Asiatic Persada
PO. Box 2000 Jambi, Indonesia
Tel. +62-741-581751 ext. 610
Fax.+62-741-581752
Mobile: 0815 3986 0051
Email: dolly.priatna@
Website:
Ekena Rangel Pinagé
WWF-Brasil
Brazil
ekenapinage@
Eliana Machado
Fundación ProAves
Colombia
elimachado@
Fernanda Panciera
Conservação Internacional
Brazil
fernandapanciera@.br
Fortunata Msoffe
Tanzania National Parks (TANAPA)
Tanzania
fmsoffe@
Gail Susanna Ross
Iniciativa Herpetológica, Inc.
Puerto Rico/Canada
gsross73@
Gonwouo Nono Legrand
CAMHERP (Cameroon Herpetology Project)
Cameroon
lgonwouo@
Janna Rist
The Institute of Zoology
UK
janna.rist@ioz.ac.uk
Jaruwan Kaewmahanin
Jaruwan Kaewmahain
Thailand
ojwkm@
Juan Prada
Servicat Ltda
Colombia
pradasso@
Karl P. Keough
Protected Areas Association of Newfoundland and Labrador
Canada
kkeough@nl.
Lawrence Nsoyuni Ayenika
Global Forest Watch, Central African Program
Cameroon
nsoyunilawrence@
Lucy Waruingi
African Conservation Centre
Kenya
lucy.waruingi@acc.or.ke
Magdalena Bennett
Wildlife Conservation Network (WCN)
Chile
mbennetm@puc.cl
Mariano Daproza
WWF - Philippines
Philippines
mgdaproza@.ph
Maxim Dubinin
Biodiversity Conservation Center
Russia
m_A_X_D@mail.ru
Mayerling Sanabria
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Naturals Sciences
Colombia
mayerlingsb@
Mikhail Yurchenkov
NGO “Eco Altai”
Kazkhstan
misha-yu@rambler.ru
Muyambi Fortunate Benda
Mountain Gorilla Conservation Fund (MGCF)
Uganda
mfbenda@
Pablo Herrera
Asociación para la Conservación y el Estudio de la Naturaleza (ACEN)
Argentina
pablo_herrera@
Randy Marshall Keleher
Taku River Tlingit First Nation
Canada
randy867@
Robert W. Myslajek, MSc, vice-president
Association for Nature WOLF
Robert W. Myslajek, MSc
vice-president
Association for Nature WOLF
corespondence address: Twardorzeczka 229, 34-324 Lipowa, Poland
e-mail: rwm@autograf.pl
wolf..pl
Robert Yappi
Orangutan Foundation International
Indonesia
rfyappi@
Sebastián Di Martino
WCS, Patagonian and Southern Andean Steppe Project
Argentina
sebastiandimartino@.ar
Sitha Som
Cambodian Turtle Conservation Project
Cambodia
sithasom@
Socorro Muñoz
Pronatura Noroeste
Mexico
smunoz@pronatura-
Susan Canney
Consortium of Save the Elephants/University of Oxford
UK
susan.canney@zoo.ox.ac.uk
Wendy A. Kuntz
University of Hawaii, Department of Zoology
USA
wkuntz@hawaii.edu
Zaw Win
WCS Myanmar Program
Myanmar
wcsmm@.mm
GROUP 2: JULY/AUG 2006 SCGIS/ESRI Conferences
(See Group Photo on Page 5)
Agnese Mancini
Universidad Autonoma de Baja California Sur (UABCS)
UABCS - Dep.to Biologia Marina
Carrettera al Sur km 5.5
23080 La Paz
E-mail: agnese@uabcs.mx o amancini79@yahoo.fr
Tel: ++52 (01) 044 612 137 8546 (movil)
++52 (01) 044 612 123 8800 ext. 4190
Alexandre Uezu
IPÊ - Institute for Ecological Research
Rodovia Dom Pedro I, Km 47
Caixa Postal 47 Nazaré
Paulista, SP 12960-000
BRAZIL
aleuezu@usp.br .br
Phone/Fax: (55-11) 4597 1327
Cell Phone: (55-11) 9831 2187
Angel Félix
CESVI Cooperazione e Sviluppo
Peru
agfveliz@
Appolinaire Nankam
CEMT : Cameroon Environmental Management and Technologies
Cameroon
apponankam@yahoo.fr
Armando Mercado
WWF Peru
Peru
armando.mercado@.pe
Belinda Oliver
Northern Land Council
Australia
belinda.oliver@.au
Bonie Adnan
Wildlife Conservation Society
Indonesia
b.fdewantara@
Dejan Gregor
SCGIS Slovenia / GISDATA
Slovenia
dejan.gregor@scgis-
Festus Ihwagi
Save the Elephants
P.O.Box 54667
ihwagi@
Hayk Yeritsian
Third Nature NGO
Armenia
yeritsian@geocom.am
Isi A. Ikhuoria
University of Benin
Nigeria
gisser2006@
James Byamukama
International Gorilla Conservation Programme
P.O Box 1584,
Masaka, Uganda
Tel: 077 867274
byajames@
James Wong Tai Hock
The Global Diversity Foundation
Malaysia
anakpetara@
Jason Northcott
"THE NATURE TRUST OF
BRITISH COLUMBIA"
Canada
jnorthcott@naturetrust.bc.ca
Larisa Faleychik
Institute of Natural Resources, Ecology and Cryology
Russia
lmf55@bk.ru
Lucy Carole Fish
World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)
UK
lucy.fish@unep-
Lucy Waruingi
African Conservation Centre
Kenya
lucy.waruingi@acc.or.ke
Luis Barbosa
Conservação Internacional
Brazil
l.barbosa@.br
Marion Cayetano
Galen University
Belize
planning@galen.edu.bz
Marius Rakotondratsima
The Peregrine Fund
Madagascar
mariusphr@
Patrizia Tenerelli
University of Bari - Department of Engineering and Management of the Agricultural, Livestock and Forest Systems
Italy
patrizia.ten@
Peter Kundu
Sustainable Management of Watersheds (SUMAWA)-Egerton University
Kenya
kundu2001@
Prosper Licens Uwingeli
Office Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux
Rwanda
uprolic@yahoo.fr
Rebecca Klein
Cheetah Conservation
Botswana
Rebecca@
Rizka Oktora Ibrahim
Sadohara-Yoshida Laboratory, Yokohama National University
Japan
likaibrahim@yahoo.co.uk
Santiago Burneo
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador
Ecuador
sburneo@
Sarah Simons
Sarah Simons/Oakar Services
Kenya
ssimons@esriea.co.ke
Trina Galido-Isorena
Environmental Governance Project (EcoGov)
Philippines
tgisorena@
Yohanes Budi Sulistioadi [ysulistioadi@]
Y Budi Sulistioadi
The Nature Conservancy Indonesia Program East Kalimantan Portfolio Office Jl. Gamelan 4 PREVAB Samarinda 75123 INDONESIA
Tel (62-541) 744069-71
Fax (62-541) 738127
Mbl (62-813) 4646 8000
@ ysulistioadi@
bsulistioadi@.id
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- borrowing capacity formula
- borrowing capacity calculator
- erp project name ideas
- biodiversity and conservation journal
- biological conservation definition
- conservation biology issues
- project name for transformation
- debt capacity calculation
- international journal of project management
- military project name generator
- another name for project manager
- another name for project coordinator