COFFEY
Results
Including our own past experience, we used five
sources of information to evaluate
projects:-
Based on
review of agricultural
source
programs, the
is, to
1. an in-person interview questionnaire for
date, the best program available for achieving water
project personnel during site visits,
quality goals. For example, the
had a set of
rules and regulations (Federal Register,
tech-
2. a short answer questionnaire administered
nical oversight, and secure, long-term funding. Some
to project personnel,
projects have documented water quality improve-
ments, and all projects have
to a greater
3. a telephone survey of producers who did not
understanding of water quality problems and to
participate in the 21 projects,
cooperation among agencies charged with address
source pollution.
ing
4.
reports from the RCWP projects, and
The overall RCWP assessment has shown that it
was not possible to document water quality benefits
own 10 years' experience in
5.
for RCWP projects in which
offering technical assistance to the projects
and performing program evaluations.
agricultural activities were not the primary
pollution source,
For site-visit evaluations, an interagency evalua-
tion team (led by a NWQEP member) visited each
the area1 extent and magnitude of land
project. In-person interviews of local and state
treatment was inadequate, or
project staffs using a standardized questionnaire
the monitoring designs were inadequate to
were conducted during site visits (Coffey and
document water quality improvements.
Smolen, 1991). Questions were designed to gather
specific information on project elements, including
However, each project did have one or more
State and local coordination, local program ad-
source pollution control benefits, including
ministration, information and education, land treat-
ment, and water qualify monitoring and evaluation.
development of cooperative relationships
among Federal, State, and local agencies
Project staff responses to a short answer ques-
necessary to achieve an effective
1992) were used to
tionnaire (Coffey and
source pollution control program;
gather information on project coordination, advisory
committees, project effectiveness, Information and
achievement of widespread adoption of
Education (I&E), farm operator participation, and
to improve water quality under this
BMP implementation. A companion telephone sur-
assistance program;
vey of farm operators was used to determine factors
that influenced participation and BMP implementa-
visual improvements in water quality
tion
and Wimberley, 1992). RCWP projects
associated with the use of
or
also produced detailed
reports that provided
water quality improvements documented by
important insights, findings, and recommendations
water quality monitoring.
for each project element.
For each RCWP project, the NWQEP wrote a
Therefore, the model program and project described
comprehensive analysis, including
herein builds on the
structure and essential
features, while adding refinements to strengthen
l a project synopsis;
weaker components identified during the RCWP
a section on findings, successes, and
evaluation.
l
recommendations for each of the project
elements; and
Elements of a Mode!
for
a detailed project description.
l
Source Pollution
At the foundation of the analysis were the RCWP
Controls
regulations and the findings from individual
project evaluations. The results of the RCWP
Guidance written in the form of regulations must be
analysis are presented here as a set of recommenda-
available to help implement the program (Federal.
tions for a model program and a model project, in-
1980a). The model program's major fea-
cluding
examples from RCWP projects that
tures (as outlined in the RCWP regulations) will in-
support the results.
clude
363
Previous Page
