Evaluation of the Nevada NSF EPSoR Track 1 Project SmartStart... · Evaluation of the Nevada NSF...

Evaluation of the Nevada NSF EPSCoR Track 1 Project

Q2 Report

March 12, 2012

Prepared for:

Gayle Dana, Ph.D.

Project Director

Nevada NSF EPSCoR

Desert Research Institute

2215 Raggio Parkway

Reno, Nevada 89512

Prepared by:

Lisa Kohne, Ed.D.

SmartStart Educational Consulting Services

4000 Barranca Parkway, Suite 250

Irvine, CA 92604

Phone: 949.262.3217

March 2012

SmartStart Educational Consulting Services Page i

Table of Contents

Section 1. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................1

1.1. Overview .....................................................................................................................1

1.2 Findings.......................................................................................................................1

Section 2. Introduction ...............................................................................................................2

2.1 Background .................................................................................................................2

2.2 Purpose of the evaluation ...........................................................................................4

Section 3. Evaluation Findings .................................................................................................5

3.1 Evaluation of project components ...............................................................................5

A. Climate Change Seminar Series .............................................................................5

B. Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting ............................................................11

C. Nevada Data Portal Workshop .............................................................................23

D. Research Awards ..................................................................................................30

3.2 Review of project reports ..........................................................................................32

A. Project Strategic Tasks .........................................................................................32

Section 4. Commendations and Recommendations .............................................................34

Appendix A: Climate Change Seminar Series Evaluation Form ...........................................35

Appendix B: Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting Evaluation Form ...........................38

Appendix C: Nevada Data Portal Workshop Evaluation Form .............................................41

Appendix D: Workshop participant notes and observations as they used data portal ........46

Appendix E: Seed Grant Self Evaluation Form ......................................................................49

Appendix F: Seed Grant Annual Report Form ......................................................................53

Appendix G: Seed Grant Report Evaluation Rubric .............................................................55

SmartStart Educational Consulting Services Page ii

List of Figures

Figure 1. Climate change seminar date, topic, location, and presenter ............................................. 6

Figure 2. Climate change seminar series survey response rates ........................................................ 6

Figure 3. Demographic description of Climate Change Seminar Series participants ....................... 7

Figure 4. Rating of Climate Change Seminar components ............................................................... 8

Figure 5. Rating of Climate Change Seminar Series presenters ....................................................... 8

Figure 6. Climate Change Seminar Series impact on participants .................................................... 9

Figure 7. Demographic description of Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting participants ...... 12

Figure 8 Rating of the quality and usefulness of Session 1............................................................ 13

Figure 9. Ratings of the quality and usefulness of the Poster Session Introductions ...................... 14

Figure 10. Rating of the quality and usefulness of the Poster Session Presentations ....................... 15

Figure 11. Rating of the quality and usefulness of Session 3 ........................................................... 16

Figure 12. Rating of conference and meeting facilities ..................................................................... 18

Figure 13. Rating of project goal achievement ................................................................................. 19

Figure 14. Demographic description of Nevada Data Portal Workshop participants ....................... 24

Figure 15. How participants heard about and will access data portal ............................................... 25

Figure 16. Ratings of Nevada Data Portal Workshop components .................................................. 26

Figure 17. Participant’s ratings of data portal user-friendliness ....................................................... 27

Figure 18. Purpose and domains of use for data portal ..................................................................... 28

Figure 19. Likelihood of using data portal again .............................................................................. 29

Figure 20. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Interdisciplinary Science Teams 2009-2011 ................. 30

Figure 21. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Integrated Science Project Recipients 2011-2013......... 31

Figure 22. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Seed Grant Awardees 2009 ........................................... 31

Figure 23. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Seed Grant Awardees 2010 ........................................... 31

SmartStart Educational Consulting Services Page 1

Section 1. Executive Summary 1.1 Overview From December 2011 to February 2012, SmartStart Educational Consulting Services conducted a

formative evaluation of the NSF Nevada EPSCoR project. The focus of this quarter’s evaluation is to

identify activities that are being conducted and to assess the quality of those activities and the

evaluation forms that are being used to evaluate them. The evaluation will also progress towards

assessment of impact on project participants based on project goals. The primary goals of the

Nevada EPSCoR project are:

Goal 1 - Climate Modeling

Goal 2 - Ecological Change

Goal 3 - Water Resources

Goal 4 - Policy, Decision Making and Outreach

Goal 5 - Cyberinfrastructure

Goal 6 - Education

Goal 7 - Small Business Innovation Research

Goal 8 - Project Integration and Synergy

The following EPSCoR activities were conducted between December 2011 and February 2012.

Information about these project components and evaluation results are included in this Quarter 2

report:

Climate Change Seminar Series

Annual Nevada Climate Change meeting

Nevada Data Portal Workshop

Research Awards

Review of Project Strategic Tasks report

1.2 Findings Participants in the project activities are primarily male Caucasian. Continue to work towards

involving more females and underrepresented minorities in this EPSCoR project and activities.

Advertise and publicize activities and events more widely and make a greater effort to

personally invite individuals from underrepresented groups to get involved. Based on the

results of the components evaluated during quarter 2, the Track 1 EPSCoR project is doing a

very good job of meeting needs of project participants. On average activities were rated as

very useful and of a high quality. Faculty, students, and the general public who participated in

the Climate Change Series, the Nevada Annual Climate Change Meeting and Nevada Data

Portal Workshop provided many valuable comments to help improve these activities. The

evaluator made specific recommendations after each section of the report. Review these

recommendations, share them with individuals in charge of the activities, and consider

implementing them to improve future meetings, seminars, courses, and programs.


Section 2. Introduction

2.1 Background of the evaluation The mission of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Experimental Program to Stimulate

Competitive Research (EPSCoR) is to assist the National Science Foundation in its statutory

function "to strengthen research and education in science and engineering throughout the United

States and to avoid undue concentration of such research and education."1

The NSF EPSCoR goals are:

1. To provide strategic programs and opportunities for EPSCoR participants that stimulate

sustainable improvements in their R&D capacity and competitiveness;

2. To advance science and engineering capabilities in EPSCoR jurisdictions for discovery,

innovation and overall knowledge-based prosperity.

EPSCoR objectives are:

To catalyze key research themes and related activities within and among EPSCoR

jurisdictions that empower knowledge generation, dissemination and application;

To activate effective jurisdictional and regional collaborations among academic, government

and private sector stakeholders that advance scientific research, promote innovation and

provide multiple societal benefits;

To broaden participation in science and engineering by institutions, organizations and people

within and among EPSCoR jurisdictions;

To use EPSCoR for development, implementation and evaluation of future programmatic

experiments that motivate positive change and progression.

On September 1, 2008, the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) received an award of

$15 million from the National Science Foundation (NSF) EPSCoR. The five-year award funds

science, education, and outreach infrastructure at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR),

University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), Desert Research Institute (DRI), Nevada State

College (NSC), and NSHE's community colleges for the study of climate change and its effects

on Nevada. This project is creating a statewide interdisciplinary program that stimulates

transformative research, education, and outreach on the effects of regional climate change on

ecosystem services, especially water resources, and supports use of this knowledge by policy

makers and stakeholders.

Nevada’s vision for this project as stated in the Five year Strategic Plan (2/20/2009, page i) is:

To create a statewide interdisciplinary program and virtual climate change center

that will stimulate transformative research, education, and outreach on the effects of

regional climate change on ecosystem resources (especially water) and support use

of this knowledge by policy makers and stakeholders.

1 http://www.nsf.gov/od/oia/programs/epscor/about.jsp


The primary goals of the Nevada EPSCoR project are:

Goal 1 - Climate Modeling:

Promote climate change scientific discovery by carrying out nationally competitive collaborative

capacity building in climate modeling.

Goal 2 - Ecological Change:


capacity building in ecological change.

Goal 3 - Water Resources:


capacity building in water resources.

Goal 4 - Policy, Decision Making and Outreach:

Enable researchers to document, interpret, and communicate institutional and societal impacts of

the project’s climate change research findings to all interested and affected parties including

decision-makers, businesses, educators, and the public.

Goal 5 - Cyberinfrastructure:

Facilitate and support interdisciplinary climate change research, policy, decision-making,

outreach, and education by using cyber infrastructure to develop and make available integrated

data repositories and intelligent, user-friendly software solutions.

Goal 6 - Education:

Create a scholarly environment to promote research skills and intellectual development for

Nevada educators and students (K–12, undergraduate, and graduate).

Goal 7 - Small Business Innovation Research:

Encourage innovation in the State of Nevada through business development and the Small Business

Innovative Research and the Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs.

Goal 8 - Project Integration and Synergy: Promote climate change scientific discovery and project integration and synergism by

conducting interdisciplinary research on climate change and its effects.

Nevada EPSCoR project components include:

Annual Nevada Climate Change conference

ENV 794 Climate change course for middle school teachers


Curriculum Development Program

Innovation Working Groups

GEOG 691 Summer Institute for middle school teachers – Las Vegas/Reno

Academic year and summer undergraduate research program

Technical Writing Assistance Program

Undergraduate research symposium

Community College Faculty Summer Fellowships

Seed Grants

Interdisciplinary science projects/teams


2.2 Purpose of the Evaluation Two types of evaluation are being conducted for EPSCoR project: (1) a formative evaluation to

monitor implementation of project components and provide ongoing feedback to the principal

investigators, and (2) a summative evaluation to assess the quality and impact of the project in

reaching its stated goals and objectives. Both types of evaluation use a combination of qualitative

and quantitative indicators.

Guiding evaluation questions are based on the goals of this EPSCoR project.

Intellectual merit

How has the addition of research infrastructure (equipment, facilities, people, and

training) provided by the EPSCoR project affected Nevada's competitiveness in climate

change science, as per the outputs/outcomes/metrics listed for each of the 8 components

listed in the 5 year strategic plan?

How has this infrastructure influenced scientists' ability to provide models and serve as

specialists in their fields?

Impact on project participants, schools, universities, businesses, and communities

What impact has participation in the EPSCoR programs had on the development and

direction of participants’ educational and career opportunities and choices?

In what ways has participation in the EPSCoR programs increased participants’

understanding of climate change as well as climate change policy issues?

Impact on participating organization and the scientific community

In what ways did participants’ take the knowledge they acquired in EPSCoR programs

and transfer it back into the classroom, school district, university, agency and/or

community in a meaningful, productive way?

How has involvement in the EPSCoR project benefited participating agencies, offices,

divisions, departments, schools, universities, etc?

In what ways have the participating agencies, offices, divisions, departments, schools,

universities, etc. changed as a result of participation in this project?

The following EPSCoR activities were conducted between December 2011 and February 2012.

Information about these project components and evaluation results are included in this Quarter 2

report:


Annual Nevada Climate Change meeting

Nevada Data Portal Workshop

Research Awards

Review of Project Strategic Tasks report


Section 3. Evaluation Findings

3.1 Evaluation of project components A. Climate Change Seminar Series Background of project The Climate Change Seminar Series (CCSS) is held the first Wednesday of each month at

UNLV and is broadcast on UNLV TV. The primary purpose of the seminar series is to promote

activities from the EPSCoR project to a wider audience and to engage stakeholders who conduct

or are interested in conducting climate change related research. EPSCoR principal investigators

select a speaker for each seminar. Constant Contact is used to send out announcements for each

Seminar Series. Announcements are normally sent out two weeks before each event and a

reminder is sent 1-2 days before the event. Email invitations are disseminated to all individuals

from Nevada colleges and universities who have signed up to receive NSHE / EPSCoR news

through the NSHE listserve. Invitations are also distributed to all media departments and public

information officers throughout the NSHE system. Online streaming of the CCSS is available at

http://studiog.unlv.tv/. Each seminar, including the title, presenter, location, date and time and a

link to the information flyer, is posted on the seminar series webpage. The link to the UNLV

archive of the series is included at the end of the page.

Background of evaluation The Climate Change Seminar Series evaluation form (Appendix A) is posted online at

www.zoomerang.com. A link to the evaluation form is posted on the video stream website above

and below the viewing window. An NSHE representative attends each Seminar at UNLV and

requests attendees to sign in with their name and email address. The representative types names

and email addresses into a spreadsheet and sends the spreadsheet to the evaluator after each

seminar. The evaluator sends attendees the link to the Zoomerang survey and tracks completion.

UNLV TV also reminds online viewers to complete the survey after they the presentation is

finished. NSHE maintains a spreadsheet that includes the following information for all of the

seminars:

Date

Location

Presenter

Institutional affiliation of presenter

Position of presenter

At the end of each quarter the evaluator requests the spreadsheet and includes the information in

the quarterly evaluation report. Two seminars were conducted during this reporting period

(December 2011 and February 2012). A description of the December and February seminars is

shown in Figure 1.

http://studiog.unlv.tv/

http://www.zoomerang.com/


Figure 1. Climate change seminar date, topic, location, and presenter

Date presented

Topic Location hosted

Presenter Institutional affiliation

Position

December 7,

2011

Where Did All the Dammed

Water Go? Educating People

About Lake Mead and Climate

Change with the 'Losing the Lake'

Computer Game

UNLV Dr.

Michael

Nussbaum

UNLV Full Professor

February 2,

2012

Does climate change save

terminal lakes? - A new approach

for estimating, comparing, and

evaluating paleoclimate

conditions in pluvial lake systems

DRI

Dr.

Douglas

Boyle

UNR Associate

Professor

Evaluation participants Twelve people attended the seminar on December 7, 2011 and 26 attended on February 2, 2012. The

evaluator emailed the link to the evaluation form to all individuals who attended the seminar and sent

three reminders for each seminar. Survey response rates are illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Climate change seminar series survey response rates

December 5 - Nussbaum Seminar February 2 –Boyle Seminar

Surveys requested 12 26

Surveys returned 5 11

Survey return rate 42% 42%

The majority of participants who completed seminar evaluations were Caucasian. There was an

almost equal distribution of male and female participants at both seminars. Most were from higher

education. The demographic description of the 35 people who completed evaluation forms is

displayed in Figure 3.


Figure 3. Demographic description of Climate Change Seminar Series participants

December 7 Nussbaum Seminar

Participants (n=5) February 2 Boyle Seminar

participants (n=11) # % # % Participate in current NV EPSCoR project

Yes No

3 2

60% 40%

5 6

45% 55%

Gender Male

Female

3 2

60% 40%

8 3

73% 27%

Ethnicity Asian

Caucasian East Indian

Hispanic Other

1 2 - - 2

20% 40%

- -

40%

3 6 1 1 -

27% 55% 9% 9%

-

Position Higher Ed Faculty / Admin

Post-Doc Graduate student Industrial Affiliate

4 - - 1

80%

- -

20%

5 3 2 1

46% 27% 18% 9%

Affiliated institution Desert Research Institute

University of Nevada, Las Vegas University of Nevada, Reno

Southern Nevada Water Authority

1 3 - 1

20% 60%

- 20%

8 2 1 -

73% 18%

9 -

How did you hear about the presentation? UNLV website

EPSCoR website Friend invited me

Professor Invited me I received an email invitation

- - 1 - 4

- -

20% -

80%

1 1 1 2

10

9% 9% 9%

18% 91%

Quality and usefulness of the Climate Change Seminar Participants rated aspects of the seminar on a Likert scale from 1-5, in which 1=poor, and

5=excellent. Ratings focused on the speaker, presentation locations, the time and the length of the

presentations, the choice of speaker, and the amount of advertisement/publicity. The overall rating of

Climate Change Seminar was good to excellent for both seminars. Results are displayed in Figure 4.

Mean ratings can be considered to trend towards positive or negative based on the following scale:

Excellent 4.21 – 5.00

Good 3.41 – 4.20

Average 2.61 – 3.40

Below average 1.81 – 2.60

Poor 1.00 – 1.80


Figure 4. Rating of Climate Change Seminar components

Presenters were rated on their knowledge, preparedness, use of audio-visual aids, and quality of the

presentation and handouts on a Likert scale from 1-5, 1=poor, 5=excellent. On average, participants

rated all aspects of the presenters as good. Results are shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Rating of Climate Change Seminar Series presenters

4.80

3.80

4.20

4.20

4.00

4.64

4.45

4.36

3.81

3.91

1 2 3 4 5

The location

The time of day

The length of the presentation

The choice of speaker

The amount ofadvertisement/publicity

Dec 7-Nussbaum Feb 2-Boyle

4.00

4.40

3.80

4.40

4.00

3.60

3.60

3.81

3.55

3.91

3.45

3.81

3.72

3.64

1 2 3 4 5

Knowledge about the subject

Preparedness for this presentation

Selection and use of audio-visual aids (PPt, diagrams,pictures)

Ability to motivate you to learn more about this topic

Ability to relate his/her research to climate change issues

Ability to align the level of difficulty of the topic to theaudience

Quality and usefulness of presentation handouts

Dec 7 - Nussbaum Feb 2 - Boyle


Participants offered comments and suggestions for the presenter. Participants who attended the

Nussbaum seminar did not provide any comments or suggestions. Only two participants commented

on the Boyle seminar both of whom appeared to be disappointed at the lack of science presented in

the seminar.

Boyle It is obvious that the presenter does not have background in the topic being studied, and the presenter was ill

prepared and did not show any meaningful results that would show the EPSCoR program is indeed promoting good

science. In fact it shows that the EPSCoR program has failed in this area.

Present some science. Was that really 2 years of research?

Program impact on participants Participants rated the impact that participating in the Climate Change Seminars had on them in four

areas on a scale of 1-5, in which 1=none and 5=a lot. Over half indicated that the two series each

had at least a good amount on impact on their knowledge. The Nussbaum seminar was rated higher

in its impact on teaching about climate change (50% rated it as having a good amount of impact)

than on research or decision making abilities. About half the Boyle seminar participants rated it as

having at least good impact on research and decision making abilities, however less than 30% rated

it as having good impact on teaching ability. Results are shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Climate Change Seminar Series impact on participants

Participants explained how they will use the information they learned and the impacts this information

may have on their educational institution and/or community.

Nussbaum - I learned more about how I could teach climate change through interactive materials.

Boyle

Personally I found the presentation a waste of time.

The speaker did not take the seminar seriously - this devalues EPSCoR funding

He used an old approach in a novel way: he developed water balance models that would have sustained observed

paleoshorelines, but no glaciers, which is somewhat backwards from the way models are traditionally used. I might

apply his approach in future climate change studies.

25%

18%

25%

18%

18%

25%

18%

9%

9%

25%

27%

50%

37%

50%

55%

50%

27%

25%

37%

18%

25%

9%

28%

25%

18%

25%

18%

25%

18%

25%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Increased awareness and knowledge about climatechange

Increased ability to conduct research in yourscientific field

Increased ability to teach others about climatechange

Increased ability to make informed decisions relatedto climate change

None A little Somewhat Good amount A lot

Nussbaum

Boyle

Nussbaum

Boyle

Nussbaum

Boyle

Nussbaum

Boyle


All but one participant who attended the Nussbaum seminar stated they received the information they

expected. That person’s response is below. Two participants who attended the Boyle seminar stated

that they did not receive the information they expected. Their reasons are provided below.

Nussbaum I was expecting more analysis of the game, and how it could be used in classes, less of the process of creating the

project.

Boyle Personally I cannot believe that he is faculty and funded through building "human infrastructure." The presentation

was more like a thesis proposal presentation, and it was obvious that the presenter was not prepared and has not

done much work on this project even though the presenter has had over 1 year to get something done related to the

topic being studied.

I expected some scientific results.

Participants made suggestions to improve this climate change seminar series. Show good science, not half baked ideas being presented from someone who does not know the research topic being

discussed.

Participants listed other topics they would like to learn about in upcoming presentations. I'd like to hear more about cutting edge research on climate change, such as geo engineering, or the geo-politics of

climate change policies.

How realistic are GCMs in capturing known climate cycles in Nevada and Southwestern US?

How to bridge gaps, from research to applied science to policy.

Historical climate change in great basin

Commendations and recommendations for the Climate Change Seminar Series 1. The number of participants attending the Climate Change Seminar Series has decreased slightly

from the previous reporting period. Participants are primarily Caucasian males and the female to

male ratio has decreased slightly from the December seminar to the February seminar. The evaluator

continues to make the following suggestions to increase visibility and viewing of the Climate

Change Seminar Series.

Currently CCSS email notifications are sent through the NSHE listserve which individuals must

opt into. An initial email invitation was sent to the listserves of all Nevada institutions inviting

faculty, staff and students to become part of the NSHE listserve. Periodic email invitations

should be sent to all Nevada institution listserves as new faculty, staff and students may not be

aware of the NSHE listserve. Periodic email invitations will also provide another opportunity or

serve as a reminder for faculty, staff, and students to become part of the NSHE listserve. All

institutions’ media departments are currently on the NSHE listserve and therefore are able to

send periodic email invitations to their respective institution’s listserv.

Encourage faculty who are already on the NSHE listserv to forward the CCSS event notifications

to their department’s faculty and student listserves to ensure they are aware of the CCSS.

When people register for and/or sign in to events, provide the opportunity for them to check a

box indicating they would like to receive email notifications about monthly CCSS presentations.

Personally invite individuals from underrepresented minority groups.


2. The response rate for evaluation form completion is low (42%). In the previous report it was

suggested that an announcement be made during the introduction and closing of the seminar to

encourage attendees to complete the evaluation form that will be emailed to them.

For those that attend the seminar in person response rate may improve if a paper and pencil version

of the evaluation form is distributed at the end of the seminar. The evaluator will provide a .pdf

version of the survey to NSHE. For online viewers, an announcement should be made before

viewers log off to encourage them to complete the evaluation form by clicking the link above or

below the video stream prior to logging off.

3. Based on open ended comments, some participants were disappointed at the lack of analyses and

scientific results presented in one of the seminars.

Remind presenters of the four primary impacts that the Climate Change Seminars is intended to

have on participants:

Increased awareness and knowledge about climate change

Increased ability to conduct research in their scientific field

Increased ability to teach others about climate change

Increased ability to make informed decisions related to climate change

Send this list to presenters prior to their presentation and encourage them to design their

presentations to impact participants in these areas. Also, brief presenters regarding the

characteristics of the typical CCSS audience.

4. Provide presentations on the following topics that were requested by participants:

Cutting edge research on climate change (ie. Geoengineering, geo-politics of policies)

How realistic are GCMs in capturing known climate cycles in Nevada and Southwestern US?

How to bridge gaps, from research to applied science to policy.

Historical climate change in the great basin

B. Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting Background of the project The Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting serves as a forum for sharing research progress and

findings of the NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Project, as well as to encourage networking and

communication among participants from the various participating university campuses. The meeting

also serves to showcase the research and education activities to the project’s external advisory board,

state EPSCoR Board vice presidents for research and other executives of Nevada System of Higher

Education. The location alternates between north (UNR) and south (UNLV) campuses. Attendees

include the climate change project’s External Research and Advisory Board (ERTAB) members,

vice presidents for research, Nevada State EPSCoR Advisory Board members, project members

(faculty, postdocs, and graduate students), and any other interested faculty or students. This year, the

meeting was held on February 13, 2012 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Background of the evaluation The evaluator created an evaluation form for the meeting in consultation with program staff

(Appendix B) and posted it online at www.zoomerang.com. After the meeting concluded a link to

the evaluation form was emailed to the list of participants provided to the evaluator by program staff.

http://www.zoomerang.com/


After the initial emailing, two reminders were sent requesting participants to complete the

evaluation.

Participants Sixty-three (53%) of the 119 meeting participants completed the meeting evaluation form. Slightly

more than half of evaluation participants were male (59%) and 68% were Caucasian. Most were

from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (33%) and Reno (32%). Approximately one-third were

university faculty and one-third were graduate students. A detailed demographic description of

evaluation participants is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Demographic description of Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting participants

N % Gender

Male

Female

37

26

59%

41%

Ethnicity

African American

Asian

Caucasian

Hawaiian / Pacific Islander

Hispanic

Native American

Mixed race

Prefer not to answer

1

6

44

0

3

0

2

6

2%

10%

70%

0%

5%

0%

4%

10%

Institution of Affiliation


University of Nevada, Las Vegas

University of Nevada, Reno

Nevada State College

Western Nevada College

Nevada System of Higher Education

ERTAB member

Southern Nevada Water Authority

Truckee Meadows Water Authority

State of Nevada

Long Now Foundation

10

21

20

1

1

5

1

1

1

1

1

16%

33%

32%

2%

2%

8%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

Current Position

Faculty – Community College

Faculty – University

Graduate Student

Staff

Undergraduate Student

Administration

Research Faculty

Senior Economist

Director

2

22

20

9

5

1

1

1

1

3%

35%

32%

14%

8%

2%

2%

2%

2%


Quality and usefulness of session Session 1: Climate Change Policy, Outreach and Education Presentations Participants rated their satisfaction with the quality and the usefulness of Session 1 on a Likert scale

from 1-5, where 1=low and 5=high. Overall, the average rating for Session 1 quality and usefulness

was good. Results are displayed in Figure 8. Ratings can be considered to trend towards positive or

negative based on the following scale:

High 4.21 – 5.00

Medium High 3.41 – 4.20

Medium 2.61 – 3.40

Medium Low 1.81 – 2.60

Low 1.00 – 1.80

Figure 8. Rating of the quality and usefulness of Session 1

Participants commented on Session 1. Many described the session as informative, interesting and well-

done. Several commented that a few presenters didn't seem prepared or lacked something in their

presentation such as activities and accomplishments and useful conclusions. Particpants’ comments

are included below:

University/College Faculty Like the youth presenting...keep the oldies for their own professional meetings!

Good effort; however, some of the presentations were too specific with many formal results - one cannot see

how this can be applied to other issues

In some of the sessions no data were presented--especially the 3 education talks were little discussion of the

actual activities or accomplishments

Very informative

A couple of the earlier talks were a bit rough. I found the later ones to be tighter and more useful to me.

It was informative. I would have liked to have seen more discussion on how best to deliver professional

development.

Presenters provided a broad range of research and education initiatives relating to climate change in the state.

I attended part of this session, and saw the PowerPoint on line of the education part.

Good and informative

Graduate Students A nice mix of climate change science, education and EPSCoR administration issues addressed. It was concise

and well-organized. Thank you for a great day!

I thought the presentations were very interesting and worthwhile since we need to better understand what role

ideology plays in human behavior and decision making.

Very important and interesting research, but did not pertain to my research interests specifically.

That was good.

The content of most presentations was great and highlighted successes in the EPSCoR social and educational

components, but several of the presenters appeared a bit under-prepared.

The content was concerned with the science of climate change. I am primarily interested in software

development and therefore was not too interested in the topics expressed.

4.10

3.68

1 2 3 4 5

Satisfaction with Quality

Usefulness


There should be a general theme to the session or perhaps each session should point out how it relates to the

greater EPSCOR effort. They were quite separate presentations.

I was unable to attend the entire session, but I did find the presenters to be well-prepared and working on

interesting topics.

My only hope for Nevada educators is that we are getting children and teachers OUTSIDE to teach them about

Earth science! The world is full of tangible examples of the ever-changing climate!

This session focused on the most important aspect of climate research which is making our findings relevant to

policy and action.

I found it very informative, even though it does not have direct implications for my work.

A significant proportion of the research presented was below the standard expected of those in academia.

Staff Great presentation and overview from all the components of the climate change project. Enjoyed the speed-

presentation from the student poster session.

The first two presentations did not seem to draw particularly useful conclusions. The topic of the session

generally is an important one - it seems there is still much work to be done in that area, which in and of itself is

quite informative and important.

Because the sample pool for many of the surveys were limited to undergraduate students, the results wouldn't

necessarily translate to the general public who pay the bills.

Undergraduate Students The survey section was not very informative, but the education section was very good--it is good to see how the

outreach is working in education.

I felt that the research presented was research that just tried to prove something we already kind of known. It

was nothing that triggered the "oh now that's really interesting" sensor for me. I was actually expecting

speakers not just people presenting their research.

It was informative and brought up concepts I had not personally thought about before.

Others - A round table would have been more interactive-better than student presentations.

Session 2: Poster Session Introductions Participants were asked to rate their satisfaction with the quality and the usefulness of the Session 2

poster introductions on a Likert scale from 1-5, where 1=low and 5=high. The average rating for

Session 2 poster introductions was excellent. Results are displayed in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Ratings of the quality and usefulness of the Poster Session Introductions

Participants commented on the poster session introduction followed by one minute oral summaries

by poster presenters. Participants found these short introductions helpful and some added that it

allowed them to determine which posters they would like focus on later. Some offered suggestions

for improving the introductions such as avoiding jargon and overly technical language, being brief

and focused, and practicing the presentation before delivering it.

University/College Faculty These are great efforts. The posters were quite spread around - maybe some thematic grouping might be good.

Did not see poster awards?

That was good keep it up

Oral presentations were brief, to the point, and very interesting.

Useful to hear the short introductions, which helped me to target particular researchers for further discussion.

I think the 1 min. intros are helpful for this.

4.56

4.32

1 2 3 4 5


Usefulness


While I like the concept of the 1min introductions, I don't think it works for such a large number of poster

presenters. I started tuning out after the 3rd or 4th one.

I really liked the 1 minute synopsis as I was not able to visit all the posters, but the synopses gave me a great

perspective on the breadth of the project.

I found it informative. I would have liked to have seen some overarching themes discussed.

I would suggest having the presenters go to the podium to make the 1-min pitch because it was difficult to see

the presenter at times.

Some posters are very helpful for my study.

Graduate Students I like the short intros and then plenty of time to go and look at the ones I was most interested in.

This was a good format to have an overview for each poster first that then allowed targeted visiting of posters

that were of greatest interest to participants in the limited time of the session.

Great session, the introduction of the presenters was great because you got to note which posters were most

important for you to visit.

The introductions were useful to determine where the posters were that I wanted to see.

Some presenters went over their 1 minute time limited with overly involved jargon and details.

I appreciated learning of the wide scope of the projects in the poster presentation.

It was nice to get the quick intros so you know where you want to follow up with more in depth questions.

I particularly liked the 1-minute introduction as it allowed viewers to focus in on which poster they wanted to

see first and also showed the breadth of research that was present.

Being one of the presenters, I had immense trouble getting my introduction down to 1 minute.

The introduction was helpful because the quick intro allowed the presenter to explain their work and give those

attending an idea of which posters may interest them.

I thought it was good to get a minute's worth of intro to get the gist of what each poster was about.

It was clear which students practiced and prepared their one minute elevator speech and those who did not.

Staff Great, Quick overviews were interesting.

Very useful - many presenters gave more information in their introductions than necessary in order to

understand whether or not their poster was of interest. Thirty seconds is probably sufficient, and would allow

for more time to speak to presenters in person, which is far more valuable.

I liked the format.

Undergraduate Students I was in the poster session and its value to me is important. The introduction session was good.

I thought this was great because it was just a brief sample of what people are doing instead of 15 minute

presentations. You should have the "presenters" just do this and get real speakers for the first half.

The descriptions were short and to the point, I was then able to speak to those who presented something I was

interested in.

Others Liked the format and quick updates by the students. Allowed them to have the spot light for a moment

1 minute is too short, and students kind of freeze and do not articulate as well as they could.

Session 2: Poster Session Presentations Participants rated their satisfaction with the quality and usefulness of Session 2 presentations on a

Likert scale from 1-5, where 1=low and 5=high. The average rating of Session 2 poster presentations

was excellent. Results are displayed in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Rating of the quality and usefulness of the Poster Session Presentations

4.76

4.41

1 2 3 4 5


Usefulness


Participants commented on the poster session presentations. Overall participants' comments were

very positive, with participants saying the posters were of high quality and interesting. Their

comments are included below.

University/College Faculty • Great efforts by the students!

• There could have been more posters by the EPSCoR faculty--it is good to see grad students but again there

could have been more in the way of summarizing accomplishments or future plans.

• The students, in particular, are doing great work and are very impressive.

• High quality posters and engaged presenters!

• I had a useful discussion with a graduate student about downscaling, a topic that is definitely not my specialty.

Not a lot of posters, actually.

• Very good and helpful for my research

Graduate Students • They all did SUCH great posters!

• A diverse and interesting array of research.

• It was of interest that the number of posters were high

• I presented to others and it seemed that we had a good interaction.

• As a presenter, I had some great conversations during this session.

• The posters were interesting and relevant to the meeting. I really liked that this session was not during lunch.

It's always difficult as a presenter to talk to someone when juggling a plate and difficult as a viewer to ask

questions when your mouth is full.

• I was one of the presenters so I didn't get to really experience this, although I found the people walking around

to have very interesting opinions.

• I found the posters to be interesting and diverse. I think having posters presented helps unify all the components

of the EPSCoR project by giving us an idea of what others involved are doing.

• Again it was very informative, but does not directly affect my work

• Allowing the graduate students to interact with one another would have been useful.

Staff • Good work by the students and facilitators

• Good amount of time given to posters, which was great

• Many very interesting and promising projects and good to talk with presenters as well as other attendees while

considering various research projects.

Undergraduate Students • Felt that everyone had great stuff and were proud to show off their hard work.

• Everyone seemed well prepared and excited to share their work.

Others - Excellent opportunity for the faculty and stakeholders to meet with the students

Session 3: Climate Change Impacts on Nevada's Ecological and Water Resources Participants were asked to rate their satisfaction with the quality and the usefulness Session 3 on a

Likert scale from 1-5, where 1=low and 5=high. The overall rating of Session 3 was excellent.

Results are displayed in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Rating of the quality and usefulness of Session 3

4.71

4.49

1 2 3 4 5


Usefulness


Participants provided general comments on Session 3. Overall, the participants viewed the session

very positively, indicating that the session was interesting, informative, relevant and demonstrated a

breath of work being conducted with EPSCoR funding.

University/College Faculty • Great progress seems to being made.

• This is closer to my area, so that's partially why I rated it higher

• Britt Johnson gave an outstanding presentation.

• I especially liked the talks by David Charlet and Dale Devitt.

• Excellent and informative

• Needs more scientific questions and answers to be discussed.

Graduate Students • Good presenters. I especially liked Brittany's "sap" presentation. She was enthusiastic and presented her

finding/research in an organized and clear manner.

• Interesting research that seems to be expanding our understanding of links between climate, hydrology, Soil

and vegetation linkages.

• Longer presentation times would have been helpful, even 20 minutes

• I thought these talks were organized well and highlighted EPSCoR's success...

• These sessions had more to do with each other, so they flowed well, and the speakers were more adept at

speaking. I am not in the field of biology, but I do need to know the local impacts of climate in my profession.

Again though, I would start with what the basic EPSCOR goals are that these projects address.

• I thought that these presentations were a very good illustration of the variety of work that is being done using

EPSCoR funding.

• As an ecology component member I found this session to be very relevant, and ultimately it gets to heart of what

the EPSCoR project is about.

• Very informative, the presenters did a really good job.

• This session was very well done and much of the research presented was interesting and useful.

• These presentations, for the most part, were extremely well prepared and presented. Presentations by Johnson,

Hay and Charlet were particularly interesting and useful to me because they provided context and tailored their

presentations to a wider audience. They did a great job of explaining how the EPSCoR research will produce

information relevant to Nevadans and stakeholders in general.

Staff - Good presentations on some good subject

Others - I am not faculty so the science is lost on me. However the content and audience were engaging

Suggestions to improve the format of the meeting Participants made suggestions for improving the format of the meeting's sessions. Several requested

a more thematic focus such as a linkage of efforts, a keynote speaker, or an overview of the program.

Others requested more opportunities for networking, having workshop-style brainstorming sessions,

round table discussions, and a panel of presenters available for Q and A after the presentations. Their

comments are included below.

University/College Faculty Roundtables.

Sessions should have some parts of all components. Also, you could organize a session dedicated to linking

efforts among the components and scientific questions to be addressed and answered.

Be more cognizant of the flight schedules and matching better with shuttle times and conference times.

There needs to be more introduction and longer overview of the whole program by the PD--those who came

who were not part of the process were given too little information about the organization and goals of the

project. Also the first session #1 should have been last--start with the scientific results then the education

policy outreach piece.

Try to get more NSHE participation in the meeting beyond EPSCoR participants.

There were posters of work that was largely completed, and oral presentations of work that was in early stages,

with but few results to show. Perhaps some of the posters should have been oral presentations and vice versa.

I think I prefer rows of chairs rather than tables, but not a big deal.


More workshop-style sessions to facilitate brainstorming.

I appreciate that there were more opportunities to network. I am glad there was not a speaker at lunch because

it gave us more time to meet with our colleagues from other parts of the state.

I felt that the presentation were just a little too short. 5 extra minutes would have provided a little more detail.

In this regard, I though the poster session was very good for interactions.

Is there room in the schedule for a keynote speaker addressing the state of climate science today?

Graduate Students I think having a questions and answer session more like a panel discussion for each of the overarching

presentation areas would be useful.

I am a CS major and much of the special talks were at too high of a level for me to understand what presenters

were really talking about.

Staff There were questions I wanted to ask but did not because we seemed to be fairly tight in our schedule.

Incorporating more designated Q&A time would have promoted more discussion, which can be just as

important or more so than what presenters choose to include in their presentations.

It would have been very good to have time to speak with the session 3 speakers after their talks before heading

over to the data portal workshop."

Undergraduate Students - For the "presenters" have real people in the industry speak. That's what’s interesting; I

don't need to hear a 15 min presentation on just one project.

Quality of meeting and meeting facilities Participants rated technical aspects of the meeting and the quality of the facilities on a Likert scale

from 1-5, 1=poor, 5=excellent. Of the areas rated, food, technology and leadership were each rated

good on average and the rest were rated excellent. Results are displayed in Figure 12.

Figure 12. Rating of conference and meeting facilities

Participants made the following comments about the food and need for recycling: Liked the healthy and diverse food choices.

The reason that I rated the food a "2" is because there were no significant vegetarian options at lunch, with the

exception of some of the sides. Let alone vegan options. I am not strict, but I usually prepare vegan food for myself and

prefer to follow that diet.

More significant effort to compost and recycle the waste from the catering - I realize those factors may be under the

control of UNLV and not the conference organizers, but as a conference attendee, those things do matter to me.

4.35

4.46

4.49

4.51

4.08

4.08

4.27

4.46

4.21

4.10

4.54

4.29

1 2 3 4 5

Preregistration Information

Registration Process

Physical Comforts

Coffee/tea breaks

Food

Technology

Conference agenda

Overall organization

Conference management

Leadership

Atmosphere

Results


Program impact Participants rated how well the Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting met each of eight goals on

a scale of 1-5, 1=not achieved at all, 5=excelled at achieving this. Between 51 and 78% of

participants reported achieving each of the eight goals very well to excelled at achieving. Results are

shown in Figure 13.

Figure 13. Rating of project goal achievement

Participants indicated the next steps they planned to take with the information learned in the meeting

and how they would use the information or implement those steps. Many participants commented

that they will follow up with contacts made in the meeting and pursue new collaborative activities.

Many also indicated they will use information gained to inform their own research program. Some

also mentioned that it would inform their educational practice. Their comments are included below.

University/College Faculty Be thankful to be living in a changing world.

Continue my assignment

Contact some of the participants who wanted to follow up on aspects of presentations.

Try to build more collaboration with other groups.

Updates on the activities of the various components will be used to further the activities planned within my own

component. Communication between and among participants in the program will also be enhanced as a result of the

interactions afforded during this meeting.

Continuing to work on my ongoing research into climate change communications and see how the k-12 system

implements new materials

I was able to better formulate my goals for my next sustainability/climate change course with the information I

heard.

Being part of a ISP, it was useful to see how other research has progressed

The meeting provided me with useful contacts.

The meeting led to a discussion which may lead to a new collaboration.

The broad range of topics was very helpful to my understanding of the impacts that are being realized by those at

the meeting.

3%

3%

2%

3%

3%

8%

6%

3%

6%

16%

10%

27%

19%

24%

29%

21%

24%

32%

18%

40%

43%

37%

35%

38%

38%

24%

38%

27%

35%

32%

27%

38%

32%

27%

35%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Share research findings on climate modeling

Share research findings on ecological change

Share research findings on water resources

Share information on climate change policy

Share information on climate change education

Share information on climate change outreach.

Enable researcher to communicate impact of theproject's climate change research

Not achieved at all Slightly achieved Somewhat achieved Achieved very well Excelled at achieving


Will use to increase collaborations in climate change science, education and outreach

Continue research

To help guide curriculum development.

Encourage more students and colleagues to submit abstracts and participate.

I will definitely be more involved in the data portal and try to learn more about the education successes and failures

for improvement.

It gives me a better grip on the contributions of the NSF EPSCoR program to climate change science.

Rethink about my research based on what I learn from the meeting

Already integrating into my work flow; opportunity to cross-connect with colleagues from other disciplines

invaluable.

Not much. Some outreach initiatives and motivations gained for future projects.

No steps planned at this point.

Graduate Students I will continue in my capacity as GRA and Education Coordinator for the UNR arm of EPSCoR to make this year's

Summer Institute the best and most practical of the past three years.

I will foster collaborations with the groups setting up the climate stations in the snake range locations so the data

can be used in modeling.

Concepts will be incorporated into my research.

Use information I gained to better my own research projects and help to build new future projects.

I will use in my component and try to disburse it in my day-to-day.

trying to collaborate with people from other components

I hope to continue to work with EPSCoR. I also made connections with a number of individuals working on similar

questions, and plan to continue to communicate with them in the future.

I will be contacting those that expressed an interest in the web portal to discuss. Also got feedback about

development directions in portal workshop--will discuss and implements suggestions.

I can talk more about the ecological impacts. It was great networking and I already have another conference

appearance planned.

Continue my research work to gain further insight in Physics of global climate change and its impacts.

Information will be used for job (teaching) applications (such as cover letters that require detail on how I plan to

encourage young students interest in topics covered during the meeting)

I did receive some suggestions to help make analyzing my data easier and will take steps to ensure that it is

implemented.

In all likelihood, I will use the results of some of the survey data to compare with my own.

Meeting with others gave me important and valuable tips on how to present my own research on water resources. I

will be including some suggestions in my next poster presentation at the Tri-State meeting this year in Idaho.

I found some of posters on the developing cyber infrastructure to be useful and will keep that in mind as I do my

research. The information on the Sap flow research may also be useful incorporate in my work in the Snake Range.

Future research resources

Keep moving forward on our project and make use of the connections established at the meeting.

Increased collaboration with other groups has been facilitated by a better understanding of the work and results

achieved by these groups.

Staff Great overall information.

I will report on some of the scientific research activities to my coworkers at the Long Now Foundation, as well as

some of the potential collaborative relationships created at the conference.

The Long Now Foundation is primarily interested in knowing what is going on and not necessarily in playing a

particularly active role. We support good science and the proliferation of its results, but as a rule we ""take no

sides"" in an activist sense.

We are very happy to have had the opportunity to be represented at the meeting, and if we do not ""implement"" the

information it does not mean we did not value the experience.

Continue working on the projects with shared info. Learned from the conference.

Use survey results to shape future annual meetings and other workshops to further support the success of the NSF

EPSCOR project.

1) network with colleagues, 2) develop research proposal, 3) apply knowledge on the ongoing research


Next step, 2nd workshop with PI's on water urban vulnerability studies. The data and conclusions will likely feed

into a water system vulnerability assessment.

Continue to use these opportunities to generate more student involvement in our programs.

Undergraduate Students Ideas for future projects and continuing of existing projects

Try to implement some research methods displayed into future work

I will look into further research, and maybe do some of my own.

The presentations that I attended were not explicitly relevant to my current undertakings. However, I did find that

EPSCOR provided a great forum for the dissemination of climate change research to a diverse audience. I think

that although I found little pertinent information, the meeting as a whole was effective in showcasing the

professional work of various researchers; the meeting certainly stimulated my desire to undertake similar research

endeavors, and also elucidated potential areas of concentration within this large field of study.

Others Apply to future conference agendas

Collaboration with more people I've discussed during the meeting.

Share their research and data/activities, and integrate with my work, which would beneficial for both.

Work with K-12 and higher education to bridge education with industry

Not really a path to implementing anything nurtured. Just individual presentations.

Not much was learned for use by a water utility.

Suggestions to improve the overall meeting Participants gave suggestions to improve the meeting. A common suggestion was for the meeting to

include more opportunities for interaction and networking such as more discussion time, focused

working groups, informal time to mingle, Q&A, and round table discussion. Some staff

recommended that there be a wider variety of participants and/or presenters such as more people

from industry. Their suggestions are included below.

University Faculty Put emphasis on scientific questions/problems and cross-cutting efforts.

I would actually like to see it a bit longer--last until 5 or 6 pm maybe. Or a 2nd day??

Could incorporate focused working groups to encourage more communication/networking

Fix the lotus notes email issue where it says the NSHE address is not unique and makes you have to guess which to

use. I had two different issues with my emails (registration and my abstract) not reaching NSHE

I thought it was well planned and executed.

Perhaps a bit more discussion. Not sure how to implement and stimulate that.

More time for mingling, less proportion of time devoted to formal presentation.

A bit more unstructured networking and side discussion time is needed.

Information on poster resources/requirements was not complete (e.g., we weren't sure of size of posters required, if

there would be backing for posters)

Could conference proceedings be published in book format?

Graduate Students It's unfortunately unclear to me what the purposes of the presentations are -- it seems like a grab-bag of topics with

no real direction or cohesiveness. Such direction will certainly be difficult when EPSCoR participants cover the

wide range of topics that we do, but I feel like a re-organization would help. Perhaps break the day into sessions for

each major track (ecological change, education, data portal, etc.) that could include both short (5 min) oral updates

and a general section discussion to identify goals and common threads. Participants could attend as many sessions

as cover pertinent topics for them, with a brief final plenary session reporting the major goings-on of each

individual session. Or, any other organizational scheme to make the meeting feel more focused and helpful.

Since scientists are generally self-centered. Have a bit of activities with name learning or forced cross contact in

order to expand that aspect.

I am assuming that the program is meant to study climate in order to lead to adaptation and mitigation efforts...we

should include that in how we do the conference. It was good to have materials online, but what about the food,

plates, etc...Were they all composted, reusable would be better.

Honestly, I think the only real improvement would to have had a few (maybe 4) more presentations.


More interaction with others would have been a nice addition (how to achieve this with the limited time available I

am not sure); the meeting was well-organized and showed marked improvement from past meetings.

Staff A few of the presentations did a much better job of communicating to a broad audience, which seems integral to the

goals of the project. Namely, Johnson's and Hay's presentations provided excellent background that a layperson

would require to understand the infrastructure being built to monitor climate. Given the purpose of the grant

broadly, I think more emphasis should be placed on crafting popularly accessible and useful messages.

You encouraged different sector representatives to attend, perhaps offer a panel session, to give representatives an

opportunity to ask questions about relevancy to their particular sector.

Undergraduate students

Involve the community more. Too many researchers there. Need industry people to share the research with and

create networking between everyone.

Others - Roundtables, and keep Q/A, posters, and other interactions long enough to have meat to them.

Commendations and recommendations for the Nevada Climate Change Meeting On average, participants rated the quality and usefulness of the sessions very highly. Many

participants commented that the sessions were interesting, informative and well done. In particular,

many commented that introductions to the posters in the poster session in particular was helpful for

participants to identify posters they would like to know more about. The conference and meeting

facilities were also rated highly by participants. Over 60% felt the conference achieved very well or

excelled at achieving the meeting's goals of sharing research findings and information, and promoting

research skills and intellectual development for Nevada educators and students. Many participants

commented that they would pursue new collaborative activities with contacts made at the meeting.

1. Many participants indicated they wanted more time to interact with the other participants and

with the presenters.

Consider adding other types of sessions to the meeting such as workshops, roundtables, and

more time for less formal interaction. Also more discussion and question and answer time could

be added to the presentations.

2. The email addresses of participants were not available until the day after the meeting so the

evaluator could not email the evaluation form to participants at the end of the meeting. Fifty-

three percent of participants completed the evaluation form.

Provide a laptop at the registration desk so people who haven’t registered can do so before they

join the meeting. Download the list of registrants and reconcile it with attendees during the

meeting. Email the list of attendees to the evaluator before the end of the meeting.

3. Several participants suggested making the meeting content more cohesive.

Consider adding a keynote speaker, begin the meeting with a panel presentation overview,

and/or add sessions or activities designed to foster linkages between various EPSCoR projects

that are presented.


C. Nevada Data Portal Workshop Background of the Project Immediately following the 2012 Nevada Climate Change Meeting a workshop was conducted to

introduce users to the tools and data available through the Nevada Climate Change Portal

(http:/www.sensor.nevada.edu/NCCP/). The workshop was held in a computer lab at the University

of Nevada, Las Vegas. It began with an overview (approximately 20 minutes) and was followed by

a period of time in which participants used and explores the data portal (approximately 50 minutes).

At the end there was a period of time dedicated to soliciting participant feedback (approximately 20

minutes).

Background of the evaluation The focus of this evaluation was twofold. First, it was designed to assess the Data Portal workshop

and second, it was intended to solicit feedback on the data portal being developed. This feedback is

provided to the data portal developers to enable them to improve the data portal. During the

workshop, participants logged into the evaluation form through a link posted on the data portal

website and completed the form as they participated in the workshop. An email with a link to the

evaluation form was also sent to participants so they could complete it after the workshop if they

hadn’t done so already. The evaluation form is included in Appendix C.

Evaluation participants Of the 30 people who registered for the workshop, 19 completed the entire evaluation form and two

partially completed the form. Participants were majority male (74%), Caucasian (63%). Most were

faculty (58%) from 4-year colleges or universities (74%). A detailed demographic description of

participants is shown in Figure 14.

Participants wanted to share the following with program organizers:

Overall it was a good meeting. Thanks for the efforts put into the meeting by the folks who

organized it.

I appreciate all of the work that Michele, Alice, and the other professional staff put into the

meeting.

Overall it was a great experience, but I do wish I could have interacts with more than just

researchers.

I just want to thank EPSCOR for making this meeting possible.

Nice job by EPSCoR staff!

The most useful time was on the side meetings and breakout sessions.

I just found out that the National Center for Science Education, which in the past has

concentrated on evolution (confronting the creationists), has now taken on climate change

(confronting the climate change deniers).


Figure 14. Demographic description of Nevada Data Portal Workshop participants

Number (n=19) %

Gender

Female

Male

5

14

26%

74%

Ethnicity

African American

Asian

Caucasian

East Indian

Hawaiian / Pacific Islander

Hispanic

Middle Eastern

Native American

Mixed race


0

2

12

1

0

0

1

0

2

1

0%

11%

63%

5%

0%

0%

5%

0%

11%

5%

Primary academic or work location

2-Year College

4-Year College/University

Business/Industry

Government

NSHE

National Center for Science Education

Non-profit organization

0

14

1

1

1

1

1

0%

74%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

Current Position Faculty

Staff

Researcher

Student

Education specialist

11

3

2

2

1

58%

16%

16%

11%

5%

Findings Mode of accessing data portal Participants were asked a series of questions about how they will access the data portal. The majority

reported that they will access the portal on Windows from their primary (68%) computer. Forty-two

percent reported that they will access it through windows on their secondary computer as well.

Participants reported they will access it using Mac OS X on their primary (21%) and secondary

(32%) computer. Firefox is the web browser used by most participants (79%). Results are displayed

in Figure 15.


Figure 15. How participants heard about and will access data portal

# %

How did you first hear about this data portal? (n=21)

Informational email or newsletter

Word of mouth

Presentation at conference/meeting

Email invitation

Climate change conference

Google search

Works on the project

Works with Long Now Foundation which has been aware of it

Advisor

University

3

4

3

3

2

1

1

2

1

1

14%

19%

14%

14%

14%

7%

7%

14%

7%

7%

When accessing the portal what is the operating system of your primary computer? (n=19)

Windows

Mac OS X

iOS

13

4

2

68%

21%

11%

When accessing the portal what is the operating system of your secondary computer? (n=19) Windows

Mac OS X

Linux/Unix

Android

ipad

None

8

6

2

1

1

1

42%

32%

11%

5%

5%

5%

What web browsers do you use on your primary and secondary computers? (n=19) Internet Explorer

Firefox

Chrome

Safari

7

15

7

6

37%

79%

37%

32%

Quality and usefulness of the data portal workshop

Participants rated the usefulness of each component of the workshop on a Likert scale from 1-5,

1=not useful at all, 5=extremely useful and commented on each component. Components were rated

very useful. Ratings and comments about each component are displayed in Figure 16.

Extremely useful 4.21 – 5.00

Very useful 3.41 – 4.20

Somewhat useful 2.61 – 3.40

Slightly useful 1.81 – 2.60

Not useful at all 1.00 – 1.80


Figure 16. Ratings of Nevada Data Portal Workshop components

Workshop Component Rating (1-5)

Comments

Beginning overview and

introduction to the portal

3.63 • I had already explored the portal somewhat.

Exploration and use of

the portal

3.84 • Probably too much guidance provided up-front for a usability

study

Feedback session 3.84 • Online survey could be accompanied with a completion bar

toward the finish.

• It was definitely useful to be able to provide comments. I think

another workshop or something similar needs to happen later.

It seems that there is still much work to be done until a fine-

tuning of the user-friendliness of the site can be undertaken.

Participants gave suggestions for how the workshop could have been more useful. Several

participants would have liked more time to explore the portal and some also would have preferred

less training in the beginning. Participant comments on the workshop are listed below.

College/University Faculty The portal has no intuitive interface about required fields in order to operate any initial search.

Need more time. Have people more prepared to look for data they actually care about.

A shorter introduction would be fine. Jump into the portal hands-on training quickly. Also have 10 minutes

discussion at the end.

Move a little slower and make sure all are on the same page during instructions.

I would've appreciated even more time with this data portal session! Will be coming back shortly...

Provide less direction up-front if conducting a usability study; I personally applaud the way this session was

handled, but would hate for your data to be corrupted by too much "training" up-front.

Staff It would have been nice to have a researcher propose a simple but meaningful use for the data portal, and to walk

through not only the retrieval of the data but also the first step of turning it into a useful data set. i.e., saving it as a

file that you could manipulate, or something like that.

We also did not really discuss the portal website generally, outside of the data retrieval. That part of the site is key

to public use, which is the only reason a public portal is even useful.

Make sure when planning that the location/equipment used for the demonstration has been tested.

Occasionally identical searches can bring different data results. Sometimes it brings up no data available and other

times it is available.

Educational Specialist The opportunity to sit and play with others ("how did you do that?") is much like in a classroom setting where peers

are sometimes the best teachers.

Data portal user-friendliness Participants rated the user-friendliness of eight aspects of the data portal on a Likert scale from 1-5,

1= poor, 5=excellent. Documentation was rated average, whereas the rest of the aspects of user-

friendliness were rated good by participants. Results are displayed in Figure 17.


3.79

3.58

3.84

3.37

3.72

3.94

3.58

3.74

1 2 3 4 5

Finding data/information

Accessing data/information

Data & Information Formats

Documentation

Performance

Availability of the portal (absence of crashes)

Ease of Navigation

Quality of design and visual appeal

Figure 17. Participant’s ratings of data portal user-friendliness

Step-by-step commentary while navigating the data portal As participants explored the data portal during the workshop, they recorded notes on observations

they made. Many participants gave detailed and technical advice for improving the data portal. The

list of comments is in included in Appendix D.

Suggestions to improve the data portal Participants also made suggestions on how the data portal could be improved to make it easier to use

and more useful. Participants made many suggestions to improve and streamline the user interface,

such as having fewer checkboxes in the entry screen, being consistent about whether items needed to

be selected or not, and having a key to the types of data available. Comments are listed below.

College/University Faculty: File naming conventions to ease with batch downloading

Lesser check-boxes would be nice. But it is understandable that there is too much data and maybe it is difficult to

use another mechanism without so many check-boxes.

See notes provided in responses to lead question, this survey

There is an issue with speed which might be due to the machine I am working on.

It would be worthwhile to incorporate some serious design input to improve the usability of the interface; choices

need to be made rather than putting everything up-front. For example: if all data sources need to be up-front,

implement as scroll _down_ rather than across - took me several minutes to figure out what I wanted was off the

screen and to the right...

Explain clearly why some sites have some information and not other information. (I know that some sites have more

equipment than others, but the average person would not have any clue what is going on.) Be perfectly transparent

in that sense - you have nothing to hide!

Explain what different kinds of data are and what instrumentation provides them. This could be in the form of a key.

The new format does seem better than the older one, because it does not have to load every time you click on a new

data type. But it does not give you the option to select only an average or minimum data type within something like

precipitation. It gives you all of them. Why can't you choose?

Some things need to be 'selected' by clicking on them, and some don't. That needs to be easier to intuit. If you have

to select a time zone, make that clear. Currently, it just fails to load and there's no indication of why."

The flow on the standard new version is horizontal versus the more traditional vertical flow. If the data boxes don't

fit in a normal window horizontally, then a vertical format would be more ideal.


Educational Specialist: For use in education settings, starting with the big picture (where in Nevada the sites are), and then highlighting the

sites (maybe with pictures/stories of when they were installed) would help set the context. Originally I thought the

transects were from north to south up and over a mountain. Looking at the map I see they are more scattered, not in

a transect line.

Staff: Please check how to make a selection and download it quickly.

Provide a general user interface that you encounter up front, with a pathway to more detailed data.

Streamline interface.

Make sure data sets generate the information that they should.

Impact of the data portal Participants indicated the purpose they had for visiting the data portal and where they planned to use

the information they obtained from the data portal. Nearly all participants indicated their purpose

was to acquire data (42%) or information (42%). Responses are shown in Figure 18.

Figure 18. Purpose and domains of use for data portal

# %

What is your primary purpose for visiting the portal (n=19)

Data (measurements & observations for download and use)

Information (reports, graphs, charts, tables, maps, photos, videos, references)

Tools (search, analysis, mapping, etc)

Teaching tool

Looking for educational opportunities

8

8

1

1

1

42%

42%

5%

5%

5%

In which of these academic and/or employment domains do you primarily plan to use the

information you obtained from this data portal? (n=19)

Education

Research

Policy Development

Education about climate change policy development

Dual purpose of possible research, but also to monitor the weather in the Snake Range

8

9

0

1

1

42%

47%

0%

5%

5%

Participants described the topic focuses of the information they obtained from the data portal.

Participants listed a variety of largely research purposes for using the data portal.

College/University Faculty Climate Monitoring, cold air drainage studies.

Soil moisture; groundwater; temperature

Image processing and visualization

Spatial Analysis

Just playing around

Assisting end-users accessing/re-purposing data

Educational purposes

Computing and communications

Assisting end-users in accessing/navigating/re-use of data

Educational Specialist I was particularly interested in the long wave incoming and outgoing values and was puzzled why they are negative

at the site I looked, which was East Sheep subalpine. Also the labels on map showing the sites is really hard to

make sense of- http://sensor.nevada.edu/NCCP/Climate%20Monitoring/Locations.aspx

Student Eventually my research


11% 32% 58%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

How likely are you to use this data portal again in thefuture?

Not sure Not likely Likely Very likely

Staff Data and publications

Awareness of the tools available for long-term science.

Climate change education within diverse communities.

Participants explained their likelihood of using the data portal again on a 4-point scale that ranged

from not likely to very likely. The majority of participants indicated they were very likely to use the

data portal again. The responses are illustrated in Figure 19.

Figure 19. Likelihood of using data portal again

Two faculty participants who answered that they were not likely or not sure if they would use the

data portal again shared why: Unless the format becomes a little more friendly to view or navigate I probably won't be interested in using it. Also

without some graphical format and good way to open the data in a tabular way I won't find this useful at all.

I'm not sure that it will be useful for my particular purpose. I have looked at it several times now, using both the

standard and the new interface. The result has been the same: it has limited utility as a teaching tool. It has

potential, but only if instructors thinking as instructors, not only as scientists, really think about how this site can be

used as a teaching tool.

As I said before, it is obvious that many resources have been used to create a pleasant interface. Some pedagogical

thinking would enhance this site.

Participants wanted to share the following with the data portal developers: Keep up the good work - I realize that you are still exploring the best interface needed.

Thank you for doing the work needed to pull this resource together. Data is indeed "the gold mine of the

researcher". =)

Thank you!

Enormous potential. It will important to verify the accuracy the data before adding other features since

data quality is crucial. Sometimes less is more, especially if the data quality is being lost in the deluge

of data. Excellent proof of concept overall.

Very nice workshop. Please share more info. And updates with us. Thanks so much.

Obviously a tremendous amount of work has gone into creating this extensive sensor-to-user system. But

there is a lot of work left to do if it is to become a site that is useful for educators, political actors,

citizens, or less highly trained researchers. Thanks very much for the portal workshop; it was a very

illuminating session.


Commendations and recommendations for the Nevada Data Portal and Workshop The project leaders are commended for taking the opportunity at the Annual Nevada Climate Change

Meeting to host this workshop and obtain feedback on the Data Portal. The evaluation tool elicited

rich feedback that can be used to improve the data portal. In terms of impact, ninety percent of

participants indicated they are likely to use the data portal again.

1. Workshop components were rated overall as good.

In order to improve the workshop, consider participants suggestions for having less time for

introduction and more time for hands on exploration. To make the demonstration more useful,

consider providing a concrete example of how the data portal could be used and guide

participants in the process of retrieving the data and turning it into a useful data set. Because

some participants have more experience than others with the data portal, it may be useful for

future workshops to have an optional introductory orienting session for those newer to the data

portal followed by time for beginners and experienced users to explore and use the data portal.

2. The data portal user-friendliness was rated good and the documentation was rated average.

Participants gave a great deal of detailed feedback and specific and technical suggestions to

improve the data portal.

Data portal developers are encouraged to look through participant comments one by one. Some

suggestions are located on page 27 of this report. Specific, step-by-step comments made by

participants as they navigated the portal are located in Appendix D.

D. Research Awards

Background of project Request for proposals were distributed for three types of research awards (Interdisciplinary Science

Teams/Projects [IST/ISP], Seed Grants, and Community College Fellowships). Proposals were

reviewed by project leaders and recipients were selected. Award recipients who have received funds

are posted at http://epscorspo.nevada.edu/nsf/climate1/awards.html. IST/ISPs and Seed Grant

recipients are reported in this report. In 2009-10 and 2010-11 there were two Interdisciplinary

Science Team Recipients. This program sunsetted and was replaced by the Integrated Science

Projects (ISP). There were two ISP awards in 2012-2013.Figures 20 and 21 list recipients of

IST/ISP awards.

Figure 20. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Interdisciplinary Science Teams 2009-2011

Recipient Institution Project Title Team Members

Michael Nussbaum

UNLV Losing the Lake: Promoting

Sustainability Awareness through

Educational Computer-Simulations of

Lake Mead Levels and Water Supply

to the Las Vegas Valley

Gale Sinatra, Sajjad Ahmad, Kent

Crippen, Frederick Harris, Sergiu

Dascau, Zhongbo Yu,

David Hassenzahl,

William Smith, Asako Stone,

Matthew Lachniet

Saxon Sharp DRI Effects of Climate Change on Spring

Ecosystem Hydroecology as a Guide

to Developing Alternative Water

Policies

Scott Bassett, Donald Sada,

Scott Mensing, James Thomas

http://epscorspo.nevada.edu/nsf/climate1/awards.html


Figure 21. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Integrated Science Project Recipients 2011-2013


Scott Mensing UNR Great Basin Climecology

Demonstration of the Utility of the

Nevada CAN

Tom Albright, Franco Biondi,

Dale Devitt, Lynn Fenstermaker,

Laurel Saito

Thomas Piechota UNLV Urban Water Vulnerability

Sajjad Ahmad, Derek Kauneckis,

Yingtao Jiang, Shahram Latifi,

John Mejia, Helen Neill,

Kimberly Rollins, Laurel Saito,

Haroon Stephen, Eric Wilcox

Four Seed Grant were awarded in 2009 and four in 2010. Figures 22 and23 list recipients of Seed

Grant awards.

Figure 22. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Seed Grant Awardees 2009


James Brock DRI, UNLV, UNR

– DHS DEES,

DAS

Creation and Pilot Testing of Wireless

Sensor Networks to Capture Spatial

Variability at EPSCoR Transect Sites

Richard Sustalk, George Nikolich,

John Arnone

Dave DuBois

DRI, UNR-DAS Aerosol Modification of Snow

Albedo in Southern Nevada and its

Influence on Snow Melt and Spring

Runoff

Hans Moosmuller

Susanna Priest UNLV Understanding the Impact of Climate

Change Media Messages

Denise Tillery, Ted Geenhalgh

Michael Young DRI, UNLV Water source partitioning for shrub

land transpiration using innovative

field methods

Dale Devitt, Matthew Lachiniet

Figure 23. NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Seed Grant Awardees 2010


Rajan Chakrabarty DRI, UNR Climate Change Collaboration,

Education and Outreach

Michael Robinson

Karletta Chief

DRI, UNLV Evaluating the Vulnerability of

Pyramid Lake Paiute Indian Water

Rights Under Climate Change

Mahesh Gautam

William Smith Jr.

Lynn Fenstermaker DRI, UNLV Assessing the Envelope of Interannual

Variation in Vegetation

Dale Devitt, David Costa

Stanley Hillyard UNLV Physiological Stress as an Indicator of

Climate Change

Frank van Breukelen


Background of the evaluation All award recipients will complete a self-evaluation form based on the goals of the award they

received. The self-evaluation form for Seed Grant Award recipients has been developed (Appendix

E). This form will be modified to align with the goals of the ISP/IST awards. Both self-evaluation

forms will be sent to award recipients in March 2012.

Award recipients submit annual and final reports to present progress made towards achievement of

project goals. For future reports, the evaluator developed an annual report questionniare for the Seed

Grant Awards (Appendix F) that should be distributed to the grant recipients. The evaluator created a

rubric (Appendix G) for the review team to use when evaluating 2010 Seed Grant Award reports. A

similar annual report questionnaire and evaluation rubric will be developed for the Integrated

Science Project. Results from the evaluation of these reports will be included in future EPSCoR

Track 1 reports.

Commendations and recommendations 1. The Awards web page should be regularly updated to include RFPs. awards, project

descriptions, and links to final reports for each award.

2. The annual report form should be aligned with an evaluation rubric. The report form should be

sent to award recipients each year to guide the recipient to provide information needed to gage

whether their project is achieving the identified goals of the award program.

3. Results from report evaluation rubrics should be provided to the evaluator so results can be

included in future reports.

3.2 Review of Project Reports A. Project Strategic Tasks

Background Five strategic tasks teams provide the vision and implement the tasks to achieve the goals of this

climate change EPSCoR project:

Climate modeling

Ecological change and water resources

Policy, Decision Making and Outreach

Cyberinfrastructure

Education

The evaluator reviewed annual 2011-2012 Strategic Tasks Progress Reports to identify areas that

may benefit from evaluation assistance. The amount, breadth, and depth of work that is being

accomplished by this project is impressive.


The evaluator believes the following areas may benefit from evaluation assistance:

1. The Education Strategic Task team develops curriculum and programs at all educational

levels. Currently the team is developing a K-12 climate modeling curriculum. In order to

assess the impact on students’ attitudes the evaluator will work with the project leaders to

identify attitudinal goals (ie. increased interest in science, increase interest in pursuing a

career in science, increase confidence in learning science) and will develop an attitudinal

survey. Curriculum developers/teachers will administer the pre/post-survey using an online

link. The evaluator will compile and analyze results. Curriculum developers are encouraged

to develop content exams, based on the content of their curriculum, and administer them to

students as a pre and post-test. The evaluator will analyze and report content test data

provided by curriculum developers. The evaluator will distribute and collect survey and

pre/post content test results through the curriculum development program leader.

2. The Policy, Decision Making and Outreach strategic tasks team has surveyed rural and urban

communities, water and energy purveyors, land managers, the general public, and cross-state

local government to assess climate change perceptions, assumptions, knowledge and

preferences. The External Research and Technological Advisory Board has suggested that

the strategic task team continue these efforts. If the team continues with these efforts the

external evaluator will work with this task force to continue to develop high quality surveys

and/or compile and analyze results. The evaluator will work with the project leaders to check

on the status of surveys and identify areas in which the evaluator can be of assistance.


Section 4. Commendations and Recommendations

Based on the results of this evaluation the following commendations and recommendations for the

Track 1 EPSCoR project have been identified.

1. Demographics: Participants in the project activities are primarily male Caucasian. Continue to

work towards involving more females and underrepresented minorities in this EPSCoR project

and activities. Advertise and publicize activities and events more widely and make a greater effort

to personally invite individuals from underrepresented groups to get involved.

2. Project components: Based on the results of the components evaluated during quarter 2, the

Track 1 EPSCoR project is doing a very good job of meeting needs of project participants. On

average activities were rated as very useful and of a high quality. Faculty, students, and the

general public who participated in the Climate Change Series, the Nevada Annual Climate Change

Meeting and Nevada Data Portal Workshop provided many valuable comments to help improve

these activities. The evaluator made specific recommendations after each section of the report.

Review these recommendations, share them with individuals in charge of the activities, and

consider implementing them to improve future meetings, seminars, courses, and programs.


Appendix A: Climate Change Seminar Series Evaluation

Page 1 - Heading

Nevada Climate Change Seminar Series

Page 1 - Question 1 - Open Ended - One Line

From what location did you view this seminar?

Page 1 - Question 2 - Open Ended - One Line [Mandatory]

What is the name of the seminar presenter?

Page 2 - Heading

About You: Completion of this section provides basic information to capture the demographics of NSF EPSCoR participants. This information strengthens future applications for funding, ultimately providing research program sustainability and growth.

Page 2 - Question 3 - Yes or No [Mandatory]

Do you participate in the current Nevada NSF EPSCoR Climate Change project?

Yes

No Page 2 - Question 4 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

What best describes your position? (Choose one)

Higher Ed Faculty/Admin

K-12 Educator/Admin

Post Doc

Graduate Student

Undergraduate Student

Community-based Organization

Industrial Affiliate

Other, please specify Page 2 - Question 5 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

With which institution are you most closely affiliated? (Choose one)


Nevada State University

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

University of Nevada, Reno

If affiliated with a Community College, High School or Middle School, please list name of school. If other, please specify:


Page 2 - Question 6 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

What is your gender?

Male

Female Page 2 - Question 7 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

With which ethnicity do you most closely identify?

African American (Black)

Asian (Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc.)

Caucasian (White)

East Indian (from India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh etc.)

Hispanic (Latino/a, Mexican, Chicano/a, Brazilian)

Middle Eastern

Native American (American Indian/Alaskan Native)

Pacific Islander / Hawaiian

Other, please specify: Page 3 - Question 8 - Rating Scale - Matrix [Mandatory]

About the Program: Please indicate the level of agreement that most accurately reflects your opinion of the presenter.

P o o r F a i r A v e r a g e G o o d E x c e l l e n t

K n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t 1 2 3 4 5

Preparedness for this presentatio n 1 2 3 4 5

Selection and use of audio-visual aids (Powerpoint, diagrams, pictures) 1 2 3 4 5

Ability to motivate you to learn more about this topic 1 2 3 4 5

Ability to relate his/her research to climate change issues 1 2 3 4 5

Ability to align the level of difficulty of the topic to the audience 1 2 3 4 5

Quality and usefulness of presentation handouts 1 2 3 4 5 Page 3 - Question 9 - Yes or No [Mandatory]

Did you receive the information you expected?

Yes

No

If no, please explain

Page 3 - Question 10 - Open Ended - Comments Box

Do you have any suggestions and/or comments for this presenter?


Page 3 - Question 11 - Rating Scale - Matrix [Mandatory]

How would you rate the seminar in terms of the following?


T h e l o c a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5T h e t i m e o f d a y 1 2 3 4 5T h e l e n g t h o f t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5T h e c h o i c e o f s p e a k e r 1 2 3 4 5The amount of advertisement/publicity 1 2 3 4 5 Page 3 - Question 12 - Choice - Multiple Answers (Bullets) [Mandatory]

How did you hear about this presentation? Mark all that apply.

UNLV website

EPSCoR website

Friend invited me

Professor invited me/my class

I received an email invitation

Other, please specify Page 3 - Question 13 - Open Ended - Comments Box

Do you have any suggestions to improve this climate change seminar series?


What other topics would you like to learn about in upcoming climate change seminar presentations?


The Program's Impact on You: To what extent has this training impacted you in the following areas?

N o n e A l i t t l e S o m e w h a t Good amount A l o t

Increased awareness and knowledge about climate change 1 2 3 4 5

Increased ability to conduct research in your scientific field 1 2 3 4 5

Increased ability to teach others about climate change 1 2 3 4 5

Increased ability to make informed decisions related to climate change 1 2 3 4 5 Page 4 - Question 16 - Open Ended - Comments Box

How will you use the information you have learned today? What impacts might this information have on your educational institution and/or community?

Thank you for your participation and feedback!


Appendix B: Annual Nevada Climate Change Meeting Evaluation

Page 1 - Heading

Annual NV NSF EPSCoR Climate Change Meeting University of Nevada, Las Vegas February 13, 2012

Page 1 - Question 1 - Rating Scale – Matrix [Mandatory]

Session 1: Climate Change Policy, Outreach and Education Presentations (Presenting authors: Riddel, Greenhalgh, Liu, Collopy, Ewing-Taylor, Kiley)

L o w 2 3 4 H i g h I did not attend this session.

Rate your satisfaction with the quality of this session. 1 2 3 4 5 . Rate the usefulness of this session to you professionally. 1 2 3 4 5 . Page 1 - Question 2 - Open Ended - Comments Box

Please comment on this session.

Page 1 - Heading

Session 2. Poster Session The format of the poster session included two portions: an introduction of all the presenters and the poster displays. We would like to get your feedback on each of these portions of the session.


Poster Session Introductions


Rate your satisfaction with the quality of this session. 1 2 3 4 5 I did not attend this session.

Rate the usefulness of this session to you professionally. 1 2 3 4 5 I did not attend this session. Page 1 - Question 4 - Open Ended - Comments Box

Please comment on the introduction portion of this session.


Climate Change Poster Session Presentations







Session 3: Climate Change Impacts on Nevada's Ecological and Water Resources (Presenting authors: Koonce, Johnson, Apodaca, Hay, Charlet, Devitt)





Page 1 - Heading

Meeting Format

Do you have any suggestions to improve the format of the sessions?


Please rate your satisfaction:


Preregistration Information 1 2 3 4 5

R e g i s t r a t i o n P r o c e s s 1 2 3 4 5

Physical Comforts (bathroom facilities, safety, location, beds) 1 2 3 4 5

C o f f e e / t e a b r e a k s 1 2 3 4 5

Food (dietary needs, preferences, freshness) 1 2 3 4 5

Technology (speed of internet connection, use during conference) 1 2 3 4 5

Conference agenda (clear purpose, balanced, meaningful) 1 2 3 4 5

Overall organization (sessions started/ended, on time, time for discussion) 1 2 3 4 5

Conference management (focused, well prepared, coordinated themes) 1 2 3 4 5

Leadership (built working relationships, encouraged involvement) 1 2 3 4 5

Atmosphere (friendly, supportive, promoted team work) 1 2 3 4 5

Results (met meeting objectives stated on agenda) 1 2 3 4 5 Page 2 - Question 11 - Rating Scale - Matrix [Mandatory]

Goals and Impacts: How well do you believe this meeting has achieved these goals:

Not achieved at all Slightly achieved Somewhat achieved Achieved very well Excelled in achieving this

Share research findings on climate modeling. 1 2 3 4 5

Share research findings on ecological change. 1 2 3 4 5

Share research findings on water resources. 1 2 3 4 5

Share information on climate change policy. 1 2 3 4 5

Share information about climate change education. 1 2 3 4 5

Share information about climate change outreach. 1 2 3 4 5

Enable researchers to communicate impact of the project's climate change research to decision-makers, businesses, educators, and the public. 1 2 3 4 5

Create an environment to promote research skills and intellectual development for Nevada educators and students . 1 2 3 4 5


Page 2 - Question 12 - Open Ended - Comments Box [Mandatory]

What are the next steps you will take with the information you have learned? How will you use and/or implement it?


Do you have any suggestions to improve this meeting?


Is there anything else you would like to share?

Page 3 - Heading

Please tell us about you: Completion of this section provides basic information to capture the demographics of NSF EPSCoR participants. This information strengthens future applications for funding, ultimately providing research program sustainability and growth.



Male Female



African American (Black) Asian (Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Vietnamese) Caucasian (White) East Indian (from India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh) Hispanic (Latino/a, Mexican, Chicano/a)

Middle Eastern Native American (American Indian/Alaskan) Pacific Islander / Hawaiian Prefer not to answer Other, please specify:


What is the name of the institution, agency or company with which you are most closely affiliated?

Desert Research Institute University of Nevada, Las Vegas University of Nevada, Reno College of Southern Nevada Great Basin College

Nevada State College Truckee Meadows Community College Western Nevada College Nevada System of Higher Education Other, please specify:


What position do you currently hold?

Faculty - Community college Faculty - University Graduate Student Industrial Affiliate Agency Affiliate

Staff Student - Middle/High school Teacher - Middle School Teacher - High School Undergraduate Student


Appendix C: Nevada Data Portal Survey & Workshop Evaluation

Page 1 - Heading

2012 NV Data Portal and Workshop Evaluation


Thank you for your participation today. Please record any notes or observations you've made as you've explored the data portal today.


How did you first find out about this data portal?

Online community

Informational email or newsletter

News story (newspaper/television)

Search engine

Word of mouth

Presentation at Conference/Meeting

Email invitation

Other, please specify Page 2 - Heading

DATA PORTAL USABILITY


Please rate the userfriendliness of the following aspects of this data portal.

P o o r F a i r Av e r a g e G o o d Excellent Not sure what this is

F i n d i n g d a t a / i n f o r m a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

A c c e s s i n g d a t a / i n f o r m a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

D a t a & I n f o r m a t i o n F o r m a t s 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

D o c u m e n t a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

P e r f o r m a n c e 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

Availability of the portal (absence of crashes) 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

E a s e o f N a v i g a t i o n 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is

Quality of design and visual appeal 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure what this is Page 2 - Question 4 - Open Ended - Comments Box

How can we improve this data portal to make it easier to use and more useful for your needs?



How likely are you to use this data portal again in the future?

Not likely

Likely

Very likely

I’m not sure Page 2 - Question 6 - Open Ended - Comments Box

If you are not likely or not sure you will use this data portal again in the future please share with us why.


When accessing the portal, what is the operating system of your primary computer?

Windows

Mac OS X

Linux/Unix

iOS

Android


When accessing the portal, what is the operating system of your secondary computer?

Windows

Mac OS X

Linux/Unix

iOS

Android

None

Other, please specify Page 3 - Question 9 - Choice - Multiple Answers (Bullets) [Mandatory]

What web browsers do you use on your primary and secondary computers? [select all that apply]

Internet Explorer

Firefox

Chrome

Opera

Safari

Other, please specify Page 4 - Heading

PLANNED USE OF DATA



What is your primary purpose for visiting the portal?

Data (measurements & observations for download and use)

Information (reports, graphs, charts, tables, maps, photos, videos, references, etc.)

Tools (search, analysis, mapping, etc.)

Other Page 4 - Question 11 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

In which of these academic and/or employment domains to you primarily plan to use the information you obtained from this data portal?

Education

Research

Policy Development

Other Page 4 - Question 12 - Open Ended - Comments Box

What is the topic focus for the use of the information you obtained from this data portal?

Page 4 - Heading

FOLLOW-UP


The creation of this data portal is sponsored by the National Science Foundation EPSCoR project. In order to continue receiving funding we need your feedback to find out how you used the data from this portal. We would like to send you a very short survey six months to a year from now. Please type your email address into the box below to receive the follow-up survey. (Your email will be kept separate from your answers to the rest of this questionnaire).


Are you interested in learning more about field-testing the data portal site as new elements are added? If so, please include your email in the box below. (Your email information will be separated from the rest of your responses to this questionnaire).


Is there anything else you would like to share with us or with the National Science Foundation about this data portal?

Page 5 - Heading

2012 Data Portal Workshop The following questions are about the workshop you participated in today.



Please rate the usefulness of each aspect of this workshop.

Not useful at all Slightly useful Somewhat useful Very useful Extremely useful

Beginning overview and introduction to the portal 1 2 3 4 5

A d d i t i o n a l C o m m e n t

Explorat ion and use of the porta l 1 2 3 4 5


Feedback session of the workshop 1 2 3 4 5



Thinking about the format of the Climate Change Portal workshop, do you have any suggestions for how it could have been more useful for you or other attendees?

Page 6 - Heading

DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Completion of this section provides basic information to capture the demographics of our data portal users. The demographic questions are required by the National Science Foundation who is funding this project. This information strengthens future applications for funding, ultimately providing research program sustainability and growth.


With which gender do you identify?

Male Female Page 6 - Question 19 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]




Caucasian (White)

East Indian (from India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, etc.)

Hispanic (Latino/a, Mexican, Chicano/a,

Brazilian)

Middle Eastern

Native American (American Indian)/Alaskan Native

Pacific Islander/Hawaiian


Other, please specify


What is your age (in years)?

<18

18-25

26-35

36-45

46-55

56-65

66-75

76-85

> 85



What is the highest educational degree you have attained?

High school diploma / GED

Associates degree

BA / BS

MA / MS

PhD, EdD, or other doctoral degree


What is your primary academic or work location?

Elementary school

Middle/High school

2-year College

4-year College/University

Government

National Lab

Business/Industry

Other, please

specify Page 6 - Question 23 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets) [Mandatory]

What is your primary academic/work role?

Student

Post-doc

Faculty

Staff

Decision-maker/Management

Researcher



How many years have you been in your current job or academic status?

<1

1-2

3-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-30

31-40

>40

Thank You Page

Thank you very much for your feedback! If you have any questions about this survey or this data portal please contact:

Project evaluator: Lisa Kohne [email protected] Data portal developer:

Nevada: Michael McMahon, [email protected]


Appendix D: Data portal workshop participant notes and observations as they used data portal

Student Search result and time zone selection in the acquire sensor data window seems confusing and redundant.

Units should be defaulted to common biological science standards, for example temperature in degrees C

Home button is often the leftmost button on many websites

Locations map for the instrument sites should have a map of Nevada to provide reference for transect locations.

This is to help people unfamiliar with Nevada geography.

Locations map should have interactive link each instrument site and general site data of that instrument site.

Clickable lists of instrument sites should consistently appear in the same order."

College/University Faculty I use a Macbook and when I go to download the data that it automatically opens the data in a standard text new

webpage and doesn't give me any options to open it in excel or any other user friendly format. Putting indicators on

mandatory fields that need to be filled in or red error messages when a field is left blank that needs to be filled in

would be preferred otherwise to a user the site appears to just not work no matter what is selected. I see there is an

analysis button, it would be nice if I could open the data in the graphical plots and then choose to download the

data or not. The preferences are not very self-explanatory, I would imagine the map format should be the default

given its ease of use. The standard view on my Macbook of the new version also has a strange look that is not very

friendly to navigate, unsure if it is my computer or how it is designed on all devices.

I like the ease of use with using the data portal to get the data using the advance setting from the GIS map.

I would like to know how the system handles the daylight saving time.

I would like to see a brief overview of the site information when I select a site from the map in the new interface.

The way to bring up the map interface is hard to remember. Need a prompt from the interface.

I think that the usability could be improved by doing some space optimization based on screen resolution. I think it

is fairly typical now to have HD res (1920x1280) and I would rather see the query pages fit on a single page

(scrolling is in general annoying). Obviously this will be very important for mobile devices

In particular, on the sensor data options, there are very long lists (columns). I suggest having bold headings which

are further expandable/collapsible. E.g. under Dendrometer radius measurement voltage in the second column on

Monitoring Hardware, default closed and expand to show the different tree species options.

What is the difference in the time-intervals. If you have 1-min data does that mean on the server side, data is

aggregated into 5 or 10 min intervals automatically? If not, is there some way to specify the time interval available

for specific measurements?

Web cameras section

- image archive - similar comment to above - the window popup requires either maximization or scrolling. I

would prefer taking me to a new page than the javascript window. All the options are intimidating (why have

the three months rather than a single adjustable calendar).

- It is also unclear what the naming convention for the downloaded files are. It would be beneficial to have the

files named based on time (20120213_153200 for 2/12/2012 3:32:00 pm). The different present positions

{north, south, ...} should also be included e.g. 20120213_153200_north.jpg

The same naming consistency should be defaulted for the csv files from sensor data

Transportation specific data portal sites which are of interest

PeMS - provides data download along with a number of ""standard"" measurements/calculations

http://pems.dot.ca.gov/

originally from Berkeley

https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/

FAST Dashboard (Las Vegas)

http://bugatti.nvfast.org/

Nice looks. I was able to download the data easily.

I think time zones is an unnecessary feature. In research we mostly use this type of data in UTC or the local time

zone.

The advanced (silverlight) version is well done.


http://sensor.nevada.edu/NCCP/Climate%20Monitoring/Web%20Cameras.aspx -> Image Archive -> radio buttons

are too much cluttered and difficult to read.

Small type on front page:

- "program under cooperative agreement number is EPS 0814372." -> remove "is"

On interface, when picking site locations, would be nice for a map to come up for those who are not familiar with

the location and names of each place.

Did not work on chrome. Also, some researchers using Linux have an aversion to Microsoft products, and

Silverlight may not work. It seems like narrowing the browser will discourage some from using the portal.

In Preferences, when switching between Advanced and Standard, the selected sites do not seem to be preserved

when switching between views.

Hmmm... drop-down menus problematic/not getting to location (other drop-downs on research sites drop-down

menu) - had to click on top link/drill-down that way

NCCP#3 - nice touch w/mouse-over on equipment image

Not seeing results in ""view data"" (did once, then not again) - std interface

In advanced/map view wasn't intuitive to end-user they'd have to select a site (over-estimating the user?)

Save button didn't do anything except ""boop"" - choosing ""open""/enabled lack of ftp passwd problem

Trying to d/l using std interface (data retrieval task #2) - clicking download didn't do anything; ctrl-click either;

seeing ""! Error on page"" lower-left-hand corner of browser (active script error?)

""Data Resources"" drop-down abnormally time-sensitive; took several attempts to select new interface.

Not finding precipitation in advanced interface? Ahhh... was off the screen to right. Perhaps a better way to

indicate there's more stuff over there? =)

Nice! That the time opens up along with the date when you're selecting start/end in advanced interface.

Oops - when trying to download multiple data set from adv interface (Data retrieval task #2, but from advanced

interface) got a ""Arg_NullReferenceException""... linkid=106663 (note: Search & Time Result Time Zone wasn't

set :-/)

In the ""advanced"" (map view) interface, may be more intuitive to load initially centered with one of the primary

transects centered?

The fact that the ""Search & Result Time Zone"" doesn't load with a default selected is a deal-breaker; if a new user

navigates through to download data, it will have been broken from the beginning. NEED TO SET A DEFAULT.

A similar observation for the ""Download Setup"" - would be good to have a default set, rather than relying on the

end-user to know to select (say ""1 minute"" or ""10 minute"")

Perhaps the category ""Temperature"" should be labelled ""Air Temperature"" as that's what's enclosed when you

click the ""+""; when I read the word ""Temperature"" I was immediately wondering ""of what""?

Might be good to have an option to ""select all sites""? Re: data retrieval question #4

The option to ""Drag a column header and drop it here to group by that column"" could be very useful;

unfortunately, no mechanism to get to the columns to the right outside of the window view.

I'm interested in using the portal for teaching purposes. Some useful background for understand my reason for

being here: I'm part of an interdisciplinary partnership to teach a course on sustainability from two interrelated

perspective--from the perspective of an environmental biologist, and the perspective of a cultural studies/media

studies scholar.

From what I can see, this site might be useful for teaching about data collection about climate change in Nevada,

for example what kind of data is being collected for climate change modeling. Why this data is being collected is not

explained, and how exactly it can be used by students is not explained, as far as I can see.

The reason for the collection of specific date is probably obvious to scientists interested in climate change, but as

someone who is not a trained scientist, and will be teaching to non-scientists, it would be useful to understand

exactly why this data is being collected.

One of the sites is close enough to UNLV that it might be possible to visit the site with the students. If these sites are

not possible to visit, the portal provides interesting, informative, and sometimes beautiful pictures of the research

sites and data collection equipment.

As of right now I don't see how I, as the cultural studies/media studies instructor of this interdisciplinary course,

could use this as a teaching tool.

To be useful for me, the list of publications would need to have annotations with a summary of the publication, and

notes about how the publication could be used in the classroom, either as potential reading materials for students


(indicating what type of student would benefit: undergraduate, graduate, science majors, non-science majors, etc.),

or as necessary or useful background reading for the instructor to incorporate into lectures.

It is obvious that a lot of work has gone into the development of this portal, but its usefulness for the particularly

purposes I need is limited now. "

This is a well designed website and easy to follow and navigate.

"Search and results time zone - why is this here and what does it mean. Why not have it just go straight to the data

logger time. If we want some to be able to change it perhaps that should be possible but not at the top of the page.

Need a note to ""pick research site first""

What is a primary data logger? The whole section of ""monitoring"" seeems odd. Not useful for scientists in general

and confusing.

I suggest the default to be degrees C not K

Though 'liquid and solid' ppt is accurate why not use rain and snow.

Can a person save preferences?

""Locations"" needs a Nevada site map otherwise you have no idea where you are from the satellite images.

Camers might also have thumbnail maps of where the sites are

Add search capacity for people - and possibly the library sect5ion as well.

I like the visual presets!"

Way too many options presented on interface - it's good to have them all accessible, but putting them up-front can

cause confusion and deter potential users from using.

Staff Please check whether the time zone selection is needed. I have been downloading some USGS data (every 15 min.),

and no need to specify that. I might create some confusion if the option is provided.

The portal has great potential and already seems very useful, but still difficult to use. Many elements are not

intuitive, such as switching between 'Standard' and 'Advanced' in the new sensor data page, which really switches

between a sort of text-based view and a map-based view. They should be labeled accordingly. (i.e. 'text view' and

'map view' or something to that effect.)

More context in general is crucial. When I retrieve snowfall data, what is the instrument collecting that data? What

is snowfall anyways? Snow depth? Amount of snow fallen in the past time interval? That information may be

somewhere on the site, but it is buried and does not show itself to you at the most helpful time and place.

I would like to share a comment from a coworker of mine, with which I and many others seem to agree: users need

a clear overview interface that shows each site separately, with basic current conditions (temperature, rainfall, etc.)

for each site with the most recent web cam picture. Like a weather website. Each of these portals could be the way

into more detailed data."

Interface was hard to navigate. Could be streamlined.

Educational Specialist Very impressed. Not everything is super intuitive, but the functionality is impressive and this has enormous

potential in education and outreach circles. High school and undergraduate teachers should know about this and

have an opportunity to play with it.


Appendix E: Seed Grant Self Evaluation Form

Page 1 - Heading

BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE PROJECT


What is the Seed Grant project title?


What is the name of the project lead for this Seed Grant?

Page 1 - Question 3 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets)

What is the name of the Lead Institution on this Seed Grant?

DRI

UNLV

UNR Page 1 - Question 4 - Open Ended - One or More Lines with Prompt

What was the start date and (anticipated) end date of this project?

Start date:

(Anticipated) end date:

Page 2 - Heading

BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF PARTICIPANTS



Male

Female Page 2 - Question 6 - Choice - One Answer (Bullets)




Caucasian (White)

East Indian (from India, Sri Lanka)

Hispanic (Latino/a, Mexican, Chicano/a, Brazilian)

Middle Eastern

Native American (American Indian)/Alaskan Native

Pacific Islander/Hawaiian




At which institution do you work?

DRI

UNLV

UNR Page 2 - Question 8 - Open Ended - One Line

What is your current position?


How many years have you worked at your current institution?

0-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-25

26+ Page 2 - Question 10 - Yes or No

Was the application review and award process for this fellowship straightforward and timely?

Yes

No

Additional Comment: Page 3 - Heading

IMPLEMENTION OF THE SEED GRANT PROJECT

Page 3 - Question 11 - Yes or No

Did your project involve undergraduate students?

Yes, How many and please explain how they were involved. No Page 3 - Question 12 - Yes or No

Did your project involve graduate student research and education?

Yes, How many and please explain how they were involved. No


Did your project involve faculty who are early in their research careers?

Yes, please explain

No



Did your project foster the development of a new collaborative effort among two or more researchers?

Yes

No

If yes, please explain. Page 3 - Question 15 - Yes or No

Did your project form new inter-institutional collaborations?

Yes

No


Did your project expand your expertise in any areas?

Yes

No


Did your project generate new data sets, new methods of data collection, archiving, or analysis; new instruments or technologies; and/or data that would support new conceptual frameworks?

Yes

No

If yes, please explain. Page 3 - Question 18 - Rating Scale - One Answer (Horizontal)

How well do you believe the project has met the goals, objectives, and expected outcomes described in your original Seed Grant proposal?

N o t m e t a t a l l M e t s l i g h t l y M e t s o m e w h a t M e t w e l l M e t v e r y w e l l

1 2 3 4 5


If met, please explain how you have met those goals. If not met, please explain why you have not met the goals and if/how you plan to meet them.

Page 3 - Question 20 - Open Ended - One or More Lines with Prompt

What have been the outputs of the seed grant project?

Articles submitted to refereed journals; How many?

Articles published in refereed journals; How many?

P r e s e n t a t i o n s ; H o w m a n y ?

F o l l o w - o n p r o p o s a l s ; H o w m a n y ?

Patents awarded, pending, or licensed; How many?

O t h e r :



Do you believe the outputs from the seed grant project have been appropriate and sufficient in number?

Yes

No, Please explain Page 3 - Question 22 - Open Ended - Comments Box

How can/could the implementation of your Seed Grant project be/have been improved?

Page 4 - Heading

IMPACT OF THE SEED GRANT PROJECT

Page 4 - Question 23 - Rating Scale - Matrix

Please rate the effectiveness of your project in meeting the Seed Grant goals and objectives on a scale of 1-5; 1=lowest, 5=highest.

Not effective at all Slightly effective Somewhat effective Very effective Extremely effective

How effectively did the project utilize or support the new infrastructure being developed as part of the NSF EPSCoR project ? 1 2 3 4 5

Please explain your response and/or give examples of how this goal was met. How effectively did the project address basic research needs that would be supported by NSF programs? 1 2 3 4 5

Please explain your response and/or give examples of how this goal was met. How effectively did the project lead to follow-on proposals to NSF or other granting agencies? 1 2 3 4 5

Please explain your response and/or give examples of how this goal was met. Page 5 - Question 24 - Rating Scale - Matrix

Rate how well the Seed Grant project has provided support to the goals and objectives of the NSF EPSCoR Climate Change project. Not all seed grants will support all goals.

No support at all A little support Fair support Strong support Very strong support Not applicable to our project

Goal 1 - Climate Modeling: Promote climate change scientific discovery by carrying out nationally competitive collaborative capacity building in climate modelin g 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Goal 2 - Ecological Change: Promote climate change scientific discovery by carrying out nationally competitive collaborative capacity building in ecological chang e 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Goal 3 - Water Resources: Promote climate change scientific discovery by carrying out nationally competitive collaborative capacity building in water resources 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Go al 4 - P ol i cy, D eci s ion Making an d Out re ach: Ena ble res ear ch ers to do cu ment , i nt erpr et , an d co m munic ate ins ti t utional an d societ al i mp act s of th e proje ct ’s cl imate ch ang e res ear ch findings to al l i nt ere st ed and aff ected part i es including d eci s ion -m ak ers , bus in esses , e duc ators , a nd the publ ic 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Go al 5 - C ybe rinfras t ructur e: F aci l it at e an d supp ort i nt erdi scipl inary cl imate c han ge rese ar ch, p oli cy, de ci s ion -ma king, out re a ch, and edu cat ion by us ing cyb er infr as t ructure to d ev elop a nd mak e avai l able int egr at ed d ata r epos i tori es and int el li gent , us er-fri en dly softw are s olutions. 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Goal 6 - Education: Create a scholarly environment to promote research skills and intellectual development for Nevada educators and st udents (K–12, undergraduate, and graduate) 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Goal 7 - Small Business Innova tion Research: Encourage innova tion in the Sta te of Nevada through business deve lopment and the Small Business Innova tive Research and the S mall Business Technology Transfe r (SBIR/STTR) programs 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project

Goal 8 - Project Integration and Synergy: Promote climate change scientific discovery and project integration and synergism by conduct ing interdisciplinary research on climate change and its effects 1 2 3 4 5 Not applicable to our project Page 5 - Question 25 - Open Ended - Comments Box

What do you anticipate will be the impacts of your project? What impacts will your project outcomes have on an area of research, a population, and/or a scientific field?

Thank you for participating in this project. We appreciate the time that you have taken to complete this survey. The information you have provided will help the project directors improve this project and make it more

valuable for participants in the future. If you have questions about this survey please contact:Project Evaluator - Dr. Lisa Kohne -

[email protected]


Appendix F: Seed Grant Annual Report Form

NSF EPSCoR – Track 1 Climate Change Annual Report Form

Seed Grant 2010-2011 DUE DATE: January 31, 2011

Project Lead: Lead Institution: Lead Email/Phone: Project Lead Signature: Completion or expected completion date:___________________________________________________ Dear NSF EPSCoR 2010 Seed Grant Awardee: Please answer the following questions concisely and completely. Your report must cover activity from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, unless you received a no cost extension (NCE). If you did receive a NCE, please indicate so and report on activity up through your NCE date. Submit your completed Annual Report Form by the due date above to [email protected], and copy michele [email protected]. 1. List the goals, objectives, and expected outcomes of the project. Summarize the results of this project. 2. List the name, institution, and academic program of students who were supported by this project.

Explain how the students were involved. a. Graduate students b. Undergraduate students

3. Explain how the project has resulted in new and potentially transformative research efforts such as:

a. Expansion of your expertise in any areas?

b. Development and/or fostering of collaborations between NSHE institutions?

c. Generation of new data sets, new methods of data collection, archiving, or analysis; new instruments or technologies; and/or data that would support new conceptual frameworks?

4. Explain how you believe the project has met the goals, objectives, and expected outcomes described in

your original Seed Grant proposal? 5. List any other outputs that have resulted from your research during the reporting period including:

Articles submitted to refereed journals

Articles published in refereed journals

Talks, presentations, or abstracts at professional meetings

Patents awarded, pending, or licensed 6. Explain how the project utilized or supported the new infrastructure being developed as part of the NSF

EPSCoR project? What were some of the successes and challenges in doing so? 7. Explain how the project addressed basic research needs that would be supported by NSF programs? Please

state the specific NSF programs or NSF solicitations that support research addressed by your project.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:michele%[email protected]


8. Did the project lead to follow-on proposal to NSF or other granting agencies? Please list all proposals

whether pending, funded or declined. If a proposal has not been submitted yet, please provide plans for submission (agency and program). (Note: Per the Seed Grant solicitation, “…a proposal to NSF or other major competitive grant programs should be submitted within six months of the completion of the project.”).

9. Explain how the project has provided appropriate support to the goals and objectives of the NSF EPSCoR

Climate Change project. All seed grants may not support all goals. Please discuss support for goals that are applicable to your project.

Promote discovery in climate modeling, ecological change, and water resources

Policy, Decision Making and Outreach

Cyberinfrastructure

Education

Small Business Innovation Research

Project Integration and Synergy 10. Provide a budget summary detailing the expenditures in the project


Appendix G: Seed Grant Evaluation Rubric

Seed Grant Annual Report Evaluation Rubric Project Title: _____________________________________________

Project Lead: Lead Institution: ______________________________________________

Evaluator: __________________________________________ Date: ________________________________________

Please evaluate the seed grant report in terms of the following criteria:

Report

Form #

1 2 3 4 5 Total

2 Has the project involved graduate and undergraduate students in an effective manner?

Number of students 0 1-2 3-5 6-8 10+

Students’ level of involvement None Slight Somewhat Fairly well Integrally

3 Has the project resulted in new and potentially transformative research efforts such as:

a Expansion of participant’s expertise in any areas?

No growth

Slight

growth

Fair

growth

Good

growth

Extensive

growth

b Development and/or fostering of collaborations between NSHE

institutions? None A little Fair Good Extensive

c Generation of new data sets, new methods of data collection,

archiving, or analysis; new instruments or technologies; and/or data

that would support new conceptual frameworks?

None A little Fair Good Extensive

4 Has the project met the goals, objectives, and expected outcomes

described in the original proposal?

Did not meet

any goals

Met some

goals

Met half of

the goals

Met most

goals

Met all

goals

5 Are the outputs from the seed grant project sufficient and

appropriate? No outputs Very

slight

Some, but

not

enough

Sufficient More than

sufficient

6 Has the project utilized NSF EPSCoR Climate Change infrastructure

in an effective manner? None A little Fair Good Extensive

7 Has the project addressed basic research needs that would be

supported by NSF programs? None A little Fair Good Extensive

8 Has the project lead to follow-on proposals to NSF or other granting

agencies? None Minimal

Some, but

not

enough

Sufficient More than

sufficient

9 Has the project provided appropriate support to the goals and

objectives of the NSF EPSCoR Climate Change project? None A little Fair Good Extensive

10 Has the budget been utilized appropriately? Not at all Poor Fair Good Excellent

Total Score

Evaluation of the Nevada NSF EPSoR Track 1 Project SmartStart... · Evaluation of the Nevada NSF...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation of the Nevada NSF EPSoR Track 1 Project SmartStart... · Evaluation of the Nevada NSF...