Proposed Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds

SUMMARY: The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension

Service (CSREES) is requesting public comment on the proposed

Guidelines for State Plans of Work for the Agricultural Research and

Extension Formula Funds. These guidelines prescribe the procedures to

be followed by the eligible institutions receiving Federal agricultural

research and extension formula funds under the Hatch Act of 1887, as

amended (7 U.S.C. 361a et seq.); sections 3(b)(1) and (c) of the Smith-

Lever Act of 1914, as amended (7 U.S.C. 343 (b)(1) and (c)); and

sections 1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research,

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221

and 3222). The recipients of these funds are commonly referred to as

the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-grant institutions,

including Tuskegee University. CSREES is also requesting public comment

on the development of research and extension protocols used to evaluate

the success of multistate, multi-institutional, and multidisciplinary

research and extension activities, and joint research and extension

activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in

the submitted plans of work.

DATES: Written comments are invited from interested individuals and

organizations. To be considered in the formulation of the guidelines,

comments must be received on or before May 19, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments to CSREES-USDA; Office of Extramural

Programs; Policy and Program Liaison Staff; Mail Stop 2299; 1400

Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-2299. Comments may be

hand-delivered to CSREES-USDA; Office of Extramural Programs; Room 302

Aerospace Center; 901 D Street, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20024. Comments

may also be mailed electronically to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. George Cooper; Deputy

Administrator, Partnerships; Cooperative State Research, Education, and

Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Washington, D.C.

20250; at 202-720-5285 or 202-720-5369, 202-720-4924 (fax) or via

electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

regulations (5 CFR Part 1320) that implement the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information collection and

recordkeeping requirements imposed by the implementation of these

guidelines have been submitted to OMB for approval. Those requirements

will not become effective prior to OMB approval. The eligible

institutions will be notified upon this approval.

Title: Reporting Requirements for State Plans of Work for

Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds.

Summary: The purpose of this collection of information is to

implement the requirements of section 7 of the Hatch Act of 1887, as

amended (7 U.S.C. 361g); section 4 of the Smith-Lever Act, as amended

(7 U.S.C. 343); and section 1444(d) and section 1445(c) of the National

Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977

(NARETPA), as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221(d) and 3222 (c)), which require

that before funds may be provided to a State or eligible institution

under these Acts a plan of work must be submitted by the proper

officials of the State or eligible institution, as appropriate, and

approved by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Need for the Information: The Agricultural Research, Extension, and

Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185, amended the

Hatch Act of 1887, Smith-Lever Act, and sections 1444 and 1445 of

NARETPA to require plans of work to be received and approved by CSREES

prior to the distribution of funding authorized under these Acts. This

collection of information will satisfy the plan of work reporting

requirements as imposed by these Acts. This collection of information

includes three parts: the submission of a 5-year plan of work every

five years; the submission of an annual update of the 5-year plan of

work, if applicable; and the submission of an annual report of

accomplishments and results.

The first two collections of information are required in order to

satisfy the above amendments to the Acts that authorize the

distribution of agricultural research and extension formula funds to

States and eligible institutions. In addition to a description of

planned programs, the 5-Year Plan of Work must include information on

how critical short-term, intermediate, and long-term agricultural

issues in the State will be addressed in research and extension

programs; how the State or eligible institution has developed a process

to consult users of agricultural extension and research in the

identification of critical agricultural issues in the State and the

development of programs and projects targeting these issues (also

referred to as stakeholder input); how the State or eligible

institution has made efforts to identify and collaborate with other

universities and colleges that have a unique capacity to address the

identified agricultural issues in the State and the extent of current

and emerging efforts (including the regional and/or multistate efforts)

to work with these institutions; the manner in which research and

extension, including research and extension activities funded other

than through formula funds, will cooperate to address the critical

issues in the State, including activities to be carried out separately,

sequentially, or jointly; and for extension, the education and outreach

programs already underway to convey available research results that are

pertinent to a critical agricultural issue, including efforts to

encourage multicounty cooperation in the dissemination of research

information.

Section 103(e) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7613(e)) also required,

effective October 1, 1999, that a merit review process be established

at the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-grant institutions in

order to obtain agricultural research and extension formula funds. The

5-Year Plan of Work includes a section for the description of the merit

review process to ensure that such a process is in place prior to the

distribution of agricultural research and extension formula funds.

Sections 104 and 105 of AREERA also amended the Hatch Act and

Smith-Lever Act to require that a specified amount of the agricultural

research and extension formula funds be expended for multistate

activities and that a description of these activities be reported in

the plan of work. Section 204 of AREERA further amended the Hatch Act

and Smith-Lever Act to require that a specified amount of the

agricultural research and extension formula funds be expended for

activities that integrate cooperative research and extension and that a

description of these activities be included in the plan of work. Two

components of the 5-Year Plan of Work submission on Multistate

Activities and on Integrated Research

[[Page 19243]]

and Extension Activities have been included to meet these additional

requirements.

The second collection of information will be an annual update to

the 5-Year Plan of Work. This will be required only if there is a

substantive change to planned programs or a significant change in

funding as outlined in the proposed guidelines.

The third collection of information will be the Annual Report of

Accomplishments and Results. This will be based on the 5-Year Plan of

Work and will assist CSREES in ensuring that federally supported and

conducted research and extension activities are accomplished in

accordance with the management principles set forth under section

102(d) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7612(d)). These principles require that to

the maximum extent possible, CSREES shall ensure that federally

supported research and extension activities are accomplished in a

manner that integrates agricultural research, extension, and education

functions to better link research to technology transfer and

information dissemination activities; encourages regional and

multistate programs to address relevant issues of common concern and to

better leverage scarce resources; and achieves agricultural research,

extension, education objectives through multi-institutional and

multifunctional approaches and by conducting research at facilities and

institutions best equipped to achieve these objectives.

Respondents: Respondents will be the 57 1862 land-grant

institutions and the 17 1890 land-grant institutions, including

Tuskegee University, who will provide a 5-year plan of work once every

five years; will update annually this 5-year plan of work, if

necessary; and will report on the accomplishments and results of this

5-year plan of work annually to CSREES.

Estimate of Burden: The amendments to AREERA require a plan of work

for funds that are distributed on an annual basis. To reduce the burden

on respondents, CSREES proposes a 5-Year Plan of Work to be modified by

an annual update only where there are substantive program changes and/

or significant funding changes.

The total reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the

submission of the ``5-Year Plan of Work'' is estimated to average

1,349.44 hours per response. There are five required components of this

``5-Year Plan of Work': ``Planned Programs,'' ``Stakeholder Input

Process,'' ``Program Review Process,'' ``Multistate Activities,'' and

``Integrated Research and Extension Activities.'' The total reporting

and recordkeeping requirement for ``Planned Programs'' is estimated at

690.00 hours; for ``Stakeholder Input Process'' is estimated at 9.19

hours; for ``Program Review Process'' is estimated at 276.00 hours; for

``Multistate Activities'' is estimated at 216.75 hours; and for

``Integrated Research and Extension Activities'' is estimated at 157.50

hours.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 57.

Estimated Number of Responses: 148.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 199,717.12 hours.

Frequency of Responses: Once every five years.

If the ``5-Year Plan of Work'' needs to be updated as an ``Annual

Update to the 5-Year Plan of Work,'' the total reporting and

recordkeeping requirement is estimated to average 134.94 hours per

response.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 7.

Estimated Number of Responses: 15.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 2,024.16 hours.

Frequency of Responses: Annually.

The total annual reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the

``Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results'' is estimated to

average 1,366.67 hours per response.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 57.

Estimated Number of Responses: 148.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 202,267.16 hours.

Frequency of Responses: Annually.

Comments: Comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of

the burden of the proposed collection of information including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

and (d) ways to minimize the burden of collection of information on

those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or

other forms of information technology. Comments may be sent to: CSREES-

USDA; Office of Extramural Programs; Policy and Program Liaison Staff;

Mail Stop 2299; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-

2299 by June 23, 1999 or to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,

Washington, D.C. 20502. Reference should be made to the volume, page,

and date of this Federal Register publication.

Background and Purpose

The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

(CSREES) proposes to implement the following Guidelines for State Plans

of Work for the Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds in

order to meet the plan of work reporting requirements enacted in the

Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998

(AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185. The AREERA amendments added new and

consistent plan of work requirements for agricultural research and

extension formula funds provided under the Hatch Act of 1887 (7 U.S.C.

361a et seq.), the Smith-lever Act (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.), and sections

1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and

Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (U.S.C. 3221 and 3222). The specific plan

of work reporting requirements are outlined in the ``Preface and

Authority'' section of the Guidelines.

These guidelines were developed by CSREES in consultation with the

State partners at the 1862 land-grant institutions and the 1890 land-

grant institutions, including Tuskegee University. Since the enactment

of AREERA on June 23, 1998, the Agency has engaged in these

consultations, under an exemption to the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(7 U.S.C. 3124a(e)), with members of both the Federal and State

partnership focusing on different aspects of the plan of work and

requirements for the agricultural research and extension formula funds

(i.e., stakeholder input, multistate and integrated activities), and

has received input and comments from the 1862 and 1890 land-grant

community to ensure that the Guidelines, while meeting the legal

requirements of the legislation, address the issues and concerns of the

recipients.

CSREES is committed to a set of basic principles regarding the plan

of work emphasizing the content in the plan of work rather than the

format. CSREES has developed guidance about what goes into a plan of

work, not how it is to be reported. Thus, CSREES does not intend to

develop a prototype, template, or a model plan of work. CSREES is

committed to allowing all institutions maximum flexibility in

responding to the content required by legislation.

The amendments to the Hatch and Smith-Lever Acts plan of work

requirements made by section 202 of AREERA require the Secretary of

Agriculture to develop protocols to

[[Page 19244]]

evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional, and

multidisciplinary research and extension activities, and joint research

and extension activities, in addressing the critical agricultural

issues identified in the plans of work. Although not included in the

Guidelines at present, CSREES also seeks comments on evaluation

protocols and criteria for the plans of work that will eventually

become part of the Guidelines. This section also stipulates that these

protocols be developed by CSREES in shared consultation with the

National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics

Advisory Board. CSREES is in the process of developing these protocols

in consultation with this Advisory Board.

CSREES is proposing to use the Annual Reports of Accomplishments

and Results to evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional,

and multidisciplinary activities, and joint research and extension

activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in

the 5-Year Plans of Work. At this time, CSREES proposes to use the

following evaluation criteria: (1) Did the planned program address the

critical issues of strategic importance, including those identified by

the stakeholders? (2) Did the planned program address the needs of

under-served populations of the State(s)? (3) Did the planned program

describe the expected outcomes and impacts? and (4) Did the planned

program result in improved program effectiveness and/or efficiency?

Pursuant to the plan of work requirements enacted in the

Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, the

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service hereby

proposes to implement the Guidelines for State Plans of Work for

Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds as follows:

Guidelines for State Plans of Work for Agricultural Research and

Extension Formula Funds

Table of Contents

I. Preface and Authority

II. Submission of the 5-Year Plan of Work

A. General

1. Planning Option

2. Period Covered

3. Projected Resources

4. Submission and Due Date

5. Certification

6. Definitions

B. Components of the 5-Year Plan of Work

1. Planned Programs

a. National Goals

b. Format

c. Program Descriptions

2. Stakeholder Input Process

3. Program Review Process

a. Merit Review

b. Scientific Peer Review

c. Reporting Requirement

4. Multistate Research and Extension Activities

a. Hatch Multistate Research

b. Smith-Lever Multistate Extension

c. Reporting Requirement

5. Integrated Research and Extension Activities

C. Five Year Plan of Work Evaluation by CSREES

1. Schedule

2. Review Criteria

3. Evaluation of Multistate and Integrated Research and

Extension Activities

III. Annual Update of the 5-Year Plan of Work

A. Applicability

B. Reporting Requirement

IV. Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results

A. Reporting Requirement

B. Format

I. Preface and Authority

Sections 202 and 225 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and

Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA), Pub. L. 105-185, enacted

amendments requiring all States and 1890 institutions receiving formula

funds authorized under the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended (7 U.S.C. 361a

et seq.), the Smith-Lever Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.), and

sections 1444 and 1445 of the National Agricultural Research,

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA), as amended (7

U.S.C. 3221 and 3222), to prepare and submit to the Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) a plan of work for

the use of those funds.

While the requirement for the Hatch Act and Smith-Lever Act funds

applies to the States, CSREES assumes that in most cases the function

will be performed by the 1862 land-grant institution in the States. The

only ``eligible institutions'' to receive formula funding under

sections 1444 and 1445 of NARETPA are the 1890 land-grant institutions

and Tuskegee University. Therefore, these guidelines refer throughout

to ``institutions'' to include both the 1862 and 1890 land-grant

institutions, including Tuskegee University.

Further, these guidelines require a plan of work that covers both

research and extension. Although the District of Columbia receives

extension funds under the District of Columbia Postsecondary Education

Reorganization Act, Pub. L. 93-471, as opposed to the Smith-Lever Act,

CSREES has determined that it should be subject to the plan of work

requirements imposed under these guidelines except where expressly

excluded.

All the requirements of AREERA with regard to agricultural research

and extension formula funds were considered and were incorporated in

these plan of work guidelines including descriptions of the following:

(1) The critical short-term, intermediate, and long-term agricultural

issues in the State and the current and planned research and extension

programs and projects targeted to address the issues; (2) The process

established to consult with stakeholders regarding the identification

of critical agricultural issues in the State and the development of

research and extension projects and programs targeted to address the

issues; (3) The efforts made to identify and collaborate with other

colleges and universities that have a unique capacity to address the

identified agricultural issues in the State and the extent of current

and emerging efforts (including regional and multistate efforts) to

work with those other institutions; (4) The manner in which research

and extension, including research and extension activities funded other

than through formula funds, will cooperate to address the critical

issues in the State, including the activities to be carried out

separately, sequentially, or jointly; and (5) For extension, the

education and outreach programs already underway to convey available

research results that are pertinent to a critical agricultural issue,

including efforts to encourage multicounty cooperation in the

dissemination of research information.

These guidelines also take into consideration the requirement in

section 102(c) of AREERA for the 1862, 1890, and 1994 land-grant

institutions receiving agricultural research, extension, and education

formula funds to establish a process for receiving stakeholder input on

the uses of such funds. This stakeholder input requirement, as it

applies to research and extension at 1862 and 1890 land-grant

institutions, has been incorporated as part of the plan of work

process.

The requirement of section 103(e) of AREERA also is addressed in

these plan of work guidelines. This section requires that the 1862,

1890, and 1994 land-grant institutions establish a merit review

process, prior to October 1, 1999, in order to obtain agricultural

research, extension, and education funds. For purposes of these

guidelines applicable to formula funds, a merit review process must be

established for extension programs funded under sections 3(b)(1) and

(c) of the Smith-Lever Act and under section 1444 of NARETPA, and for

research programs funded under

[[Page 19245]]

sections 3(c)(1) and (2) of the Hatch Act (commonly referred to as

Hatch Regular Formula Funds) and under section 1445 of NARETPA. Section

104 of AREERA amended the Hatch Act of 1887 also to stipulate that a

scientific peer review process (that also would satisfy the

requirements of a merit review process under section 103(e)) be

established for research programs funded under section 3(c)(3) of the

Hatch Act (commonly referred to as Hatch Multistate Research Funds). As

previously stated, these program review processes must be established

prior to October 1, 1999, in order for the institutions to obtain

agricultural research and extension formula funds. Consequently, a

description of the merit review and scientific peer review process has

been included as a requirement in the submission of the 5-Year Plan of

Work.

These plan of work guidelines also require reporting on the

multistate and integrated research and extension programs. Section 104

of AREERA amended the Hatch Act of 1887 to redesignate the Hatch

regional research funds as the Hatch Multistate Research Fund,

specifying that these funds be used for cooperative research employing

multidisciplinary approaches in which a State agricultural experiment

station, working with another state agricultural experiment station,

the Agricultural Research Service, or a college or university,

cooperates to solve the problems that concern more than one State.

Section 105 of AREERA amended the Smith-Lever Act to require that each

institution receiving extension formula funds under sections 3(b) and

(c) of the Smith-Lever Act expend for multistate activities in FY 2000

and thereafter a percentage that is at least equal to the lesser of 25

percent or twice the percentage of funds expended by the institution

for multistate activities in FY 1997. Section 204 of AREERA amended

both the Hatch and Smith-Lever Acts to require that each institution

receiving agricultural research and extension formula funds under the

Hatch Act and sections 3(b) and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act expend for

integrated research and extension activities in FY 2000 and thereafter

a percentage that is at least equal to the lesser of 25 percent or

twice the percentage of funds expended by the institution for

integrated research and extension activities in FY 1997. These sections

also require that the institutions include in the plan of work a

description of the manner in which they will meet these multistate and

integrated requirements.

These applicable percentages apply to the Federal agricultural

research and extension formula funds only. Federal formula funds that

are used by the institution for a fiscal year for integrated activities

may also be counted to satisfy the multistate activities requirement.

The multistate and integrated research and extension requirements

do not apply to formula funds received by American Samoa, Guam,

Micronesia, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

Since the Smith-Lever Act is not directly applicable, the multistate

and integrated extension requirements do not apply to extension funds

received by the District of Columbia, except to the extent it

voluntarily complies.

The amendments made by sections 105 and 204 of AREERA also provide

that the Secretary of Agriculture may reduce the minimum percentage

required to be expended by the institution for multistate and

integrated activities in the case of hardship, infeasibility, or other

similar circumstance beyond the control of the institution. CSREES will

issue separate guidance on the establishment of the FY 1997 baseline

percentages for multistate activities and integrated activities and on

requests for reduction in the required minimum percentage.

Also included in these guidelines are instructions on how to report

on the annual accomplishments and results of the planned programs

contained in the 5-Year Plan of Work, information on the evaluation of

accomplishments and results, and information on when and how to update

the 5-Year Plan of Work if necessary.

II. Submission of the 5-Year Plan of Work

A. General

1. Planning Option

This document provides guidance for preparing the plan of work with

preservation of institutional autonomy and programmatic flexibility

within the Federal-State Partnership. The plan of work is a 5-year

prospective plan that covers the period of fiscal year 2000 through

2004, with the option to submit annual updates to the 5-Year Plan of

Work. The 5-Year Plans of Work may be prepared for an institution's

individual functions (i.e., research or extension activities), for an

individual institution (including the planning of research and

extension activities), or for state-wide activities (a 5-year research

and/or extension plan of work for all the eligible institutions in a

State). Each 5-Year Plan of Work must reflect the content of the

program(s) funded by Federal agricultural research and extension

formula funds and the required matching funds. This 5-Year Plan of Work

must describe not only how the program(s) address critical short-term,

intermediate, and long-term agricultural issues in a State, but how it

relates to and is part of the broad national goals.

2. Period Covered

The 5-Year Plan of Work should cover the period from October 1,

1999, through September 30, 2004.

3. Projected Resources

The resources that are allocated for various planned programs in

the 5-Year Plan of Work, in terms of human and fiscal measures, should

be included and projected over the next five years. The baseline for

the institution's or State's initial plan (for five years) should be

the Federal agricultural research and extension formula funds for FY

1999 and the required matching funds. During the course of the 5-Year

Plan of Work, if the baseline for the formula funds at the FY 1999

level changes by more than 10 percent in one year or by 20 percent or

more cumulatively during the 5-year period, a revised 5-Year Plan of

Work should be submitted as an annual update the following fiscal year.

4. Submission and Due Date

The 5-Year Plan of Work must be submitted by July 1, 1999, to the

Partnerships Unit of the Cooperative State Research, Education, and

Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture. It is preferred that

these 5-Year Plans of Work be submitted electronically to

[email protected] in either WordPerfect file format, Microsoft Word

file format, or ASCII file format. If this submission method is not

available, an original and two copies of the 5-Year Plan of Work should

be submitted to: Partnerships/POW; Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Stop

2214; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington. D.C. 20250-2214.

5. Certification

The 5-Year Plan of Work must be signed by the 1862 Extension

Director, 1862 Research Director, 1890 Extension Administrator, and/or

1890 Research Director, depending on the planning option chosen.

6. Definitions

For the purpose of implementing the Guidelines for State Plans of

Work for Agricultural Research and Extension Formula Funds, the

following definitions are applicable:

Formula funds for the purposes of the plan of work guidelines means

funding

[[Page 19246]]

provided by formula to 1862 land-grant institutions under section 3 of

the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended (7 U.S.C. 361a) and sections 3(b)(1)

and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 343(b)(1) and (c))

and to the 1890 land-grant institutions under sections 1444 and 1445 of

the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act

of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3221 and 3222).

Formula funds for the purposes of stakeholder input means the

funding by formula to the 1862 land-grant institutions and 1890 land-

grant institutions covered by these plan of work guidelines as well as

the formula funds provided under the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative

Forestry Research Program (16 U.S.C. 582, et seq.), the Animal Health

and Disease Research Program (7 U.S.C. 3195), and the education

payments made to the 1994 land-grant institutions under section 534(a)

of Pub. L. 103-382 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).

Integrated or joint activities means jointly planned, funded, and

interwoven activities between research and extension to solve problems.

This includes the generation of knowledge and the transfer of

information and technology.

Merit review means an evaluation whereby the quality and relevance

to program goals are assessed.

Multi-institutional means two or more institutions within the same

or different States or territories that will collaborate in the

planning and implementation of programs.

Multistate means collaborative efforts that reflect the programs of

institutions located in at least two or more States or territories.

Multi-disciplinary means efforts that represent research,

education, and/or extension programs in which principal investigators

or other collaborators from two or more disciplines or fields of

specialization work together to accomplish specified objectives.

Outcome indicator means an assessment of the results of a program

activity compared to its intended purpose.

Output indicator means a tabulation, calculation, or recording of

activity of effort expressed in quantitative or qualitative manner

which measures the products or services produced by the planned

program.

Program review means either a merit review or a scientific peer

review.

Scientific peer review means an evaluation performed by experts

with scientific knowledge and technical skills to conduct the proposed

work whereby the technical quality and relevance to program goals are

assessed.

Seek stakeholder input means an open and fair process which allows

opportunities for individuals, groups, and organizations a voice in a

process that treats all with dignity and respect.

Stakeholder is any person who has the opportunity to use or conduct

agricultural research, extension, and education activities in the

State.

Under-served means individuals, groups, and/or organizations whose

needs have not been addressed in past programs.

Under-represented means individuals, groups, and/or organizations

especially those who may not have participated fully including, but not

limited to, women, racial and ethnic minorities, persons with

disabilities, and limited resource clients.

B. Components of the 5-Year Plan of Work

1. Planned Programs

a. National Goals. The 5-Year Plan of Work should be based on the

five national goals established in the Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) Agency Strategic Plans and

linked to the five national goals within the Research, Education, and

Economics (REE) Mission Area of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

These national goals were adopted by the National Agricultural

Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board. These

goals were developed from stakeholder input in conjunction with

existing Federal-State Partnerships. The body of the 5-Year Plan of

Work narrative should focus on these goals and outcomes.

Currently the national goals are:

Goal 1: An agricultural system that is highly competitive in the

global economy. Through research and education, empower the

agricultural system with knowledge that will improve competitiveness in

domestic production, processing, and marketing.

Goal 2: A safe and secure food and fiber system. To ensure an

adequate food and fiber supply and food safety through improved science

based detection, surveillance, prevention, and education.

Goal 3: A healthy, well-nourished population. Through research and

education on nutrition and development of more nutritious foods, enable

people to make health promoting choices.

Goal 4: Greater harmony between agriculture and the environment.

Enhance the quality of the environment through better understanding of

and building on agriculture's and forestry's complex links with soil,

water, air, and biotic resources.

Goal 5: Enhanced economic opportunity and quality of life for

Americans. Empower people and communities, through research-based

information and education, to address economic and social challenges

facing our youth, families, and communities.

b. Format. As mentioned under the Planning Options section, an

institution or State may opt to submit independent plans for the

various units (e.g. 1862 research) or an integrated plan which includes

all units in the institution or State. Regardless of the option chosen,

the 5-Year Plan of Work should be reported in the appropriate matrix

format, each cell of which identifies planned programs that fall under

one of the national program goals. If an integrated 5-Year Plan of Work

is submitted, the various units within the entity for which the 5-Year

Plan of Work has been developed (i.e., 1862 research, 1890 research,

1862 extension, 1890 extension) would appear on the vertical axis.

Individual cells within the matrix would be used to summarize the State

programs.

The following example illustrates the desired matrix.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Goal 1 Goal 2 Goal 3 Goal 4 Goal 5

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1862 Research

1862 Extension

1890 Research

1890 Extension

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Program Descriptions. Program descriptions presented in a

narrative form or in each cell of the matrix for a planned program will

be related to one of the five national goals and should reflect the

following planning components:

[[Page 19247]]

1. The statement of issue to be addressed. This component should

discuss the critical agricultural issue within the State that was

identified and being targeted by this planned program. This component

may also reference the stakeholder input which identified the critical

agricultural issue in the State and the need for the targeted research

and/or extension program.

2. The performance goal(s) is a target level of performance. The

output indicators should reflect the tabulation, calculation, or

recording of activity or effort expressed in quantitative or

qualitative manner which measures the products or services produced by

the program. The outcome indicators should assess the results of a

program activity compared to its intended goal.

3. The key program component(s) identify the major efforts included

in the work to be conducted.

4. The internal and external linkages include activities identified

as integrated, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, and/or

multistate. This component may also address any efforts made to

identify and collaborate with other colleges and universities that have

a unique capacity to address the identified agricultural issues within

the State and the extent of current and emerging efforts (including

regional efforts) to work with those institutions.

5. The target audiences identifies the set of stakeholders,

customers, and/or consumers for which the program is intended. The 5-

Year Plans of Work should address the institution's commitment to

facilitating equality of service and ease of access to all research and

extension programs and services.

6. The program duration should be expressed as short-term,

intermediate (one to five years), or long-term (over five years).

7. The allocated resources (human and fiscal measures) must be

described for each planned program. This component may not only include

the amount of Federal agricultural research and/or extension formula

funds and matching funds allocated to this planned program, but also

the manner in which funds, other than formula funds, will be expended

to address the critical issues being targeted by this planned program.

8. Education and outreach programs must be described that are

already underway to convey the research results that are pertinent to

the critical agricultural issue identified in the ``Statement of

Issue.'' Efforts to encourage multicounty cooperation in dissemination

of research results should also be identified. This planning component

applies only to those 5-Year Plans of Work incorporating extension

activities of the 1862 and/or 1890 land-grant institutions.

2. Stakeholder Input Process

Section 102(c) of AREERA requires the 1862 land-grant institutions,

1890 land-grant institutions, and 1994 land-grant institutions

receiving agricultural research, extension, and education formula funds

from CSREES to establish a process for stakeholder input on the uses of

such funds. CSREES will promulgate separately in the Federal Register

regulations to implement this stakeholder input requirement.

As a component of the 5-Year Plan of Work, each institution must

report on the actions taken to seek stakeholder input that encourages

their participation and a brief statement of the process used by the

institution to identify stakeholders and to collect input from them.

This report will be required annually and may be submitted with the

Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results. This component will

satisfy the reporting requirements imposed by the separately

promulgated regulations on stakeholder input.

3. Program Review Process

a. Merit Review. Effective October 1, 1999, each 1862 land-grant

institution and 1890 land-grant institution must establish a process

for merit review in order to obtain agricultural research or extension

formula funds.

b. Scientific Peer Review. A scientific peer review is required for

all research funded under the Hatch Act of 1887 Multistate Research

Fund. For such research, this scientific peer review will satisfy the

merit review requirement specified above.

c. Reporting Requirement. As a component of the 5-year Plan of

Work, each institution depending on the type of program review required

will provide a description of the merit review process or scientific

peer review process established at their institution. This description

should include the process used in the selection of reviewers with

expertise relevant to the effort and appropriate scientific and

technical standards.

4. Multistate Research and Extension Activities

a. Hatch Multistate Research. Effective October 1, 1998, the Hatch

Multistate Research Fund replaced the Hatch Regional Research Program.

The Hatch Multistate Research Fund must be used for research employing

multidisciplinary approaches to solve research problems that concern

more than one State. For such research, State agricultural experiment

stations must partner with another experiment station, the Agricultural

Research Service, or another college or university.

b. Smith-Lever Multistate Extension. Effective October 1, 1999, the

cooperative extension programs at the 1862 land-grant institutions must

expend up to 25 percent of their formula funds provided under sections

3(b)(1) and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act for activities in which two or

more State extension services cooperate to solve problems that concern

more than one State. As required by law, CSREES will work with each

1862 land-grant institution to identify the amount each institution

expended for multistate extension activities for fiscal year (FY) 1997.

For FY 2000 and thereafter, cooperative extension programs must commit

two times their FY 1997 baseline percentage or 25 percent, whichever is

less, for multistate activities. Institutions should describe the

contributions of extension staff and programs toward impacts rather

than to describe the programs. Each participating State or territory

must be a collaborator towards objectives and involved in the outcomes.

Evidence of the proposed collaboration must be provided in the 5-Year

Plan of Work submitted by each State. This planning is documented

through formal agreements, letters of memorandums, contracts, or other

instruments that provide primary evidence that a multistate

relationship exists.

c. Reporting Requirements. The 5-Year Plan of Work should include a

description of the Multistate Research, where applicable, and

Multistate Extension programs as specified above and these programs

must be reported consistently across the units of an institution as

well as with the 5-Year Plan of Work of the cooperating State(s) or

State institutions.

5. Integrated Research and Extension Activities

Effective October 1, 1999, up to 25 percent of all funds provided

under section 3 of the Hatch Act and under section 3(b)(1) and (c) of

the Smith-Lever Act must be spent on activities that integrate

cooperative research and extension. As required by law, CSREES will

work with each 1862 land-grant institution to establish the

institution's baseline for integrated research and extension activities

for FY 1997. For FY 2000 and thereafter, 1862 land-grant institutions

must commit twice the FY 1997 baseline percentage or 25 percent,

whichever is less, for integrated activities. Integration may occur

within the State or between units within two or

[[Page 19248]]

more States. Integrated programming must be reported in the 5-Year Plan

of Work and be reported consistently across the units of the

institutions as well as with the 5-Year Plan of Work submitted by

cooperating State(s). Federal formula funds used by a State for

integrated activities may also be counted to satisfy the multistate

research and the multistate extension activity requirements.

C. 5-Year Plan of Work Evaluation by CSREES

1. Schedule

All 5-Year Plans of Work will be evaluated by CSREES. The 5-Year

Plans of Work will either be accepted by CSREES without change or

returned to the institution, with clear and detailed recommendations

for its modification. The submitting institution(s) will be notified by

CSREES of its determination within 90 days (review to be completed in

60 days, communications to the institutions allowing a 30-day response)

of receipt of the document. Adherence to the Plan of Work schedule by

the recipient institution is critical to assuring the timely allocation

of funds by CSREES. Five Year Plans of Work accepted by CSREES will

remain in effect for five years and will be publicly available in a

CSREES database. CSREES will notify all institutions of a need for a

new 5-year plan of work two years prior to the plan's expiration on

September 30.

2. Review Criteria

CSREES will evaluate the 5-Year Plans of Work to determine if they

address agricultural issues of critical importance to the State;

identify the alignment and realignment of programs to address those

critical issues; identify the involvement of stakeholders in the

planning process; give attention to under-served populations; indicate

the level of Federal formula funds in proportion to all other funds at

the director or administrator level; provide evidence of multistate,

multi-institutional, and multidisciplinary and integrated activities;

and identify the expected outcomes and impacts from the proposed 5-Year

Plan of Work.

3. Evaluation of Multistate and Integrated Research and Extension

Activities

CSREES is proposing to use the Annual Reports of Accomplishments

and Results to evaluate the success of multistate, multi-institutional,

and multidisciplinary activities and joint research and extension

activities, in addressing critical agricultural issues identified in

the 5-Year Plans of Work. Once evaluation protocols are developed,

these guidelines will be modified to specify the protocols that will be

used to evaluate the Annual Reports of Accomplishments and Results.

III. Annual Update of the 5-Year Plan of Work

A. Applicability

An annual update to the 5-Year Plan of Work is optional and is only

required if: (1) there is a substantive change in planned programs; (2)

if the change in Federal agricultural research and extension formula

funding is 10 percent or greater in one year from the FY 1999 base

year; or (3) if the cumulative change during the five year period is 20

percent or greater than the FY 1999 base year.

B. Reporting Requirement

If a revised 5-Year Plan of Work is required, or if the

institution(s) chooses to submit an optional update to the 5-Year Plan

of Work, it should be submitted at the beginning of the next plan of

work cycle (July 1) to either the same electronic mail address or

regular mail address as listed for the submission of the 5-Year Plan of

Work.

IV. Annual Report of Accomplishments and Results

1. Reporting Requirement

The 5-Year Plan of Work for a reporting unit, institution, or State

should form the basis for annually reporting its accomplishments and

results. This report will be due on or before December 31 each year

with the first report being due on December 31, 2000, for FY 2000. This

report should be submitted to either the same electronic mail address

or regular mail address as listed for the submission of the 5-Year Plan

of Work.

2. Format

This annual report should include the relevant information related

to each component of the program in the matrix cells of the 5-Year Plan

of Work. Accomplishments and results reporting should involve two

parts. First, institutions should submit an annual set of impact

statements linked to sources of funding. Strict attention to just the

preceding year is not expected in all situations. Some impact

statements may need to cover ten or more years of activity. Focus

should be given to the benefits received by targeted end-users. Second,

institutions should submit annual results statements based on the

indicators of the outputs and outcomes for the activities undertaken

the preceding year. These should be identified as short-term,

intermediate, or long-term critical issues in the 5-Year Plan of Work.

Attention should be given to highlighting multistate, multi-

institutional, and multidisciplinary and integrated activities, as

appropriate to the 5-Year Plan of Work.

Done at Washington, D.C., this 13th day of April 1999.

I. Miley Gonzalez,

Under Secretary, Research, Education, and Economics.

[FR Doc. 99-9638 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-22-P