Visitor Use Estimation and Monitoring

Post Date

September 1st 2010

Application Due Date

September 8th 2010

Funding Opportunity Number

J9836100056

CFDA Number(s)

Funding Instrument Type(s)

Cooperative Agreement

Funding Activity Categories

Information and Statistics

Number of Awards

1

Eligibility Categories

Other

This is a CESU with the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Please see the single source justification for more information.

Funding

• Estimated Total Funding:

  $90000

• Award Range:

  $40000 - $90000

Grant Description

ABSTRACT Funding Announcement: J9836100056 Project Title: Visitor Use Estimation and Monitoring Recipient: University of Alaska Fairbanks Principle Investigator: Dr. Peter Fix Total Anticipated Award Amount: $90,000 Cost Share: N/A New Award Or Continuation: New CESU award Anticipated Length of Agreement: 4 Years Anticipated Period of Performance: September 10, 2010 – September 30, 2013 Award Instrument: Cooperative Agreement/CESU Statutory Authority: 16 U.S.C. ¤1a-2(j) authorizes the National Park Service (NPS) to enter into cooperative agreements that involve the transfer of NPS appropriated funds to educational institutions for the public purpose of carrying out NPS programs. More specifically, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), 16 U.S.C. Section 5933, authorizes the National Park Service to enter into cooperative agreements with colleges and universities, including but not limited to land grant schools, in partnership with other Federal and State agencies, to establish cooperative study units to conduct multi-disciplinary research and develop integrated information products on the resources of the National Park System, or the larger region of which parks are a part. CFDA# and 00.000 Not Elsewhere Classified Title: Single Source Justification Criteria Sited: CESU task agreement J9836100056 Visitor Use Estimation and Monitoring BACKGROUND: • Denali NPP has been working on a variety of planning documents to support visitor experience and resource protection decision-making within the park (e.g. Vehicle Management Plan, Resource Stewardship Strategy, and others). In the process, it was determined that visitor use estimation data was incomplete and/or was not accurate enough to meet the parks needs. Providing better estimates of numbers of park visitors and itineraries by various user segments will assist managers to more accurately gauge potential impacts to the biophysical and experiential resources in the park. More specifically, a comprehensive survey of visitors in and around the entrance area of the park was last done over a decade ago. Additionally, a complete sampling of visitors within the South Denali area and other access points off the George Parks Highway needs to be implemented in order to account for missing user groups and for overall improvement to the model used to estimate and monitor visitor use. This specific effort to more comprehensively collect data and develop a methodology is not part of any pre-existing cooperative effort, although it does tie into ongoing efforts to better understand the visitor experience. 1) 505 DM 2 Single Source - Only one responsible source will satisfy agency requirements. • Faculty and students at the University of Alaska System (the System) will assist us in developing survey instruments and new methodologies. The System is uniquely qualified due to prior experience working in Alaskan national parks, the particular faculty expertise in collecting visitor use data on federal lands in Alaska, and due to logistical advantages (significantly shorter travel distances, Alaska-specific data sources, etc) they have over universities in the lower 48 states. 2) Nature and description of the deliverable required to meet the agency’s needs: • Following is a list of expected deliverables: a) formatted results of the visitor survey in report format, b) the survey instrument itself in a format such that it may be utilized in future survey monitoring efforts, c) a copy of data collected on visitor numbers in a format that can be easily queried, edited, and scalable (e.g. MS Access), d) collaborate (with park social scientist) on presentation of survey results and a list of recommendations to management on how best to collect and monitor Denali visitor use data park-wide in the future. In addition to a comprehensive list of monitoring strategies, the recommendations will include a list of equipment and personnel estimates necessary in order implement such a strategy at various levels of accuracy. Additional products or elements will include maps and graphics for demonstrating visitor use by segments and areas of the park sampled in the study. The associated tasks will also involve working with Denali planning and visitor use staff to work on a data integration strategy for existing specific visitor use data collection efforts (e.g. park road use, air taxis, Cantwell ORV) both at Headquarters and Talkeetna. This project will be a two phase process. The first phase will involve development of survey instruments and strategies for capturing the various visitor segments of interest. The second phase will involve implementation at various locations and months of the year as well as analysis of the data. The project is currently funded for cooperative assistance in FY 2010 and 2011, with funds likely extending to 2012 and beyond. • In addition to the deliverables described above, services to be provided include: staff and/or graduate student assistance in collecting and analyzing data, background research on data collection methodologies, assistance in understanding levels and relative proportions of visitor groups, their modes of access to the park, and the specific areas and services of the park that they utilize (e.g. visitors on buses past Savage vs. visitors only to mp 0-14 and/or accessing directly off George Parks Hwy) of the park. The visitor segments or user groups will be defined and corresponding numbers assigned to each category. The cooperator will also assist in determining appropriate visitor intercept locations strategically in order to insure that both dispersed and concentrated visitor segments are captured. • Estimated Project Budget FY 2010: $37,000 FY 2011: $45,000 FY 2012: $5,000 3) Criteria for justifying award without competition. In order for an assistance award to be made without competition, the award must satisfy one or more of the following criteria. Please explain which criterion specifically addresses the proposed agreement. • Unsolicited proposal - The proposed award is the result of an unsolicited assistance application which represents a unique or innovative idea, method or approach which is not the subject of a current or planned contract or assistance award, but which is deemed advantageous to the program objectives; • Continuation - The activity to be funded is necessary to the satisfactory completion of, or is a continuation of an activity presently being funded, and for which competition would have a significant adverse effect on the continuity or completion of the activity. • Legislative intent - The language in the applicable authorizing legislation or legislative history clearly indicates Congress' intent to restrict award to a particular recipient or purpose. • Unique Qualifications - The applicant is uniquely qualified to perform the activity based upon a variety of demonstrable factors such as location, property ownership, voluntary support capacity, cost-sharing ability, if applicable, technical expertise, or other such unique qualifications; This criterion applies to the proposed agreement due to the fact that the UA System is located strategically near Denali National Park and Preserve, is able to cost-share with us, does have work experience and technical expertise specific to visitor use issues in and around Denali, the identified faculty/experts at UA have recently conducted similar efforts in parks within Alaska, and the identified faculty have indicated a high level of interest and availability to work on the project immediately. • Emergencies - Program/award where there is insufficient time available (due to a compelling and unusual urgency, or substantial danger to health or safety) for adequate competitive procedures to be followed. 4) A description of the market research that was conducted and the results, or a statement of the reason a market research was not conducted: • This proposal does not involve sole source purchasing of any equipment. Prior to contacting faculty at the UA System, a comprehensive review of literature published on visitor use projects in parks and protected areas was conducted, providing additional evidence that the services needed will be best provided by experts within the UA System. 5) Any other facts supporting the use of other than full and open competition: • Not applicable. 6) A statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers for competition before any potential future agreement award: • Not applicable. National Park Service Point of Contact: Erica_Cordeiro@nps.gov

Contact Information

• Agency

  Department of the Interior

• Office:

  National Park Service

• Agency Contact:

  Erica Cordeiro
  Contract Specialist
  Phone 907-644-3303

• Agency Mailing Address:

  Work

• Agency Email Address:

  Erica_Cordeiro@nps.gov