1 / 10

The Legacy of Project XL: Insights into Evaluation and Analysis of Experimental Environmental Projects

Project XL (1995-2003) aimed to test regulatory innovations that required superior environmental performance and cost-effectiveness. With 51 projects running by late 2002, this initiative highlighted the importance of evaluation and analysis in measuring success and learning from failures. Insights from the evaluation of Project XL have paved the way for broader regulatory adaptations, such as flexible permitting and compliance improvements, which are now being implemented in multiple states. This report sheds light on valuable lessons learned and key outcomes from Project XL.

tod
Télécharger la présentation

The Legacy of Project XL: Insights into Evaluation and Analysis of Experimental Environmental Projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What Ever Happened to Project XL ? The Importance of Evaluation and Analysis to Followup on Experimental Projects George Frantz, EPA New England Innovation/Experimental Projects

  2. In the Beginning… • Project XL - 1995 to 2003 • designed to test regulatory innovation • required superior environmental performance • measured cost effectiveness • transferability highly valued • success in project said to lead to review of national rule Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  3. XL - Underway • Carol Browner promised 50 projects • commitment to Congress translated to high priority at HQ and in the Regions • In regular calls with RA’s, Administrator would ask for XL progress report • highlighted progress, barriers • 51 XL projects running by Oct ‘02 • 8 projects in New England Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  4. N.E. States Projects • 8 projects in New England • HADCO - closed out April ‘04 • MA ERP - spawned new generation of flexible regulation • New England University Labs - new labs rule in ‘06 • IBM VT - Copper Metalization - finished in ‘04 • IP (Jay) Predictive Emissions Monitoring - finished ‘04 • IP (Jay) Effluent Improvement - finished ‘05 • Narragansett Bay Commission - casualty • Lead Safe Boston - new nationwide Pb guidance Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  5. Definitions • Reporting Results • what happened during project? • most all projects have this level of information • Evaluation • most rigorous study, looks at what happened, why, and factors affecting the outcome • Analysis • what’s the likely impact? Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  6. Reporting, Evaluation Efforts • Early reporting HQ driven • 2001 Comprehensive report on all projects • XL “nameplate” closed out Jan ‘03 • evaluation and analysis mostly up to regions • some projects got close scrutiny • ERP • New England University Labs • other projects under “flexible permitting” umbrella • Formal critiques of XL program cite inadequate evaluation Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  7. Sharing Results • Results and analysis • results in project reports required by FPA • not widely shared • Only a handful of projects underwent systematic evaluation (ERP, Labs, Intel) • resource intensive process • agency moving to new programs • Final XL report due early 2006 • Projects selected based on potential Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  8. Evaluation: Worth the Effort? • Evaluation made case for broader adoption • MA ERP • skepticism from regulatory agencies until thorough evaluation showed big improvement in compliance and environmental outcomes (now running in 15 states) • New England Labs • strong correlation between adoption of flexible Lab Management Plan and beyond-compliance performance • helped drive and shape upcoming Academic Labs rule (proposed in 2006) • States must adopt Federal rule to enable C/U implementation Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  9. Drive for Performance Measurement • GPRA • Government Performance & Results Act (1993) • Beginning of measurement efforts • Act required report to Congress by 1997 • Showed improvement, more work needed • PART • Program Assessment Rating Tool • Comes from OMB, promotes administration goals • Failure to demonstrate effectiveness: cut budget Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

  10. Where to Find Results • http://www.epa.gov/ProjectXL/ • http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/ • http://www.epa.gov/innovation/aboutncei.htm • For information: frantz.george@epa.gov Evaluating ProjectXL - G. Frantz

More Related