Strategic Use and Implementation 

of EPA OAR Voluntary, 

Partnership, and CommunityBased Programs

A Report of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee

October 25, 2010
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs i

Partnership and Community-Based Programs Work 

Group

The CAAAC would like to recognize and thank the members of the CAAAC Partnership 

and Community-Based Programs Work Group for their time and efforts in developing 

this report.

S. William Becker

National Association of Clean Air 

Agencies

Carolyn L. Green

EnerGreen Capital Management, LLC

Richard Bolton

Center for Toxicology and Environmental 

Health, LLC 

Brian Higgins

Nalco Mobotec

John Crouch

Hearth, Patio & Barbeque Association, 

Inc.

Gary A. Jones

Printing Industries of America 

Graphic Arts Technical Foundation

Anthony John DeLucia, Ph.D

East Tennessee State University

Ursula Kramer

Pima County Department of 

Environmental Quality

Michael Formica

National Pork Producers Council

Jeffry C. Muffat

3M Corporation

Jack Gehring

Capterpillar, Inc.

Frank Spassaro

SDG&E/SoCal Gas 

(Sempra Energy Utilities)

Jack H. Goldman

Hearth, Patio & Barbeque Association, 

Inc.

Eddie Terrill

Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality

Lisa P. Gomez

Sempra Energy Utilities

Kathryn Watson, Work Group Chair

Improving Kids’ Environment
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs i

National Air Program Vision Statement

Achieve and maintain air quality 

that protects and enhances 

public health, welfare, and the 

environment.

Strategic Use and Implementation 

of EPA OAR Voluntary, Partnership,

and Community-Based Programs

Executive Summary

A Report of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee

The Clean Air Act Advisory Committee 

(CAAAC) has developed this report to the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA) Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) to 

provide advice on the selection, 

implementation, and management of 

voluntary, partnership, and communitybased programs. The observations and 

recommendations in this report fully align with and support the CAAAC’s Vision and 

Guiding Principles for the National Air Program that the CAAAC issued in February 2009. 

Key observations and recommendations in this report include:

1. Partnership programs1are an essential component of EPA and OAR’s work to 

protect human health and the environment. 

Partnership programs are an important complement to OAR’s regulatory 

programs.

OAR should finalize the revised draft principles (included in this report) and use 

them to guide the design, implementation, and management of its partnership 

programs. The “what to do” principles should be used by OAR in deciding 

whether to invest resources in a program, along with potential cost 

effectiveness, and potential to cause long-term sustainable change. The “how to 

do it” principles should be considered when developing and operating 

partnership programs. The CAAAC also recommends some modifications to the 

wording of the principles.

 

1

Throughout this report, the CAAAC uses the term “partnership programs” to refer to voluntary, 

partnership, and community-based programs that are managed or supported by OAR. 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs ii

Possible Partnership Model Roles

EPA: technology, best practices, 

expertise, other support

NGO/Academia/Industry Association: 

principal “community” contact, leadership, 

grant applicant

Private Sector: pilot efforts for market 

transformation

Private Foundation: partial or full funding

Other Federal/State/local/Tribal 

government/Utility: expertise, funding; 

community contact and other support

2. Proposed and existing partnership programs should have clear, written plans, 

followed by a regular strategic review to continually improve the program.

Every proposed program should have a clear plan that includes the following elements:

1. Goals, objectives, and milestones (including quantifiable goals and qualitative 

benefits);

2. A description of how the program will achieve results (i.e., a logic model or 

theory of change);

3. A plan for measuring and communicating performance and results;

4. An assessment of other EPA or third party programs that address the same issue 

so as to justify the proposed scope and scale of OAR’s program and role;

5. A funding plan that describes how the proposed program will consider 

opportunities to leverage external resources; and

6. Projected program lifespan and/or evolution.

All OAR partnership program plans should 

use a common planning template, which will 

allow OAR leadership to compare the merits 

of various programs and assist OAR in 

performing strategic reviews following 

implementation. The planning template 

should enable assessment of how each 

program addresses the partnership program 

principles and incorporate the best practices 

discussed in this report, where appropriate.

Every program should undergo a strategic 

review following implementation to:

Identify and share “lessons learned” 

within OAR, EPA, and with program 

partners and stakeholders;

Allow OAR to look strategically across its portfolio of programs;

Assess cost effectiveness; and

Determine appropriate program lifespan or evolution.

3. Partnership programs should maximize opportunities to leverage resources.

OAR management should ensure that partnership program plans address 

opportunities to leverage resources, including money, in-kind contributions, 

human resources, publicity, and credibility.

OAR should explore opportunities to leverage resources from a variety of 

sources, including other EPA programs, federal programs, state/local/tribal 

government programs, NGOs, trade associations, environmental groups, private 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs iii

companies, and foundations. Special consideration should be given to 

opportunities to leverage resources from non-traditional partners.

OAR should look for opportunities to strategically deploy resources to support 

other organizations’ efforts to reduce emissions and improve air quality.

4. OAR should identify and share best practices within EPA and with outside 

partners.

OAR should create mechanisms for identifying and diffusing lessons, best practices, and 

tools to improve the design, implementation, and management of partnership 

programs. The CAAAC has identified a number of best practices and lessons which EPA 

should consider in its development, implementation, and review of partnership 

programs. Where appropriate, best practices should be incorporated into the common

planning template (recommended above), as well as into each program plan. The 

CAAAC identified several best practices and lessons (see table below) during its 

discussions; however, the CAAAC also considers this report to be a collection of lessons 

and best practices for OAR partnership programs.

Selected Best Practices and Lessons for OAR Partnership Programs

Use a more collaborative design process that identifies and engages key 

stakeholder groups and their leaders early in the process. “Buy-in” and the 

establishment of a trust relationship with these groups is a key element of success.

Accommodate flexibility in the implementation of partnership programs.

Expand and enhance use of social media in partnership programs, and other 

computer-based technology such as webinars.

Look for opportunities to enhance participation of disadvantaged communities in 

community-based programs, including providing mentoring, training, and network 

development for leaders within those communities.

Set reasonable and achievable goals for partnership programs that are easy to 

assess and report.

Establish partnership programs with stages or milestones at which an assessment 

is made to determine whether to continue or adapt the program.

Perform a regular strategic review of the entire portfolio of partnership programs 

to ensure they support OAR’s goals and priorities.

Create opportunities for participants to share their experiences internally and with 

others outside the partnership or program.

Encourage and implement peer-to-peer learning models in program design.

Focus on empowering communities to achieve sustainable, lasting change or 

improvement.

Promote friendly competition and awards as useful tools for engaging participants 

and sharing best practices.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 1

Strategic Use and Implementation 

of EPA OAR Voluntary, Partnership,

and Community-Based Programs

A Report of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee

Final Report – October 25, 2010

The CAAAC strongly supports the use of partnership programs and encourages OAR to 

adopt the recommendations in this report to help ensure the strategic focus and 

implementation of voluntary, partnership, and community-based programs.

In May 2010, the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) was asked to provide the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with advice and recommendations 

regarding the strategic use and implementation of voluntary, partnership and 

community-based programs to achieve EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) goals.2 

This report summarizes key observations and recommendations identified during the 

CAAAC’s review and provides advice to OAR regarding the strategic use and 

implementation of partnership programs.

The observations and recommendations in this report fully align with and support the 

Vision and Guiding Principles for the National Air Program that the CAAAC issued in its 

February 2009 report. The Vision and Guiding Principles encourage EPA and its partners 

in the National Air Program to: 

Draw on a diverse collection of regulatory and non-regulatory tools and techniques, 

including innovative approaches, to make rapid progress toward air quality and 

National Air Program goals in a cost-effective manner. Careful consideration is 

needed to ensure that tools and techniques, including regulatory, voluntary and 

partnership approaches, are deployed appropriately and at the right level of 

government. 

At the same time, the CAAAC recognizes in the Visions and Guiding Principles that 

“government agencies face unprecedented funding and resource challenges due to 

current economic conditions,” new challenges, and other factors. These factors can 

constrain EPA’s ability to invest in partnership programs that are not mandated by 

 

2

Throughout this report, the CAAAC uses the term “partnership programs” to refer to voluntary, 

partnership, and community-based programs that are managed or supported by OAR. The CAAAC believes 

this term is appropriate, given that nearly every voluntary, partnership, and community-based program 

involves partnership among a variety of entities.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 2

statute, even if they play a significant role in achieving the Agency’s mission of 

protecting human health and the environment.

Scope of this Report

This report is structured to provide strategic advice to OAR on the selection, 

implementation, and management of partnership programs. In doing this, the CAAAC 

has addressed the five questions outlined in the charge to the CAAAC. These questions 

are:

1. What general principles should guide OAR investments in partnership and 

community-based programs? (Do you have suggestions for improving the 

proposed principles developed by OAR?)

2. What types of best practices should be considered when designing, 

implementing, and operating partnership programs? What best practices are 

relevant for community-based programs?

3. What improvements would create synergies and improve coordination 

across OAR’s and other EPA partnership and community-based programs, 

including grant programs?

4. How can OAR better leverage opportunities to partner with others (e.g., other 

federal, state, local and tribal organizations, NGOs, foundations, industry 

associations, and others) to implement, operate, and evolve its partnership and 

community-based programs? What partnership models could enable OAR to 

significantly expand progress towards its goals in light of limited resources?

5. How can OAR best understand if its partnership and community-based 

programs are achieving results commensurate with the scale of the investment?

This report focuses on partnership programs in which OAR plays or has potential to play 

a significant role. The CAAAC believes that partnership programs complement EPA’s 

regulatory programs and should not replace or be undertaken at the expense of 

regulatory programs. Partnership programs, as discussed in this report, have several 

purposes.

OAR uses partnership programs to cooperatively engage individuals, businesses, 

schools, communities and organizations to work together in mutually beneficial ways to 

solve environmental problems and foster sustainability. Partnership programs 

complement regulations, enforcement, and other Agency activities by providing 

information, assistance, or resources to enhance capacity, encourage behaviors, or 

facilitate technology adoption. Partnership programs can also enable OAR to enhance 

capacity or encourage behaviors, technology adoption, or other actions in areas where 

the Agency may not have regulatory authority but that are important to meeting EPA air 

and climate-related goals. In other cases, partnership programs address problems not 

amenable to regulatory approaches, such as providing information directly to 

individuals, households, and assistance providers. Ultimately, OAR partnership
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 3

programs must be able to demonstrate cost-effective results for achieving 

environmental and public health goals. 

Framework for this Report

In response to the charter for this effort and questions posed by EPA, the CAAAC 

identified five areas in which it provides summary observations and recommendations.3 

These five areas are summarized in the box below. This report is structured in sections 

around each of these five areas.

 

3

The text box references the specific questions from EPA’s charter to the CAAAC for this effort that are 

addressed in each of the five areas used to structure this report.

Observation and Recommendation Areas

I. Principles and Leverage – The principles that guide EPA OAR’s creation and use of 

partnership and community-based programs and how these programs can be used 

to strategically leverage results which complement those achieved through 

regulatory programs. (Questions 1 and 4)

II. Program Design – The approach and process for designing partnership and 

community-based programs, including the configuration of activities and roles to 

achieve results. (Questions 2 and 4)

III. Program Implementation and Operations – Best practices for how programs are 

implemented and coordinated to maximize effectiveness and efficiency in achieving 

results. (Questions 2 and 3)

IV.Measuring Results and Evaluating Performance – The ways in which program 

performance and results are measured to inform program management, strategic 

planning, and transparent accountability. (Question 5)

V. Learning and Continuous Improvement – The process and practice of capturing 

lessons learned and using information to improve and evolve partnership and 

community-based programs. (Questions 2 and 3)
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 4

Observations and Recommendations Addressing the 

Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership 

Programs

I. Principles and Leverage

1.1 OAR’s principles provide an effective tool for guiding design, implementation, and 

management of partnership programs, although improvements can be made to 

enhance the principles and ensure their effective use.

Overall, the draft partnership program principles developed by OAR provide an 

important tool for guiding the development and review of partnership programs. The 

draft principles should be organized in two groups – one set focused on guiding OAR 

considerations of “what to do” (e.g., what programs to develop and/or invest in) and 

another set focused on “how to do” program development and implementation. The 

CAAAC also recommends some slight modifications to the language and focus of several 

of the principles. These suggested changes are reflected in the text box below. The 

CAAAC recommends that the revised draft principles be finalized by OAR, 

communicated within OAR, and shared with key partners, as appropriate. 

“What to Do” Principles

1. Address a priority environmental issue

2. Complement (and not undermine) core regulatory and enforcement responsibilities, 

including filling regulatory and compliance gaps and building capacity to increase 

compliance

3. Enhance EPA’s relationship with the public and key stakeholders

4. Ascertain the appropriate EPA role along with those of other stakeholders (EPA could 

be considered for a lead role if that role cannot easily be filled by other levels of 

government or other organizations, at least at this time)

5. Effectively leverage other resources in OAR, EPA, and other external organizations 

6. Help build expertise and capacity within EPA related to a specific environmental issue or 

to working with a group of partners

7. Help build capacity and effectiveness in communities, companies, and other 

organizations to address environmental needs

“How to Do It” Principles

8. Set measurable goals, collect performance information, and report on environmental 

and public health results in a manner that supports accountability

9. Identify the appropriate duration of EPA involvement – from helping convene partners, 

to launching and piloting new programs, to long-term operation of a program

10. Be designed and operated with transparency to ensure clear communication with 

stakeholders and the public

11.Comply with the EPA partnership program guidelines and process requirements
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 5

The original list of draft principles are provided in Appendix A, along with the CAAAC’s 

observations and comments on them. It will be important for OAR to define and 

articulate the process by which these principles should be used or considered. 

Additional context and editing would likely be needed when communicating these 

principles to stakeholders outside of EPA.

1.2 Encourage opportunities for collaboration and leveraging of resources with 

traditional and non-traditional partners.

OAR’s efforts to provide support to programs run by other EPA offices and 

federal agencies – primarily in the form of expertise, advisory input, and 

technical assistance – represent an important area for OAR to achieve results 

with limited resources. Given the large number of potential opportunities for 

OAR involvement, OAR will need to prioritize resources to focus on those areas 

that promise and demonstrate the greatest returns to protecting human health 

and the environment.

Important air quality and climate change co-benefits can be realized by close 

coordination with initiatives and grant programs managed both in and outside 

of OAR. For example, EPA has participated in the Sustainable Communities 

Grant Program managed by HUD (under the auspices of the HUD-DOT-EPA 

Sustainable Communities Partnership), the federal Task Force on Childhood 

Obesity, and in the Middle Class Task Force Recovery through Retrofit initiative. 

Stimulus (ARRA) funding also provides a unique opportunity for building crossprogram connections and synergies while leveraging resources. 

OAR should continue and expand the use of non-traditional partners for 

collaboration and leveraging of resources. For example, academics can be 

perceived as more approachable and impartial as messengers for a program. 

News media and other publicity outlets can also be invaluable resources to tap 

when conducting program-related communication and outreach. Private 

companies can relate positive stories of profitable air pollution reductions that 

can encourage other companies.

By educating partnership program staff in other federal agencies, EPA offices, 

and stakeholder groups about air quality issues, tools, and resources, program 

participants and grantees can reach and influence broader audiences in a costeffective, efficient manner.

1.3 OAR should look for more opportunities to leverage partnership programs to 

accomplish regulatory objectives.

OAR should continue and expand efforts to encourage and enable well-designed 

partnership programs to receive “credit” under the State Implementation 

Planning (SIP) process. This might also include potential “credits” through 

activities in other media (e.g., green infrastructure, waste minimization). The 

CAAAC recognizes the important work that OAR has done to develop 

approaches and guidance to assist State and tribal agencies to receive “credit” 

under the SIP process for non-regulatory and partnership programs that address 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 6

air quality needs. See Appendix B for a list of EPA SIP “credit” guidance for 

partnership programs.

There may be additional opportunities to expand awareness and use of existing 

guidance, to fill gaps in existing guidance, and to improve guidance periodically 

based on field experience. 

In addition, SIP credit opportunities should be explored during the design of 

new OAR partnership programs, where appropriate. However, it is important to 

recognize that not all partnership programs may be well-suited to accommodate 

SIP credits, and that developing viable pathways (e.g., guidance) for programs to 

provide SIP credits can require resources.

II. Program Design

2.1 Limited EPA resources require proposed partnership programs to have clear, 

written plans at the outset, followed by a regular strategic review to continually 

improve the program.

OAR should ensure that all partnership programs, including major new enhancements to 

existing programs, have a clear plan which includes the following elements:

1. Goals, objectives, and milestones (including quantifiable goals and qualitative 

benefits);

2. A description of how the program will achieve results (i.e., a logic model or 

theory of change);

3. A plan for measuring and communicating performance and results;

4. An assessment of other EPA or third party programs that address the same issue 

to justify the proposed scope of OAR’s program and role and identify possible 

leveraging opportunities; 

5. A funding plan that describes how the proposed program will consider 

opportunities to leverage external resources; and

6. Projected program lifespan and/or evolution.

Additional observations and recommendation related to program plans include:

Develop a common “planning template” (including the elements listed above) 

for all OAR supported partnership programs that would allow OAR leadership to 

compare programs across OAR’s portfolio and support OAR in performing 

strategic program reviews following implementation. The planning template 

should enable assessment of how each program addresses the partnership 

program principles and incorporate the best practices, where appropriate.

While it is important that all programs have clear plans, the CAAAC recognizes 

that program plans may need to change rapidly as programs learn, adapt and 

evolve. Planning efforts should accommodate the flexibility needed to allow 

new types of partnership programs to address environmental needs and 

challenges in creative ways.

Program plans should take a holistic or systems approach to environmental 

protection by looking for opportunities to support complementary initiatives 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 7

and results in other environmental media areas aside from air, such as water 

and waste (where appropriate). 

Program designs that foster peer-to-peer learning opportunities are particularly 

useful in disseminating and communicating information and best practices 

among program participants and beyond.

OAR should ensure that program plans do not become lengthy, bureaucratic 

documents that divert staff attention from important work. The value of 

program plans lies in ensuring important information is considered during 

program design and implementation and in being able to clearly communicate 

and discuss this information with OAR managers and leadership.

As reference, the draft December 2007 EPA document Guidelines for Designing 

EPA Partnership Programs was identified by several OAR program 

representatives as a useful resource, and it should be made broadly available to 

OAR offices.

Every program should undergo a regular (e.g., annual) strategic review following 

implementation to:

o Identify and share “lessons learned” within OAR, EPA, and with program 

partners and stakeholders;

o Allow OAR to look strategically across its portfolio of programs;

o Assess cost effectiveness; and

o Determine appropriate program lifespan or evolution.

While any formal policy on “sun-setting” programs may be problematic and 

inflexible, a regular internal strategic review across the portfolio of programs 

can help ensure that tough questions are asked that can help to improve 

programs, identify gaps and challenges, and ensure that OAR’s resources are 

directed where they can achieve the greatest benefit. Careful attention will 

likely be needed to ensure that such a review process does not become a 

cumbersome bureaucratic exercise that inhibits candor and productive internal 

deliberation.

When OAR opts to disinvest in a specific partnership program, discussions with 

program participants can be useful to determine whether the program, or 

specific elements of it, can be effectively transferred to and operated by other 

entities.

2.2 Explicitly consider alternative program models and different EPA roles during 

program design to maximize results and ensure program sustainability.

Programs do not always need to be designed with a lead role for EPA. In 

addition, more opportunities may exist for EPA to evolve its role over time, 

freeing resources to focus on other priorities. In many cases, an appropriate 

long-term goal may be to have effective programs operating that require little 

or no investment by EPA.

Alternative models for addressing a need should be actively considered before 

EPA invests in new program development. This typically requires assessing 

external organizations and initiatives that are currently working to address—or 

who are well-suited to address—the problem or need (referenced above as a 

recommended part of a program plan).
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 8

A range of models exist for engaging partners and for ensuring longer-term 

program effectiveness and sustainability. For example, EPA was successfully 

able to develop and incubate the Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (H2E) 

program before launching it as a separate not-for-profit organization. In other 

cases, EPA has worked to support other organizations’ efforts to develop 

programs as an alternative to EPA developing a new program with the Agency in 

a lead role. In such cases, OAR may be particularly well-suited in some areas to

provide technical expertise and informational resources, tools, and templates to 

external organizations.

There can be divergence between OAR Headquarters programs and how they 

are translated at the regional level. Enhanced clarity around how OAR programs

should be supported or implemented at the EPA Regional level should be 

included in program plans. 

2.3 Engage key stakeholder representatives earlier in the program design phase.

Some work group members observed that EPA can sometimes have an “I’m in 

charge” mentality when working with program stakeholders. Partnerships 

necessarily involve give and take between parties as they jointly implement 

programs. It was noted that community-based programs work best when 

partners have equal footing and where there are ample opportunities for 

communication and for participants to engage in meaningful ways that help 

build trust. Defining the roles and responsibilities of the partners up front is an 

identified best practice.

Engaging key stakeholders—such as community leaders, environmental groups, 

environmental justice groups, businesses, trade associations and academic and 

research institutions—during program design has the potential to strengthen 

shared ownership, enhance potential project impacts, increase long-term 

investment by project partners, and open significant opportunities for OAR. 

Using more collaborative design approaches may require cultural changes 

within OAR which would require support from OAR leadership.

III. Program Implementation and Operations

3.1 Explore opportunities (in collaboration with EPA Regional Offices) to reach and 

support small, resource-constrained, and/or impacted communities.

When EPA offers competitive grant opportunities to fund partnerships and 

community-based projects, it is very difficult for small agencies to compete due 

to limited staff resources and the lack of staff grant-writing expertise. This is

also true for many community-based and tribal organizations, which constrains

the ability of some communities to participate in OAR programs. 

OAR should consider opportunities to enhance the capacity and 

competitiveness of such small and/or resource-constrained agencies, 

organizations and impacted communities to apply for or participate in OAR 

programs. Among other things, outreach and workshops for communities 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 9

conducted by some EPA Regional Offices may provide useful assistance for 

overcoming these constraints.

3.2 Create opportunities to increase sharing of information and best practices among 

EPA staff. 

Create opportunities to enhance information and skill sharing among OAR staff 

supporting similar functions (e.g., marketing, communications, recruitment, 

performance measurement) for different OAR partnership programs. For 

example, informal, cross-OAR work groups of partnership program staff could 

support cross-program learning, while capturing lessons learned for future 

benefit.

Build into the design, implementation, and strategic review of partnership 

programs a methodology to identify, extract and share best practices within EPA 

and with outside partners.

While identifying a full inventory of “best practices” for partnership programs is 

beyond the scope of this effort and report, the CAAAC has identified a number 

of “best practices” and lessons (summarized in the table below) which EPA is 

encouraged to consider in its development, implementation, and review of 

partnership programs. The CAAAC also considers this full report to be a 

collection of best practices for OAR partnership programs.

Selected Best Practices and Lessons for OAR Partnership Programs

Use a more collaborative design process that identifies and engages key stakeholder 

groups and their leaders early in the process. “Buy-in” and the establishment of a trust 

relationship with these groups is a key element of success.

Accommodate flexibility in the implementation of partnership programs.

Expand and enhance use of social media in partnership programs, and other 

computer-based technology such as webinars.

Look for opportunities to enhance participation of disadvantaged communities in 

community-based programs, including providing mentoring, training, and network 

development for leaders within those communities.

Set reasonable and achievable goals for partnership programs that are easy to assess 

and report.

Establish partnership programs with stages or milestones at which an assessment is 

made to determine whether to continue or adapt the program.

Perform a regular strategic review of the entire portfolio of partnership programs to 

ensure they support OAR’s goals and priorities.

Create opportunities for participants to share their experiences internally and with 

others outside the partnership or program.

Encourage and implement peer-to-peer learning models in program design.

Focus on empowering communities to achieve sustainable, lasting change or 

improvement.

Promote friendly competition and awards as useful tools for engaging participants and 

sharing best practices.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 10

3.3 Continue efforts to expand and improve use of social media to engage partners 

and to communicate.

Several OAR programs already appear to be using social media in significant 

ways. OAR should expand efforts to encourage voluntary programs to use social 

media tools and technical information delivery mechanisms in appropriate ways 

that support program communication, outreach, and implementation goals.

OAR should ensure that program staff members have access to training and 

resources to equip them to effectively use social media and other technical 

information delivery mechanisms.

3.4 Create broad-based support for partnership programs by involving a balanced set 

of key stakeholders, including industry, trade associations, community-based 

organizations, environmental justice groups and environmental groups.

The credibility of all programs is increased when there is balanced 

representation and participation from a range of key stakeholders. Balanced 

stakeholder participation can help programs communicate with and secure 

program support from important constituencies, thereby enhancing 

participation in and performance of programs. Significant opportunities exist to 

involve a balance of stakeholders in partnership programs.

For example, trade associations can provide credibility to industry-focused 

programs and mitigate potential concerns industry participants may have in 

working collaboratively with a government agency. Trade associations also have 

well established networks which can enhance communication and outreach to 

commercial and industrial target audiences. Significant opportunities exist to 

involve a balance of stakeholders in partnership programs. For example, as part 

of the Great American Wood Stove Change-out Program, OAR is working with 

the Hearth, Patio, and Barbeque Association (HPBA), state agencies, tribes, 

utilities, environmental groups and others to promote the replacement of old 

stoves with new, cleaner burning alternatives using creative partnership and 

communication approaches.

While state, local, and tribal government organizations are typically viewed as 

co-regulators by EPA, their involvement in the design and implementation of 

partnership programs can help broaden programs’ reach, effectiveness, and 

results.

IV.Measuring Results and Evaluating Performance

4.1 All OAR partnership programs should have a clear plan for measuring results and 

performance. 

Evaluation and measurement are critical to being able manage programs 

effectively and for knowing whether to continue, terminate or revise them. 

Evaluation and measurement are also necessary to ensure accountability. As 

mentioned, all OAR partnership programs should have a clear plan for 
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 11

evaluating and measuring program performance and results. Regular program 

review will also allow OAR to look strategically across its entire portfolio of 

programs. EPA’s draft June 2006 Guidelines for Measuring the Performance of 

EPA Partnership Programs is a useful resource to guide plan development. The 

CAAAC further recommends that the draft June 2006 Guidelines for Measuring 

the Performance of EPA Partnership Programs be finalized and periodically 

refreshed by EPA.

During the program development phase, participants should agree on 

outcomes—including environmental and human health outcomes—and metrics 

to assess program performance and results.

There are a variety of tools (e.g., “scorecards,” “dashboards”) that help program 

managers focus on a small number of key measures that can help program 

managers adapt and improve program results and performance. 

While measuring and evaluating program results and performance is important 

even for small programs, OAR needs to balance investment in quantitative 

measurement and evaluation activities with other important program needs 

that can be more difficult to measure such as community outreach, community 

education and community empowerment.

While OAR needs to quantify the environmental or emissions reduction results 

achieved through program activities, OAR also needs to measure progress 

relative to the scale of the need or opportunity to address the problem. This 

could involve consideration of the total emissions reduction potential in the 

area being targeted by a program as well as the total population (e.g., 

individuals, schools, grocery stores) being targeted by the program. By 

assessing progress relative to the scale of the opportunity or need, OAR will be 

better equipped to determine whether a program is appropriate, or has 

sufficient resources, to adequately address the scale and scope of the challenge.

4.2 Partnership programs have important benefits that are not easily measured 

quantitatively; these should be qualitatively assessed and considered during 

program reviews.

Partnership programs often have important qualitative benefits that may not be 

easy to measure quantitatively. These benefits may include capacity building 

among communities, organizations, and within EPA as well as influences on 

behavior or technology adoption beyond participants directly involved in a 

program. OAR should consider these benefits when reviewing programs.

In some cases, partnership programs provide valuable learning and capacitybuilding opportunities in areas that may eventually be addressed (at least 

partially) by regulatory programs. For example, OAR programs such as Climate 

Leaders have helped develop capacity and experience within EPA and among 

external audiences that have supported emerging regulatory initiatives such as 

EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule.

More qualitative measures and approaches for understanding how a program is 

achieving results should be developed in cases where direct cause and effect 

(attribution) cannot easily be measured.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 12

V. Learning and Continuous Improvement

5.1 Catalyze information sharing and collaboration within and among programs by 

supporting peer-to-peer networks.

OAR should explore opportunities to catalyze greater information sharing and 

collaboration among program participants, partners, and grantees. This can 

also support efforts to harvest and disseminate lessons learned, case examples, 

and best practices more broadly. For example, OAR’s SmartWay Transport 

partnership program publishes case study information and OAR’s Climate 

Showcase Communities grant program periodically convenes grantees to share 

information on common challenges, strategies, tactics, and resources.

Web-based tools open new opportunities for program participants and grantees 

to directly share information peer-to-peer in real-time and to collaborate in new 

tool development.

5.2 Create mechanisms for identifying and sharing lessons learned, best practices, and 

tools.

As mentioned previously, OAR should develop efficient mechanisms to identify 

and share lessons, tools, and any materials developed across and among OAR 

partnership and community-based program teams. OAR does not appear to 

have taken many steps to identify, collect, and share lessons learned across its 

partnership programs. Effective sharing of current and past program best 

practices, resources and tools is well worth the effort. Best practices should 

directly inform the development of the program planning template discussed 

earlier in this report.

A mechanism or process for capturing lessons learned in partnership programs 

could be incorporated into the significant amount of evaluation and reporting 

that is currently being done within OAR. 

Periodic program evaluations can complement direct information sharing 

among program staff, as evaluation results in one program may be informative 

to other programs as well. Combining the two complementary efforts can also 

avoid creating a large burden on staff time and resources.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 13

Concluding Thoughts

Partnership programs are a vital component of OAR’s work and they complement 

regulatory programs in achieving EPA’s mission and the vision of the National Air 

Program. While these programs may not always be required by statute, they typically 

address important and timely needs and gaps—enabling EPA and its partners to reduce 

emissions and better protect human health and the environment.

As disparities between needs and available resources grow, OAR must confront several 

challenges related to its support for partnership programs.

First, OAR must carefully select where to invest its resources, prioritizing areas 

that promise and demonstrate significant returns in achieving OAR’s goals and 

EPA’s mission.

Second, OAR must intensify efforts to leverage resources and scale impact and 

results in its partnership programs, engaging non-traditional partners and 

creative approaches.

Third, OAR must seek efficiencies in implementing its partnership programs. 

Rapid learning and adaptation will help EPA and its partners get better results 

faster.

The CAAAC recognizes that designing, implementing, and managing partnership 

programs is complex. As a result, it is vital for OAR to engage with external partners and 

key stakeholders on these programs. The CAAAC applauds OAR’s willingness to seek 

advice on this important topic and hopes that this report advances OAR’s efforts to 

continually improve its programs.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 14

Appendix A: Draft OAR Principles for Partnership and 

Community-Based Programs

The CAAAC has provided review and comment on the following draft principles provided 

by EPA OAR in the charter to the CAAAC for this effort.

OAR investments in partnerships and community programs must:

a. Address a priority environmental problem

b. Set measurable goals, collect performance information and report on 

environmental and public health results

c. Complement (and not undermine) core regulatory and enforcement 

responsibilities, including filling regulatory and compliance gaps

d. Enhance EPA’s reputation with the public

e. Justify the unique need for an EPA lead role, rather than other levels of 

government or other organizations

f. Plan for the appropriate duration of EPA involvement – from helping convene 

partners, to launch and piloting of new programs, to long-term operation of a 

program

g. Effectively leverage other resources in OAR, EPA and other organizations

h. Be designed and operated with transparency and accountability

i. Help build internal environmental management capacity in communities, 

companies and other organizations

j. Comply with the EPA voluntary program guidelines and process requirements

The CAAAC had the following specific comments related to the principles listed above. 

As a result of the comments below, the CAAAC revised the draft principles accordingly 

(these revised principles are included in the report). 

Principles “a, c, d, e, g, and i” are principles that should be considered when 

OAR is deciding what programs to develop or invest in. Principles “b, f, h, and j” 

relate more to how a program should be managed or operated to ensure its 

effectiveness. The CAAAC recommends having a set of principles that should be 

considered when assessing what programs to develop or invest in, or “what to 

do”. A second set of principles that focuses on “how to do it” should be 

considered during program design and periodic reviews to ensure each program 

is being operated in a manner that addresses these important considerations.

Adjust principle “a” to use the word “issues” rather than “problems.” This 

allows for consideration of programs that seek to prevent areas from becoming 

environmental problems. For example, partnership efforts designed to prevent 

areas from being designated as non-attainment for the NAAQS should be 

considered as important too.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 15

Principle “c” should also mention increasing compliance awareness and 

assistance.

Principle “d”, related to enhancing EPA’s reputation with the public, will occur 

naturally if the program addresses the other principles. The way it is worded, 

“d” appears too self-serving and should be focused more on building trust with 

the public than building EPA’s reputation. Instead, more of an emphasis should 

be placed on communication and outreach with a focus on communicating 

about the program and its benefits for the community and the public. The long 

term goal for any partnership or program is to change behavior with an 

emphasis on a building capacity and launching a cultural change in communities, 

businesses, and corporate practices that will sustain for the long term. To the 

extent that the principles are communicated broadly outside of EPA, OAR 

should consider making adjustments to principle “d” to be less “EPA-centric.”

The language in principle “e” should be modified; “demonstrate” is a better 

word than “justify”. Or it could be modified to say “ascertain the appropriate 

EPA role along with that of other stakeholders.” The language suggested helps 

to clarify that principle “e” should not discourage OAR from participating in and 

or supporting partnership programs in which it does not have a lead role. 

In principle “f”, “plan” should be changed to “identify.”

Expand principle “g”, related to the opportunity to leverage external resources, 

to include the ability to transition the program to a more sustainable funding 

model over time that does not rely solely on OAR budget allocations. While this 

should clearly not be a litmus test for new programs, it is an important area of 

consideration.

In principle “h”, it was unclear to the CAAAC how closely transparency and 

accountability are related and which was the main focus for this principle. The 

CAAAC observed that it would be useful to separate these concepts or to more 

clearly identify the connection between them. One approach would be to link 

“accountability” to principle “b”, as measurement and reporting are often 

designed to ensure accountability (in addition to enabling results-based 

management).

Clarify what is meant by the EPA guidelines and process requirements referred 

to in principle “j”. OAR could refer to the series of draft publications that were 

developed in 2006 and 2007 by EPA’s National Center for Environmental 

Innovation with cross-EPA input, however it would be important to note that 

the focus of these materials is on partnership programs and may not fully 

address some unique features of community-based programs.

In addition to the principles listed above, OAR should consider adding a principle 

that states that partnership and community-based programs should create a 

long term benefit over the course of their lifespan. In addition, it may be useful 

to indicate that some consideration should be given to a program’s benefits and 

effectiveness in relationship to the program’s cost. At the same time, the 

CAAAC recognizes that this may not need to be a separate principle, and that 

these considerations could be incorporated into the process in which programs 

(and potential programs) are periodically considered in relation to these 

principles.
Strategic Use and Implementation of Partnership Programs 16

Appendix B: EPA Guidance Related to SIP Credit for 

Partnership Programs

The CAAAC identified the following EPA guidance documents addressing opportunities 

to obtain “credit” in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for partnership programs.

Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measures in State Implementation Plans: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/evm_ievm_g.pdf 

Guidance on Incorporating Bundled Measures in a State Implementation Plan: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/10885guideibminsip.pdf

Guidance on SIP Credits for Emissions Reductions from Electric-Sector Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy Measures: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/ereseerem_gd.pdf 

Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile Source Emission Reduction 

Programs in SIPs: 

http://www.epa.gov/oms/stateresources/policy/general/vmep-gud.pdf

Guidance for Quantifying and Using Emissions Reductions from Voluntary 

Woodstove Changeout Programs in State Implementation Plans: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttncaaa1/t1/memoranda/guidance_quantfying_jan.pdf

The SmartWay Program issued SIP guidance for states that are reducing long 

duration truck and locomotive idling. These resources include:

o Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long Duration Truck Idling Emission 

Reductions in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity: 

http://www.epa.gov/smartway/transport/documents/tech/420b04001.pdf

o Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long Duration Switch Yard Locomotive 

Idling Emission Reductions in State Implementation Plans: 

http://www.epa.gov/smartway/transport/documents/tech/420B09037.pdf