WSP00967 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . ... 2 I-" t.~ as to general importance. The criteria for prioritization was whether or I ' not the solving of the problem would have a direct and positive impact on ~0 SCP performance. Those that fell to the bottom of the ranking were elimi- nated from consideration. In seeking to identify possible solutions to the problems, the Study Team found that the solutions fell generally into two categories -.the first were individual, problem directed, nonstructural solutions and the second were organizational or structural solutions that addressed the overall problem. The body of the report contains the problem, problem directed solution options, and recommendations for each identified problem followed by the organizational solutions any of which could replace one or more of the recommended problem directed solutions. It is strongly recommended by the Team that the nonstructural solutions be considered first and only if it is determined that their implementation will not generate the desired program improvement should any of the organizational options be considered. Many of the problems identified here have surfaced before in previous studies, as agenda items for the overview committee, or as obvious identified impedi- ments to program progress. Likewise, many of the solutions have been identified previously. Some are in the process of being implemented. Others while having been initiated at previous times have failed to receive adequate fallow-through to ensure successful implementation. Although some of the Study Team recommen- dations might duplicate some solutions already in progress, we felt that it was important to confirm those actions with which we especially concurred. I OVERVIEW OF MAJOR FINDINGS - General widespread disappointment in the slow progress that has been made by the program. There was a sense that this disappointment was due to some extent to unrealistic expectations that existed early in the program. - A feeling expressed almost universally within the Service and widely expressed in non-Service interviews that considering the circumstances (institutional, political, and technical constraints) things had not gone too badly, but that we still could have done better. - A strong sense that was backed up by examples that in the last 2 years the program had shifted. gears and that there had been a distinct and steady progress at a substantially increased rate. - Within the Service, there was a widely held position that in comparison with recent experience in the Services overall planning program the projects associated with the salinity program have on the average moved through the process as fast or, more often, faster than other projects. - Almost a universal opinion that program funding has not been and is not presently an active constraint but some felt that as more projects advanced through the process funding could becpme a problem - especially for Soil and Conservation Service (SCS).