Challenges when implementing quality assurance best practices for ecological restoration data

Session: Connecting Management Needs and Science Information (1)

Craig Palmer, General Dynamics Information Technology, [email protected]
Molly Amos, General Dynamics Information Technology, [email protected]
Brick Fevold, GDIT, [email protected]
Louis Blume, U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office, [email protected]

Abstract

An interagency ecological restoration quality committee (IERQC) provides quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) guidance and other recommended best practices to facilitate the planning and collection of reliable ecological restoration (ER) monitoring data. This guidance builds upon on long-established QA/QC principles and procedures generally accepted by the scientific community for chemistry-based projects. However, several challenges are anticipated for those individuals interesting in adopting these best practices as core elements of ER project management and oversight. For example, a frequently cited challenge is how to justify the additional costs required when implementing QA/QC practices such as conducting QC remeasurements and implementing data quality review procedures when they are not specifically required by the funding institution. The lack of experience in carrying out recommended QA/QC best practices, particularly for monitoring activities in field settings (e.g., wildlife and habitat monitoring), is another challenge often cited by project planners. To address these challenges, the U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) working in collaboration with the IERQC have developed comprehensive guidance to help practitioners of ER incorporate QA/QC best practices into ER projects, even if not required by their institutions or granting agencies.