Attendees

1. News and Status of Items in the National Partnership Office and Associate Director's Priorities
   
   
   1. Staffing updates- Training, Partnership Coordinator, Tourism
      
      
      • Rich Fedorchak, the new Partnership Training Coordinator will start in August and will be stationed at Mather Training Center.
      • Chris Soller is now permanently working in the Partnership Office, specifically working on the Building Better Partnership project assignments.
      • Tourism- interviews have been held.
   
   
   2. Status of agreements with NPF
      
      
      • Corporate Marketing Agreement and Unilever agreement were sent to Capitol Hill for review but not signed by the NPS or the Foundation yet.
      • DO-21 is in the review process, and once released, it will be published for a 60-day review and a Notice of Availability will be published in the Federal Register. The draft document will go out to the NPS and the public simultaneously. The document will be posted on the Partnership Website once it has been approved for release.
   
   
   3. Building Better Partnership projects news
      
      
      • The Yellowstone Visitor Center, Yellowstone Association, Old Faithful Visitor Center, and Statue of Liberty Agreements have been approved.
      • There are several discussions occurring with the Hill on how to move projects forward.
      • Currently 12 projects are under review.
   
   
   4. National Park System Advisory Committee on Board Philanthropy Update
      
      
      • John Debo has been selected to be the lead person for coordinating the work of the committee.
      • The staff of the committee is looking to meet in August.
      • The Committee on Philanthropy is expected to be a 1 year project.
   
   
   5. Vetting Fund-raising info for Website
      
      There was wide-ranging discussion about how best to continue to grow and vet further content for the NPS Partnership Website regarding:
      
      
      • What information should we post on the webpage and what is the most appropriate way to obtain, vet and review content? The Partnership Council approved an outline in 2003 and there have been some modifications since. As approved by the Partnership Council at that time, the website was intended to be a best information resource on successful partnering and fundraising for both NPS managers and staff and our friends and partners.
      • It was agreed that website information that relates to our partners should be reviewed prior to posting by the partners involved. As appropriate, the website should have subject matter links to other best sources of related information that represent best practice.
      • Need information on how-to-fundraise on the Website. What level of how-to fundraising information is appropriate for the Website? Ray Murray made the point that the original intent of the webpage was to present how-to information that would both inform and empower so that NPS understood best practices and processes involved in order to provide appropriate support to these efforts by our park support organizations. We need to re-establish consensus on how best to: vet information for the website. Determine what is appropriate for the NPS. How best to present accurate information.
      • The Partnership Council needs to review the basic direction for the Website, review process, and prioritization of items.
      • We will explore review by APPL along with partners who are already engaged in reviewing specific subject matter pieces. John Piltzecker agreed to set up a call with Donna Ashbury and Ray regarding this possibility.
   
   
   6. Centers of Excellence and Partnership Skills Bank
      
      Note: John Piltzecker provided a status update on the status however, since then the project has been put on hold.
      • Initiative of the 4 Cs group.
      • Project involves identifying parks demonstrating sustained partnerships.
      • Some parks would be identified as Centers of Excellence.
      • A Partnership Skills Bank would also be developed to provide assistance and mentoring.
      • APPL and NPS have been working together on the project.
   
   
   7. PMDS Reporting Requirements
      
      
      • The goal is for every park to develop a community partnership to promote outdoor recreation.
      • Only 269 parks have reached the goal.
      • John Piltzecker will work with the PMDS partnership goal coordinators in each region to develop a new goal for the 2007-2009 period.
      • What is the definition of a community partnership?
      • Reporting? How many donations do we receive over $100,000? We need to find a way to capture this information.
   
   
   8. Shared Identity Update
      
      
      • Coordinated Identity Document is in process. Will continue to review and share update at a later reporting. Will Review D O 52 for current status.
      • Develop standards on partner donated vehicles.
   
   
   9. Update on fundraising projects waiting Director's approval and/or projects sent to the DOI for Congressional approval
      
      * How do we get things through the department more efficiently?
      What has been sent to date has been approved.


2. Other Business
   
   
   1. Fall Partnership Council meeting and training update
      
      Set for October 25th 2005 in Omaha, NE.
   
   
   
   2. Council Co-Chair candidates/Charter Change will be proposed at October meeting
      
      Consider the possibility of the co-chair not being a regional co-chair. This will require the charter being changed.
   
   
   
   3. Regional Highlights and just the highlights
      
      
      • Ray Murray from PWR - implementing small teams/groups to coach Friends Groups.
      • Judy Gottlieb is working on a project to send out monthly reports on parks and partnerships.
   
   
   4. Update on NPS Advisory Council Subcommittee on Health and Recreation
      
      
      • Developed to promote recreation and the connection between parks and health benefits.
      • 7 pilot projects will be implemented, 1 park per region, 4 urban parks and 3 destination parks.
      • Will examine health connection and visitor's perception.
      • Parks selected are not Unilever projects.