Final Report to the Joyce Foundation May 1, 2009 April 30, 2012 I.

. General Objectives of the Project for Which Grant Funds Were Awarded:
As cited in the original September 2009 project description, The overall goal of this project is to work with the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust (SWWT) collaboration to make significant improvements in water quality, esthetics and habitat in the Southeastern Wisconsin watersheds and move us forward toward the primary goals of the Clean Water Act--fishable, swimmable waters.

II. Is the Project Proceeding as Scheduled?

The project as a whole proceeded and was completed on schedule.

III. Overall Project Progress This Reporting Period:

Sweet Water, with funding from the Joyce Foundation, was instrumental in the development of watershed restoration plans (WRPs) and detailed implementation plans for the WRPs for the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. The nonprofit environmental organization (NGO) partners ensured that sound science and policy were incorporated into the implementation of the plans. The NGOs have also played a critical role in facilitating public input in this process, through the planning phase and the ongoing implementation phase of the work. Sweet Water is now coordinating implementation of priority projects and programs in the watersheds, working closely with existing partners and engaging new ones where they are essential to successful implementation. Sweet Water and its partners were able to leverage Joyce Foundation funding to obtain support from the Fund for Lake Michigan and a variety of other sources to begin implementation on several priority projects this past year. Through the efforts of Sweet Water staff and staff at partner NGOs funded by the Joyce Foundation, key strategic relationships have now been developed with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, many watershed municipalities, the Department of Natural Resources, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, UW-Milwaukees School of Freshwater Sciences, and private sector consulting firms with capacity and capabilities to implement some of our priority projects. That is only a partial list. This relationship-building work lays the groundwork for the transformative collaboration that Sweet Water has set out to foster since its inception. As will be discussed in more detail below, Sweet Water also made progress in a number of other key areas, including: a) advancing particular priority Implementation Plan projects in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds; b) obtaining funding for and launching the Menomonee River watershed-based stormwater permit effort; c) organizing a regional stormwater outreach campaign; and d) obtaining funding for and planning a watershed restoration planning effort for the Root River watershed. 1

These new efforts are in addition to the ongoing work of the Sweet Water collaborative. The chairs of the various Sweet Water committees and Watershed Action Teams continue to work to coordinate Sweet Water, NGO partner, committee and volunteer activities. The chairs continue to report to the Steering Council regularly on their progress. The Sweet Water communications team has sustained an ongoing outreach effort throughout the fall and as noted below, are launching a major expanded regional outreach effort in 2012 and 2013. While this is the final report for Sweet Water collaboratives work from May 1, 2009April 30, 2012 and will refer to work accomplished during that whole period, the report itself focuses on activity in the last year of the grant. The next section of this report is organized in the five activity areas cited and described in our original application and in subsequent reports to the Joyce Foundation. Activity 1: Monitoring, Modeling and Science Work 1. A. Citizen Monitoring Participating organizations: River Alliance of Wisconsin and Milwaukee Riverkeeper Phosphorus monitoring: In 2011 and 2012, for the first time in Wisconsin, volunteers monitored Total Phosphorus at 50 locations in the Kinnickinnic (KK), Menomonee, and Milwaukee River watersheds as a pilot program using funding from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Area of Concern (AOC) program. Results from the first year show that volunteers have effectively followed official DNR protocols for monitoring phosphorus and the data collected is credible. The DNR is using the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) created for this project as a model for the expansion of the volunteer stream monitoring program to include Total Phosphorus monitoring statewide. Data collected by volunteers help Sweet Water understand which streams/rivers have a phosphorus problem, and help affirm and track the effects of implementation projects on particular streams/rivers. Data results have shown that 70% of all monitoring sites had phosphorus levels exceeding the states water quality standard. The DNR is using the volunteers data in its biennial assessment of impaired waters (see attached Volunteer Phosphorus Monitoring: Helping to Control Algae Blooms in the Milwaukee River Basin). Leveraging Joyce Foundation funding, Milwaukee Riverkeeper obtained $34,642 through a Fund for Lake Michigan grant to continue this phosphorus monitoring project into 2013. Citizen baseline water quality monitoring: Milwaukee Riverkeeper trained a total of 40 new volunteers in 2011: 13 Level II and 27 Level I volunteers. In the spring of 2012, we trained 12 Level II and 15 Level I volunteers. This brings our total of citizen monitoring volunteers to 97 volunteers monitoring approximately 100 sites in the Menomonee, Kinnickinnic, and Milwaukee Rivers. In January 2012, Milwaukee Riverkeeper released the 2010 Milwaukee River Report Card. The 2011 report card is scheduled to be released in the summer of 2012. Citizen monitoring data is essential to help us maintain a baseline of surface water information and to gage the success of our restoration efforts. Citizen data has been put into DNR databases and 2

submitted to the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) for use in Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and watershed-based permitting efforts. Chloride monitoring: Between February and December 2011, 11 Riverkeeper volunteers tested 15 sites throughout southeastern Wisconsin as part of a pilot citizen chloride monitoring project with DNR and U.S. Geological Services (USGS). Results show that the Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) acute standards for toxicity were breached 24 times at 7 locations, including sites on the Kinnickinnic River, Root River, and Ulao Creek (a Milwaukee River tributary). The chronic standard was breached 42 times at 8 sites, which include Lilly Creek of the Menomonee River in addition to the sites mentioned above. DNR is continuing funding for a subset of sites for 2012. Twelve Milwaukee Riverkeeper volunteers are currently monitoring 21 sites. Chlorides are not regulated as yet, but regulations may be necessary soon, as chloride levels continue to increase in our rivers, causing water quality conditions that are toxic to aquatic life. Pilot efforts to address chlorides are part of ongoing Sweet Water implementation projects, and a chloride reduction project is currently included in the Menomonee River watershed-based stormwater permit as a suggested watershed project that watershed municipalities could take on to help meet their permit conditions (see attached Madison and Milwaukee Area Volunteer Specific Conductance and Chloride Monitoring Results February-December 2011). Overall citizen monitoring outcomes: There has been an important expansion of information on water quality that can be used as a baseline for measuring improvement; Data is being collected on phosphorus, which has not been monitored by anyone in the past; The data collected by citizens is now accepted as valid and being used by the DNR and municipalities in decision-making; Citizens are more aware of and engaged in water quality issues in their watersheds; Sweet Water is working as a credible partner with DNR and MMSD on water quality improvement. 1. B. Modeling and Science Work Participating organizations: Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Clean Wisconsin, and River Alliance of Wisconsin Bacteria Monitoring: The support of the Joyce Foundation has also allowed Milwaukee Riverkeeper to leverage additional funding to help identify and quantify stormwater outfalls discharging human sewage into area waterways. In 2010, a $10,000 grant from the WDNRs AOC program, along with an additional $3,500 contributed by Milwaukee Riverkeeper, allowed the Great Lakes Water Institute (GLWI) to run bacteria samples from the 2008 to 2010 season using quantitative qPCR genetic tests to point to the presence and strength of human sewage in stormwater (for samples exceeding 1,000 colony forming units of E. coli or Enterococcus). Milwaukee Riverkeeper also received a 2011 Sweet Water mini-grant for $4,000, with additional support from MMSD, to support running 2011 samples through the same test. 3

Milwaukee Riverkeeper and the McLellan Lab at the UW-Milwaukee Great Lakes Water Institute received an additional $20,930 in May 2012 from the DNRs AOC program to support qPCR testing of 140 samples taken in 2012approximately 70 stormwater outfall samples and 70 up the pipe samples in problem sewersheds, which will be collected by MMSD. The Milwaukee Riverkeeper also has funding proposals pending to the Fund for Lake Michigan and the DNR/EPA to support 2012-2013 monitoring efforts. The top priority for 2012 is to finish all sampling in a 10-mile hot-spot area of the Menomonee River to ensure there are at least 3 wet weather samples from each pipe, as well as a dry sample from any pipes found flowing during dry weather. The plan also includes a goal to finish all dry-weather sampling on the Kinnickinnic River this year (see attached Human Bacteroides High Counts and 2011 Sample Counts for Kinnickinnic River as an example). A recent analysis of the data going back to 2008 shows that 66% of Menomonee River stormwater outfalls tested are positive for human sewage; 62% of Honey Creek outfalls tested are positive; 27% of Underwood Creek outfalls are positive; and 25% of Kinnickinnic River outfalls are positive. Riverkeeper will use this information to work with MMSD and other communities to do further up the pipe testing. MMSD is testing up the pipe throughout the areas draining to three problem stormwater pipes identified by Milwaukee Riverkeepers sampling.

Milwaukee Riverkeeper also procured a $4,000 mini-grant through Sweet Water to bring in sewage sniffing dogs from Environmental Canine Services in Michigan. These dogs tested three problem sewersheds in early May and detected areas of possible sewage contamination in all three areas (two in Wauwatosa and one in Milwaukee). The Great Lakes Water Institute took samples during the dog testing so that we will be able to correlate human bacteroides levels to situations where both dogs indicated sewage, neither dog indicated sewage, or only one dog indicated sewage. It is our hope that using sewage sniffing dogs in the future could be a more cost-effective way of finding and fixing problem connections between sanitary sewer and stormwater systems. The dogs also brought some media attention to this water quality problem and this unique way to address it. (See representative press links at http://www.wauwatosanow.com/news/sewer-dogs-keep-things-tidy-3g5bfdd151734115.html#!page=0&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst and http://fox6now.com/2012/05/13/dogs-used-to-help-clean-milwaukee-rivers/. Milwaukee Riverkeeper staff are following up with officials in Wauwatosa and Milwaukee to see if subsequent smoke and dye testing has confirmed cross connections or infrastructural issues. Wauwatosa is currently replacing storm and sanitary sewers that are tributaries to one of the worst stormwater pipes for contributions of fecal bacteria on the Menomonee River. They are also conducting dye testing in two additional areas of concern. As a result of the citizen monitoring, multiple particular problems have been fixed: o For example, data collected from a pipe that was discharging sewage to Honey Creek from a gas station helped persuade MMSD to test there and the pipe was fixed and resulted in instantaneous improvements in bacteria levels in the creek (as confirmed by MMSD surface water monitoring staff).

o A problem pipe discharging sewage to the Kinnickinnic River from a hospital was found and fixed. In addition, one of the worst pipes discharging to the Menomonee River near 90th Street is being fixed by the City of Wauwatosa with both the sanitary and storm sewer mains being replaced. o Milwaukee is almost done with a major pilot lateral sealing project in a neighborhood called Coopers Park, which discharges to several problem pipes entering the Menomonee River at Center Street. Riverkeeper will be conducting follow up sampling in that area later this summer. o The City of Milwaukee has detected a cross connection at a restaurant that discharges to the worst pipe discharging to the Menomonee, near Hawley Avenue. o Finally, the sewer dogs found a school with a cross connection in this same area that is currently being fixed. Finally, the sewer dogs found a school with a cross connection in this same area that is currently being fixed. In addition, new requirements for identifying, detecting, and eliminating suspected sources of human sewage have been incorporated into the new draft Menomonee River Watershed Based Permit for stormwater. The data collected by citizens was key to getting this in the permit. Municipalities will have to start to test all outfalls in their jurisdiction now previously they were only required to test major outfalls greater than 36 inches. They will be able to stop monitoring pipes that have tested clean over their last permit cycle, to free up staff time to investigate these smaller pipes. There is also a protocol and requirement for notifying DNR of pipes with suspected human discharge and taking additional samples within a 6-month period, or until the problem has been fixed. Municipalities will also have two years (until March 2014) to come up with a consistent watershed-wide strategy for identifying, detecting, and eliminating human sewage inputs into the stormwater system. The hope is that the permit will also include requirements that municipalities must respond to either their own field screening tests or third-party data (such as that collected by MMSD or Milwaukee Riverkeeper and its volunteers) in addressing suspected sources of illicit connections. These improvements to the watershed-based permit were possible as a result of Milwaukee Riverkeepers monitoring work, funded largely by Joyce and other partners, and testing partnership with the UW-Milwaukee and will lead to measurable improvements in water quality in the coming years.

Science Committee: The Science Committee met several times this winter and spring to help strategize best methods of choosing pilot locations to fix the sources behind stormwater outfalls identified as hot-spots for human sewage / bacteria. The Committee also discussed issues associated with floatable trash that led to beach closings in Michigan in 2008 and 2010, which was associated with Milwaukee flooding by the media. The Committee also reviewed the draft watershed-based stormwater permit for the Menomonee River watersheds municipalities, and in particular, reviewed and provided input on the requirements under the illicit discharge section. Issues of concern associated with the ongoing TMDL efforts, including the use of phosphorus and sediment as proxies for one another, concerns over the use of fecal coliform as the bacteria parameter were also reviewed, given the science that strongly suggests better 5

indicators now exist for detecting recreational impacts, and questions regarding whether ammonia is a sufficient field screening indicator for human sewage. The committee also learned about recent research applying computer models and advanced statistical methods to better understand ecological processes and factors limiting habitat for fish and other wildlife in river environments. This research may help us better prioritize habitat restoration efforts for maximum impact on both habitat and water quality.

Overall modeling and science outcomes: The Sweet Water Science Committee included many interested experts which bodes well for our ability to adhere to one of the core philosophies behind Sweet Water: that everything the organization supports and facilitates be grounded in sound science and thorough analysis so that funders and taxpayers can be confident that the activities recommended by and undertaken by Sweet Water are cost-effective and strategic steps along the path toward our regions shared water quality, habitat, and watershed health goals. Activity 2. Participate in the Development and Implementation of Watershed Restoration Plans Participating Organizations: Clean Wisconsin, Milwaukee Riverkeeper, River Revitalization Foundation, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, Sweet Water and 1000 Friends of Wisconsin Overall: Watershed Action Teams (WATs) have been meeting periodically to update and share information on projects and advise on projects and priorities of the Watershed Restoration Plans and associated Implementation Plans. Going forward, the WAT co-chairs will become Watershed Project Coordinators and will focus on engaging WAT members and other key implementation partners in project implementation, including prioritization, fundraising, and project management. WAT co-chairs worked with Sweet Water leadership this past spring to develop appropriate strategies and a comprehensive game plan to guide watershed coordination activities over the coming three-year period. Much of this planning took place within the context of work planning for the 20122015 Joyce Foundation grant period. The resulting work plans and redefined roles for some organizations reflect substantial reflection on what worked best over the past three years and what will be required to best position our collaborative effort for success going forward. We feel the changes will place Sweet Water and its many partners in a position to continue the successes they have generated over the past several years. Menomonee River watershed: The Menomonee WAT met on April 12th to help provide guidance on the Granville Dog Park Restoration Project, a priority project being led by River Revitalization Foundation. Project updates were also given for other ongoing projects, with a focus on spring projects in the watershed needing volunteers. There were several recent events that helped engage people in and heighten their awareness of water quality in the Greater Milwaukee watersheds. They include:

o Milwaukee Riverkeepers 17th Annual River Cleanup on April 21 drew 4,300 volunteers, including WAT members, to 54 cleanup sites throughout the watersheds. As part of the River Cleanup festivities, approximately 250 volunteers helped plant trees and shrubs in the riparian areas of Hart Park in Wauwatosa (using $4,000 in funds from a Sweet Water mini-grant to Friends of Hart Park). Also 150 volunteers help plant trees at Rotary Park in Menomonee Falls, as well as remove invasive species in Rotary and Rivers Edge Parks. Additionally, more than 250 volunteers participated in a crane-assisted cleanup along the lower reaches of the Kinnickinnic River, where a heavy duty construction crane facilitated the removal of heavy debris from inaccessible portions of the river bed. o On April 14, over 80 volunteers helped to remove trash and invasive species in the Bobolink Industrial Park, which drains to Lilly Creek, a major tributary of the Menomonee River. Milwaukee Riverkeeper received a $4,000 Sweet Water minigrant to fund the Lilly Creek work, and a $34,000 grant from Fund for Lake Michigan to help support work in Rotary Park, which will continue this summer and fall. o The Village of Menomonee Falls held a successful Stormwater Expo on May 10th, which included many volunteers from the WATs as well as representation from the Cities of Wauwatosa and Brookfield. Milwaukee Riverkeeper and UWExtension taught a stormwater class to all 7th graders in Menomonee Falls, and the larger expo drew community members to hear several talks, including Jeff Martinka about Sweet Water and a local celebrity gardener talking about sustainable landscaping efforts. Milwaukee Riverkeeper is also currently conducting a fish passage impediment survey for the Menomonee River Watershed. This was a priority project in the WRPs, and is funded by a $25,000 Wisconsin Coastal Management Program (WCMP) grant (using Joyce funds as partial match) and a $10,000 DNR Planning Grant. This work will continue through the end of 2012. Milwaukee Riverkeeper also submitted an approximately $250,000 grant with Ozaukee County to NOAA to support design and engineering work of several barriers in the lower Menomonee River between Center Street and Harmonee Avenue as well as to address remaining barriers in the Milwaukee River downstream from Graftons Bridge Street Dam. Milwaukee Riverkeeper partnered with the City of Brookfield to get a $4,000 Sweet Water mini-grant to help stabilize a small portion of eroding streambank along Underwood Creek in the Willaura Subdivision, which is threatening a local property. We are also planning a project with the Village of Butler to improve the riparian area of the Menomonee River in their only public park, and hope to submit this project for funding in late summer/fall of 2012. It is also important to note that other priority projects from the Menomonee WRPs are also going forward, including a Milwaukee County pond restoration project upstream of Capitol Drive, the Airline Yards restoration project being coordinated by Menomonee Valley Partners in the Menomonee Valley, and the installation of doggie-pots in several riverside parks in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds (another Sweet Water mini7

grant supported effort), as well as pet owner education efforts being coordinated by the Paws Pledge Subcommittee, which has excellent representation from Menomonee River municipalities, local humane societies and veterinary clinics, UW-Extension, and Sweet Water organizations. Finally, there are also planned restoration efforts in the Tamarack Bog tributary to the Menomonee River in Menomonee Falls. Kinnickinnic River watershed: Sweet Water partners continued to make strong progress on the Kinnickinnic River Residential Stormwater BMP project, where up to 75 properties will receive residential stormwater BMP retrofits (rain barrels, rain gardens, swale gardens) in three phases over an 18-month period. The project team made several strategic adjustments to the project timeframe and the work will now extend into the first half of 2013. While not funded under the Sweet Water grant, American Rivers has expanded its cooperation with the Sweet Water partnership, offering both WAT leadership and completing commercial BMP projects in the Kinnickinnic watershed. In addition, plans are underway to expand the geographic focus of work with American Rivers, including future Menomonee watershed projects. The lower Kinnickinnic River Corridor community has come together to plan and construct a pocket park adjacent to the Kinnickinnic River, with support from the City of Milwaukees Community Improvement Project grant program and the Sweet Water mini-grant program. Two former residential properties have been converted to a community green space, with stormwater management features displayed predominantly on the site. A group of Sweet Water partners has been awarded a grant from the Wisconsin Coastal Management Program to develop a Green Street Concept Plan. Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, MMSD, the City of Milwaukees Department of Public Works, and the Citys Office of Environmental Sustainability, along with the Madison office of architectural / planning consultants JJR and other NGO partners, will work over the 12month project period to gather information, select a qualified street segment, and develop a concept plan that can help secure funding for final design and engineering and, eventually, capital costs for construction. Importantly, the project is intended to influence the City of Milwaukees citywide sustainability plan and a citywide policy for green streets. Implementation of the Menomonee River Land Protection Plan (LPP) recommendations and the Milwaukee River LPP: The River Revitalization Foundation (RRF) completed the Menomonee River Land Protection Plan incorporated into the Menomonee River Watershed Restoration Plan. RRFs LPP places greater emphasis on projects that improve trail connections, public access, and quality of life than the WRPs. RRF implemented priority projects in the Menomonee (and Milwaukee) River LPP and WRP including: Granville Park, Doyne Park, Little Menomonee River Parkway, Beerline Trail Loop and Wheelhouse property restoration. Landowners of priority parcels within upper reaches of Menomonee River in Milwaukee County were identified and contacted to discuss land management practices and opportunities for conservation. This was a challenge as the time needed to develop relationships with landowners and stakeholders in order to complete a project was lengthy.

Parcels along the tributaries of the Menomonee River were evaluated in order to rank and prioritize targeted conservation opportunities. A three acre parcel was acquired as part of large-scale river corridor protection. RRF was able to leverage the Joyce Foundation funding match for several other grants including: DNR Capacity Grant for $150,000 over two years, River Planning Grant from DNR for $10,000 and Wisconsin Coastal Management Program Grant for $28,000. Additionally, RRF was awarded a $65,000 Fund for Lake Michigan grant for Planning, Outreach, and Feasibility for Restoration at Granville County Park (currently in progress). This leveraged funding was critical as securing funding for urban conservation projects, small scale/big impact urban conservation is not usually competitive for large funding programs. New partnerships were established with the City of Wauwatosa Neighborhood Association Council and Residents for Off Leash Milwaukee Parks. Through RRF work and outreach programs, we engaged and educated: o Municipal leaders, local and state officials, local and state policy makers, and community members on land conservation options and tools; o Minority youth and students in partnership with the City of Milwaukees Earn and Learn crew, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and Marquette University Service Learning Program o Diverse community and peer groups on conservation practices and issues faced in urban watersheds through a variety of events and programs RRF actively participated in WATs, serving as co-chair this past year. RRF brought the land trust/use perspective to the table with an emphasis on buffers, continuous corridors, and habitat restoration (and aesthetics) for improved water quality.

Outcomes: Stakeholder engagement and landowner outreach was strengthened in greater Milwaukee River basin (public and private) including the partnership with Milwaukee County Parks, landowner of more than 70% riparian land in the Menomonee watershed. The land trust perspective was brought to the table by emphasizing the connection between land use and water quality. Protection of over 800 acres of primary environmental corridor was achieved through the City of Milwaukees passage of Greenway Overlay ordinance in May 2010. Widespread delivery of conservation practices and issues faced in urban watersheds that can lead to increased protection of natural areas. The community developed an appreciation of and participation in natural resource protection in urban areas through over 800 hours of volunteer time donated towards habitat improvement on riparian buffers. Activity 3: Policy and Legal Participating Organizations: Clean Wisconsin, Midwest Environmental Advocates, Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Sweet Water and 1000 Friends of Wisconsin

Water quality trading: Since the late-session passage by Wisconsins legislature of a bill enabling more widespread application of water quality trading statewide, Sweet Water and partners have been tracking the DNRs activities to implement a statewide trading framework. To date, that work remains internal to the Department, and an external stakeholder advisory committee has not yet been convened. Sweet Water and partners will seek to be on that advisory committee when it is formed. Beyond that, we plan to engage key stakeholders in potential future trades between point-source dischargers (sewage treatment plants, industrial dischargers, and municipalities) and non-point sources (mostly farms) to shape how trading might take place in Sweet Waters territory. Phosphorus rules implementation / Watershed Adaptive Management Option: In early 2012, the DNR released its detailed guidance on phosphorus-rule implementation, including the Watershed Adaptive Management Option. Sweet Water partner NGOs commented on that guidance in its draft form and helped shape its final form. River Alliance of Wisconsin began in early 2012 to engage relevant players in demonstrating the application of the phosphorus rules / Watershed Adaptive Management Option within Sweet Waters territory. To that end, this summer, Ozaukee County and River Alliance of WI is pursuing multiple sources of funding for a sub-watershed-scale pilot project in the Milwaukee River basin. Building off of our public forum on this subject and water quality trading in November, 2011, early this spring Sweet Waters Policy Committee met and addressed this topic to raise our collective awareness on the details of DNRs implementation approach as they continued to take shape. MMSDs EPA operating permit renewal permit remains pendingthe final details of that document will help to shape how and to what extent the District will drive water quality trading and/or the pursuit of the Watershed Adaptive Management Option in the next five years. TMDLs: The TMDLs continue to move forward approximately on schedule, with Sweet Water providing stakeholder involvement and public outreach support. Stakeholder and public input meetings were held in March 2012, and the next round of meetings will start on July 31st. Sweet Water and its NGO partners have engaged the Science and Policy Committees in this process via regular progress updates. We will continue to work to assure they are prepared to address policy and scientific issues raised as the TMDLs are developed. Progress on the TMDLs is also leading to increased municipal interest in the Menomonee River watershed-based stormwater permitting effort. Watershed-based stormwater permit for the Menomonee River watershed: Sweet Water, with administrative support from 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, has continued to support development of a Menomonee River watershed-based permit. Work to create a watershed-based stormwater permit framework for the Menomonee River watershed has advanced with strong participation of representatives of the Menomonee River watershed municipalities, EPA, DNR, MMSD, SEWRPC, and Sweet Water partners. A draft permit has been prepared, and will be finalized this summer, for issuance around the end of 2012 (see 10

attached for the 7/2/2012 version of the watershed-based permit). The Sweet Water NGO partners are working to ensure that the permit will deliver substantive improvements in water quality. The current draft, which has received widespread support from staff from the participating municipalities, includes a number of innovative features, including: 1) a broader and more effective coordinated public education and outreach program; 2) the ability to jointly devise approaches, using the best information available, to detect and eliminate sources of wastewater contamination to surface waters; 3) using cost-effective opportunities, such as green infrastructure, for reducing discharges of suspended solids, even if those opportunities are located in neighboring communities; and 4) implementing watershed projects, either individually or jointly. Sweet Water and its NGO partners will continue to participate in work group meetings to maximize the permit's ability to deliver increased water quality benefits and to ensure broad-based buy-in in the resulting permit. Ultimately, all involved hope to maximize the participation of Menomonee River watershed communities in the permit and to have a successful pilot of this relatively untested approach. Green infrastructure: Sweet Water and its NGO partners have been participating in a wide range of integrated efforts to support more widespread use of green infrastructure in the Milwaukee region to further multiple shared goals relating to water quality improvements and water quantity management. The City of Milwaukee's Green Teamincluding representatives from Sweet Water, the River Revitalization Foundation, and Midwest Environmental Advocatesis in the midst of a 15- to 18-month effort to prepare a Sustainability Plan for the City. That plan, including its consideration of green infrastructure, is being integrated with MMSD's Regional Green Infrastructure Plan, and will reflect the opportunities resulting from MMSD's green roofs program and green infrastructure partnership program. Another effort of Sweet Water to support green infrastructure is its mini-grant program. Over $50,000 raised for the program in 2011 was distributed as grants during the last 12 months to a variety of schools, nonprofits and neighborhood groups for small-scale green infrastructure projects such as rain gardens, rain barrel projects, cisterns, planting of stormwater trees, and community garden rainwater collection systems. As noted above, the draft Menomonee River watershed-based stormwater permit includes provisions that encourage municipalities to use green infrastructure. In addition, Sweet Water is supporting 1000 Friends of Wisconsins, Milwaukee Countys, and MMSDs joint effort to pursue funding from the Fund for Lake Michigan to assist eight Menomonee River watershed municipalities in a review of their municipal codes and ordinances to identify those which discourage green infrastructure or make green infrastructure more difficult or costly. The project will yield targeted recommendations for municipal policy changes that can foster more widespread use of green infrastructure through reduced barriers and enhanced incentives for the practices. Sweet Waters NGO policy team and members of the Policy Committee feel that active engagement in all of these initiatives going forward remains critical to the ultimate outcomes of Sweet Waters work to improve water quality in the watersheds in southeastern Wisconsin. The Committee will continue to work on strategies to integrate these policy initiatives. A critical element for this integration is the participation and leadership of Sweet

11

Water partners, including NGO representatives, on Sweet Water committees and advisory groups. Overall policy/legal outcomes: The watershed-based permitting pilot in the Menomonee River watershed appears to be on track to meet Sweet Waters (and all participants) twin goals of improved water quality and greatly expanding coordination across the watershed of permit holder activities to meet or exceed permit requirements. The pending TMDLs will serve as drivers behind much water quality work by municipalities, point-source dischargers, and nonpoint sources in these watersheds in the years to come. A critical mass of green infrastructure-related implementation and planning activity is happening in the Greater Milwaukee area right now, thanks in part to efforts by Sweet Water and its partners. The table is being set now for widespread implementation of green infrastructure in a targeted but distributed way throughout the watersheds, which is just what has been called for by the Watershed Restoration Plans. Critical policy pieces are now in place at the state level to allow pilot efforts to implement both the Watershed Adaptive Management Option for phosphorus and water quality trading for phosphorus and total suspended solids. Sweet Water is well-positioned to be able to advance both of these important policy fronts in Southeastern Wisconsin and statewide. Activity 4: Developing an Outreach and Communications Strategy Participating organizations: Sweet Water and 1000 Friends of Wisconsin Stormwater Pollution Outreach Campaign Sweet Water's Communication Committee, led by Sweet Water and 1000 Friends of Wisconsin in 2011, launched efforts for a much-expanded 2012 public storm water pollution outreach campaign. In February, Sweet Water and Root-Pike WIN joined resources to develop a region-wide campaign for 2012, with a two-year campaign budget of $250,000, which includes DNR grants awarded to both Sweet Water and Root-Pike WIN and support from their respective municipal partners. Thus far, Sweet Water has raised more than $29,000 from 12 Milwaukee, Menomonee and KK watershed municipalities to match municipal funds provided by Root and Pike watershed communities. A request for qualifications (RFQ) was developed and sent to 20 ad agencies and in March, Eichenbaum Associates was chosen to lead our new regional campaign. A TV-focused campaign was developed and a twelve week outreach campaign was formally launched on 6/27. The campaign has two main components: 1) a June-September TV and on-line campaign delivered through Fox 6 WITI-TV; and 2) a complementary outreach effort at July August community events throughout the region. Eichenbaum/Associates created a campaign using humor and a dose of role-reversal. Eichenbaum staff created a dog puppet of an American water spaniel called Sparkles that functions as a mascot. After script approval by our funding partners, a series of television campaign ads was taped on 6/12, with Sparkles being played by national comedian Jeff Cesario, a Kenosha native now in California. Four regional actors joined Sparkles, each playing the roles

12

of local residents (see attached press release with photo of Sparkles which includes campaign web site with our TV ads). The 2012 outreach campaign is highly leveraged for our cash investment of about $120,000 this year, we are expected a public impact value of more than $240,000. Public Presentations and Displays The most recent Sweet Water public presentations included: 10/3-5 Clean Water America Alliance annual meeting in Milwaukee; 10/6 Urban Stormwater and Water Quality Forum in Milwaukee; 10/15 National Land Trust Alliance Rally in Milwaukee -- Sweet Water represented in two workshops: a Sweet Water introductory workshop and a BMP/Green Infrastructure seminar (Martinka with Nature Conservancy, MMSD, and Conservation Fund representatives), 1/24 Lake Michigan Stakeholders meeting in Cleveland, WI; 2/3 Intertwine Congress/Metro Greenspace Alliance Retreat in Portland, OR; 2/23 Wisconsin Wetlands Assoc. annual meeting in Lake Geneva, WI; 5/2 UWM All Things Water Seminar; 5/6 River Networks River Rally in Portland, OR; 5/10 Menomonee Falls Stormwater Conference and 6/29 Sweet Waters board member Preston Cole taped for the Fox Focus news show. A new Sweet Water display was created in February to augment our outreach efforts. In addition, a new Sweet Water brochure was developed to support outreach (see attached Sweet Water Brochure). Collegiate BMP Design Challenge Five student teams, four from Marquette University and one from University of WisconsinMilwaukee took part in this years 1000 Friends of Wisconsins Collegiate BMP Design Challenge. They were matched with five projects rising out of the watershed restoration implementation plans. Conceptual or foundational designs/plans employing green infrastructure projects were developed. The team of UWM students who worked on the Hoyt Park green infrastructure project was invited to present their plans at a summer meeting of the Friends of Hoyt Park. Online Communications Sweet Water continues its regular outreach through an online monthly newsletter, Watershed Watch, and a quarterly print/online newsletter, RiversReport (see attached RiversReports). Mail Chimp is used for the distribution of the Watershed Watch reaching 424 on our listserve. We have a 25% open rate for announcements sent via the list-serve. Thirty-nine announcements were distributed through the list-serve May 2011 April 2012. These included the Watershed Watch e-news as well as additional special events and Watershed Action Team announcements. The UW-Extension list-serve also distributes these two newsletters and reaches 487 individuals and organizations. Partnerships have been strengthened by inclusion of articles about their efforts in the newsletters; notably DNR/AOC, UWM School of Freshwater Sciences, MMSD and Root-Pike WIN. All past conference presentations and forum presentations are now housed online at www.scribd.com. Facebook and Twitter are regularly updated with 222 followers on Facebook and 518 followers on Twitter and inclusion on 31 Twitter lists. The current web site is updated weekly with news items associated with water quality and restoration efforts. Three new pages have been developed; policy updates/news, past Clean Rivers, Clean Lake Conference presentations, and an in-depth story about 2011 Collegiate 13

BMP Design Challenge participants. The new web site continues to be developed with the framework now complete. We are readying files and data for transfer to a new hosting site. Other Communications/Outreach Efforts Between May 2011 and April 2012, 14 press releases were sent out to over 20 press/media outlets, resulting in more than web or print articles during that same period (see postings at http://www.swwtwater.org/home/news.cfm). 1000 Friends of Wisconsin continued to serve as liaison to the Menomonee River Watershed Municipal Group for SWWT communications and facilitates the development of education and outreach programs for their current storm water permit requirements and proposed watershed-based storm water permit through the end of the 2009-2012 grant cycle. Overall Outreach and Communications Outcomes: The expanded regional stormwater pollution education campaign has been a major success and is poised to become a sustainable multiyear effort. The Sweet Water collaborative has continued to both sustain and grow its communications efforts. Activity 5: Sweet Water Administration and Committee Support Participating organizations: Sweet Water and various partners Fundraising / Funds Distribution Sweet Water raised a total of nearly $750,000 in funds to match the investment of the Joyce Foundation in 2011 and 2012. The organization raised $450,000 in 2011, building on $300,000 total from 2010. The majority of those funds went to our partner organizations, funding work such as new restoration planning efforts, small scale NGO implementation work, and public storm water pollution education. That total does not include the many new grants and investments secured or raised by Sweet Waters Joyce and non-Joyce partners in the region. Since last summer, we also completed complex planning efforts toward our comprehensive new grant request for the Joyce Foundation. We remain very pleased and proud that the Joyce Foundation Trustees approved a $1.5 million, three-year grant in April, 2012. Clean Rivers Clean Lake Conference Sweet Water produced a highly-successful 8th Annual Clean Rivers Clean Lake Conference on 4/30, attracting 255 registrants, up from 223 in 2010. The speakers were diverse and strong, with attendee evaluations offering good or excellent rankings for more than 85% of the sessions. The conference offered 3 workshop tracks featuring 17 speakers on 15 topics. Engaging plenary sessions were led by EPA Region 5 Administrator Susan Hedman; WI DNR Secretary Cathy Stepp; Dean of the UWM School of Freshwater Sciences David Garman; and others. A particular focus of the conference this year was on the economic impact of cleaner waters (see attached Clean Rivers Clean Lake Conference Program). The next conference is already being planned for April 2013.

14

TMDL Project Work In the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) area, Sweet Water continues work with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District in engaging stakeholders and doing public outreach on a program to complete four TMDL analyses for rivers/water bodies in our region. The first two of nine planned TMDL stakeholder meetings were held on 11/11 and 4/12, at the Wauwatosa Public Library, with 80 to 105 representatives of municipalities, treatment plants, and state water quality permit holders attending. The next is set for 7/31. The first of five TMDL public information sessions was held on 3/12 in Wauwatosa. Four Sweet Water representatives, from DNR, SEWRPC, UWM and Sweet Water itself, participate in bi-weekly TMDL planning sessions. Administrative Capacity-Building Sweet Waters administrative capacity since the start of 2012 has dramatically improved. With the support of a new grant from the Brico Fund, we hired a new time administrative staff member in December, a Project Specialist with a strong water/habitat and NGO background, secured a seasoned auditor in April, and increased the capacity of our GIS support intern in May. Finally, in May, we hired an additional time administrative staffer, a person with a long background at one of our key private sector partners. IT systems at Sweet Water were also much improved over the last year. With Brico Fund support, Sweet Water purchased its first two computers and it also upgraded its software systems with donations through TechSoup. With the help of the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee IT staff, Sweet Water records and data were moved into a UWM cloud storage system, allowing for easy file sharing and remote access to Sweet Water data. Sweet Water was hired in May to provide GIS services to CH2M Hill in its work to create a Phase 1 Green Infrastructure Plan for MMSD. A new GIS intern was hired for the work and our interns initial efforts have been praised by CH2M Hill project staff. Sweet Water has launched an important strategic planning initiative including both its Joyce partner NGOs and the Sweet Water Steering Council Planning Committee to examine progress made by the collaborative and to plot the most effective course for the coming years. Sara Wilson, of Mayes Wilson Associates, will guide that effort, largely funded through a grant from the Nonprofit Management Fund. Sweet Water Mini-Grants As part of its fundraising in 2011, Sweet Water raised $52,500 to support 2011/2012 Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River watershed green infrastructure mini-grants. In the first round, which focused on the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River watersheds, eight grants totaling about $29,000 were distributed. A second round of 21 grant applicants from all five Sweet Water watersheds were evaluated and $25,000 in mini-grant funding was awarded to nine organizations at the Clean Rivers Clean Lake Conference on 4/30. Mini-grant supporters in 2011 included the Fund for Lake Michigan, the MMSD, the Wisconsin Energy Foundation, and CH2M Hill. Sweet Water has already started raising funds for a planned third grant round. Overall administrative and committee support outcomes: Sweet Water was successful in securing a new three-year commitment from the Joyce Foundation Trustees in May. 15

The organization found funds to expand its current capacities and also funded and started a strategic planning process to chart its future course.

Summary of Major Successes and Challenges

Successes: As detailed above, progress on the watershed-based storm water permit framework for the Menomonee River watershed has continued to be strong with great cooperation from the municipalities, WI DNR and EPA Region 5. As-of the date of press, this effort appears on track to yield a permit framework that improves water quality more than the status quo, and it appears that a critical mass of Menomonee River watershed municipalities are likely to sign on to the watershed-based permit rather than opting for individual permits as in the past. WAT co-chairs worked with Sweet Water leadership this past spring to develop appropriate strategies and a comprehensive game plan to guide watershed coordination activities over the coming three-year period. Much of this planning took place within the context of work planning for the 20122015 Joyce Foundation grant period. The resulting work plans and redefined roles for some organizations reflect substantial reflection on what worked best over the past three years and what will be required to best position our collaborative effort for success going forward. We feel the changes will place Sweet Water and its many partners in a position to continue the successes they have generated over the past several years. The ongoing funding of citizen-based monitoring costs has remained a challenge, though new 2011 grants from the Fund for Lake Michigan, especially in the Root River, have shown they are willing to consider strategic monitoring requests. Fund for Lake Michigan-supported NGO implementation efforts are well-underway by American Rivers, Groundwork Milwaukee, and Sixteenth Street Community Health Center in the Kinnickinnic River watershed and new Fund for Lake Michigan- or Sweet Water mini-grant-supported projects have begun on the Menomonee River watershed, as well, led by Milwaukee Riverkeeper and River Revitalization Foundation. The Root River Watershed Restoration Plan is progressing well with strong, continued community and stakeholder input. We are already expecting our 2012 storm water outreach campaign to be a major success this year. The initial 2011 Sweet Water-organized storm water public education pilot effort ($41,000 in cash value) was expanded this year to a two-year, $250,000 project with a truly regional focus, bringing together Sweet Water and the Menomonee River municipal group and a similar group of municipalities from the Root and Pike River watersheds to the south. The $52,500 Sweet Water raised in 2010 and 2011 has funded seventeen mini-grants in December 2011 and April 2012. Those small cash infusions are clearly bolstering the work of both key Joyce Foundation Sweet Water partners as well as a range of civic and grassroots groups across the watersheds. To date, Sweet Water mini-grants have provided $67,500 to 27 local groups. Initial progress and initial stakeholder involvement in Milwaukees four, third-party TMDLs has been very strong. On a related matter, Sweet Waters 11/14 water quality 16

forum was well-attended and covered some of the very policy issues which impact TMDL implementation, namely the phosphorus Watershed Adaptive Management Option and water quality trading. Sweet Waters 2012 Clean Rivers Clean Lake conference was a strong success, drawing 255 attendees from across the region, an increase of 15% over the prior year registrations. The event served as an effective communications and teaching opportunity, with strong speakers drawing >85% good or excellent evaluations and securing stronger sponsor support than in 2010. It also functioned as a very useful networking event, with strong exchanges happening during the break periods and in the closing poster-session reception. Through the efforts of Sweet Water staff and staff at partner NGOs funded by the Joyce Foundation, key strategic relationships have now been developed with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, many watershed municipalities, the Department of Natural Resources, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, UWMilwaukees School of Freshwater Sciences, and private sector consulting firms with capacity and capabilities to implement some of our priority projects. That is only a partial list. This relationship-building work lays the groundwork for the transformative collaboration that Sweet Water has set out to foster since its inception.

Challenges: Because the WRPs did not have the refinement down to the expected level of detail to easily identify and prioritize projects for the watershed. The WAT leaders are working with Sweet Water on new approaches. In a continuing challenge, collaborative, cooperative fundraising work is difficult across agencies and within existing resources. As noted in prior reports, in the Fund for Lake Michigan and GLRI arenas in particular, it is difficult for NGOs to offer shovel-ready, design-prepared grant options to funders. We recently undertook new efforts to counter that challenge, reaching out to private sector partners for engineering and analysis support. We are proud of our Sweet Water mini-grant program, but the grants generated interest beyond our resources, which meant only 35% of the requests could be funded. We hope to continue and expand the program in future years. Integration of efforts continue to pose challenges to the Sweet Water collaborative. It continues to be difficult to effectively mesh programs and planning across the range of NGO partners. This compounds the problem of effective project or program prioritization. A central theme of work planning for the 2012-2015 grant period is a much stronger integration of Sweet Waters component parts. In a related arena, integration of the policy initiatives involving Sweet Water, including watershed-based permitting, water quality trading and TMDLs and the watershed restoration implementation plans is a challenging task. We are convinced that the outcomes will be best if all of the various policy tools, vehicles, and drivers are viewed holistically rather than as disparate parts. As noted in past reports, as efforts continue to expand to include new partnerships, new projects, and new watersheds, the workload will increase exponentially. Tactics to achieve operating efficiencies and balanced workloads among partners is an on-going

17

challenge. The commitment to having diverse stakeholders as part of this process and a commitment to general agreement on complex issues compounds that challenge. The proper profile for Sweet Water in the region is an unsettled issue should the collaboration be a behind the scenes playmaker or more of a media star. Certainly, to date, its public profile has been relatively modest. Sweet Water recognizes that one of its key roles is to support and celebrate the efforts of all of its partners that serve to further the overall mission and specific water quality targets we have set for ourselves.

IV. Additional Narrative Addressing Questions from the December 2009 Joyce Foundation Award Letter
1. Can you describe Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage Districts (MMSD) continued involvement in Sweet Water? MMSD continues to be a very active participant in Sweet Water activities. In addition to serving on the Steering Council, MMSD Executive Director Kevin Shafer is also a member of the Executive Committee that works with Jeff Martinka to oversee the Sweet Water collaboration; that group meets in one-hour sessions every other Thursday. MMSD staff continues to participate on many of the Sweet Water committees. Of particular importance, MMSDs Karen Sands attends the monthly Sweet Water Chairs Committee meeting, our major regular partnerconvening effort. In other arenas, MMSD was very active in the planning and organizing of the Clean Rivers Clean Lake Conference and the District donated use of a GIS work station and GIS manager support for Sweet Waters two GIS interns. MMSD also continues to provide important linkages to the major regulatory agencies. MMSD staff also provided crucial support on the identification of funding and collaboration on projects, including the three Watershed Restoration Plans, the TMDLs, Sweet Waters water quality mini-grants, and the Menomonee watershed-based stormwater permit. To be realistic, MMSD is a complex organization and Sweet Water and its partners are working in diverse arenas. There have been times when Sweet Water partners have been out of the loop on particular issues under consideration at MMSD, and vice versa. We continue to work to improve coordination and cooperation in all realms possible. 2. What activities did the partner organizations engage in to educate local and state officials, local and state policy makers, advocates, and gubernatorial staff? The DNR continues to serve as an ex-officio member on the Steering Council. The DNR is active in all matters brought before the Council and Sweet Waters committees and work groups. In addition, DNR staff continues to be invaluable in assisting Sweet Water and its partners in developing project proposals for Great Lakes Restoration Initiative funding. Other state and local officials are directly involved in Sweet Water through their active participation on the Science and Policy Committees and Work Groups, including offering advice in the legal and policy development of the WRP, water quality trading, watershed-based permitting and development of the 303(d) Impaired Waters List. State and local officials and

18

staffs will be involved in the development of the monitoring strategy for ensuring that water quality improvements and watershed restoration can be effectively measured. 3. How has the partner organizations efforts improved water quality in the Milwaukee River watershed? As noted in our report, Sweet Waters work has been focused more to date and the KK, Menomonee and Root River watersheds. That has not meant that the Milwaukee River is completely neglected, however. Key partners like Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Ozaukee County, River Revitalization Foundation, River Alliance of Wisconsin and Sand County Foundation have been very active in the Milwaukee watershed in this grant period. Sweet Water will expand its own work there in the coming grant period, particular through the rural nonpoint work of River Alliance. Past Milwaukee River efforts by partners also include Milwaukee Riverkeepers extensive monitoring and data gathering information, its litter pickup efforts, and its Milwaukee River Report Card. River Revitalization Foundations riparian corridor work in the lower Milwaukee and its support of the Greenway Coalitions work are important additions. Finally, Sweet Waters stormwater pollution outreach efforts include education of Milwaukee River watershed residents, of course. 4. How have the partner organizations efforts improved local or state policy in Wisconsin? As outlined in detail in Activity Area 3, Sweet Water and its Policy Committee continues to work with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on moving forward a range of water policy efforts, including watershed-based permitting and water quality trading. In addition, several of the NGOs participated on advisory groups to the DNR on phosphorus rule making and water quality trading and Joyce NGOs, working through the Policy and Science Committees, continue to work with DNR on the revisions of the 303(d) Impaired Waters List. On another important Great Lakes Basin water quality issue, Sweet Waters Science and Policy Committees continue to monitor potential impacts of a proposed Lake Michigan diversion and that of new invasive species. 5. How did the partner organizations work with other stakeholders including the business community, agricultural community, municipalities and utilities to contribute to the work of Sweet Water? As noted by reference in many reports sections above, all key stakeholder groups are represented on the Sweet Water Steering Council and many are represented on our Committees. Our engagement with key local and state government officials has been particularly strong and our connections to the academic, engineering/consulting firm and NGO communities are also active and mutually-beneficial. Beyond particular board members, we are much less connected to diverse interests in the agricultural community and the business community-at-large than we would like. While much work remains, those weaknesses have started to be addressed in the coming year with new partnership structures with River Alliance of Wisconsin (rural outreach) and American Rivers (commercial outreach), in particular. We know we also need to work more aggressively with some sectors of government the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, in particular, and we 19

are addressing that now. 6. What recommendations have been made with regards to a watershed based permit for the Milwaukee River watershed or its subwatersheds to date? What actions have been taken to implement a watershed based permit? As noted in much greater detail in the Activity Area 3 above, the EPA-funded Menomonee River Watershed-Based Permit (WSBP) Pilot Project is a very major interim success for our collaborative. The work is nearing its early summer completion date in July and the process has been almost perfectly-aligned with the original intentions of Sweet Waters founders. We hope that the anticipated success in one of the five Sweet Water watersheds leads to efforts focused on others, in our region and elsewhere. 7. How would you describe the policy and other outcomes of your work to date? Also as described in Activity Area 3 and question 4 above, a significant foundation has been laid on several water quality policy fronts through the work of Sweet Waters partners and our Policy Committee. The clear objective of Sweet Water is to use tools such as watershed-based permits, TMDLs, and water quality/adaptive management proposals to yield improvements in the water quality of the southeastern Wisconsin watersheds and we are actively engaged in work in those areas. We have also been effective in using programs such as public events or conferences to promote important policy discussions or policy outcomes.

V. Strategic Modifications:
In a project as complex as ours, especially in terms of the number of our partners and the scale of our mission, strategic changes were inevitable. In particular, there were instances where key players needed to change that happened in terms of WAT leadership over time, for example. And there were particular opportunities that were too appealing to resist the chance, for example, to initiate the WRP effort for the Root River could be cited. In general however, our efforts were very consistent with the original hopes of our founders. Sometimes circumstance meant that we overachieved against plan, other times, efforts stayed on track but proceeded a bit slower than we would have liked.

VI. Problems Encountered:

The Challenges section starting at the top of page 17 is a good summation of problem areas for Sweet Water and its partner.

VII. Project Budget and Actual Expenditures:

The attached Sweet Water Joyce Grant Financial Report provides a summary of expenditures against budget. In short, the project met or exceeded its overall financial goals, including the securing of matching funds to the Joyce Foundation gifts.

VIII. Financial Narrative:

The project proceeded on budget, with all partners performing according to plan. A copy of Sweet Waters most recent audit, for fiscal/calendar 2011 is attached. The audit of the projects fiscal agent, River Revitalization Foundation, will be provided to the Joyce Foundation as soon as it is completed. 20