NOAA Great Lakes Microplastics: Partnership and Community of Practice Network

Key Connections & Insights

This map shows how a Great Lakes microplastics research project becomes a living partnership. Scientists, agencies, educators, artists, parks, and communities connect around one shared goal: making invisible plastic threats visible, and turning that knowledge into action. The story it tells is about reach. A discovery in a UW-Madison lab travels through trusted relationships until it reaches a child at a museum, a teacher in a classroom, and a decision-maker at a policy table.

Network at a glance

38 nodes across eight categories

The network maps the core research team, institutions and agencies, education and outreach groups, public engagement venues, art and social engagement, the Microplastics DJ hub, the respectful GLIFWC tie, and a planned Great Lakes scaling layer. Solid ties are confirmed. Dashed and dotted ties show what is planned or still to verify, so the design intent stays honest and visible.

Five connection types

Every line carries a type, colored to show how the relationship works: research collaboration, data sharing and integration, engagement and education, community of practice, and policy and public engagement. Reading the colors reveals where the science lives, where the data flows, and where the public conversation happens.

One project, many doorways

The Wisconsin pilot is designed to scale. Park stations, companion museums, extended USGS connectivity, and like-organized institutions across the bordering Great Lakes states appear as a parallel dashed layer, showing where the model is meant to travel next.

Centrality with a purpose

The largest node is not the lab and not the funder. It is the engagement design role, because the project's distinctive strength is how it connects research to people. Node size reflects how many relationships each player anchors.

What the map reveals

STEMsaic as the boundary crosser

Linking research, public engagement, and policy

The most important pattern in this network is a bridge. STEMsaic sits between the science and the public, carrying findings outward and carrying community questions back in. The same role connects the project to policy boards, parks, and the funder, so the research does not stay in journals. It becomes a conversation that families, teachers, and decision-makers can join.

Research Engagement Policy

The Microplastics DJ as the scaling hub

One platform, many settings

The Microplastics DJ is the project's engine for reach. Built on a Makey Makey core with a hybrid in-person and online model, it travels into children's museums, schools, parks, festivals, and policy conversations. It is also a train-the-trainer launchpad: museum staff, teachers, and citizen scientists learn the model and adapt it to their own setting. That is what turns one Wisconsin pilot into a Great Lakes network.

Engagement Data

The USGS, Sea Grant, and UW data-sharing core

Where the evidence is built and shared

At the center of the science sits a tight data triangle. USGS leads environmental monitoring and flow sampling, UW-Madison develops the detection technology and sample preparation, and Wisconsin Sea Grant carries education and field experiences. The EPA Guardian vessel adds co-contaminant sampling for mercury and PFAS. Together they form the confirmed, evidence-producing heart of the network.

Data sharing Research

A parallel Great Lakes scaling plan

Park stations and companion museums, rendered dashed

Two tracks share the same logic. A park-station network, in development, would host Microplastics DJ stations across the Great Lakes watershed, scaled through UW-Madison Extension. A museum track would extend the Wisconsin children's-museum model to companion museums in the bordering states. Both radiate toward a Great Lakes states grouping, with STEMsaic at the hinge of each. These are shown as aspirational so the plan is clear without overstating what exists today.

Engagement Data

Clusters in the network

The map organizes into recognizable clusters that mirror how the work actually unfolds across the Great Lakes region.

Core research team

The six co-PIs anchor the science: Haoran Wei (detection), Mohan Qin (sample preparation), Gavin Dehnert (bioaccumulation, with a second tie to Wisconsin Sea Grant), Sarah Janssen (USGS monitoring), Ginny Carlton (Sea Grant education), and Travis Tangen (STEMsaic engagement). Bryce contributes USGS flow sampling as a connected collaborator rather than a core co-PI.

Institutions and agencies

UW-Madison and its Engineering and Extension arms, USGS, Wisconsin Sea Grant, EPA, and the NOAA Marine Debris Program form the institutional backbone. UW-Madison Extension is the opportunity-extender, carrying the work into park, waterway, and watershed systems across the region.

Education, outreach, and public engagement

Water@UW demos, teacher networks, children's museums, school clubs, Green & Healthy Schools, and WSST connect the science to learners. The Wisconsin Science Festival, UW Science Expeditions, Remake Learning Days, City of Madison Parks, and policy boards add depth of history and public-facing reach.

Art and social engagement

An artist intake process invites practitioners into the work. Haley, a UW-Green Bay student artist, is building a two-panel Great Lakes model made from plastics, focused on the water. UW-Green Bay sits at the edge of the network, connected through the art track rather than as a direct institutional research partner.

Planned versus realized, told honestly

A trustworthy network map shows what is real and what is intended. The confirmed core sits in solid lines. The Great Lakes scaling plan, including park stations, companion museums, and extended USGS connectivity, appears in dashed lines as design intent. A possible Great Lakes water collaboration, perhaps hosted by the University of Michigan or a Canadian institution, is shown as a dotted, to-verify tie until it is confirmed. The GLIFWC relationship is intentionally light and respectful: TEK-respectful engagement facilitated through GLIFWC's already-established outreach programs, reflecting an approach that honors Traditional Ecological Knowledge rather than a fully realized program.

Most connected nodes

Node	Category	Confidence	Connections

About This Sociogram

A plain-language guide to what you are looking at: how the map is built, what the nodes and lines mean, and how to read the confidence levels so you always know what is confirmed and what is planned.

What is a sociogram?

The interactive map on the first tab is a sociogram, a picture of relationships within a defined group. The idea goes back to Jacob Moreno in the 1930s, who used network diagrams to study how people connect. In its simplest form, a sociogram shows participants as points (nodes) and their relationships as lines (edges) between them.

This sociogram maps a partnership and community-of-practice network built around the NOAA Great Lakes microplastics project. Some nodes are people, such as the co-PIs. Others are organizations, programs, venues, or planned future partners. The lines show how research, data, education, community, and public engagement flow between them.

A note on respectful framing

The GLIFWC node is shown with a light, respectful presence. It represents TEK-respectful engagement facilitated through GLIFWC's already-established outreach programs, an approach that honors Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Great Lakes stewardship. The map intentionally does not detail internal tribal structures or council processes, because the relationship is built on trust and shared decision-making, not on cataloging.

What the nodes mean

Each node is colored by category, so you can see at a glance which part of the work it belongs to.

Node color = category

Eight categories organize the map: core research team, institution or agency, education and outreach, public engagement and venues, art and social engagement, the Microplastics DJ hub, the GLIFWC TEK-respectful tie, and the planned scaling layer. The legend on the first tab lists each color.

Node size = connectivity

Larger nodes anchor more relationships. The engagement design role (STEMsaic) and the Microplastics DJ are the largest, because the project's distinctive strength is connecting research to people.

What the lines mean

Line color = connection type

Five types describe how each relationship works: research collaboration, data sharing and integration, engagement and education, community of practice, and policy and public engagement. Use the filter on the first tab to isolate one type at a time.

Line style = confidence

Solid lines are confirmed relationships grounded in project documentation and meeting records. Dashed lines are planned or aspirational, used for the Great Lakes scaling layer. Dotted lines are held in reserve for ties that are still to verify. This keeps the difference between what exists and what is intended visible at every step.

How the layout works

The map uses a force-directed layout from D3.js. Nodes gently push apart while connected nodes pull together, like charged particles linked by springs. The simulation settles into a balance where related players cluster near one another. Because the starting positions are random, the exact arrangement changes each time the page loads, but the underlying structure stays the same. You can drag any node to rearrange it, scroll to zoom, and hover to highlight a node's immediate connections.

How the data was assembled

The network was built from the project's own record: quarterly community-of-practice meetings, reporting documents, engagement plans, and partner conversations spanning 2025 and 2026. STEMsaic, as the engagement and evaluation partner, tagged the relationships by type and confidence, then assembled them into this interactive view using research-informed sociogram practice. The goal is to move beyond a simple hub-and-spoke picture and show how the partnership actually works, including how connections came to be, not only that they exist.

Limitations

A point in time. This is a snapshot. Partnerships grow and shift, and the map will be updated as the work develops.

Planned ties are clearly marked. The scaling layer reflects design intent. Dashed and dotted lines show where the model is meant to go, not relationships that are fully in place today.

Relationships, not rankings. Node size reflects connectivity in this map, which is a structural measure, not a judgment about any partner's value or effort.

Suggested references

Moreno, J. L. (1934). Who Shall Survive? The origin of the sociogram.
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance. JPART, 18(2), 229-252.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2018). Analyzing Social Networks (2nd ed.). SAGE.

Network analysis for partnerships

See Your Partnership Network

You have built more partnerships than any single page can hold. The trouble is that they live in your head, in scattered reports, and across dozens of email threads. When you cannot see the whole picture, it is hard to show funders the reach you have created, hard to spot the gaps, and hard to know where to invest next. STEMsaic helps you see it, understand it, and act on it.

The map you just explored is the deliverable

This Great Lakes microplastics sociogram is a working example of what STEMsaic builds. We gather your partnership data, tag each relationship by type and confidence, and turn it into an interactive map you can share with your team, your funders, and your board. The result is not a static chart. It is a strategic tool you can return to as the work grows.

What becomes possible

A clear network map changes the conversation. Instead of describing your partnerships one by one, you can show the whole ecosystem and the patterns inside it.

🏢

Tell your reach story

Show funders and stakeholders how a discovery travels from the lab to a classroom, a museum, and a policy table. Reach becomes visible and credible, not just claimed.

🔗

Find the gaps and bridges

See which players hold the network together and where connections are thin. Network maps reveal the bridging roles and missing links that org charts and partner lists miss.

🗺

Map the landscape

Understand your place in the broader ecosystem. Where do opportunities cluster? Which regional players should you reach next? Landscape maps clarify strategic positioning.

🎯

Track planned versus realized

Mark what exists, what is planned, and what is still to verify. As your network grows, the map updates, turning estimates into confirmed relationships over time.

How STEMsaic works with you

Whether you need a one-time landscape snapshot, an ongoing monitoring system, or a hands-on mapping activity for a convening, STEMsaic provides the evaluation design, facilitation, data analysis, and interactive build. We start with your context and your questions, then design the right approach. You stay the hero of the work. We are the guide who helps you see it clearly.

Where this fits

Grant reporting and evaluation

Generate interactive sociograms for annual reports, RPPRs, and reviews. Show funders the evolving structure of your partnership ecosystem, with confidence levels that keep the story honest.

Convenings and stakeholder events

Turn a partnership meeting into a data collection moment. We design and facilitate mapping activities that produce a shared picture in the room.

Strategy and planning

Use the map to decide where to build next. Identify bridge-building opportunities, underserved clusters, and the partners who would extend your reach.

Let's map your network

If you lead a research project, a center, a community partnership, or a grant-funded program, you can have a map like this one. Visit stemsaic.com to learn more, or reach out at partner@stemsaic.com to talk through what a network analysis engagement could look like for your team.

How This Was Made

This map began as a research project and grew into a partnership. The story of how it was built mirrors the story it tells: science is most powerful when it travels through trusted relationships and reaches the people who live with the water it studies.

The project

The NOAA Great Lakes microplastics project, funded by the NOAA Marine Debris Program through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, set out to do something genuinely hard: detect and understand nano- and microplastics in the Great Lakes, particles thousands of times smaller than a grain of sand. UW-Madison leads the detection and sample-preparation science. USGS leads environmental monitoring. Wisconsin Sea Grant leads education and outreach. STEMsaic leads the community of practice and public engagement. Together, the team carries the work from the lab to the public.

Engagement designed in from the start

What makes this project distinctive is that public engagement was not added at the end. It was designed in from the beginning. Rather than wait for findings and then translate them, the team built relationships across education, art, parks, and community settings while the science was still underway. That choice is why the map looks the way it does, with a strong engagement core connecting research to people, not a thin line tacked on at the edge.

A note on how this map was built

This network was assembled from the project's own record: quarterly community-of-practice meetings, reporting documents, engagement plans, and partner conversations across 2025 and 2026. STEMsaic tagged each relationship by type and by confidence, then built this interactive view. Partnership work is ongoing and dynamic, and we welcome corrections as the network continues to grow.

The Microplastics DJ

The clearest example of the project's engagement logic is the Microplastics DJ. It started as a slide deck and became a platform. Built on a Makey Makey core, it pairs hands-on, in-person interaction with an online interactive skeleton, so it can travel into children's museums, schools, national park pop-ups, science festivals, conferences, and policy conversations. Scientists send datasets that become new interactive components, from filtration stages to bioaccumulation patterns to sampling footage. And because it follows a train-the-trainer model, museum staff, teachers, and citizen scientists can learn it and adapt it to their own context. That is what makes it a launchpad rather than a single activity.

Working with Tribal partners, respectfully

The project's relationship with GLIFWC is built on respect for Traditional Ecological Knowledge and for established trust. On this map, GLIFWC appears with a light, intentional presence: TEK-respectful engagement facilitated through GLIFWC's already-established outreach programs. The map does not catalog internal tribal structures or processes. That restraint is part of the partnership, reflecting an approach grounded in shared decision-making rather than extraction.

Designed to scale across the Great Lakes

The Wisconsin work is a pilot with a plan. Two parallel tracks carry the same logic outward. A park-station network, in development, would host Microplastics DJ stations across the Great Lakes watershed, scaled through UW-Madison Extension. A museum track would extend the Wisconsin children's-museum model to companion museums in the bordering Great Lakes states. Extended USGS connectivity follows the same watershed pathways. On the map, these appear as a dashed, aspirational layer radiating toward a Great Lakes states grouping, with STEMsaic at the hinge of both. A possible Great Lakes water collaboration, perhaps hosted by the University of Michigan or a Canadian institution, is shown as a dotted, to-verify tie until it is confirmed.

Reading confidence honestly

Every node and line carries a confidence level, because a useful map tells the truth about itself.

Confirmed (solid). Relationships grounded in project documentation and the team's own meeting record. This includes the core research team, the institutional backbone, the data-sharing core, and the active education and engagement work.

Planned or aspirational (dashed). The Great Lakes scaling layer: park stations, companion museums, and extended USGS connectivity. These show design intent, the direction the model is meant to travel.

The regional anchor. STEMsaic presented at the inaugural EGLE Great Lakes Microplastics Summit, a confirmed convening of more than 1700 registrants worldwide. It sits in the scaling layer as the one realized regional connection, with the collaborations and parallel engagement plans it opened shown as planned. The dotted style is held in reserve for ties still to verify.

STEMsaic Research Impacts

STEMsaic Research Impacts serves as the engagement and evaluation partner on this project, designing the network-based public engagement and building the interactive tools that carry the science to the people of the Great Lakes. As the boundary crosser linking research, public engagement, and policy, STEMsaic tagged the partnership connections by type and confidence and assembled this map using research-informed sociogram practice. The work goes beyond mapping who the project knows. It illuminates how the connections came to be, and where the model can grow next.