Kickstart your Application! Webinar No. 5: Programmatic Capability - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Brownfield Grantwriting Training Webinar S eries: Kickstart your Application! Webinar No. 5: Programmatic Capability and Past Performance July 30,2020 Pre-Webinar Q&A: What questions do you have from previous webinars or about applying
1
Brownfield Grantwriting Training Webinar S eries:
Webinar No. 5: Programmatic Capability and Past Performance
July 30,2020
Hosted by: Louisiana Dept. of Environmental Quality Kansas S tate University's Technical Assistance to Brownfields Program Pre-Webinar Q&A: What questions do you have from previous webinars or about applying for Brownfields in general?
Webinar No. 5 will start at 2pm
Sponsored by:
2
All participants will be muted during
minimize distractions and background noise.
S
ubmit questions via chat to “ Everyone.”
A recording of the webinar along with slides will
be available after the webinar on the KS U TAB website.
3 3
If you are using a phone for audio – make sure your Computer Audio is turned off.
4
Rebecca Otte
S tatewide Brownfield and VRP Program Coordinator Louisiana Dept. of Environmental Quality
5
Webinar No. 1: Check all the Boxes: Narrative S ummary S heet & Threshold Criteria Webinar No. 2: Proj ect Area Description & Plans For Revitalization Webinar No. 3: Community Need & Community Engagement Webinar No. 4: Task Descriptions, Cost Estimates & Measuring Progress
Webinar No. 5: Programmatic Capability & Past Performance
Webinar No. 6: Updates to the new Request for Applications
5
6
EP A Brownfields Program in Another Region Region 6 Federal Partner EP A Region 6 Brownfields Program EP A Region 6 Brownfields Program
Reviewers for Parts 1,2 & 3 Reviewer for Part 4
7
PART 4: PROGRAMMATIC CAPABILITY AND PAST PERFORMANCE 4.a. Programmatic Capability
tructure
taff
4.b. Past Performance & Accomplishments
Choose One of the Options Below:
A Brownfields Grant
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
8
PART 4: PROGRAMMATIC CAPABILITY AND PAST PERFORMANCE
4.a
i. Organizational S tructure ii. Description of Key S taff
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria To conserve space, you may present information for 4.a.i. and 4.a.ii. in the same response. Per the ranking criterion in S ection IV .E.4.a., applicants may consolidate information for 4.a.i. and 4.a.ii. into
the response against the sub-criteria
9
4.a
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Describe the organizational structure you will utilize to ensure The degree to which the applicant’s organization has the programmatic and administrative capacity to successfully manage and complete the grant within the 3-year period of performance. the timely and successful expenditure of funds and completion of all technical, administrative and financial requirements of the proj ect and grant.
10
4.a
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Assessment Coalition applicants – Additionally, describe the proposed governance/ decision-making structure among your coalition partners. Additionally, for Assessment Coalition applicants, the extent to which the proposed governance/ decision-making structure ensures coalition partners will be meaningfully involved in determining how grant funds will benefit each member’s community.
Coalition Applicants
11
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Provide a brief discussion of the key staff that will work together to successfully implement the grant, including their:
The degree to which your team will be structured to ensure the timely and successful expenditure of funds to complete all technical, administrative and financial requirements of the grant. The degree of expertise, qualifications, and experience of key staff that will result in the successful administration of the grant.
4.a
Describe your organization
12
4.a
Keep it Brief
Brownfield Coordinator
Main EP
A Working Contact
What do you have the in-house capabilities to do
Fiscal Person
What’s your process for tracking grant expenses/
drawing down on the grant? Coalition Member Contacts
13
KSU Webinar on Building a Brownfield Program
4.a
14
Pause for Questions / S tretch Break
4.a
15
PART 4: PROGRAMMATIC CAPABILITY AND PAST PERFORMANCE
4.a
Environmental Consultant to conduct Environmental Assessments Consultant to Oversee/ Manage the Grant Marketing/ Outreach Firm to assist with Community Outreach
16 16
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Describe the system(s) you have in place to appropriately acquire any additional expertise and resources (e.g. contractors or subrecipients) per grant requirements to successfully complete the proj ect. The degree to which the applicant’s organization has the ability to acquire any additional expertise and resources (e.g. contractors or subrecipients) required to successfully complete the proj ect. (Refer to S ection IV .G. regarding the difference between contractors and subrecipients.) 4.a. Programmatic Capability iii. Acquiring Additional Resources
4.a
Competitive Process
Already have a S
hort List of Environmental Consultants to conduct Environmental Assessments
Issue RFP to include writing and executing the grant Issue an RFP after awards are announced/ prior to the
start of the cooperative agreement
Issue an RFP after the Proj ect Period S
tarts
17
Timeline
Contractors:
Provide goods and services on commercial terms Operate in a Competitive Environment Reasonable Profit is Allowed Requires Competitive S
election
Example: Environmental Consultant
18
4.a
S ubrecipients:
Pass through funding to another organization to carry out a portion of the work plan Only receive reimbursement for actual costs – no profit Competitive S
election Not Required
Example: Intergovernmental agreement with a Coalition Member to conduct
19
Next S teps: 4.a
4.a
Describe your Organization
How does your work/ mission relate to Brownfields?
Describe your Key S taff: Role, Expertise, Qualifications & Experience
Brownfield Coordinator
Fiscal Person
What’s your process for tracking grant expenses & drawing down on the grant?
Coalition Member Contacts Role in selecting proj ects/ determining how grant funds will benefit each member’s community
Briefly Describe your Competitive Procurement Process for Additional S ervices
Environmental Consultant to perform Environmental S ite Assessments/ develop Cleanup Plans
Other Consultants to execute work plan
20
Pause for Questions / S tretch Break
4.a
Currently has a Brownfield Grant and/ or received one in
the Past
Never received an EP
A Brownfields Grant, but has received
Never received any type of federal or non-federal
assistance agreements
21
22
4.b
PART 4: PROGRAMMATIC CAPABILITY AND PAST PERFORMANCE
Choose One of the Options Below:
i. Currently Has or Previously Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant
ii. Has Not Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
iii. Never Received Any Type of Federal or Non-Federal Assistance
Agreements
23
A Brownfields Grant
23
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Identify and provide information regarding each of your current and/ or most recent EP A Brownfields Grant(s) (no more than three). The degree to which there is demonstrated ability to successfully manage the grant based on current/ past EP A Brownfields Grant(s) and the extent to which the applicant successfully performed all phases of work under the grant. Demonstrate how you successfully managed the grant(s), and successfully performed all phases of work under each grant by providing information on the items listed below.
4.b.i
24
A Brownfields Grant
24
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria (1) Accomplishments Describe the accomplishments The quality of the accomplishments (including specific outputs and outcomes) under current/ prior grant(s), (including specific outputs and outcomes) of the current/ prior grant(s), including at a minimum, the number of sites assessed and/ or cleaned up. including at a minimum, the number of sites assessed and/ or cleaned up, Discuss whether these outputs and outcomes were accurately reflected in the Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange S ystem (ACRES ) at the time of this application submission; and if not, please explain why. and the extent to which outputs and outcomes were accurately reflected in ACRES at the time
4.b.i
25
A Brownfields Grant
25
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria (2) Compliance with Grant Requirements Discuss your compliance with the workplan, schedule, and terms and conditions under the current/ prior grant(s). The extent of compliance with the workplan, schedule, and terms and conditions under the current/ prior grant(s), and the degree to which progress was made (and reported on), or was being made, towards achieving the expected results of the grant(s) in a timely manner. Include whether you have made and have reported on, or are making and reporting on, progress towards achieving the expected results
If not, discuss what corrective measures you took,
were effective, documented and communicated. If expected results were not being reported on, the extent to which the measures taken to correct the situation were reasonable and appropriate or there is an adequate explanation for lack of reporting.
4.b.i
26
A Brownfields Grant
26
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria (2) Compliance with Grant Requirements Discuss your history of timely and acceptable quarterly performance and grant deliverables, as well as ongoing ACRES reporting. A demonstrated history of timely and acceptable quarterly performance and grant deliverables, as well as ongoing ACRES reporting. For all open EP A Brownfields Grant(s) indicate the grant period (start and end date), if there are funds remaining, and the plan to expend funds by the end of the grant period. The extent to which funds from any open EP A Brownfields Grant(s) are committed to ongoing eligible grant activities
current/ prior grant(s) being expended by the end of the period of performance. For all closed EP A Brownfields Grant(s), indicate if there were funds remaining when the grant closed, the amount
funds were not expended. For all closed EP A Brownfield Grants, the extent to which there is a reasonable explanation of why funds remained when the grant closed, and the degree to which the applicant made every effort to spend the remaining funds within the grant period of performance.
4.b.i
Example
4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments 4.b.i Currently Has or Previously Received an EP A Brownfields Grant Portland has an extensive history of receiving and administering EP A Brownfields grants dating back to 1996. Our three most recent grants include a $200,000 assessment grant in FY18 (BF00A00465), a $1.3 million RLF grant in FY16 (BF00A00199), and a $200,000 assessment grant in FY05 (BF97132201). Other than these grants, we have successfully managed a total of $1.34 million in Brownfields grant funds, including assessment, RLF , and cleanup grants. Each grant was managed per program requirements and successfully implemented as discussed below. 1) Accomplishments: Assessment (BF00A00465): We have led an expeditious assessment program since receiving this funding, completing 3 Phase I ES As and 4 Phase II ES As, and cleanup planning is underway. This includes the target site at 58 Fore S treet, the former Portland Company S ite, a contaminated former locomotive foundry along Portland’s waterfront that is being redeveloped into a 10-acre mixed-use development with a $100+ million of private investment . The assessment of a former elementary school built on a dump is paving the way for a future housing development in a low-income area of the City. As of the time of this grant application, we have drawn down 80%
27
3.a.ii
28
2) Compliance with Grant Requirements: S ince 1996, our previous assessment and RLF grants have been completed in accordance with their work plans and met the applicable programmatic requirements. We have a proven track record of successfully managing our grants over nearly 25 years. In addition, the City has completed quarterly reports and ACRES inputs for our existing grants. We have filed all reports on time and maintain contact with our EP A PO on all fronts. Based on historical grants, all available assessment and RLF funds were expended prior to the end of the performance period. In the past, $328,352.56 of prior RLF grant funds were de-obligated due to challenging market conditions, which stalled development proj ects and prevented us from loaning the funds before the period of performance
applications, and renewed marketing strategy have ensured that current funds are being loaned or subgranted well before the period for this RLF ends.
29
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements Identify and describe each of your current and/ or most recent federally and nonfederally funded assistance agreements (no more than three) The degree to which the applicant demonstrates its ability to successfully manage the grant and perform all phases
current/ prior federal or non-federal assistance agreements. that are most similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed proj ect. Demonstrate how you successfully managed the agreement(s), and successfully performed all phases of work under each agreement by providing the following information.
4.b.ii
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
30
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria (1) Purpose and Accomplishments Describe the awarding agency/ organization, amount
agreement(s) you have received. The extent to which similar past federal or non- federal assistance agreement(s) is identified (in terms of size, scope, and relevance to the proposed proj ect) and the degree to which sufficient information is provided to make that determination. Discuss the accomplishments (including specific
the assistance agreement(s), The quality of the accomplishments (including specific outputs and outcomes) of the proj ect supported by the assistance agreement(s), including specific measures of success for the proj ect supported by each type of agreement received. including specific measures of success for the proj ect supported by each type of agreement received.
4.b.ii
31
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria (2) Compliance with Grant Requirements Describe your compliance with the workplan, schedule, and terms and conditions under the current/ prior assistance agreement(s). Include whether you have made and have reported on, or are making and reporting on, progress towards achieving the expected results of the agreement in a timely manner. If not, discuss what corrective measures you took, or are taking, and how the corrective measures were effective, documented and communicated. The extent of compliance with the workplan, schedule, and terms and conditions under the current/ prior assistance agreement(s), and the degree to which progress was made (and reported
expected results of the agreement(s) in a timely
the extent to which the measures taken to correct the situation were reasonable and appropriate. Discuss your history of timely and acceptable reporting, as required by the awarding agency/ organization. A demonstrated history of timely and acceptable reporting, as required by the awarding agency/ organization.
4.b.ii
32
3.a.ii
4.b. Past Performance & Accomplishments 4.b.ii.1 Has Not Received an EPA Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal
Purpose and Accomplishments. MEDC has previously received various assistance agreements from federal and non-federal sources. Three recent examples most similar in size, scope and relevance to this applicat ion are identified below, and are described in subsections that follow. Awarding Agency Purpose Funding Department of Health and Human S ervices (2017) S elf-Governance $3,739,542 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin. (NOAA) (2016 and 2017) Fish Population Restoration $709,244 Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (2017) Tribal Transportation Program $318,381
33
S elf-Governance: CIT receives annual funding to manage Tribal member health
manage their own healthcare. The current funding agreement allows CIT to provide: 1) outpatient medical and pharmacy services, 2) mental health and social services, 3) a purchase-referred care program and 4) program management. Proj ect outputs include successful implementation of these healthcare programs. CIT has been successful in implementing its self-governance program and achieving the intended
experience with self-governance will allow CIT/ MEDC to effectively manage this GRANT . 4.b.i.2. Compliance with Grant Requirements: CIT/ MEDC complied with all work plan, schedule, and terms and conditions requirements during implementation of all three of the assistance agreements described above. All output and outcome commitments made in each of these three agreements were achieved. All reporting was completed in accordance with agreements’ respective requirements and schedules. CIT/ MEDC regularly conducts audits of their organization particularly in programs that receive federal funding. No findings of significance have been reported in these audits.
34
Assistance Agreements
34
Ranking Criteria Evaluation Criteria
Affirm that your organization never received any type of federal or non-federal assistance agreement (grant or cooperative agreement). The extent to which it is clearly affirmed that the organization never received any type of federal or non-federal assistance agreement. (Applicants that indicate that they do not have a history of performing assistance agreements will receive a “ neutral” 5-point score. [These applicants will receive a “ neutral” score of 5 points.] However, failure to indicate anything in response to this sub-criterion may result in zero points.)
4.b.iii
35
i. Currently Has or Previously Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant
Develop your list of Brownfield Grants
Accomplishments Outputs Outcomes Number of sites assessed/ cleaned up ACRES
Reporting
Compliance with Work Plan, including S
chedule
Compliance with Reporting Requirements Amount Remaining at Grant Close Out
4.b
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
36
ii. Has Not Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
Describe 1-3 similar grants that your entity has managed similar in size, scope, and relevance:
Awarding agency/ organization,
Amount of funding,
Purpose of the assistance agreement(s)
Accomplishments
Outputs Outcomes
How did you measure success?
Compliance with Work Plan, including S chedule
Compliance with Reporting Requirements
4.b
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
37
iii. Never Received Any Type of Federal or Non-Federal Assistance
Agreements
Write your statement that your organization has never received any type
Use the extra space to beef up the rest of your application!
4.b
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
38
Q&A S ession & Expert Panel
Danielle Getsinger, Community
Lattice/ KS U TAB Partner
Amanda Alewine, S
enior Planner managing the Brownfields Program for the City of Oklahoma City
What do you think makes an application stand out? What’s a common issue that you see in applications? What worked well for you in putting together an application?
What would you have done differently? Any tips for
What snacks do you keep on hand while you’ re writing/
reviewing a grant?
Any other recommendations?
39
Use a Header on each page – Name of Organization &
Type of Grant your Applying for
Reminds the reviewer and is helpful if pages get separated
Include Page Numbers – helps if pages get separated & if
reviewers are discussing your proposal
White S
pace
Clearly Label Each S
ection of your Proposal
Attachments
40
Make sure you’ re registered on Grants.gov!
S
tart with a basic Inventory of Brownfield S ites in your community if you don’ t have one already
Conduct a basic Inventory of EJ Issues in your Community Takes 100 to 300+ hours to prepare an Application S
tart Early!
Have someone outside of Brownfields review your proposal
Allow enough time for their review and for you to incorporate
comments
Email S
cott if you would like KS U TAB to review your proposal so they can plan accordingly
41
Best Option: Include an Opportunity Zone in Y
Backup Option: If your Target Area doesn’ t include an OZ, but there is an OZ
nearby/ adj acent to your TA, will the redevelopment of your priority sites:
tore
chool
resources to the nearby OZ?
42
43
Historical Industrial Health
44
Benefit to the Community How will you adj ust your Outreach if COVID is still around? Grass Roots Data on Health in your Target Area Local Health Agencies S
chools
S
chool Nurse
Absent Rates Asthma Rates Hospitals
Contact them for data and support for your application
EPA Document: “Environmental Contaminants Often Found at Brownfields Sites” www.epa.gov/ sites/ production/ files/ 2019- 10/ documents/ environmental_contaminant s_often_found_at_brownfield_sites.pdf
45
46
47
Next S teps: 4.a Programmatic Capability
4.a
Describe your Organization
How does your work/ mission relate to Brownfields?
Describe your Key S taff: Role, Expertise, Qualifications & Experience
Brownfield Coordinator
Fiscal Person
What’s your process for tracking grant expenses & drawing down on the grant?
Coalition Member Contacts Role in selecting proj ects/ determining how grant funds will benefit each member’s community
Briefly Describe your Competitive Procurement Process for Additional S ervices
Environmental Consultant to perform Environmental S ite Assessments/ develop Cleanup Plans
Other Consultants to execute work plan
48
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
i. Currently Has or Previously Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant
Develop your list of Brownfield Grants
Accomplishments Outputs Outcomes Number of sites assessed/ cleaned up ACRES
Reporting
Compliance with Work Plan, including S
chedule
Compliance with Reporting Requirements Amount Remaining at Grant Close Out
4.b
49
4.b
ii. Has Not Received an EP
A Brownfields Grant but has Received Other Federal or Non-Federal Assistance Agreements
Describe 1-3 similar grants that your entity has managed similar in size, scope, and relevance:
Awarding agency/ organization,
Amount of funding,
Purpose of the assistance agreement(s)
Accomplishments
Outputs Outcomes
How did you measure success?
Compliance with Work Plan, including S chedule
Compliance with Reporting Requirements
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
50
iii. Never Received Any Type of Federal or Non-Federal Assistance
Agreements
Write your statement that your organization has never received any type
Use the extra space to beef up the rest of your application!
4.b
Next S teps: 4.b Past Performance & Accomplishments
51
www.ksutab.org/ resources S earch for: 2020 LDEQ
52
August/ S
eptember: Updates to the new RF A
53
S cott Nightingale, KS U TAB S ervices Coordinator for EP A Region 6 scottnight@ ksu.edu / (785) 207-6021 Jennifer Clancey, KS U TAB S ervices Coordinator for EP A Region 7 j mclancey@ ksu.edu / (319) 270-3394 Rebecca Otte, Louisiana Brownfields & VRP Coordinator Rebecca.Otte@ la.gov / (504) 736-7069
EPA Region 6 Contacts: Denise Williams Williams.Denise@ epa.gov (214) 665-9749 Paul Johnson Johnson.Paul@ epa.gov (214) 665-2246
54
This proj ect has been funded wholly or in part by the United S tates Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement TR-83684001 to Kansas S tate University. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does the EP A endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document.