State Approaches to Funding Local Projects A Survey of RFPs The State/EPA NPS Partnership New Orleans, November 27, 2001

Van Gogh Museum of Fine Arts Boston Renoir Museum of Fine Arts Boston A restoration grant project, before and after?

Goals of the Survey Identify elements of a good RFP Provide links to states Highlight effective techniques

Elements of an RFP Introductory material Eligibility criteria Proposal requirements Evaluation criteria “cool stuff”

Introductory Material Objectives: Rhode Island: reduce NPS pollutant loadings entering water resources so that beneficial uses of the water resources are maintained or restored. Alabama: WE NEED YOU! (focus on public involvement). Hawaii: objectives include measurement of load reductions or public awareness Michigan: encourages getting your feet wet, collecting data to develop good watershed plans

Eligibility Criteria Legal Requirements: Link to NPS Management Plan No enforcement actions No NPDES

Eligibility Criteria (con’t) Geographic Priorities: Florida: Only in priority watersheds listed in NPS Plan Indiana: Only in 303(d), 305(b), Clean Lakes, or UWA impaired watersheds Virginia: Targeted to 303(d) or NPS Assessment Report South Carolina: Base funds must be spent in TMDL watersheds

Eligiblity Criteria (con’t) Programmatic Priorities: Pennsylvania Organization of watershed groups Watershed assessments Watershed plan Watershed implementation Maine BMP implementation Aquatic habitat restoration Watershed survey Watershed Management Plan

Proposal Requirements Common Elements in State RFPs Applicant Information Scope of Work Financial Summary Water Quality Problem Partnerships Deliverables

Proposal Requirements (con’t) Connecticut: Good application form generally Budget section: Requires budget by task Assigns match funds by task

Evaluation Criteria Alaska: 60 out of 100 possible points are awarded for “Demonstrated Project Need” and “Project Design” Virginia: values cost-effectiveness, e.g. $/ft. of BMPs installed

Evaluation Criteria (con’t) 30 ptsWatershed Priority 20 ptsPotential Water Quality Benefit 15 ptsComprehensive Watershed Approach 10 ptsInstitutionalized Program 10 ptsProject Coordination 10 ptsCapacity of Applicant 5 ptsQuality of Proposal

Evaluation Criteria (con’t) New Mexico Major Criterion: The degree to which a project will address the cause rather than the effect of a problem

Cool Stuff What else is out there?

Cool Stuff (con’t) Completed Project Reports on Web Site PROJECT CLOSE OUT FY95 Section 319 Grant Program Demonstration of Innovative Bridge Crossing To Reduce Sedimentation From Unpaved Roads EPA Grant Number: C Work Plan Project Number: Task 12 Project Period: February 3, February 3, 1998 DEP Contract Number: WM659 Contractor: Jackson County Board of County Commissioners

The Centennial Clean Water Fund -- $15-20 M low-interest loans and grants for wastewater treatment facilities and fund-related activities to reduce nonpoint sources of water pollution. The State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) -- $53 M low-interest loans for wastewater treatment facilities and related activities, or to reduce nonpoint sources of water pollution. Section $2 M Combined RFP

Web-based Application Handbook Extensive Outreach, including teleconferencing

Alabama Electronic Application Form template submittal

Rhode Island Pre-Proposal Process Watershed location Pollutants addressed Purpose Outline Major outcomes Budget estimate

Rhode Island (and others) Match Calculation: Grant X = Match

Pennsylvania Legal Assistance Options Formation of watershed organizations Creation of by-laws

California Requires 1 page summary to: 1. Network with watershed groups 2. Track implementation of BMPs 3. Determine effectiveness in protecting beneficial uses