USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office
FY2005-2006 Funding Guidance

Funding Questions and Answers

General Questions

Q. Are local governments and organizations eligible under the Funding Guidance?

A. Yes. Section III of the Funding Guidance says that "State pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, and other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organizations are eligible; "for-profit" organizations are not. Since other federal agencies are public agencies or institutions, they are eligible to compete."

Since local governments and organizations would be "other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organizations," they are eligible to compete.

Q. "Does GLNPO require project submissions to be approved by an authorized official from the Applicant?"

A. No. Applicants have told us that some organizations impose additional administrative
requirements if project submittals are called "proposals." In order to
simplify and speed the application process, and to still comply with EPA's Competition
Order which distinguishes for it's purposes between proposals and initial proposals, the Funding Guidance instead refers to "projects and project submissions or submittals."

Q. After a more careful review of the solicitation eligibility, we noticed that "for-profit" companies like ours are ineligible...Is this true?

A. Per Section III of the Funding Guidance, State pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organizations are eligible; "for-profit" organizations are not.

We have been told that For-profit organizations have in some cases assisted eligible organizations with the preparation of their proposals. Once a grant is awarded, the grantee, complying with applicable procurement requirements (found in 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31 and OMB Circular A-102 or A-110, as applicable), can sometimes contract for work with the for-profit.

Q. This a proposal for a second year of funding and I want to use the same
title as last year. Is there a problem with this?

A. You can use the same title. Do also mention that this is a request for a second year of funding.

Q. I want to budget $5,000 to go to another federal agency to create island maps and images for our publications and planning. How do I handle that re indirect costs? Can I contract directly because these are products and not personnel?

A. Use of USEPA money to pay the indirect costs of sister Federal agencies is discouraged. The other Federal agency may also not have the authority to take USEPA money through a grant, whether for personnel or for a contract. It may be that two separate agreements (a grant to you and an Interagency Agreement between USEPA and the other Federal Agency) would be necessary. Describe your plans and, if your project is selected, these are matters that could be worked through later.

Q. I am teaching at the time the phone conference on funding guidance is held but wonder if I can get transcripts or a short list of comments afterwards.

A. We will record the conference call and make it available from our website.

Q. How do you consider proposals from Michigan?

A. All proposals will be considered. According to the Funding Guidance:

In making final selection recommendations management may also consider the geographic distribution of projects and funds, selecting technically sound projects across the basin at both a geographic and institutional level to achieve a reasonable balance of funding by Lake, applicant type, and the State of project location and impact.

Q. If a proposal does not get approval then do we have second chance to resubmit it?

A. You may re-submit next year.

Q. How long does it take to approve proposals?

A. See Section V of the Funding Guidance. Initial Proposals are due May 31. Applicants will be notified around June 27 and full application packages can be submitted immediately thereafter through July 27. Processing of the complete application package is expected to take up to 60 days.

Q. Can matching funds be in the form of overhead? (i.e., office space, lights, heat, computer access, etc.) If so, what criteria should be used to determine the amount of the match?

A. Yes. Applicants should use applicable cost provisions of OMB circulars (such as (A-21, A-87, or A-122) and EPA grant regulations (40CFR Part 30 or 31) in valuing their match. Per Section III of the Funding Guidance, matching funds (in cash or in-kind) are encouraged and the match percentage will be considered by reviewers during evaluations in the same way as other criteria are considered.

Q. Will the grant cover aspects of response activities following a terrorist attack against key assets such as bridges, bulk storage facilities and power plants?

A. To the extent it satisfies the Funding Guidance criteria.

Q. Our project will be related to these watersheds outside of North America. We want to collaborate with foreign scientists in this area, and find financial funding. I hope you might help us.

A. Section III of the Funding Guidance states that “Assistance is available pursuant to Clean Water Act §104(b)(3) for activities impacting the Great Lakes Basin and in support of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

Q. If one project qualifies for funding under several categories, is it better to choose one category or apply under all eligible categories?

A. Choose one category. Section V of the Funding Guidance notes that GLNPO will screen Initial Proposals upon receipt for eligibility, conformance to the announcement provisions, and to make sure that proposed projects are aligned with the appropriate topic area.  If the project is not aligned with the appropriate topic area,  and with the applicants approval, the project will be evaluated under the specific criteria of another topic.

Q. As a NOAA employee, am I eligible to receive EPA-GLNPO funding?

A. Section III of the Funding Guidance states that “State pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organizations are eligible; "for-profit" organizations are not.” Consequently, you as an individual are not eligible, but NOAA is eligible as a public agency. Note, however, the Funding Guidance General criteria in section V addresses funding for the mission of other agencies.”

Q. Would binational projects be considered?

A. Yes.”

Q. Will you fund Lake Champlain projects?

A. Only if the project can be construed as supporting implementation of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, such as a demonstration applicable to Great Lakes issues. Lake Champlain is not part of the Great Lakes basin under Clean Water Act Section 118.

Q. We got a notice from you about the Conference Call. Should one of us participate or listen in?

A. It's optional on your part. You could, of course, join us for the start and see if it is worth your time to stay for the duration, or whether you might want to call back in for a specific session.

Q. Can proposed projects span multiple years, or must they be 1-year projects? If so, are the targeted funding amounts for the total life span of the project, or for each year?

A. Except for incrementally awarded Lake Ontario projects in Section I.D.a., applicants should plan for projects to be completed within 2 years of their start dates. The budget should represent the total which would be requested from USEPA for the project's duration. Funding will generally be awarded as a "lump sum" and is not assured for subsequent years. (See Section II Award Information and Section IV - Summary of PSS2005 Fields).

Q. How do we go about applying for the non-competitive extension (up to $75,000) to an existing project?

A.Talk to your Project Officer.  The competition threshhold is now $15,000, so you may not have an available exemption.

Q. For current grantees applying for a second year of funds to enter a second phase of work, are there any additional things we should keep in mind?

A. The same general and specific criteria apply to existing projects as to new projects. Note that pursuant to Section V - General Criteria, past performance is a consideration.

Q. Can I get the details on this program?

A. You may want to visit our home page ( http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/ ) for information about the office, or our Funding page ( http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/fund/glf.html ) for information about previous funding opportunities. Application information is in the Funding Guidance at http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/fund/2005guid/index.html .

Q. If I wanted to simultaneously apply for an EPA STAR grant and a GLNPO grant to fund related work, could I do that? 2. Would I briefly summarize what the other grant would do, and then focus on the work to be funded by, and done under, this grant?

A. Yes. That would be a good approach. Either proposal should be able to stand alone, though, as selection under either process is not assured.

Q. What are the rules or guidelines for equipment purchases? Specifically, we have a proposal that has high start-up costs for equipment, and am looking to several funding sources to share/partner in the these costs (including our own agency). Is this situation something EPA has funded in the past, or would consider in this round of RFPs?

A. Equipment purchases supporting eligible projects under the Funding Guidance would be eligible and would be considered.

In referece with Tab 9: Collaboration/community based support:
Q. What is sufficient "evidence of support?" Will we need actual signed letters from other collaborators/ supporters stating their support of the project, or will listing the supporters and their means of support suffice? Should we include these letters as attachments to the proposal?

A. Please describe the support for your project from the public, private, and independent sectors in your “Collaboration” narrative under Tab 6, but do not attach or include letters of support at this time. You can say whether you have actually gotten commitments for support, and from what sources, or what your plans are for getting support. “Evidence of support will be requested later” after selections have been made, and may include signed letters.

Q. You don't want names of personnel who will be working on a project or their equals? I've looked at example projects, and indeed they don't give names of personnel other than the contact person.

Names of personnel and qualifications were not previously required. However, it may now be included as part of programmatic capability.

Q. The project I'm proposing adds to/corrects existing work and I want to make
sure the reviewers know that I know about the existing work. Plus I give values that I want to provide backup for. Will I be dinged if I list citations in the "environmental outcome" section (I have room)?

A. Although the citations and the backup information for the values are not required, they may be helpful in addressing the General Criteria. You will not be dinged for including that information.

Q. Do you require citations or references in the statement of the problem and proposed work? This will affect how we tailor the narratives, since there are character limits for certain fields.

A. There is no requirement for citations or references. Some applicants include them, others do not. We suggest that you use your best judgment to determine whether a citation or reference is needed in order for reviewers to evaluate your proposal in light of the general criterion for "Scientific/Professional Merit.: Soundness of technical approach, including design, objectives, and scientific viability of the project." There will likely be a greater need for citations and references on projects which are more novel and innovative.

Q. Can you confirm that this year's proposal have much larger "character limit's for individual sections than in the past? Per your samples from last
year's proposals, the longest proposal I can find is nearly three pages. In the current round, however, it appears even the "Problem Statement" has a
4,500 character limit which is nearly 2 pages (thus it appears the overall proposal could well be ten or more pages long).

A. We are more interested in quality than in quantity. Hopefully the examples bear that out. This year for the first time we are requesting entries for programmatic capability and plans for measuring progress. These will make the proposals longer than they have been. On the flip side, the abstract/brief project description will be shorter, and we have eliminated or combined a couple other fields. The other fields (problem statement, work, and environmental results) should be about the same length as in the past - feel free to check that for yourself by looking at past Funding Guidances available from the GLNPO Funding Page <http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html> under "We have previously issued..."

Q.In the Measuring Progress section, what sorts of information should go to "describing the plan for measuring progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes" beyond listing
the project milestones in the later section? Can you give me any examples
of what might be expected, especially from a proposal coming from a
university (e.g. more detail about possible papers and reports,
accountability structure in lab and university, etc)?

A. This is the first year of implementing this HQ requirement, so we do not have examples or prior experience with this requirement. In writing this section of your project submission you should clearly address the following general criterion:

H. Measuring Progress. Effectiveness and sufficiency of the applicant’s plan for tracking and measuring its progress toward achieving environmental outputs and outcomes.

Q. The Instructions ask for a DUNS number. What is that and how do I get it?

A. The D-U-N-S number is a new government-wide requirement put in place last year, requiring all grant recipients to obtain a Dun and Bradstreet number. The number is available without cost from: http://www.dnb.com/us/

If applicants have that number already, we are asking them to include it with their project submission, but we are not requiring it. If your organization received a grant last year, the number should be on your application and your award.

Q. The Project Budget section of the “Summary of PSS2005 Fields and Project Information Requirements” in the Funding Guidance says that “Budget should represent the total which would be requested from USEPA for the project's duration.” Don’t we also need to include any matching funds in the budget description?

A. Yes, you do, if you are proposing matching funds. The PSS2005 Submission program allows for that. Earlier in that section it does call for both "USEPA funds and Applicant matching funds." This part of the Funding Guidance text should have said “The USEPA share represents the total which the Applicant expects to request from USEPA for the project's duration.” We apologize for the confusion.

PSS2005 Software

Q.  Is PSS2005 available in a Mac version?

A. No, unfortunately, PSS2005 is only available in a Windows version. In the past, Mac users have had some success running versions of this software under a Windows emulator, but this hasn't always been successful.

Q.  When I run the SETUP.EXE program to install PSS2005, I get an error message and the program does not get installed.

A. The first thing to try is to download the SETUP.EXE file again to make sure that the file wasn't corrupted in downloading it. If you still get the error, and you are attempting to install the software on a Windows 2000 or Windows XP machine, the problem is most likely because you do not have sufficient rights to perform the installation. Either logon as and Administrator or see your Information Technology support person for assistance. If this doesn't solve the problem, contact Tony Kizlauskas at (312) 353-8773 for technical support.

Q.  Can I include figures and tables in my initial proposal?

A. No, the software only accepts plain text, not figures and tables. To the maximum extent possible, you should describe your project in words and include references to publications or Web addresses to supporting information. We only want you to send us the data file, PSS2005.TPS.

Q.  Do the character limits in PSS2005 include blanks?

A. Yes, in fact, it includes everything typed on the keyboard, including carriage returns. It will also include any special formatting codes that may be pasted in if you cut and paste directly from your word processor, even though these may not be visible in PSS2005. Furthermore, some of these embedded codes may cause PSS2005 to crash when you try to print out your proposal. These are the reasons for cutting and pasting plain text from a plain text editor like Windows Notepad.  See the PSS2005 Help File for additional information on this issue.

Q. Are studies that identify ecological benefits of restoring/protecting wetland ecosystems and identify specific impacts for managers to focus restoration efforts a good fit in the `General Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration' funding opportunity?

A. Yes

Q. In past years, hasn't there been more money available for Habitat projects?

A. When all is said and done, there may be more funding available this year than previously. Habitat funding is available in the Funding Guidance under the topics of:
- Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration,
- RAP Priorities (various Projects of Particular Interest address Habitat Beneficial Use Impairments), and
- LaMP Priorities (particularly Projects of Particular Interest for Lakes Huron and Ontario).

In addition, later this year, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) is expected to issue a request for proposals in support of the Regional Collaboration Habitat/Species Strategy Team's priorities. GLNPO anticipates including up to $350,000 as a part of that request via an incremental funding amendment to its existing cooperative agreement with NFWF. The GLNPO funds would be matched by dollars from other funders. NFWF’s request for proposals will outline criteria and proposal submission guidelines for that funding.

Q. To what does "regional" refer in the Habitat topic calling for projects that are "Great Lakes basin wide or regional in scope"? Is this saying that GLNPO will fund only Habitat projects that address only the whole Great Lakes Basin? We had hoped to submit a proposal for habitat restoration for a watershed. It is "regional" in that the watershed afftects two states, four counties, and a large nuber of local jurisdictions. Does it sound like our project idea would qualify for consideration?

A. Your project would be considered regional. Single site projects at a local scale would not be considered in this category. Site specific or local projects fitting the description of Project of Particular Interest number 6 in the RAP topic should be submitted to that topic. We believe that later this year there will be an opportunity for applicants to submit site specific or local projects for consideration for a sub-award under a grant GLNPO has in place with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. GLNPO will provide information about that process on the GLNPO funding website, and via e-mail to prospective applicants registered on GLNPO's Great Lakes News mail list. Applicants can register for that mail list at: http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/maillist/index.html
 

Q. There is no protection for drinking water in metro. Detroit. There is no monitoring below chemical valley, sarnia. 4.5 million American and Canadian drinking water is at risk.

A. Such a project could be eligible under Strategic or Emerging Issues, or under the LaMP/RAP category. Note, however, that general criteria relating the project to the GLNPO mission rather than other sources wuch funding could reasonably be expected”

Q. GLNPO and other recent RFPs in which we could apply STAR GLEI biological condition indicators to demonstrate their usefulness to agencies and other stakeholders, maybe how to interface with RAPS or other pertinent programs.

A. Depending on the subject area, such a project could be eligible under the Funding Guidance.

Q. I am mainly interested in determining GLNPO's priorities for which projects it will fund. I have two ideas for emerging issues and would like to know which of these projects would be fundable.

- measuring EDCs/pharmaceuticals in surface and drinking water

- testing the estrogenicity of the water in the Lake St Clair watershed

A. Both projects would be eligible for this category. We especially encourage projects which identify and propose solutions/mitigation. Areas of particular interest are identified in the Funding Guidance.

Q. We are very involved in binational RAP LaMP activities. Are Canadian organizations eligible for funding under this program?

A. Canadian organizations are eligible.

Q. GLNPO's regular budget increased by $2.45 million this year, so what funding does GLNPO have to support RAPs?

A. GLNPO had discussions with the Great Lakes States about where some of the additional funding could best be spent to advance progress toward de-listing of Areas of Concern. Most States proposed to use a part of the additional RAP funding either to re-build or strengthen their RAP programs, or for non-competitive projects. New York and USEPA Region 2 proposed to spend both existing and new RAP funding on competitive projects in the Funding Guidance.

The FY2005-2006 Funding Guidance reflects these discussions. Funding for RAP priorities in the Funding Guidance totals an estimated $2,440,000, targeted for approximately 7-20 projects.

• A cumulative total of up to $90,000 is targeted for RAP projects in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin (paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of Topic I.D.) These projects would set RAP delisting criteria and targets; leading to delisting of RAP Beneficial Use Impairments; and address AOC post remedial monitoring. Funding for this work is triple that made available last year.
• Reflecting the discussions with the States, $2.1 million of Region 2's overall Great Lakes funding is targeted for New York RAP projects in the Funding Guidance. In addition to being available for the type of RAP projects described above, up to $1.5 million of this amount would be funded over the next 5 years for RAP Program Capacity/Coordination/ Management for St. Lawrence Massena, Buffalo River, and/or the Rochester Embayment RAPs.
• Up to $250,000 is specifically targeted for projects leading to delisting of one of the three habitat-related beneficial use impairments (BUIs)CDegraded Fish and Wildlife Populations, Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat, Degradation of Benthos (paragraph 6 of Topic I.D.) Project activities must be based on an ecological restoration approach and comprised of one or more of the following steps in the pathway to delisting (see http://www.glc.org/spac/pdf/FishWildlifeBUI.pdf ).
• Additional RAP projects can be funded through the Funding Guidance under the Pollution Prevention and Reduction topic; however, no specific amount is targeted there for RAP projects.

In addition, GLNPO's targets about $24 million for contaminated sediments work, principally in Areas of Concern. Contaminated Sediments funding information is available from Marc Tuchman 312-353-1369 / tuchman.marc@epa.gov. For Great Lakes Legacy Act funding for Contaminated Sediments, contact Marc or see: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/sediment/legacy/index.html

Pollution Prevention

Q. Our question here is we are proposing an educational/outreach project under the Pollution Prevention and Toxic Chemicals category and do not know how scientific we should or can get when describing the “Environmental Outcome” under Tab 4. How numerical do these estimates have to be for a communication/education proposal? Is it fine if we list the type of chemicals that will be prevented from this proposal, and maybe how many people we plan on reaching/educating? Or is it better to estimate the specific amount of each chemical that might be reduced?

A. Any of all of these will support the criteria calling for “an evaluation of the potential reductions of pollutants in the environment.” We encourage numerical quantification of that information where possible.

Return to Great Lakes Funding

.

EPA Home | Privacy and Security Notice | Contact Us