Building a Climate-Resilient Great
Lakes: Federal Resources and
Assistance for State and Local
Governments
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................... 5
Federal Resources and Assistance for Climate Adaptation in the Great Lakes .................... 7
An Overarching Administration Strategy .............................................................. 7
Federal Resources and Assistance ...................................................................... 8
Forms of Resources and Assistance .................................................................. 8
Areas of Resources and Assistance ................................................................. 10
Opportunities for Improving Federal Resources and Assistance ..................................... 14
Explicit Authorization and Required Consideration ................................................. 14
Region-Specific Preparedness .......................................................................... 15
Adequate Funding ........................................................................................ 15
Conclusion ................................................................................................... 17
References ................................................................................................... 18
Appendix of Federal Resources and Assistance ........................................................ 20
Table A1. Information and Tools ...................................................................... 20
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements.......... 22
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
2
About the Northeast-Midwest Institute
The Northeast-Midwest Institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization based in Washington,
D.C that undertakes timely policy research and strategic projects to serve Northeast-Midwest
regional interests, often partnering with others. The Institute opened in 1977 in response to
calls for a stable and trusted source of regional data and objective analysis from the bipartisan
Northeast-Midwest Congressional Coalition—one of the longest-standing and largest
Congressional caucuses on Capitol Hill. The Institute provides interpretation and summaries of
federal programs and funding, as in past reports on the Federal Partnership for Sustainable
Communities (NEMWI 2012) and federal spending and taxation (NEMWI 2011).
Contributors
Danielle Chesky, dchesky@nemw.org
Colleen Cain, PhD, ccain@nemw.org
Allegra Cangelosi, acangelo@nemw.org
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Elin Betanzo, Senior Policy Analyst at the Northeast-Midwest Institute, for her
helpful review and comments. The authors also thank the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation and
the Joyce Foundation, which support the work of the Northeast-Midwest Institute’s Great Lakes
Washington Program.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
3
Acronyms
ACOE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
BIA
Bureau of Indian Affairs
CDC
Centers for Disease Control
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
DOC
Department of Commerce
DOD
Department of Defense
DOI
Department of the Interior
DOT
Department of Transportation
EDA
Economic Development Administration
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
FTA
Federal Transit Agency
GLRI
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative
GSA
General Services Administration
HHS
Department of Health and Human Services
HUD
Department of Housing and Urban Development
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS
National Park Service
NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service
NSF
National Science Foundation
USDA
U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS
U.S. Forest Service
USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGCRP
U.S. Global Change Research Program
USGS
U.S. Geological Survey
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
4
Introduction
A changing climate carries with it significant economic, environmental, and public health
implications. Since 1980, the U.S. has experienced 170 billion-dollar weather events, nine of
which occurred in 2013 alone. 1 The cataclysmic and highly-publicized destruction associated
with such major storm events as Superstorm Sandy and the Joplin tornadoes in 2013 has fueled
public awareness about the need for greater community, environmental, and structural
resiliency. Yet, adaptation measures to prepare for and lessen climate change impacts entail
significant investment at the state and local level. 2
For localities in the Great Lakes region, the effects of climate change can be both gradual and
catastrophic. Climate change manifests as shorter, warmer winters, as well as heavy flooding,
and damaged roads and homes. Often under the radar is also incremental damage to stressed
water infrastructure and public transportation systems. In the Great Lakes region, the coastal
waters dominate the economy and ecosystems, with over 1.5 million jobs directly dependent
on the Great Lakes. 3 Climate change-related impacts, like weakened boating infrastructure or
erosion of beaches, can have direct and cascading indirect effects on the communities and their
economic bases.
States and localities may need to undertake a variety of actions to prepare for climate impacts,
including updating building codes, making infrastructure investments, and adjusting the
management of natural resources. 4 These actions can be highly technical and expensive to
implement. For example, Grand Rapids, Michigan, has invested more than $300 million over ten
years to upgrade infrastructure to eliminate overflows of sewer water during large rain events
(known as combined sewer overflows, or CSOs) and to reduce city flooding. 5
Some feel the federal discussion around climate change at times unwisely neglects the Great
Lakes. Six Senators wrote to the President 6 with concerns that the President’s June 2013
Climate Action Plan 7 made no mention of the resource, reminding him of the potentially
devastating impact climate change could have on the Great Lakes, which contain 95% of the
country’s surface freshwater and supply drinking water to approximately 40 million people. 8
Recent climate studies—such as a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the
Ecological Society of America 9 and a 2010 addendum from National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) 10—support the Senators’ concerns. The reports underscore the unique
1
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2014.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2010.
3
Michigan Sea Grant, 2011.
4
Executive Office of the President, 2013.
5
Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, 2013.
6
Available at:
http://www.nemw.org/images/issues/GLTF/SenateLetters/Senate_POTSUS_GreatLakesandClimateChange_07231
3.pdf
7
Executive Office of the President, 2013.
8
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012.
9
Union of Concerned Scientists, 2003.
10
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2010.
2
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
5
impacts of climate change to the Great Lakes, including a decline in the quantity and quality of
the freshwater resource for recreational, commercial and ecological uses. The most recent
National Climate Assessment highlights expected effects of climate change on the Great Lakes:
changes in the range and distribution of certain fish species, increased invasive species and
harmful blooms of algae, declining beach health, and ice cover changes. 11 International
commitments and treaties surrounding Great Lakes protection and restoration (e.g., the Great
Lakes Water Quality Agreement) and state authority over water quantity conservation and use
(e.g., the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact) further differentiate
and complicate adaptation in the Great Lakes region.
This Northeast-Midwest Institute (NEMWI) report provides information on the increasingly
prevalent, but still difficult to navigate, federal resources and assistance for climate adaptation
available to states and localities in the Great Lakes region. Specifically, the report lays out the
overarching federal strategy around climate resiliency, the primary forms that federal climateresiliency resources and assistance can take, and the areas of need that federal resources and
assistance currently target. In addition, this report makes recommendations for enhancing
federal assistance to address climate resiliency needs at the state and local levels in the Great
Lakes region. Lastly, this report provides an easy-to-understand spreadsheet for non-federal
governmental entities to assess federal resources and assistance to meet their resiliency needs,
organized according to adaptation focus areas.
11
U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
6
Federal Resources and Assistance for Climate Adaptation in the Great
Lakes
This section of the report provides information on the Administration’s climate adaptation
strategy, and the forms and areas of federal resources and assistance available to state and
local governments in the Great Lakes region.
An Overarching Administration Strategy
Federal recognition of climate change and a cohesive federal strategy provide a framework for
effective federal assistance to state and local governments to implement adaptation measures.
Federal support for climate adaptation in the Great Lakes and the nation received a boost in
2009 and 2013 with the establishment of a top-down Executive Branch strategy to help
coordinate and drive agency actions. The Obama Administration established a U.S. federal
strategy focused on climate change adaptation, first through the October 2009 Executive Order
(EO) 13514, and then the November 2013 EO 13653. 12 EO 13514 directed federal agencies to
coordinate action on climate change and for the first time ordered every federal agency to
develop and maintain an agency-specific adaptation plan, to be updated every four years. EO
13514 also created the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, which assesses
potential federal action to adapt to climate change, including the agency adaptation plans, and
provides recommendations for additional actions to support a national adaptation strategy.
Following on, EO 13653 created the State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate
Preparedness and Resilience, which will provide a report to the President in November 2014 on
opportunities for the Executive Branch to enhance climate adaptation and resiliency in states
and local communities. Multiple Great Lakes leaders are members of this Task Force: Mayor
George Heartwell (Grand Rapids), Governor Pat Quinn (Illinois), and Chairwoman Karen Diver
(Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Minnesota). As direct participants, they can
serve as liaisons for the Great Lakes region, and can help ensure that the specific needs of the
Great Lakes are included in policy recommendations.
In addition, the Administration has worked climate change adaptation into other regionallyspecific, federal initiatives. The 2012 update to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement—the
Canadian and U.S. commitment to addressing environmental health issues in the Great Lakes
region—listed climate change among the primary issues requiring binational consideration,
along with the near-shore environment, aquatic invasive species, and habitat degradation. 13
Further, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), an Administration initiative, supports
interagency planning and funding opportunities for federal, state, and local entities. The
FY2010-14 GLRI Action Plan acknowledges the importance of increasing resiliency to climate
change within the Great Lakes region. 14 As part of the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force,
which coordinates federal actions through the GLRI, federal agencies can plan and implement
strategies, including climate adaptation, in the region.
12
Available at: EO 13514; EO 13653
Available at: http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/glwqa/20120907-Canada-USA_GLWQA_FINAL.pdf
14
White House Council on Environmental Quality et al., 2010.
13
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
7
Federal Resources and Assistance
Federal agency resources and assistance for state and local entities seeking to build climate
resiliency takes diverse forms, from grants to regional research centers, and is scattered across
the federal agency landscape. This support is often targeted to specific areas of resiliency, such
as habitat protection or infrastructure investments. These forms and areas are arrayed for easy
reference in the Appendix (Tables A1 and A2) along with relevant details on funding levels,
applicant eligibility, and key terms.
Forms of Resources and Assistance
Current federal resources to help state and local entities with climate change adaptation in the
Great Lakes may take the form of: 1) information and tools; 2) technical and planning
assistance; and 3) grants and cooperative agreements. Information and Tools refers to data,
software, and web-based platforms, as well as outreach material for public use/benefit.
Technical and Planning Assistance is tailored federal guidance for state and local entities to
meet the specific needs of a site or sites through collaborative communication between a
federally-supplied specialist and the site(s). Grants and Cooperative Agreements include direct
funding and in-kind services for specific climate adaptation efforts.
Information and Tools
Information and tools offered by federal programs to support climate change resiliency include
data portals, interactive monitoring and forecasting tools, and guidebooks, among other
resources. They are readily-available through Web interfaces and regionally-located hubs,
allowing multiple non-federal entities to benefit from a single resource without increasing
capital or other administrative costs. This report divides Information and Tools into five
subcategories: data portal/clearinghouse; information/outreach; interactive tool; regional
resource center; warning system; and study/assessment (Figure 1). Many of these resources,
like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Ready Water Utilities program or
the National Integrated Drought Information System, provide data at a regional or local level
but pull from a larger national database, thus serving multiple regions at once. Additionally,
data portals, like the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s (ACOE) Toolbox on Water Management,
compile information sources that can assist local entities with resilience planning and
preparation. Regional centers, like the Department of Interior-led Climate Science Centers, two
of which are based in Minnesota and Wisconsin, or the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
Climate Hubs, with a regional location in Houghton, Michigan, are region-specific sources of
support and information. The Appendix (Table A2) includes a more detailed list of Information
and Tools.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
8
Information
and Tools
Data Portal/Clearinghouse: “one-stop” web-based compilation of
public-use information, such as research, primary data,
guidebooks, events, etc.
Information/Outreach: multi-faceted products and services
(typically web-based) such as data, tools, training, and guides
Interactive Tool: downloadable software or similar online aid for
such purposes as assessment, modeling, or data analysis
Regional Resource Center: network of regional providers of
information and/or tools
Warning System: web-based platform for targeted monitoring,
forecasting, and/or reporting
Study/Assesment: in-house or commissioned research and reporting
Figure 1. Subcategories: Information and Tools.
Technical and Planning Assistance
Technical assistance, whether through assessments, planning, or development of other critical
skills, can fill gaps in local and state governments while ensuring compatibility with larger
federal and regional planning strategies. Great Lakes communities can use technical and
planning assistance to access needed information and skills to initiate and complete resilience
planning without having to divert investments from other needs (Appendix, Table A2). For
example, programs like the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Climate-Ready States and Cities
Initiative help state and city departments investigate, prepare for, and respond to the effects of
climate change. By providing predictive and other modeling tools and expertise, the CDC assists
states and cities in monitoring health impacts, preparing response plans, and predicting
vulnerabilities within the population. The CDC’s program has provided assistance in five Great
Lakes states: Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
Grants and Cooperative Agreements
The federal government provides direct financial support for state and local projects and
planning in the form of grants or cooperative agreements. For example, NOAA’s Great Lakes
Habitat Restoration Program and the Department of Interior’s (DOI) State and Tribal Wildlife
Grants are well-suited to support state and local restoration efforts for fish or wildlife habitat.
Additionally, the EPA’s Green Infrastructure Grants can fund state or local governments, as well
as non-profit organizations, to improve levels of stormwater runoff. Details of these and other
Grants and Cooperative Agreement Programs, along with relevant details for grant-seeking
communities, are available in the Appendix, Table A2.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
9
Areas of Resources and Assistance
Federal resources target many kinds of resiliency actions that state and local governments may
seek to undertake. This report groups federal resources and assistance for climate adaptation
into six focus areas, described below.
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Aging transportation, water, and energy infrastructure in Midwestern cities, where most of the
region’s population resides, is particularly vulnerable to climate change-related flooding and
heat waves. 15 Federal programs that can help address built/physical infrastructure
improvements for the purpose of climate resiliency numbered the greatest among those
reviewed by this report (Appendix, Tables A1 and A2), commensurate with pressure on states
and local governments to ensure that public transportation, water and wastewater facilities,
and other infrastructure withstand the effects of major weather events and other climate
change impacts. For example, in 2014, four northern Ohio cities received more than $1.3
million (total) in Green Infrastructure Grants from EPA (through the Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative) for projects to improve water quality in Lake Erie, including reduction of storm water
runoff.
Reviewed Programs Addressing Built/Physical Infrastructure 16
Grants: DOC Public Works and Economic Development Program; DOC Economic Adjustment Assistance
Program; DOD Broad Agency Announcement; EPA Green Infrastructure Grants; EPA Capitalization Grants
for Clean Water State Revolving Funds; EPA Human and Ecological Health Impacts Associated with Water
Reuse and Conservation; NSF Resilient & Sustainable Infrastructures and Environmental Sustainability
Engineering Grants; NSF Resilient Interdependent Infrastructure Processes and Systems; DOT Accelerated
Innovation Deployment Demonstration Program; DOT Resilience Projects in Response to Hurricane Sandy;
USDA Section 306C Water and Waste Disposal Grants to Alleviate Health Risks; USDA Emergency
Community Water Assistance Grants; USDA Technical Assistance and Training Grant; USGS Water
Resources Research National Competitive Grants Program
Information and Tools: ACOE Responses to Climate Change Pilots; ACOE Toolbox on Water Management;
EPA Climate Ready Water Utilities; EPA Vulnerability Self-Assessment Tool; EPA Climate Resilience
Evaluation and Awareness Tool; DOT Transportation & Climate Change Clearinghouse; DOT Climate
Change Adaptation Initiative; DOT Climate Change Resilience Pilots; Multiple Agencies’ Great Lakes St.
Lawrence Seaway Study
Technical Assistance: ACOE Protection of Essential Highways, Highway Bridge Approaches, and Public
Works
15
16
U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014.
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
10
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Wetlands provide natural flood protection and water filtration, and can lend additional
resiliency to coastlines. Climate adaptation can include protecting coasts and wetlands through
such activities as mapping, acquisition, controlling invasive species, and preventing beach
erosion. In 2013, for example, Michigan spent over $1.7 million of its Coastal Zone
Management funding, made available through NOAA and non-federal partners, on coastal
habitat, conservation, and protection, including a grant to the City of Marquette to reduce
coastal hazards, like erosion and flooding, to the Lake Superior shoreline. 17
Reviewed Programs Addressing Coastal and Wetland Protection 18
Grants/Agreements: ACOE Estuary Habitat Restoration Program; DOI National Wetlands Conservation
Fund; DOI Increase Resiliency of Beach Habitats, Sandy Disaster Relief; DOI North American Wetlands
Conservation Act; EPA Wetland Program Development Grants; NOAA Coastal Zone Management Awards;
NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserve Land Acquisition and Construction Program
Information and Tools: EPA/NOAA Climate Ready Estuaries Program; NOAA Coastal Services Center
Technical Assistance: ACOE Beach Erosion Control Projects; ACOE Aquatic Plant Control
Community Preparedness
Most cities in the Great Lakes region are only at the beginning stages of planning or
implementing climate adaptation measures, according to a 2013 survey by the Great Lakes and
St. Lawrence Cities Initiative. 19 Such measures vary and can include vulnerability assessments,
workshops and training, and building capacity and partnerships. For example, in October 2014,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Tribal Climate Change Program helped support the College of
Menominee Nation and its partners, including Michigan State University, to host a summit
focused on climate change adaptation training for Tribes. 20
Reviewed Programs Addressing Community Preparedness 21
Grants/Agreements: BIA Tribal Climate Change Grants; EPA Environmental Justice Small Grants Program;
HHS Building Capacity of Public Health Systems; HUD Community Development Block Grant Program;
NOAA Sea Grant Community Climate Adaptation Initiative
Information and Tools: CDC Harmful Algal Bloom Monitoring via National Outbreak Reporting System;
CDC Assessing Vulnerability to Climate Change Guide for Health Departments; EPA Climate Adaptation
and Brownfields Checklist; NOAA-led National Integrated Drought Information System; USDA Climate
Hubs
Technical Assistance: CDC Climate-Ready States and Cities Initiative
17
More information at:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/Michigan_CZMP_FY13_Fact_Sheet_opt_448702_7.pdf
18
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
19
Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, 2013.
20
More information at: http://sustainabledevelopmentinstitute.org
21
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
11
Flood Preparation
According to the National Climate Assessment, climate change will mean more days with heavy
precipitation in the Midwest, and thus, greater flood risk. In preparation, localities are engaging
in such activities as floodplain mapping and rezoning, and adapting buildings with flood
protection measures. 22 An example of a flood preparation activity planned for the Great Lakes
is a $1.1 million cost-share U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Flood Control, Clearing and
Snagging project to dredge a channel at the outlet of the Kawkawlin River in Saginaw Bay
(Michigan) to authorized dimensions. 23 Shoaling—the accumulation of additional sediment,
especially along the shoreline—has occurred in the channel, increasing the risk to the adjacent
lands of flooding from storms. By reducing the shoaling that has occurred, the project will
improve flood protection.
Reviewed Programs Addressing Flood Preparation 24
Grants: DHS Flood Mitigation Assistance Program; USDA Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention
Information and Tools: ACOE Sea-Level Change Calculator; Climate Data Catalog; FEMA Great Lakes
Coastal Flood Study
Technical Assistance: ACOE Flood Control Projects; ACOE Snagging and Clearing for Flood Control; DHS
Community Assistance Program State Support Services Element
General Disaster Preparation
The Multihazard Mitigation Council, a council of the National Institute of Building Sciences,
suggests that on average every dollar spent by the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal
Emergency Management Agency on hazard mitigation activities provides the nation about four
dollars in future benefits. 25 Activities in this category tend to address multiple climate
adaptation measures at once, such as pre-disaster comprehensive planning, post-disaster risk
reduction efforts in housing and economic development, and resource management. In 2014,
the Chicago area received $128 million through HUD Disaster Recovery for rebuilding efforts
following 2013 storms and flooding. 26
Reviewed Programs Addressing General Disaster Preparation 27
Grants: DHS Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program; DHS Public Assistance Grant Program; DHS Hazard
Mitigation Program; HUD Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Assistance Program;
NOAA Climate Program Office
Information and Tools: FEMA Hazus; USGCRP Global Change Info. System
22
U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014.
More information at: http://w3.lre.usace.army.mil/OandM/factsheets/kawkawlinriver.pdf
24
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
25
Multihazard Mitigation Council, 2005.
26
More information at:
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/press/press_releases_media_advisories/2014/HUDNo.14-025
27
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
23
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
12
Habitat Protection/Restoration
Many studies suggest that the positive impacts of climate change in the Great Lakes region,
such as longer growing seasons or reduced wintertime energy consumption due to rising
temperatures, will be largely outweighed by adverse effects, such as increased numbers of
invasive species. Specifically, a report on the state of climate adaptation in the Great Lakes
predicts climate change will increase suitable habitat for the invasive phragmites and purple
loosestrife, which threaten migrating birds and other wildlife dependent on habitat with native
vegetation for survival. 28 Activities enhancing, restoring, and protecting habitat can include:
protecting trees and forests, development of new conservation approaches, and planning and
implementing outdoor recreation plans. In 2012 NOAA's Great Lakes Habitat Restoration
Program provided technical assistance to grantees to increase climate resilience of restoration
projects. 29
Reviewed programs addressing Habitat Protection/Restoration 30
Grants: DOI State/Tribal Wildlife Grants; DOI Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund; DOI
Land and Water Conservation Fund State and Local Assistance Program; NOAA Great Lakes Habitat
Restoration Regional Partnership Grants; USDA Urban and Community Forestry Program; USDA
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative; USDA Conservation Innovation Grants
Information and Tools: DOI-led Climate Science Centers; DOI Climate Change Vulnerability Assessments
Course; USDA Forest Service Climate Change Resource Center
Technical Assistance: EPA Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants
28
Gregg et al., 2012.
More information at: http://www.regions.noaa.gov/great-lakes/index.php/habitat-restoration-partnerships/
30
See appendix for additional details on these programs.
29
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
13
Opportunities for Improving Federal Resources and Assistance
There are several important ways the federal government could better support climate
resiliency efforts of state and local governments in the Great Lakes region. The
recommendations in this report revolve around built/physical infrastructure and community
preparedness, priority concerns within the Great Lakes region given its aging infrastructure and
concentrated coastal population. However, similar recommendations could apply to all focus
areas. The last recommendation, adequate funding, is a necessity for any program if it is to aid
states and local communities in their urgent efforts to improve resiliency.
Explicit Authorization and Required Consideration
Making the Great Lakes region’s aging infrastructure resilient to climate change requires
specific expertise, extensive planning, and large amounts of funding. Among the federal
resources available via programs reviewed in this report, those potentially supporting climate
resiliency of built/physical infrastructure numbered the greatest, and were accompanied by the
largest funding amounts available (Appendix, Tables A1 and A2). In particular, funds from the
large formula grant programs provide broad discretion to states and local governments
regarding use of funds. However, few formula grant programs explicitly allow or require climate
change adaptation efforts in project budgets. 31 Without explicit authorization for—or required
consideration of—climate adaptation, it can be difficult for states and local governments to
justify such precautionary expenditures in the context of other more immediate needs.
One clear opportunity is within the Highway Trust Fund, which provides federal funds to stateadministered highway infrastructure projects. The recent Surface Transportation
Reauthorization of 2012, MAP-21, explicitly allows the Highway Trust Fund to provide monetary
and policy support to protect bridges and tunnels against extreme events, including severe
weather. However, other aspects of highway infrastructure funded through the Highway Trust
Fund, like the construction of roads, do not yet include similar explicit support. Explicitly
allowing use of funding to consider extreme events when constructing and repairing all aspects
of highway infrastructure will ultimately aid state and local climate resiliency.
Another opportunity for federal programs to better assist state and local government climate
resiliency efforts exists within the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF). In general, the
Drinking Water SRF provides collateral for low-interest loans to state and local governments to
upgrade drinking water infrastructure. The Drinking Water SRF could aid local adaptation
efforts by requiring the incorporation of climate resiliency into source water protection plans
and upgrades. Source water protection plans identify and work to prevent contamination issues
prior to the source water arriving at the treatment plant, thus reducing the stress on the
treatment process. In many localities source water protection plans are still in early
development stages and could readily incorporate green infrastructure measures, where
appropriate, to protect source water, in consideration of potential climate change impacts.
Green infrastructure investments can enhance the climate resiliency of traditional gray
infrastructure investments.
31
Government Accountability Office, 2013.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
14
Further, state and local governments’ climate adaptation efforts could benefit from integration
of climate-resilient source water protection (using their Drinking Water SRF funds) and climateresilient wastewater and stormwater management systems (using their Clean Water SRF
resources). The Clean Water SRF requires a certain portion of wastewater infrastructure
upgrades to include green infrastructure projects, like wetlands or other non-traditional
infrastructure. Through further support of these protection efforts and by integrating SRF
projects, overall treatment system costs can decrease while increasing climate resiliency.
Region-Specific Preparedness
Communities throughout the Great Lakes are investing in climate planning activities, 32 though
most are only at the beginning stages. 33 Their plans aim to integrate place-specific
considerations around infrastructure, economic development, emergency response, and social
impacts. Community preparedness plans must be specific to a region’s partners and governance
structure, making them a blueprint for planning and response.
The federal government has begun supporting illustrative place-specific planning with the Great
Lakes region notably absent from the list. For example, the U.S. EPA conducted a pilot study in
Iowa on climate change adaptation and resiliency. The resultant report, released in 2011,
identified barriers and incentives for considering regional effects of climate change in hazard
mitigation and other community planning. 34 The authors indicated place-specific opportunities
for state and federal agencies to coordinate on-going planning efforts and increase planning
capacity within the communities. The Administration recently announced similar “Preparedness
Pilots” for the city of Houston and the state of Colorado. 35 A Great Lakes regional pilot would be
timely and could benefit from the previous extra-regional pilots and studies. Such an initiative
in the Great Lakes region should draw and build upon the expertise of Great Lakes entities that
currently provide technical and planning assistance, such as the NOAA-supported Great Lakes
Integrated Sciences and Assessments Center. By leveraging existing resources, the federal
government can boost the value of their investment in planning pilots.
Adequate Funding
Federal programs to provide assistance to state and local governments for climate adaptation
in the Great Lakes cannot be effective without funding. State and local governments benefit
fiscally from focusing on preparation and planning, as these pre-disaster efforts are on average
less costly than post-disaster assistance. 36 However, justifying federal funds for pre-disaster
climate adaptation is difficult in the face of a challenging accounting convention within the U.S.
Congress’ funding process. The federal budget works within certain budget caps, which limit
the total amount of spending for the federal government and its various programs. It is through
these programs, limited by budget caps, that the federal government provides funding for
climate resiliency and pre-disaster preparation. If the federal government wants to spend more
32
More information at: http://www.glslcities.org/best-practices/sustainability.cfm
Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, 2013.
34
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011.
35
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2014.
36
Multihazard Mitigation Council, 2005.
33
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
15
on climate resiliency in one program, there must be a concurrent decrease in funding for
another program in this zero-sum approach. However, post-disaster appropriations, like those
for Superstorm Sandy or Hurricane Katrina, are not counted against the federal budget caps
and thus require no offset from other programs. As a result, post-disaster funding appears
through the normal budgetary process to be less costly than pre-disaster funding. Despite these
challenges, adequate funding for climate adaptation is essential to support states and local
communities with long-term planning and resiliency efforts.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
16
Conclusion
The federal government offers significant assistance for infrastructure, development, and
prioritization of climate adaptation efforts across the country and in the Great Lakes region. As
attention to resiliency builds, the list of applicable federal programs will continue to expand.
This continuous expansion of opportunities is a positive trend for Great Lakes state and local
governments facing the front-door impacts of a changing climate. 37 Current federal resources
to help state and local entities with climate adaptation in the Great Lakes may take the form of:
1) information and tools; 2) technical and planning assistance; and 3) grants and cooperative
agreements. These resources and assistance often target specific areas of resiliency, ranging
from habitat protection to infrastructure investments.
Accessing and utilizing these resources is essential to Great Lakes states’ and communities’
ability to adapt to increasingly severe climate impacts and extreme weather events, and to
continue to benefit from their globally-significant freshwater resource. Several improvements
in the federal offerings around climate resiliency assistance could help accelerate climate
adaptation in the Great Lakes region. Especially in the area of built/physical infrastructure, the
federal government could explicitly authorize or require expenditures for climate adaptation,
including through green and grey infrastructure investments; otherwise, it can be difficult for
states and local governments to justify such precautionary expenditures in the context of other
more immediate needs. Further, the federal government could direct more attention to
community and climate preparedness in the Great Lakes, specifically, through region-specific
preparedness pilots. Efforts to increase resiliency and climate adaptation at the state and local
levels are useless without adequate and fiscally-prudent federal investment in these resources
and assistance. Bringing greater transparency and equivalency of expenditures for climate
preparedness and mitigation needs, relative to post-disaster response, will make such prudent
investments more likely.
37
One extensive, searchable, and regularly-updated resource for states and localities is the Tribal Climate Change
Funding and Program Guide. Though the title indicates a tribal focus, the resource is also applicable to state and
local communities. Available at: http://envs.uoregon.edu/tribal-climate/
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
17
References
Executive Office of the President. June 2013. “The President’s Climate Action Plan.” Available
at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf
Government Accountability Office. April 2013. “Climate Change: Future Federal Adaptation
Efforts Could Better Support Local Infrastructure Decision Makers.” Available at:
http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/653741.pdf
Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative. 2013. “Adaptation and resiliency to a Changing
Climate in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence basin.” Available at: http://grcity.us/enterpriseservices/officeofenergyandsustainability/Documents/4%20pager-to%20printtuesday%2018%20NEW%20LAYOUT%20(4).pdf
Gregg, R. M., K. M. Feifel, J. M. Kershner, and J. L. Hitt. 2012. “The State of Climate Change
Adaptation in the Great Lakes Region.” EcoAdapt, Bainbridge Island, WA. Available at:
http://ecoadapt.org/data/library-documents/EcoAdapt_GreatLakesAdaptation.pdf
Michigan Sea Grant. 2011. “The Great Lakes: Vital to Our Nation’s Economy and Environment.”
Available at: http://www.miseagrant.umich.edu/downloads/economy/11-708-Great-LakesJobs.pdf
Multihazard Mitigation Council. 2005. “Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study
to Assess the Future Savings from Mitigation Activities.” National Institute of Building Sciences,
Washington, D.C. Available at:
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/MMC/hms_vol1.pdf
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2010. “Adapting to Climate Change: A
Planning Guide for State Coastal Managers–A Great Lakes Supplement.” Available at:
http://coastalmanagement.noaa.gov/climate/docs/adaptationgreatlakes.pdf
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2014. “Billion-Dollar Weather/Climate
Disasters: Overview.” Available at: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/
The Union of Concerned Scientists and the Ecological Society of America. 2003. “Confronting
Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region: Impacts on our Communities and Ecosystems.”
Available at: http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/greatlakes_final.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011. “Iowa Climate Change Adaptation & Resilience
Report.” Available at: http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/iowa_climate_adaptation_report.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012. “Great Lakes – Basic Information.” Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/basicinfo.html
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
18
U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014. “National Climate Assessment.” Available at:
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report
White House, Office of the Press Secretary. July 16, 2014. “Fact Sheet: Taking Action to Support
State, Local, and Tribal Leaders as They Prepare Communities for the Impacts of Climate
Change.” Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/07/16/fact-sheettaking-action-support-state-local-and-tribal-leaders-they-pre
White House Council on Environmental Quality, et al. 2010. “Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative Action Plan.” Available at: http://greatlakesrestoration.us/pdfs/glri_actionplan.pdf
World Resources Institute. 2014. “Designed for the Future? Assessing Principles of Sustainable
Development and Governance in the World Bank’s Project Plans.” Available at:
http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/Designed%20for%20the%20future_World%20Bank.pdf
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
19
Appendix of Federal Resources and Assistance
Table A1. Information and Tools
Focus Area
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Resource Name
Great Lakes St. Lawrence
Seaway Study
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Category
Study/Assessment
Agency
DOD (ACOE), DOT,
DOI (FWS)
Transportation and Climate
Change Clearinghouse
Data Portal/Clearinghouse
DOT
Toolbox on Water
Management
Data Portal/Clearinghouse
DOD (ACOE)
Description
A binational report that identifies factors and trends that affect commercial
navigation on the Seaway, including climate change
One-stop source of information on greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories,
analytic methods and tools, GHG reduction strategies, potential impacts of
climate change on transportation infrastructure, and approaches for
integrating climate change considerations into transportation decision
making
Provides a single source for stakeholders looking for technical resources to
support water management; allows federal agencies, states, interstate
organizations, Tribes, non-governmental agencies and international entities
to access and share water resources information for planning and
management
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Climate Ready Water Utilities
Information/Outreach
EPA
Resources to assist the water sector in addressing climate change impacts;
promotes clear understanding of climate science and adaptation options by
translating complex climate projections into accessible formats and
through development of easy-to-use tools
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Climate Change Adaptation
Initiative
Information/Outreach
DOT (FTA)
Workshops and webinars on transit and climate adaptation to share
information, provide technical assistance, and bring stakeholders together
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Vulnerability Self Assessment
Tool (VSAT)
Interactive Tool
EPA
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Climate Resilience Evaluation &
Awareness Tool (CREAT)
Interactive Tool
EPA
A downloadable tool to assist water and wastewater utilities with
determining vulnerabilities to man-made and natural hazards and with
evaluating potential improvements to enhance their security and resiliency
A software tool to assist drinking water and wastewater utility owners and
operators in understanding potential climate change threats and in
assessing the related risks at their individual utilities; provides users with
access to the most recent national assessment of climate change impacts
for use in considering how these changes will impact utility operations and
missions
DOT (FHWA)
Partnering with State Departments of Transportation , Metropolitan
Planning Organizations, and Federal Land Management Agencies to pilot
approaches to conduct climate change and extreme weather vulnerability
assessments of transportation infrastructure and to analyze options for
adapting and improving resiliency
DOD (ACOE)
Targeted pilot studies to develop and test alternative adaptation strategies;
each study addresses a central question that will help guide USACOE to
develop policy and guidance to mainstream adaptation
DOC (NOAA)
Wide array of tools and services to help coastal resource managers address
the challenges associated with flooding, hurricanes, sea level rise, and
other coastal hazards; core areas of expertise include geospatial
technologies, training, and social science.
EPA/DOC (NOAA)
Works with the National Estuary Programs and the coastal management
community to: assess climate change vulnerabilities; develop and
implement adaptation strategies, and engage and educate stakeholders
Conducts climate-related research and outreach to local business owners,
municipalities, and other stakeholders on agriculture, watershed
management, and natural resources-based tourism, among other issues.
Includes the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments Center.
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Climate Change Resilience
Pilots
Built/Physical Infrastructure
Investments
Responses to Climate Change
Pilots
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Coastal Services Center
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Climate Ready Estuaries
program
Study/Assessment
Study/Assessment
Information/Outreach
Information/Outreach
Community Preparedness
Regional Integrated Sciences
and Assessments
Regional Resource Center
DOC (NOAA)
Community Preparedness
Climate Adaptation and
Brownfields Checklist
Information/Outreach
EPA
Community Preparedness
Regional Climate Hubs
Regional Resource Center
USDA
Checklist to help cleanup and revolving loan fund recipients address
changing climate concerns in an analysis of brownfield cleanup alternatives
Information for farmers, ranchers and forest landowners to help them
adapt to climate change and weather variability
Community Preparedness
Harmful Algal Bloom
Monitoring via National
Outbreak Reporting System
(NORS)
Warning System
CDC
Supports waterborne diseases surveillance capacity in Great Lakes states
with epidemiology and lab capacity funding to focus on waterborne disease
surveillance and prevention issues of ambient water quality; events can be
reported electronically through CDC’s largest outbreak reporting system
Community Preparedness
National Integrated Drought
Information System (NIDIS)
Warning System
DOC (NOAA)-led
Provides dynamic drought information through accessible tools, products,
programs, and other resources; includes monitoring and forecasting
Community Preparedness
Assessing Health Vulnerability
to Climate Change:
A Guide for Health
Departments
Information/Outreach
CDC
Flood Preparation
Sea-Level Change Curve
Calculator
Interactive Tool
DOD (ACOE)
Flood Preparation
Great Lakes Coastal Flood
Study
Study/Assessment
FEMA
Provides guidance for health departments on how to assess local
vulnerabilities to health hazards associated with climate change; health
departments can use information to develop health interventions and
health adaptation strategies that are tailored to their specific community
Provides site-specific detail on projected flood elevations for 5-year
intervals from 2010 to 2100, for use by floodplain managers, professional
engineers, and surveyors, to develop additional safety margins above the
FEMA best available elevation data
Comprehensive storm and wind study of the Great Lakes basin for the
purpose of updating the coastal flood hazard information and Flood
Insurance Rate Maps for Great Lakes coastal communities
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
20
Table A1. Information and Tools (continued)
Focus Area
Flood Preparation/ Community
Preparedness
Resource Name
Category
Agency
Climate Data Catalog
Data Portal/Clearinghouse
GSA
Description
In pilot phase: Compilation of data and resources related to coastal
flooding and food resilience
General Disaster Preparation
Global Change Information
System
Data Portal/Clearinghouse
USGCRP
General Disaster Preparation
Hazus
Interactive Tool
FEMA
Habitat Protection/Restoration
Climate Change Resource
Center
Data Portal/Clearinghouse
USDA (USFS)
Habitat Protection/Restoration
Community Preparedness
Climate Science Centers
Regional Resource Center
DOI-led
Web-based source of information on climate and global change for use by
scientists, decision makers, and the public; initially focused on capturing
and presenting all of the supporting information (datasets, papers, people,
projects, etc.) from the National Climate Assessment Uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology to estimate
physical, economic and social impacts of disasters; for mitigation and
recovery as well as preparedness and response.
Web-based, national resource that connects land managers and
decisionmakers with useable science to address climate change in planning
and application
Eight regional centers that provide scientific information, tools, and
techniques that land, water, wildlife, and cultural resource managers and
other interested parties can apply to anticipate, monitor, and adapt to
climate change impacts
DOI (FWS)
Course designed to guide conservation and resource management
practitioners in two essential elements in the design of climate adaptation
plans: identifying which species or systems are likely to be most strongly
affected by projected changes; and understanding why these resources are
likely to be vulnerable
Habitat Protection/Restoration
Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessments Course
Information/Outreach
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
21
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements
Focus Area
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Program Name (CFDA)
Emergency Community Water Assistance Grants (10.763)
Technical Assistance and Training Grant (10.761)
Agency
USDA
USDA
Type
Key Terms
Grant
State, local or tribal Assist rural communities that have governments; public bodies; experienced a significant decline in quantity non‐profits
or quality of drinking water due to an Projects must serve rural emergency (drought, flood, tornado, areas excluding towns with Drinking water
chemical spill/leakage, etc.), or in which populations greater than Rural communities
such decline is considered imminent, in 10,000 or median household Severe weather impacts
order to obtain or maintain adequate income greater than 100% of FY 13 $5.8 M
Spill or leakage impacts
quantities of water that meet the Safe a State's non‐metropolitan FY 14 est $4 M
Water quantity and quality Drinking Water Act standards. median household income. FY 15 est $9 M
Grant
Drinking water
Rural communities
Waste disposal
Description
Eligibility
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Sound development of rural communities to help communities bring safe drinking water and sanitary, environmentally‐sound waste disposal facilities to rural Americans Private nonprofit through assistance with evaluating organizations ‐ grants to solutions, assisting with grant applications provide technical assistance FY 13 $17.55 M
to state level offices, and improving and training to state and FY 14 est $19.1 M
operation and maintenance.
localitites
FY 15 est $19 M
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Public Works and Economic Development Program DOC (11.300)
(EDA)
Grant
Construction or rehabilitation of essential public infrastructure and facilities necessary to generate or retain private sector jobs and investments, attract private sector capital, Water and transportation and promote regional competitiveness, infrastructure
innovation, and entrepreneurship, including State or local governments; Workforce development
water and sewer systems, industrial access Academia; Non‐profit acting Environmental roads, business parks, and brownfield in cooperation with state or sustainability
redevelopment.
local government
Unavailable
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Economic Adjustment Assistance Program (11.307)
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Infrastructure
Technical assistance
Economic hardship
Public works
Wide range of technical, planning and public works, and infrastructure assistance for distressed communities experiencing adverse economic changes.
Flood erosion
Protect public infrastructure
CAP ‐ Sec. 14
Construct emergency shoreline and streambank protection works to protect public facilities, such as bridges, roads, public buildings, sewage treatment plants, water wells, and non‐profit public facilities (i.e., churches, hospitals, schools), endangered by flood‐caused erosion.
State or local governments
Water Supply
Infrastructure
Conservation
Governance
Modeling
Improvement and enhancement of the nation's water supply, including treatment, infrastructure, maintenance, management, evaluating costs, development of alternative approaches and governance, and evaluation and assessment of Projects through a Water FY 12 $853,498
conservation practices.
Research Institute or Center FY 14 $963,704
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
DOC (EDA)
Protection of Essential Highways, Highway Bridge Approaches, and Public DOD Works (12.105)
(ACOE)
Water Resources Research National Competitive DOI Grants Program (15.805)
(USGS)
Cooperative agreement
Technical assistance
Grant
State or local governments; Academia; Non‐profit acting in cooperation with state or local government
Unavailable
Unavailable
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
$37,000 to $500,000; Av $261,417
Repairs, partial replacement, or significant maintenance: $150,000 max
Alleviate significant decline in water quantity or quality: $500,000 max No
$13,500 to $100 M
No
FY 2011 Av $1.70M
Yes ‐ min 50% FY 2011 Av $550,000
Yes ‐ min 50% Not applicable
Feasibility ‐ first $100,000 0% and 50% thereafter
Total federal contribution limited to $1 M
$35,000 to $250,000
Yes ‐ 50%
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
22
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Program Name (CFDA)
Accelerated Innovation Deployment Demonstration Program (20.200)
DOT
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Resilient & Sustainable Infrastructures and Environmental Sustainability Engineering Grants (47.041)
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Resilient Interdependent Infrastructure Processes and Systems (47.041; 47.070; 47.075)
NSF
NSF
Type
Key Terms
Description
Eligibility
Grant
Technology deployment
Innovation
Infrastructure
Non‐infrastructure
Highway transit
Provides funding and other resources to offset the risk of trying an innovative practice or technology in highway State or tribal governments; transportation, including infrastructure and Federal Land Management non‐infrastructure strategies or activities. Agecnies
Annual Est $15 M
Grant
Specific programs: Hazard Mitigation, Infrastructure Management and Extreme Events, and Civil Infrastructure Systems
Infrastructure
Research leading to engineering of Resiliency
infrastructure systems for resilience and Materials, structure, design sustainability that support human well‐
Ecological services
being and are compatible with sustaining Green engineering
natural environmental systems.
Grant
Development of knowledge and methods to study and implement higher resiliency, as State or local governments; Infrastructure well as collection of new data to support Academia; Non‐profits; For‐
interdependencies
model building, within the linked profits; Individuals; Other Annual Est $15 M
Theory, modeling, metrics infrastructure.
federal agencies
State, local, or tribal governments; Academia; Non‐profits; Private and public groups; Commercial organizations
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Annual Est $17 M
maximum of $1,000,000
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
None for innovation portion
$300,000 to $1,2000,000 No
$300,000 to $2,500,000
No
Unavailable
No
Grant
Water infrastructure
Green infrastructure
Water pollution
Stormwater mitigation
Funds establish the State Revolving Fund. Green Project Reserve required as a portion of capitalization grant toward projects that address green infrastructure, water efficiency, energy efficiency, or other environmentally‐innovative activities. State or tribal governments
Human and Ecological Health Impacts Associated with Water Reuse and Conservation (66.509)
EPA
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Wastewater
Water Quality
Water reuse
Innovation
Quantitative understanding of the impacts of using reclaimed water and harvest State, local, tribal, or insular applications, including costs, sources, governments; Academia; Annual Est $4 M
capacity, adoption, and engagement.
Non‐profits
$300,000 to $750,000
No
Broad Agency Announcement Grant
Cooperative agreement
Procurement contract
Infrastructure
Engineering
Adaptation planning
Civil and military applications
Broad agency announcement for grants and agreements in engineering, climate‐
relevant fields, including infrastructure, cold State, local, or tribal regions research, construction engineering, governments; Academia; remote sensing, regional ecological Non‐profits; Small or private Unavailable
planning and simulation.
businesses; Individuals
Unavailable
No
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Capitalization Grants for Clean Water State Revolving Funds (66.458)
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Agency
EPA
DOD
10‐20% of CWSRF
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
23
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Built/Physical Infrastructure Investments
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Program Name (CFDA)
Resilience Projects in Response to Hurricane Sandy ‐ Competitive Resilience
Agency
DOT (FTA)
Green Infrastructure Grants (66.509 ‐national; 66.469 ‐ EPA
Great Lakes)
Section 306C Water and Waste Disposal Grants to Alleviate Health Risks USDA
Coastal Zone Management DOC Awards (11.419)
(NOAA)
National Estuarine Research Reserve Land Acquisition and Construction Program (11.420)
DOC (NOAA)
Type
Key Terms
Green infrastructure to reduce water pollution and boost resilience to climate change impacts. National: FY 12‐14 total $2.2 m
Great Lakes: State or local governments; FY 13 $7 m
Non‐profits
FY 14 $4.5 m
Rural Communities
Water access
Waste disposal
Economic hardship
Public health risks
Water and waste disposal facilities and services to low income rural communities whose residents face significant health risks.
Federally Recognized Native American Tribes: per capita income less than 70% national average, unemployment greater than 125% national average; rural areas
Colonias area (unorganized areas along US‐Mexico Unavailable
border)
Coastal resouces
Habitat mapping
Best practices
State and local projects for managing coastal erosion, collecting data for and mapping coastal and ocean habitat and uses, and developing best practices for addressing sea level rise. Includes National Estuarine Research Reserve Programs and Collaboratives.
State, local, or tribal governments with an approved Coastal Zone Management Program
Grant
Technical assistance
Green infrastructure
Water pollution
Water infrastructure
Stormwater mitigation
Grant
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Rebuild or repair public transportation infrastructure after Hurricane Sandy or reduce future risk of being damaged or destroyed in a natural disaster.
Grant
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Eligibility
States, local, or tribal governments; Other Federal Transit Administration recipients Must have been impacted by Hurricane Sandy (CT, DE, MD, MA, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, Single Appropriation $3 B Unavailable
RI, VA, WV, DC)
Public transportation infrastructure
Disaster response
Future vulnerability
Resilient communities
Grant
Loan
Description
Estuarine reserves
Land acquisition
Habitat restoration
Resiliency
Climate change factors
Key property acquistion and construction for protecting, long‐term research, and education.
FY 12 $66.1 m
FY 13 $61.2 m
FY 14 $66.1 m
FY 15 est $71.1 m
National Estuarine Research FY 12 $16 M
Reserve managing State FY 13 $14.85 M
agency or Academic partner FY 14 est $21.3 M
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
Yes ‐ 20% Emergency Relief; 25% Resilience Projects;
non‐
Federal match may include the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, including CDBG Disaster Recovery (CDBG‐DR) funds that are available for transportation purposes
Great Lakes: $100,000 to Varies
$500,000
Unavailable
Loans: No, applicants expected to borrow as much as they can afford to repay
Grants: No
$0 to $2 M
Yes ‐ Administrative Grants 50%
No ‐ Enhancement Grants
$20,000 to $1.9 M
Yes ‐ 30% construction; 50% land acquisition
NOTE: Federal share for each reserve shall not exceed $5,000,000 for acquisition of lands, waters or interests therein, unless using Congressionally‐directed funds.
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
24
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Program Name (CFDA)
Aquatic Plant Control (12.100)
Agency
Type
DOD (ACOE)
Cooperative agreement
Technical assistance
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Beach Erosion Control Projects (12.101)
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Estuary Habitat Restoration DOD Program (12.130)
(ACOE)
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Coastal and Wetland Protection
Community Preparedness
DOD (ACOE)
National Coastal Wetlands Conservation DOI Grant Program (15.614)
(FWS)
North American Wetlands Conservation DOI Fund (15.623)
(FWS)
Increase Resiliency of Beach Habitats, Hurricane Sandy Disaster Relief DOI (15.677)
(FWS)
Wetland Program Development Grants (66.461 ‐ regional; 66.462 ‐ national)
EPA
Sea Grant Community Climate Adaptation Initiative (11.417)
DOC (NOAA)
Key Terms
Description
Aquatic plants
Invasive species control
Provides for cooperation of ACOE with State and local government agencies in the control of obnoxious aquatic plants of major economic significance in rivers, harbors, and allied waters.
State or local governments
Technical assistance
Beach and shore erosion
CAP ‐ Sec. 103
Cooperative agreement
Estuaries
Habitat restoration
Innovation
Grant
Wetlands
Acquisition, restoration, management, enhancement
Fish and wildlife habitat
Grant
Grant
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Eligibility
Study, design, and construct small coastal storm damage reduction projects in partnership with non‐federal government agencies through projects not specifically authorized by Congress
Estuary habitat restoration projects, innovation and monitoring, while encouraging partnerships among public agencies and non‐governmental organizations.
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
Unavailable
Not applicable
Yes ‐ 50%
Not applicable
Feasibility ‐ first $100,000 0% and 50% thereafter
Total federal contribution limited to $2 M
State or local governments
Unavailable
State, local or tribal governments; Non‐profits (public)
FY 13 $0
FY 14 est $645,696 FY Not applicable
15 est $600,000
Conservation projects to acquire, restore, and enhance coastal wetlands.
Coastal State governments
FY 13 $20 M
FY 14 est $16.5
FY 15 est $17 M
FY 13: 24 awards
FY 14: 22 applications
FY 15: Anticipate 20 awards
Wetlands
Acquisition, restoration, management, enhancement
Fish and wildlife habitat
Long‐term wetlands conservation through real property acquisition, and/or restoration, management or enhancement of wetland ecosystems. State, local, or tribal governments; Academia; Non‐profits; Private and public groups
FY 12 $70.5
FY 13 $61.6
FY 14 est $77.6
FY 15 est $70 M
Small grants: $0 to $75,000; Av $42,000
Standard Grants: $75,000 Yes ‐ min 50%
to $1,000,000; Av Projects on federal lands can $710,000
be 0% match
Data and tool integration
Impact assessments
Beach resiliency
Monitoring network
Coordinated effort to integrate existing data and tools with foundational data and impact assessments to guide decisions about where to conduct beach restoration, State, local, or tribal conservation and management in regions governments; Academia; affected by Hurricane Sandy, led by the Landscape Conservation FY 13 $450,000
North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperatives; Non‐
FY 14 est $81.6 M
Cooperative.
governmental organizations FY 15 est $20.4 M
Wetlands
Innovation
Water pollution
Coordination and acceleration of research, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution as part of comprehensive, wetlands program development.
REGIONAL: State, local, or tribal governments; Interstate agencies; Intertribal consortia
NATIONAL: Interstate agencies; Intertribal consortia; Non‐profits; Non‐
governmental organizations
Region 5 (Great Lakes) FY Region 5 FY 14 Range: 14: $1.5 M
$50,000 to $500,000
NATIONAL
National Wetlands FY 12 $792,440
Program Development FY 13 $750,000
Grants Range (for two Yes ‐ 25% minimum; Tribes FY 14 est $500,000
year grants): $75,000 to can reduce cost share to 5‐
FY 15 est $500,000
$300,000; Av. $160,500 10%
Climate adaptation
Coastal communities
Resiliency
Local partnerships
Enhance climate adaptation in coastal communities through partnerships with local community governments, state and federal agencies on projects that support NOAA's Next Generation Strategic Plan missions goals and National Sea Grant performance measures.
Sea Grant Programs (Academia)
Annual Est $1 M
Unavailable
$0 to $100,000
Yes ‐ 35%
Yes ‐ 25% for States with a dedicated fund for land conservation; 50% for all other states
No
Yes ‐ 50%
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
25
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Community Preparedness
Community Preparedness
Community Preparedness
Community Preparedness
Community Preparedness
Program Name (CFDA)
Community Development Block Grant Program (14.218 ‐entitlement; 14.228 ‐state)
Agency
HUD
Building Capacity of Public HHS Health Systems (93.524)
(CDC)
Building Resilience Against HHS Climate Effects (93.070)
(CDC)
Environmental Justice Small Grants Program (66.604)
EPA
Tribal Climate Change Grants
Type
Grant
Grant
Fellow placement
Cooperative Agreement
Grant
DOI (BIA) Grant
Eligibility
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
ENTITLE (Metros): FY 13 $3.3 M
FY 14 est $1.9 M
ENTITLE: $72,231 to $178 FY 15 est $2.9
M (New York City); Av STATES:
$2.96 M STATE: Formula FY 13 $921.3 M
distribution $1.9 M to FY 14 est $906.9 M $61.5 M; FY 15 est $906.9 M
FY 14 Av $17.6 M
ENTITLE: No; STATE: state administration of program allowed an initial $100,000 with no match, followed by up to an additional 3% of the grant amount but must match dollar for dollar
Key Terms
Description
Neighborhood revitalization
Economic development
Community resiliency
Urban neighborhoods
States governments; Metropolitan Area cities Develop viable urban communities by designated by OMB; Other providing decent housing, a suitable living cities over 50,000 in environment, and expanding economic Metropolitan Areas; opportunities, principally for persons of low Qualified urban counties of and moderate income.
at least 200,000
Epidemiology
Public health
Water‐borne diseases
Includes the Applied Epidemiology Fellowship program which provides a two year fellowship to build state capacity for detection, investigation, and reporting of waterborne disease and outbreaks related to ambient water exposure by training recent graduates in applied epidemiology and placement in state agencies.
Public health
Capacity building
Assists states and cities with anticipating health effects of climate change by applying climate science, predicting health impacts, and preparing flexible programs through a State, tribal, and local health FY 12 est $2.5 M
five‐step program.
departments
FY 13 est $7.5 M
$200,000 to $250,000
12 grants expected in FY No
12
Environmental Health Public health
Assists recipients in building collaborative partnerships to help them understand and address environmental and public health concerns in their communities; for 2015, special emphasis on proposals supporting community‐based preparedness and resilience efforts.
Non‐profits; federally recognized tribal governments; tribal organizations
FY 13 $1.2 M
FY 14 est $0
FY 15 est $1.6 M
$20,000 to $50,000/fiscal year; avg $30,000
FY 15: Up to 4 grants per EPA region in amounts of up to $30,000 per award for a 2‐year project No
period
Adaptation planning
Training workshops
Vulnerability assessment
Tribal adaptation workshops and training, as well as development of tribal government climate adaptation plans, vulnerability assessments, and data analysis.
Tribal governments or organizations
FY 14 est $600,000
Unavailable
Master or Doctoral students for fellowship
State or local health agencies 30 fellows
for fellow placement
One fellow per agency
Yes ‐ administration and professional support
No ‐ improved ranking for leverage funds
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
26
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Program Name (CFDA)
Agency
Watershed Protection and Flood Flood Preparation Prevention (10.904)
USDA
Flood Control Projects Flood Preparation (12.106)
Snagging and Clearing for Flood Preparation Flood Control (12.108)
Community Assistance Program State Support Flood Preparation Services Element (97.023)
DOD (ACOE)
General Disaster Preparation
Climate Program Office (11.431)
CDBG Disaster Recovery Assistance
Grant
Loan
Technical assistance
Cooperative Agreement
Technical Assistance
Eligibility
Description
Watershed resources
Flood prevention
Agriculture
Recreation
Water supply
Yes ‐ 0% for flood prevention construction;
Max 50% for agricultural Works of improvement to protect, develop, water management, public and utilize the land and water resources in State, local, or tribal recreation and fish and watersheds, including watershed governments; Non‐profits Cooperative Agreements wildlife purposes; 100% for protection, flood prevention, agricultural with state authority to carry (Discretionary Grants)
certain other nonagricultural water management, sedimentation control, out, maintain, and operate FY 13 $6.6 M
water management purposes
and public‐water based fish, wildlife, and watershed works of FY 14 est $17.4 M
$0 to $2.2 M (per state); 0% installation costs (eligible recreation.
improvement
FY 15 est $0
Avg (per state) $650,000. for program loans)
Flood damage
CAP ‐ Sec. 205
Study, design, and construct small flood control projects, not specifically authorized by Congress, in partnership with non‐
Federal government agencies. State or local governments
DOD (ACOE)
Technical Assistance
Flood control
DHS (FEMA)
Cooperative agreement
Technical assistance
Floodplain management
Flood insurance
Disaster preparation
Enforcement and compliance
Evaluate community implementation and performance of NFIP floodplain management activities, and build State and State or insular National community floodplain management Flood Insurance Program expertise and capacity.
State Coordinating Agency
Mitigation
Flood hazards
Infrastructure
Flood insurance
Reduce or eliminate the long‐term risk of flood damage to properties insured under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), including activities like relocation, elevation, minor localized flood risk reduction, and dry‐flood proofing.
DOC (NOAA)
HUD
Grant
Technical assistance
Grant
Cooperative agreement
Grant
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
Key Terms
Plan, engineer and design, and construct projects removing snags and other debris, in‐
stream clearing, and limited embankment construction using material from the clearing operation to reduce damages caused by overbank flooding
State or local governments
Flood Mitigation Assistance DHS
Flood Preparation Program (97.029)
General Disaster Preparation
Type
Not applicable
Feasibility ‐ first $100,000 0% and 50% thereafter
Final design (plans and specifications) and construction costs ‐ 35% Unavailable
Not applicable
Studies ‐ 0%
Federal cap for projects set at $500,000
FY 12 $10 M
FY 13 est $10.4 M
FY 14 est $10.4 M
FY 13: 52 awards [50 states + DC and Puerto Rico]
Yes ‐ min 25%
FY 14: 60 awards expected
Yes ‐ generally 25%; 0% for Severe Repetitive Loss and 10% for Repetitive Loss properties
Unavailable
State, local, tribal, or insular FY 13 $5.2 M
governments
FY 14 est $89 M
Research, assessments and climate services development activities for climate sensitive State, local, or tribal resource management and adaptation governments; Academia; Climate‐sensitive resources challenges. Includes Climate and Societal Non‐profits; Private Assessment
Interactions, and the Great Lakes Integrated organizations; International Interdisciplinary
Sciences and Assessments.
organizations
State, local, tribal, or insular governments
Must be part of declared Low‐income
Recovery efforts involving housing, federal disasters with Housing
economic development, infrastructure and significant unmet recovery Economic Development
prevention of further damage, from needs and capacity to carry Resiliency
Presidentially‐declared disasters, especially out a disaster recovery Hazard mitigation
in low‐income areas.
program
FY 12 est $15.5 M
FY 13 est $14.5 M
FY 14 est $11 M
FY 15 est $15.5 M
Yes ‐ 5% only for NOAA FY 15: Anticipate 100 Climate Transition Program awards ranging $50,000‐ (NCTP)
200,000
No otherwise
FY 12 $400 M (FY 11 disasters)
FY 13 $15.18 B (Hurricane Sandy)
Unavailable
No
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
27
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
General Disaster Preparation
General Disaster Preparation
General Disaster Preparation
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Program Name (CFDA)
Public Assistance Grant Program (97.036)
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (97.039)
Pre‐Disaster Mitigation Program (97.047)
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (Competitive Grants Program) (10.310)
Urban and Community Forestry Program (10.675)
Conservation Innovation Grants ‐ EQIP (10.912)
Community‐Based Restoration Program (includes Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Regional Partnership Grants) (11.463)
Agency
DHS
DHS (FEMA)
DHS (FEMA)
USDA
USDA
USDA (NRCS)
DOC (NOAA)
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
FY 12 $4.4 B
FY 13 est $5.7 B
FY 14 est $6.6 B
FY 15 est $4.7 M
Unavailable
Yes ‐ max 25%
Yes ‐ 25%
Pre‐disaster mitigation planning and projects, primarily addressing natural FY 12 $53.2 M
hazards, to reduce injuries, loss of life, and State, local, tribal, or insular FY 13 $21.3 M
damage and destruction to property. governments; Academia
FY 14 est $63 M
Unavailable
Maximums for federal contribution
$3 M for projects
$800K for new mitigation plans
$400K for mitigation plan updates
Agricultural contributions
Climate adaptation
Output and yield
Pests and pollinators
Specifically: the Agriculture and Natural Resources Science for Climate Viability and Change has a focus on societal challenge to adapt agroecosystems and antural resouce systems to climate variability and change, and implement mitigation strategies.
Tribal Organizations (other than Federally‐recognized tribal governments); Academia; Nonprofits; For profit organizations; Small businesses; Individuals
FY 13 Range: $25,000‐$1 Yes ‐ 50% M
Forest resources
Ecosystem services
Urban forestry
Urban green space
National, competitive, urban and community forestry challenge to plan for, establish, manage and protect trees, forests, green spaces and related natural resources in and adjacent to cities and towns. State, local, or tribal governments; Academia; Non‐profits; Public or Indian housing authorities; Native FY 13 $301.7 M
American tribal FY 14 est $28 M
organizations FY 15 est $28 M
Unavailable
Yes ‐ 0‐50%
Competitive Challenge Cost Share Grant Program: 50%
Innovation
Technology transfer
Pilot projects
Management systems
Development and adoption of innovative conservation approaches and technologies while leveraging Federal investment in environmental enhancement and protection with agricultural production. Projects are expected to lead to transfer of conservation technologies, management systems, and innovative approaches.
State, local, or tribal governments; Academia; Non‐profits; Small or private Annual Est $15 M
businesses; Individuals
$5,000 to $1,000,000
Yes ‐ 50%
Coastal habitat
Restoration
Areas of Concern
Habitat restoration, coral reef conservation, construction, management, public education activities, and research for marine and estuarine habitats, especially for species currently under, or proposed for, State, local, or tribal Federal or inter‐jurisdictional management. governments; Academia; Within the Great Lakes, focus areas are the Non‐profits; Private Areas of Concern.
businesses; Individuals
Type
Key Terms
Description
Grant
Disaster response
Emergency protective measures
Hazard mitigation for future events
Debris removal, emergency protective measures and the repair, restoration, reconstruction or replacement of public facilities or infrastructure damaged or destroyed by disasters.
Grant
State, local, or tribal governments [Excludes Alaska native corporations with private individual ownership]; Private, non‐
Mitigation planning and hazard mitigation profit organizations that own Mitigation planning
measures, including efforts to improve or operate a private, non‐
Hazard mitigation
resilience prior to a disaster and initiatives profit public facility; FY 13 $482 M
Post‐disaster risk reduction to reduce future risks after a disaster has Qualified conservation FY 14 est $400 M
Infrastructure
occurred.
organizations
FY 15 est $400 M
Grant
Natural hazards
Planning and resiliency
Public health
Infrastructure
Grant
Grant
Grant
Grant
Technical assistance
Eligibility
State, local, or tribal governments; Non‐profits (private)
Restricted to Presidential‐
declared disasters or emergencies
New Awards
FY 13 $6 M
FY 14 $0
FY 15 est $5 M
National Cooperative Agreements:
FY 11 $56.3 M
Great Lakes: FY 14 est $4 M [Habitat] $800,000 [AOC Acquisition]
Yes ‐ generally 25%
10% for impoverished communities
National Cooperative Agreements: $15,000 to $36 M
Great Lakes: $100,000‐
No, but can vary depending on $10 M
funding opportunity
NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
28
Table A2. Technical and Planning Assistance, Grants and Cooperative Agreements (continued)
Focus Area
Program Name (CFDA)
Agency
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (15.615)
DOI
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
State (Tribal) Wildlife Grants (15.634 ‐ state; 15.639 ‐ tribal)
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Habitat Protection/
Restoration
Land and Water Conservation Fund State and Local Assistance Program (15.916)
Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants (66.460)
DOI
DOI (NPS)
EPA
Type
Grant
Grant
Key Terms
Description
Eligibility
Funding levels ‐ Annual Funding Levels ‐ project
Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition
Development of programs for the FY 13 $14.2 M
conservation of endangered and threatened FY 14 est $17.9 M
species, including animal, plant, and habitat FY 15 est $17.9 M
ESA‐listed species
surveys, research, planning, monitoring, Conservation Grants
Conservation
habitat protection, restoration, State governments
FY 13 $10.6 M
Habitat protection
management, and acquisition, and public Must have a cooperative FY 14 est $12.6 M
Education
education.
agreement with DOI
FY 15 est $12.6 M
States Formula [Discretionary]
FY 12 $56.7 m
FY 13 $47 m [$5.2 m]
FY 14 est $47 m [$5.48 m]
Landscape‐scale Development and implementation of fish FY 15 est $47 m [$5 m]
Conservation
and wildlife and habitat projects, with Tribes Discretionary
Mapping priority on projects that benefit species of State or tribal governments FY 13 $4.1 M
State Wildlife Action Plan greatest conservation concern supporting Must have an approved FY 14 est $4.1 M
evaluation
climate change resiliency efforts.
State Wildlife Action Plan
FY 15 est $4.1 M
PLANNING GRANTS: State governments
ACQUISITION & DEVEL GRANTS: State governments on behalf of other State and Preparation and implementation of local government entities; Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Indian tribes organized to Recreation Plans (SCORPs) and acquisition govern themselves and and development of outdoor recreation perform the functions of a FY 13 $20.3 M
areas and facilities for the general public, to general purpose unit of FY 14 est $50 M
meet current and future needs.
government
FY 15 est $45 M
Grant
Outdoor recreation planning
Recreation project construction
Grant
Technical assistance
Nonpoint source projects and programs, including best management practices, Nonpoint source
technology demonstration, and education, Watershed planning
to coordinate development, Runoff management
implementation, and monitoring of Technology demonstration watershed‐based plans.
State governments; Indian Tribes and intertribal consortia with approved FY 13 $157.8 M
nonpoint source assessment FY 14 est $159.3 M
and management plans
FY 15 est $164.9 M
Non‐Federal Match Requirement
Varies
Yes ‐ min 25% for single states; min 10% for multi‐
state agreements
States: $155,000 to $3.1 M; Av $1.1 M
Tribes: $0 ‐ $200,000; Av $167,000
Yes ‐ Planning: 25%
Implementation: 35%
TRIBAL: no matching requirements
$1,000 to $768,386; Av $98,451; Max FY 14 $3 M
Yes ‐ min 50%; under certain conditions all or part of the project sponsor's matching share may be from other Federal assistance programs, such as CDBG when allowable under the other program’s sponsoring legislation. States/Territories: $422,000 to $8.4 M; Av. $2.8 M
Indian Tribes: Base grants $30,000 to $50,000; Yes ‐ min 40%
Competitive grants Max Tribes w/financial hardship ‐ $100,000
10% NORTHEAST-MIDWEST INSTITUTE | www.nemw.org | November 24, 2014
29