NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Purpose
To describe the funding allocated to wildland-urban interface grants for the protection of state
and private lands in the Pacific Northwest since the inception of the National Fire Plan. This
paper explains the roles played by each of the state and federal entities engaged, and summarizes
the funding involved.
Program Overview
While there are several fire grant programs available to communities and/or states, this paper
more fully describes the Wildland-Urban Interface Community Assistance (WUI CA) program.
Funding allocated to other community assistance programs is summarized for context (see below
and also in attachments), but the focus is on the interagency wildland-urban interface program,
which has been primarily funded through the hazardous fuels management programs of each of
the five federal wildland agencies.
WUI CA is an interagency community assistance grant program that combines Forest Service
with the DOI Wildland-Urban Interface Fuels funding streams. At the outset of the National Fire
Plan, funding was available through the Forest Service State & Private and Hazardous Fuels
budgets, as well as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the
US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Park Service (NPS). An interagency team
was formed in 2001 to deliver community assistance in the Pacific Northwest. In concert with
representatives from the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) and the Washington Department
of Natural Resources (DNR), the group developed and implemented a one-stop grant application
process for hazardous fuels reduction on non-federal lands, as well as funding for community
wildfire protection planning, biomass development projects and prevention/education programs.
Involvement by each of the federal and state agencies is described by agency in the following
sections.
Bureau of Indian Affairs
A representative was assigned to and has participated in the regional interagency grant process.
The grants team has assigned a “lead” agency to grant proposals in past years. BIA has then
reviewed proposals that are adjacent to Pacific Northwest Indian Reservations. BIA has funded
several of these proposals through assistance agreements, under the following conditions:
1
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
1. Project areas are adjacent to Reservation/Indian Trust lands and complement work being
done on adjacent Tribal lands.
2. Grantee must collaborate with the adjacent Tribe(s) and the Tribes must be supportive of
the project, as proposed.
3. The Tribes must be willing to potentially give up a portion of their fuels funding in order
to finance the assistance agreement.
4. The Grantee must be willing to work with the BIA NW Region thru an assistance
agreement type of contract.
Grant timelines
Grant proposals that meet the above conditions have to be in the National Fire Plan Operations
Reporting System (NFPORS) database by National Office-set timelines; for Fiscal Year 11, that
was April 15, 2010; in previous years it was May 1st. Tribes are notified of their “official
project budgets” by as early as August or as late as March of the following year (which happened
in 2010). Notice of the availability of other project funding can happen at any time, but usually
not until around June of the federal fiscal year (October 1 – September 30).
Funding Source and Amounts
Funding is through the National Fire Plan, and no amount is set aside to cover grant proposals.
Picking or Priority Identification for funding
Project prioritization is done by adjacent Tribe(s).
Summary of Grants Funded
Awarded to
WA DNR
WA DNR
ODF
Lyle School District,
WA
U of WA
USFS
Yakima Co
Yakima Co District 5
Project Areas or Type of Work
Colville, Spokane, Kalispell, defensible
space
Okanogan Co CWPP
Public Information Campaign
Defensible Space Education
Training on Implementing Risk
Reduction Strategies
FRCC Mapping – Colville & Spokane
Reservations
Defensible space fuel reduction
assessments and Public education
related activities
Defensible space fuel reduction
assessments
Award $
Years Work
Performed
$100,000
2001-2004
$ 35,000
$106,000
$ 2,692
2005-2007
2001-2006
Cancelled
$ 60,000
2004-2006
$ 13,000
2002
$ 52,000
2003-2005
$ 51,000
2003-2006
2
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Yakima Co District 5
Yakima Co District 5
WA DNR
WA DNR
ODF
Defensible space fuel reduction
assessments & treatments
Defensible space fuel reduction
assessments & treatments
Yakima, Glenwood, Spokane, Kalispell,
Fruitland defensible space + Oversight
Salary for 1 yr
Fruitland defensible space
Umatilla County & Lake Hump Te Pin
defensible space
Total Awarded:
$ 63,000
2003-2005
$100,000
2005-2009
$1,076,720
2004-2008
$299,000
$293,755
2007-2009 +
2006 +
$2,249,475
Table 1.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1) NFP Community Assistance Grants – Up until 2004, this was the largest grant source
available to Pacific Region Fire Management. These grants totaled nearly one million dollars in
annual outlays before financial constraints brought on by the splitting of the region and National
Office reallocation of WUI funds. These funds were typically utilized to fund
prevention/education, planning and mostly fuels mitigation projects. The prioritization of these
grants was handled at the local level by the FMO’s, at the Regional level and then at the GACC
level within the NFP Working Team.
The timeline for these grants has varied a bit over the years but the application period is usually
late winter with selections in the spring, followed by allocation of dollars to the communities by
July of that year. FWS has not funded any of these grants for several years but has funded over
time at: Keno FD, ODF in the Columbia Gorge, Walker Range FPA in Central Oregon, Douglas
County FPA, and ODF in Grant and Harney Counties. In Washington, FWS has supported
grants in the town of Leavenworth, and the counties of Stevens, Clark, Skamania, Klickitat, and
Benton.
2) RFA – FWS continues to participate in this process although the funding has gone from an
annual high of over $150,000 down to about $60,000 in 2010. The focus for FWS has
increasingly become the Columbia Basin where most of the applications come from. Current
funding levels only allow for 1-2 grants in ID, one in HI, 2-4 in OR, and 4-6 in WA. This
process is also done with the local FMO providing the initial prioritizing followed by the
Regional Office and then at the interagency level at the state meeting of partners. Timeframes
have been similar to NFP in the past.
3
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
The table below is a summary of community assistance funding in the Pacific Northwest through
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Funding from other federal agencies is highlighted in
separate sections.
Summary of Pacific Northwest Grant Funding – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Community Assistance
Receiving Agency
FWS Dollars in Thousands
2001
ODF
550
DNR
455
Maryhill Museum
31
Pend Oreille Cons. District
25
City of Spokane
41
Columbia Gorge Interp
Center, Stevenson, WA
85
Yakima Co. FPD #5
24
ODF
95
ODF
200
Wa Dept. of Ecology
72
Ponderosa Comm, Club
Leavenworth, WA
100
ODF
255
ODF
26
ODF
66
Chelan Co.
16
Chelan Co.
18
Walker Range FPD
111
Skamania Co FPD #3
60
Clark Co FPD #2
17
Sinlahekin Wildlife Area
37
REACH Inc.
200
ODF
120
ODF
105
WSU – Skamania Co
30
Keno FPD
160
2002
2003
2004
2005
4
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
2006
Keno FPD
80
Clark Co FPD#3
7
Stevens Co
40
Table 2.
National Park Service
The funding process PWR utilizes takes 2% of annual WUI project funding (per business rules)
and allocate to CA grants. This is about $150,000 annually. Looking at the "successful
applications criteria" in the attached document they are pretty much the same as what is used in
California. The exception being that there does not need to be a completed or planned treatment
on adjacent NPS lands.
Historically it has all gone to California. Bob Appling did make a commitment to WA DNR for
the Lake Cushman project that shows up in the report but did not leave any tracks and when the
bill came money was gone and it was way more than the funding available for the FY. We have
already committed $138,000 in FY10 that needs to be paid in FY11 all in California. Under the
new HFPAS funding process and decreased budget we will meet this obligation and are not
going to offer any grants in 2012 based on the information we have today.
The NPS should still move forward on the process document as we never know for sure what
dollars may come available in future years. Sid Beckman, the NPS rep on the NWCG WUI
mitigation group as also is Mark Gray from WA DNR have talked about this subject a few
times.
The PWR NPS thoughts on WUI philosophy are: We (NPS) are good neighbors and will work
with local communities to develop strategies and treatments to reduce the risk of damage and
loss in the interface. We also will work with those in state and local government who are
responsible for codes, compliance, treatments and education in regards to these communities to
assure success for all in this mission.
Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service
Funding through the interagency process in recent years has only been available through the
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management. Projects have been more narrowly focused
on hazardous fuels reduction projects resulting in acres accomplished, and rate higher if they
5
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
incorporate elements of biomass utilization and prevention/education activities. The grant
application process has been guided by the Pacific Northwest Wildland Coordinating Group
(PNWCG) National Fire Plan Working Team (NFP WT). This group was folded into the
PNWCG Fuels Management Working Team during Fiscal Year 2010 as a subcommittee to help
foster a better integrated regional hazardous fuels strategy. In Fiscal Year 2011, it is anticipated
that funds available through BLM will dramatically decrease to approximately $185,000. Forest
Service funding will likely be about $1.6 Million, with a possible additional $1 Million in
funding to emphasize biomass utilization. FWS, NPS and BIA each report that funds are unlikely
to be available in FY 2011.
The table below is a summary of community assistance funding in the Pacific Northwest through
the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. Funding from other federal agencies is
highlighted in separate sections.
Summary of Pacific Northwest Grant Funding – BLM and Forest Service
Fiscal
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
VFA
BLM RFA
RR
WUI CA
$108,000
$812,000
$796,000
$808,000
$805,000
$814,000
$803,880
$812,000
$821,000
0
$850,000
$850,000
$800,000
$592,000
$674,000
$543,086
$0
$386,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
$150,000
$155,000
$120,000
0
$8,400,088
$6,354,789
$6,054,384
$6,563,305
$4,948,000
$4,100,000
$3,600,000
$3,300,000
2009
902,370
451,300
$140,000
2010
Totals:
933,000
$8,415,250
$486,000
$5,632,386
$79,000
$644,000
SFA
WSFM
Total
$594,000
$808,000
$2,089,790
$2,579,300
$2,668,000
$2,333,000
$2,236,000
$2,229,000
$2,022,000
$72,000
$3,444,000
$4,443,200
$195,250
$854,900
$1,662,574
$4,000,900
$4,236,300
$2,245,000
$8,100,000*
$2,375,522
$2,814,807
$4,501,641**
$55,922,207
$2,736,000
$22,670,612
$2,391,275
$5,206,082
$774,000
$14.3 million
$14.5 million
$10.4 million
$11.5 million
$9.6 million
$12.2 million
$11.6 million
$8.9 million
$8,415,999
million**
$11,126,916**
$113,3316,915
VFA: Volunteer Fire Assistance, BLM RFA: Rural Fire Assistance, RR: Ready Reserve, WUI CA: Wildland-Urban
Interface Community Assistance – BLM and FS only, SFA: State Fire Assistance, WSFM: Western State Fire
Managers Wildland-Urban Interface Grants
* In FY 2009, $7,000,000 in Supplemental Funds were directed to be awarded in hazardous fuel reduction grants
from the Forest Service within Region 6. The Region awarded the one-time supplemental $7M and also reduced its
regular grant hazard fuel reduction award from $1.6M to $632,000.
** This total does not include $9,931,200 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds for
hazardous fuels reduction on non-federal lands awarded through the fire program in FY 2009. An additional
$2,908,000 in ARRA funds were awarded through the fire program in FY 2010 and are also not included here.
Including these awards would bring the grand total for WUI CA to $66,761,407.
Table 3.
6
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
BLM and FS fire management operates in a Service-First environment, and the two agencies
have had the most funding available for the WUI CA program. As a result, BLM and FS have
played a “lead” role among the federal agencies in the interagency grants process, funding the
greatest number of projects (annual combined totals appear in the above chart under WUI CA),
and hiring a full-time BLM-FS grants manager in 2002. The grants manager has served as the
primary point of contact for the interagency program and has been the conduit to receive
applications each year. Timelines and adjacency requirements for these two agencies typically
drive the interagency program’s processes, including a requirement for Interior agencies to input
project proposals into the NFPORS for the following fiscal year, typically by mid-April.
When the PNWCG National Fire Plan Working Team developed a new process for FY 2008 to
reduce the number of applications accepted to the two highest priority applications per high-fire
risk county, this greatly reduced the overall number of applications from 115 for FY 2007 to 30
for FY 2008, somewhat decreasing the amount of administrative time required to receive,
evaluate, track and provide feedback on incoming applications. At the same time, this new
process increased the level of state partner involvement in the review and prioritization of
incoming applications, allowing the state forestry partners increased opportunity to more
strategically align community projects with statewide risk assessments. Applications in
subsequent years have also been for about 30 projects.
For a variety of reasons, some of which include the reorganization of the PNWCG working
teams, staffing changes or vacancies at various participating agencies, and a desire to more
closely align the time between when community partners submit an application and when the
project is actually funded, during Fiscal Year 2010, the newly formed team managing the
interagency grants program under the PNWCG Fuels Working Team decided to take a “bye” or
suspend the WUI CA application process for the year. A process for soliciting proposals for
Fiscal Year 2011 is yet to be determined.
The following sections more fully describe state involvement in the WUI CA program.
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has benefited from federal support
for fire prevention education, planning, and hazardous fuel treatments through the WUI CA grant
program since 2001 as shown in Table 3.
7
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
2001-2010 National Fire Plan Federal Funding
(includes planning and fuels funding)
2001
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Total
437,000
804,200
200,000
436,000
631,455
648,232
3,608,407
219,000
248,923
250,000
200,000
600,000
2,415,595
99,000
88,656
111,344
USFS
451,520
BLM
428,750
327,722
141,200
BIA
100,000
1,076,720
35,000
FWS
455,000
Total
1,435,270
1,611,720
60,000
1,404,442
515,000
673,200
1,023,200
547,923
774,656
942,799
1,248,232
8,150,722
Note: See Attachment 1 for a listing of all federal funding including Western States Fire Managers, 2008 USFS Supplemental, 2010
USFS Biomass Removal, and ARRA.
Table 4.
The WUI CA grant program has enabled DNR, in working with federal partners, local
government and communities across the state, to accomplish important fuels reduction work to
mitigate wildfire threat to many communities. Table 4 lists by funding agency, the acreage
accomplishments, and different types of fuel treatments that have been successfully implemented
with WUI CA grant funding.
2001-2010 NFP Fuel Treatment Acreage Accomplishments
Pile
Funding Agency
Footprint
Thin
Prune
Chip
Masticate
Pile
& Burn
BIA
1,757
1,658
1,365
1,206
309
249
239
BLM
1,097
1,095
607
576
FWS
574
574
84
84
USFS
2,609
2,092
1,827
1,667
103
577
482
Totals
6,037
5,419
3,883
3,533
412
877
721
51
Note: 2007-2010 projects are ongoing with percent completion ranging from 0-90%.
Note: See Attachment B for a map showing treatment location for all federally funded fuels projects including Western States Fire Managers,
2008 USFS Supplemental, 2010 USFS Biomass Removal, and ARRA.
Table 5.
8
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Federal Guidelines
Over the years federal guidance addressed in the call for application materials has adapted to
change. Below is the most recent version used for the 2011 application period as it differs from
prior years due to reduced funding and the completion by state of the Statewide Assessment and
Forest Resource Strategy required by the 2008 Farm Bill. Significant amount of funding for FY
2011 will be provided through the Forest Service.
Step 1. Local CWPP Group Coordinates and Submits Proposals
Local CWPP groups may collaboratively develop hazardous fuels treatment projects on nonfederal lands and/or fuels utilization and marketing proposals identified as high priority in
CWPPs. Applications will be available at: www.nwfireplan.gov and must be submitted, along
with a map no larger than 2Mb, to NW_Fire_Plan_Grants@or.blm.gov by 5:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 16th, 2011.
Successful applications will meet the following criteria:
Project is identified in a CWPP completed by March 16, 2011.
Adjacent to a federal land fuels reduction project planned within the next three
years or completed within the next three years of the planned project start date
In a high priority landscape area identified in the Statewide Assessment and Forest
Resource Strategy (see Figure 1 below for a map of Washington high-risk
communities).
The federal share of the project budget is a maximum of $200,000
Collaborative match of at least 50 percent of the total project budget (may include
in-kind) is optional—no requirement.
Include a map clearly identifying the project area on non-federal lands and the
adjacent federal project or projects (map must be smaller than 2 Mb)
Working through the guidance of their respective State partners, the CWPP group may also
recommend which organization involved in the group, such as a non-profit group, county
organization, or state organization, would be the most appropriate to submit the project proposal
and become the grant recipient. No more than two proposals per county may be submitted. If
two proposals are submitted, they must be prioritized by the county-level CWPP group.
9
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Step 2. Statewide Review and Prioritization
Oregon Department of Forestry and Washington Department of Natural Resources, using their
own selection criteria, will submit to PNWCG – FMWT a list of approximately 10 proposed
projects to NW_Fire_Plan_Grants@or.blm.govby 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, March 16th, 2011.
Review at the statewide level may also consider:
Statewide Assessment and Forest Resource Strategy
Project integration with other hazardous fuels projects and programs
Communities that have been awarded a National Fire Plan grant in the last two
fiscal years, both from the Western States Fire Managers grant process and from this
Wildland-Urban Interface Community Assistance grant program may be prioritized
lower than communities with more recent awards
Project’s enhancement of community capacity (e.g., educate on FireWise
principles, provide jobs/job training, assisting underserved communities)
Step 3. PNWCG review and decision
PNWCG - FMWT will review each state’s proposal list and make its 2011 grant program
recommendation to the PNWCG Steering Committee for grant selection by April 5th, 2011.
Review at the geographic level may also consider:
Geographical distribution of funding and the appropriate funding agency
Project integration with other hazardous fuels projects and programs
Biomass utilization
Project’s enhancement of community capacity (e.g., educate on FireWise
principles, provide jobs/job training, assisting underserved communities)
State Application Internal guidance
DNR follows the process outlined in the Federal Guidance. DNR region fuels management staff
coordinate with CWPP groups within their DNR region. They work with local CWPP groups to
identify the two top priority projects per county and assist in the decision on which agency or
organization should make the proposal application. Statewide prioritization is conducted via
conference call with participating DNR region staff and LCG members.
For 2011, review and prioritization will be based on:

Statewide risk assessments (Figure 1)
10
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Figure 1 - Washington WUI Communities (with 2010 project proposals)


Project integration with other hazardous fuels projects and programs
Priority for projects that protect a community that have not had a National Fire Plan
grant in the last two years, both from the Western States Fire Managers grant process
and from the Wildland-Urban Interface Community Assistance grant program

Project’s ability to build community capacity (e.g., educate on FireWise principles,
provide jobs/job training)
Prioritization was conducted by discussion and consensus. Given the relative similarity of all the
projects, (i.e., all in high risk areas, all in completed CWPPs), and to assure equitable geographic
distribution of the projects, the prioritization group agreed to establish the statewide priorities by
merging the regional priority lists.
For future years, DNR anticipates that USFS funded hazardous fuels priorities will be
determined and implemented based on the Wildfire Hazard Reduction and Forest Health
11
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Restoration strategies identified in DNRs recently completed Forest Resource Statewide
Assessment and Strategy. The 2008 Farm Bill required states to complete a statewide
assessment and forest resource strategy in order to continue to receive federal funds for State &
Private Forestry programs covered under the bill.
The statewide strategies provide a long-term plan for investing State & Private Forestry program
funding that is best leveraged with other state, federal, and private resources to manage “priority
landscapes” identified using the statewide assessment. Focus is on where program investments
can most effectively implement desired actions and engage multiple partners while meeting
statutory program purposes.
DNRs assessment and strategy can be viewed at:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ResearchScience/Topics/ForestHealthEcology/Pages/em_statewide_asse
ssment_of_forestry_programs.aspx
Oregon Department of Forestry
Oregon has been actively engaged in the Community Assistance grant program since 2001:




Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Fish and Wildlife Bureau of Indian Affairs TOTAL:
$ 7.5 million
$11.7 million
$ 2.0 million
$ 462 thousand
$21.662 million
In addition to prevention education, CWPP development, biomass, planning and other activities
supported by these grants, the following represents acres treated and number of treatments that
have been accomplished with these dollars to date thru May 2010 (note that one 2005 and all
2006 – 2009 are open and active projects):
FEDERAL AGENCY FUNDS
ACRES TREATED (footprint)
TREATMENTS COMPLETED
2001 – 2004 (all closed)
Forest Service
Bureau of Land Management
7,745
Would need to be manually
tallied
13,903
Would need to be manually
tallied
12
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Fish and Wildlife
5,486
Would need to be manually
tallied
-0- no funding
-0-
27,134
27,134 minimum
Forest Service
2,772
6,385
Bureau of Land Management
2,756
8,720
Fish and Wildlife
-0-
-0-
Bureau of Indian Affairs
632
1,121
6,160
16,226
Bureau of Indian Affairs
TOTAL:
2005 – 2009 (still
open/active)
TOTAL:
Average cost per acre: $650.63
’05-’09 Additional accomplishments
will further lower this cost/acre
Table 6.
Federal Guidelines
Over the years federal guidance addressed in the call for application materials has adapted to
change. Below is the most recent version used for the 2010 application period.
Step 1. Local CWPP Group Coordinates and Submits Proposals
Local CWPP groups may collaboratively develop hazardous fuels treatment projects on nonfederal lands and/or fuels utilization and marketing proposals identified as high priority in
CWPPs. Applications will be available at: www.nwfireplan.gov and must be submitted, along
with a map no larger than 2Mb, to NW_Fire_Plan_Grants@or.blm.gov by 5:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 16th, 2011.
Successful applications will meet the following criteria:
Project is identified in a CWPP completed by March 16, 2011.
Adjacent to a federal land fuels reduction project planned within the next three
years or completed within the next three years of the planned project start date
In a high priority landscape area identified in the Statewide Assessment and Forest
Resource Strategy (see Figure 1 below for a map of Washington high-risk
communities).
The federal share of the project budget is a maximum of $200,000
13
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
Collaborative match of at least 50 percent of the total project budget (may include
in-kind) is optional—no requirement.
Include a map clearly identifying the project area on non-federal lands and the
adjacent federal project or projects (map must be smaller than 2 Mb)
Working through the guidance of their respective State partners the CWPP group may also
recommend which organization involved in the group, such as a non-profit group, county
organization, or state organization, would be the most appropriate to submit the project proposal
and become the grant recipient. No more than two proposals per county may be submitted. If
two proposals are submitted, they must be prioritized by the county-level CWPP group.
Step 2. Statewide Review and Prioritization
Oregon Department of Forestry and Washington Department of Natural Resources, using their
own selection criteria, will submit to PNWCG – FMWT a list of approximately 10 proposed
projects to NW_Fire_Plan_Grants@or.blm.govby 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, March 16th, 2011.
Review at the statewide level may also consider:
Statewide Assessment and Forest Resource Strategy
Project integration with other hazardous fuels projects and programs
Communities that have been awarded a National Fire Plan grant in the last two
fiscal years, both from the Western States Fire Managers grant process and from this
Wildland-Urban Interface Community Assistance grant program may be prioritized
lower than communities with more recent awards
Project’s enhancement of community capacity (e.g., educate on FireWise
principles, provide jobs/job training, assisting underserved communities)
Step 3. PNWCG review and decision
PNWCG - FMWT will review each state’s proposal list and make its 2011 grant program
recommendation to the PNWCG Steering Committee for grant selection by April 5th, 2011.
Review at the geographic level will also consider:
Geographical distribution of funding and the appropriate funding agency
Project integration with other hazardous fuels projects and programs
Biomass utilization
Project’s enhancement of community capacity (e.g., educate on FireWise
principles, provide jobs/job training, assisting underserved communities)
14
NFP Community Assistance Grant Program Overview
February 14, 2011
State Application and Internal Guidance
ODF follows the process outlined in the Federal Guidance keying in on: project identified in
completed CWPP, have federal adjacency, and be in high priority landscape area identified in the
Statewide Assessment and Forest Resource Strategy. ODF field foresters participate at varying
levels (leadership, participant, informed) with CWPP groups across the state. They will work
with local CWPP groups to identify the two top priority projects per county and assist in the
decision on which agency or organization should make the proposal application. If ODF is
identified as the applicant, the field forester prepares the project proposal which would be
submitted through the process identified in Step #1 above.
15