Enclosure 3B - Project Summary Form
172
NATIONAL FIRE PLAN COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE AND WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE PROJECTS
Application for Community Risk Assessment and Mitigation Planning
Applicant
Applicant/Organization:
Skagit Conservation District
Phone:
Type of Applicant: (enter appropriate letter in box)
G
360-428-4313
FAX:
A. State
B. County
C. Municipal
D. Township
E. Interstate
F. Intermunicipal
G. Special District
360-424-6172
Email:
carolyn@skagitcd.org
H. Independent School District
I. State-Controlled Institution of Higher Learning
J. Private University
K. Indian Tribe
L. Nonprofit Organization
M. Other (Specify) _______________________
Address (Street or P. O. Box, City, State, Zip):
2021 E. College Way, Suite 203, Mount Vernon, WA 98273
Project Coordinator
Project Coordinator (Name and Title):
Carolyn Kelly, Manager
Organization/Jurisdiction:
Skagit Conservation District
Phone:
FAX:
Email:
360-428-4313
360-424-6172
carolyn@skagitcd.org
Project Information
Project Title:
North Puget Sound Community Wildfire Protection Planning
Proposed Project Start Date:
1/01/05
Federal Funding Request:
$100,000
Proposed Project End Date:
12/31/05
Total Project Cost:
$137,000
Are you submitting multiple projects? If so, please prioritize, and explain if the projects are stand alone, sequential, or other:
No
Brief Project Summary: Who, What, Where, Desired Outcomes in relation to NFP Goals and Community Risk Assessment and
Mitigation Plans (This should summarize page 2).
Five contiguous conservation districts in North Puget Sound will act as lead coordinating agencies in the collaborative
development of landscape level community wildfire protection plans. Building on a platform of recently raised community
awareness and partnership training, the districts will work with local community stakeholder groups to prioritize target
communities, identified by the NASF Field Guidance, Mapping Communities at Risk, and develop map based plans that
meet criteria identified in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act(HFRA) of 2003 and upcoming NASF Guidance.
Project Location:
North Puget Sound,
Washington
Counties:
Skagit, Snohomish,
Whatcom, San Juan,
Island
Name of Federal, tribal, and/or State Official with whom you coordinated this
proposal:
Marc Titus, WA State Dept of Natural Resources
Jim Chu, USFS Mt Baker/Snoqualmie National Forest
Federal Congressional District:
2
Telephone number of Contact:
360-856-3500
Enclosure 3B (Page 1 of 3) - Project Narrative Description
Applications for funding must include a narrative response that describes the proposal. Please do not submit responses longer than
one page, single space, 12-pitch font.
Describe project including, but not limited to:
 change fire behavior
 WHO are your collaborators - are they current or potential collaborators?
Address these
through fuels reduction
 describe the relationship of this plan’s desired outcome to NFP Goals
items as
 increase community
and to any existing community fire protection plan.
applicable:
education and awareness
 project time frames and matching or contributed funds
 enhance fire protection
 tools and/or skills needed to complete project
capability
 specific project location, geographic extent, and fire risk assessment
 desired outcome
methodology
For this project, explain the level of cooperation, coordination or strategic planning, through a “Local Coordination
Group.” If you haven’t worked with a local coordination group, why not? Unanimous support from multi-agency LCG
Our end result on the landscape is to mirror the core principles of the National Fire Plan Comprehensive Strategy
Implementation Plan: “end results sought by all stakeholders are healthier watersheds, enhanced community protection,
and diminished risk and consequences of severe wildland fires.” To attain this we will be working to attain primary plan
goals, specifically those of improving prevention and suppression, reduction in hazardous fuels, restoring fire adaptive
ecosystems, and promoting community assistance.
To attain these goals we will be building on program we will have just implemented (funded by the Western States Fire
Managers Assistance Grants Program) that will: 1) train conservation districts and LCG partner personnel in community
wildfire hazard reduction and risk assessment (allowing all project partners to have the skills necessary to proceed), and
2) facilitate the development of individual home risk assessments and promote the development of individual FireWise
Community plans, using Firewise Communities/USA model. Moving into a comprehensive planning process will build
additional community awareness, program interest, program participation, as well as provide local jurisdictions further
direction in National Fire Plan Program implementation.
Utilizing guidance developed by the National Association of State Foresters, we will work collaboratively within five
counties to develop Community Wildfire Protection Plans(CWPP). Priorities for planning targets will be communities at
the landscape like-risk level that border federal lands and those with the highest fire risk potential.
These plans will be based on recently updated WADNR RAMS (Risk Assessment and Mitigation Strategies) mapping
completed by Washington DNR and reviewed by the Local Coordinating Group, and will include assessments of local
conditions, local protection measures in place, community descriptions and demographic information, and an overall
community assessment as to fire hazards and associated risks. This will be followed by the development of community
stakeholder developed mitigation plans that will address fuels hazard reduction and wildfire prevention, as well as
identifying key roles and responsibilities for plan implementation. Oversight will be provided by WADNR region staff, as
well as the Westside CWPP coordinator. (2005 Fire Plan grant application submitted by WADNR Resource Protection
Division)
Target Communities have been mapped and identified following NASF guidance with LCG approval. Highest
priority target communities border the Mt Baker/Snoqualmie National Forest. Currently targeted high risk areas
under consideration by the LCG for CWPP are: Glacier, Marblemount, Rockport, Darrington & Index. Other
communities under consideration due to high risk factors are located in Island and San Juan Counties.
Our partners in this process include current members of our Local Coordinating Group – federal, state, and local
agencies, conservation districts, fire prevention groups, cities and counties, and will incorporate affected homeowner and
civic groups and private individuals. Although matching funding identified in the project budget currently exceeds 25%,
we anticipate the actually level of time committed by all LCG partners will greatly exceed that.
As presented, our program will take one year to complete from contract signature.
Enclosure 3B (Page 2 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
Applications for funding, must include narrative responses that address the following four criteria. Be sure you address every one
briefly, yet thoroughly. Limit your responses to the area provided.
1. Planning for Action (40 points)
A. Describe your desired plan outcome and how the outcome will be measured.
B. How will the plan address :
 Fire behavior changes through fuels reduction
 Community education and awareness
 Enhanced suppression capability
C. How will the completed plan be implemented, and by whom? OR How does this plan enhance or complete
previous fire planning by the community?
D. How will the plan address landowner responsibility for implementation of this plan?
E. Describe your ability to complete project in one year of receipt of funds
Response:
Our anticipated outcome is the development of a minimum of five Community Wildfire Protection Plans.
By following guidelines provided by the NASF & HFRA of 2003, the five plans will specifically address targeted criteria,
including fuels reduction, and enhanced suppression capability. Local stakeholder involvement, as well as publicity
regarding the Community Wildfire Protection Plans, will heighten overall community education and awareness.
Each plan developed will include key responsibilities and timelines for implementation, as well as budgeting
implementation plans. This will focus the LCG in moving toward implementation.
Landowners, as well as agencies, will be identified as responsible parties in the implementation action plans. We
anticipate that because community stakeholders will be involved in the actual development of a plan tailored to their site
specific needs, landowner implementation efforts will be greater than a one size fits all plan handed out from an agency,
or as a regulated mandate.
Upon receipt of funds, we will proceed immediately, as this follows on the heels of 2004 funding of a multi-agency
educational campaign. The LCG is in place, and has been active. Target at-risk communities have been identified. The
five conservation districts currently work closely together. We will have completed training and preliminary community
outreach.
2.
Enhancing Community Collaboration and Local Capacity. (30 points)
A. Describe your strategy for collaboration to develop this plan across multiple ownerships.
B. Identify the interested partners and members of the community who are involved in this project, and the level of
their involvement.
C. How will this project enhance local community collaboration and local capacity for cooperative action?
D. Describe skills or experience the community will gain through development of this plan.
Response:
The five conservation districts, acting as project coordinators, will work with the LCG to prioritize communities and
identify additional stakeholders.
Conservation districts have a long and proven track record of bringing diverse stakeholders together to develop
mutually acceptable, common solutions to natural resource problems.
The five CDs will act as lead under the guidance of the Washington DNR and County Fire Marshal’s Offices. The
project will include the involvement of the LCG (federal, state, local agencies, fire protection and prevention
personnel, city and county representatives), and interested community stakeholder groups and citizens.
A community built plan will increase stakeholder interest and participation. In addition, involvement in the plan
development itself will provide educational opportunities for members of the community, plus, the planning process
will help community stakeholders build skills for working together in a collaborative manner toward a common goal.
Enclosure 3B (Page 3 of 3) - Project Evaluation Criteria
3.
Expanding Community Participation. (30 Points)
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Explain the level of cooperation, coordination and/or involvement of the Local Coordination Group. List the
cooperators/members (in a broad way) of the local area coordination group.
Describe your strategy for leveraging funding. Who are the partners and what is their commitment to the
plan’s completion, including any existing or proposed cost-share agreements and their status.
Describe the extent of local support or opposition for the project.
Describe your strategy for post-plan marketing and collaboration for the successful implementation of the
next steps described in the plan.
To what extent will this project be offered to serve as a model for other communities in your sub-geographic
area, state-wide area?
Response:
A) The Local Coordination Group will participate in all phases of this project, from identification and targeting of high
risk areas, public outreach, and participation in the development of the Community Wildfire Protection plans.
LCG members include federal, state, and local land use agencies, fire prevention and suppression agencies,
conservation districts, towns and counties.
B) Funding will be matched by Washington DNR and County Fire Marshal’s Office Staff, who will provide assistance
and coordination in the implementation of this project. Conservation District supervisors experienced in Natural
Resource issues will provide technical assistance. In addition, although not enumerated in the budget, we
anticipate considerable time and expertise to be donated by other members of the LCG in the preparation,
outreach, and development of the community plans.
C) The proposed project has garnered local support from within each of the five participating conservation districts,
as well as unanimous support from the LCG. There has been interest from several community groups from the
proposed project area in preparing this type of proactive response to reducing wildfire risks.
D) The finished plans will clearly identify next steps and responsible parties. There is no known opposition to this
project. The LCG group is currently looking at ways to implement plans in this area, and a chipper has been
made available by Skagit County for fuels reduction projects. Post-plan marketing of the plans will be “selfsufficient” and minimal, as the community involved will be intimately involved in each plan’s development.
E) This project serves as a model for collaborative and comprehensive stakeholder developed planning throughout
the state in general. Specifically, it provides a demonstrative model of National Fire Plan Implementation to other
conservation districts throughout the state and region.
Enclosure 3C - Project Work Form
Tasks
Time Frame
Responsible Party
Review and further prioritize according to
project goals in priority target areas.
Select communities in which to begin
planning process.
January 2005
Local Coordinating Group
Build on previous stakeholder outreach in
target communities.
February 2005, with community
updates throughout process
Conservation Districts
Solicit
addiotnal
community
stakeholder
Convene
planning
teams in each
March 2005
partipcationselected.
in plan development in each of
community
five areas.
Conservation Districts
Conservation Districts
Prepare plans, coordinating with federal
and state planning coordinators.
March – November 2005
Conservation Districts
Draft plans prepared and available for
review and comment
Revisions to draft plans as appropriate.
November 2005
Conservation Districts will lead,
community group ultimately
responsible
Final Plans completed.
December, 2005
Conservation Districts
Review and evaluate planning process
and products.
December, 2005
Local Coordinating Group
Enclosure 3D Project Budget
Cost Category
Description
Federal
Agency
Conservation Districts
WADNR
County Fire Marshalls
Total
Personnel
Coordinators
Subtotal
65,000
2,500
15,000
10,000
65,000
2,500
15,000
10,000
92,500
5,000
3,200
29,200
Fringe Benefits
Subtotal
21,000
Subtotal
1,250
Travel
1,250
Equipment
Subtotal
Supplies
Workshop supplies
Brochures, ed materials
Subtotal
1,000
4,000
5,000
2,000
2,000
7,000
Contractual
Subtotal
Other
Indirect
Subtotal
Total Costs
7,750
7,750
100,000
7,750
2,500
22,000
13,200
Project (Program) Income1
(using deductive alternative)
1
Program income is the gross revenue generated by a grant or cooperative agreement supported activity during the life of
the grant. Program income can be made by recipients from fees charged for conference or workshop attendance, from rental
fees earned from renting out real property or equipment acquired with grant or cooperative agreement funds, or from the sale
of commodities or items developed under the grant or cooperative agreement. The use of Program Income during the
project period may require prior approval by the granting agency.
137,700