OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES APPEALS GUIDELINES
FOR COMPETITIVE FUNDING DECISIONS
REGARDING STATE AND/OR FEDERAL GRANT MONEY
Pursuant to the direction of the California Council on Criminal Justice (CCCJ), the following
guidelines are to be utilized in all appeals of competitive funding decisions made by the Office of
Emergency Services (OES) involving state and/or federal grant money:
I.
II.
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL AND AVAILABLE REMEDY
A.
The only OES action subject to appeal is the decision not to fund an appellant’s
project in connection with a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) process.
B.
The standard for an appeal is that OES’s criteria or priorities (as specified in the
applicable RFP) were not followed with respect to the appellant in making the
funding decision regarding the appellant’s proposal, which failure constitutes a
sufficiently substantial error to justify a change in the funding decision.
C.
The only remedy available under this appeals process is for an appellant to receive
funding. For example, re-doing the RFP application process or RFP rating
process, are not available remedies.
STANDING FOR APPEAL
A.
An appellant must have standing to appeal. Standing is established when the
appellant presents specific facts demonstrating that the criteria or priorities (as
specified in the applicable RFP) were not followed in the making of the funding
decision. Conclusions or assumptions not based on specific facts are insufficient
to establish standing. Standing shall not be granted solely because an appellant
disagrees with the scores given to their proposal.
B.
Only facts and arguments relating to the denied appellant will be considered.
Facts and arguments regarding other applications, or other unrelated matters, will
not be considered.
C.
Any appellant whose RFP application fails to meet the eligibility requirements
established in the RFP does not have standing to appeal.
D.
The Chair of CCCJ will determine whether standing has been established.
Appeals that have been granted standing will be submitted to an Appeals
Committee (comprised of members of CCCJ) for a hearing, if necessary. If an
appellant has not been granted standing, no hearing will occur and OES’s
preliminary funding decision will become final.
E.
Contingently funded projects are those projects that may be affected by the
granting of an appeal. OES shall identify those contingently funded projects,
1
which may be displaced based upon the number of appeals received and granted
standing. Contingently funded projects are automatically granted standing.
III.
APPEAL TIMELINES
A.
Deadline to Submit Appeal.
1. Notification of Preliminary Denial of Funding. A project that has been denied
funding will be sent a letter from OES notifying them of the decision, along
with a summary of the project’s scores and/or reason(s) for denial.1 This letter
will be sent via certified mail, or other similar means with a return receipt.
2. Notice of Intent to Appeal and Appeals Justification Statement. A project
desiring to appeal the decision denying funding must provide CCCJ with a
written Notice of Intent to Appeal the denial of funding decision. The Notice
of Intent to Appeal shall include a typewritten Justification Statement (five
pages maximum length), signed by the official designated by title in the RFP
application.
The Justification Statement shall contain specific facts and arguments
demonstrating that the criteria or priorities (as specified in the RFP) were not
followed in making the funding decision for appellant’s application.
The Notice of Intent to Appeal and Justification Statement shall be mailed,
faxed, or hand-delivered to:
c/o Chief Legal Counsel
Office of Emergency Services
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, California 95655
Attn.: Chair, California Council on Criminal Justice
Re: Appeal of Denial of Funding
3. Both the Notice of Intent to Appeal and the Justification Statement must be
postmarked or received within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of
receipt of the preliminary funding decision letter. No electronic mail (i.e.
email) transmission shall be accepted. Failure to file the Notice and
Justification Statement with OES within this 14-day period shall result in the
automatic denial of standing. Neither CCCJ nor OES are responsible for late
If the denial was based wholly or in part on an applicant’s past performance problems, the
applicant will be provided with a summary of why the performance problem penalty was
invoked. An applicant is entitled to appeal this denial of funding on the same basis as other
appeals of denial of funding. That is, an applicant may appeal on the basis that the requirements,
criteria, and priorities in the RFP, including OES’s Past Performance Policy, were not followed.
1
2
or incomplete Notices of Intent to Appeal or Justification Statements due to
mistakes or delays of the appellant (or the carrier used by the appellant.)
4. An appellant cannot raise new issues after the appeals submission deadline.
B.
Response from CCCJ. The Chair of CCCJ shall review the Notice of Intent to
Appeal and the Justification Statement to determine whether or not the appellant
has standing. The appellant shall be mailed notification of this decision within ten
(10) calendar days of the appeals submission deadline, or as soon thereafter as
practicable.
C.
Hearing. Appellants granted standing might require an appeals hearing before the
CCCJ Appeals Committee. This hearing shall occur within seventy (70) calendar
days of the date of the chair of CCCJ’s decision regarding standing.
1. No Hearing for Undisputed Appeals. Appeals where the OES (and/or the
applicable state advisory group or committee) do not dispute the merits, shall
be reconsidered by OES. These appeals shall not be heard by the Appeals
Committee, provided no contingently funded project is displaced by any
reconsideration of the appellant’s application. The appellant will be notified
by OES of any such reconsideration.
2. Hearings for Disputed Appeals. Appeals to be heard by the Appeals
Committee are those where:
a) OES (and/or the applicable state advisory group or committee) dispute the
merits of the issue(s) granted standing; and/or
b) A contingently funded project would be displaced if the appellant’s
program/project is funded. The Chair of the Appeals Committee, or
his/her designee, shall notify the appellant, OES, and any affected
contingently funding projects, in writing, of the time and place of the
hearing at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing date.
IV.
APPEAL HEARING PROCEDURES
A.
Power and Authority of the Appeals Committee.
1.
The Appeals Committee shall be comprised of current members of CCCJ,
with the number and composition to be determined at the discretion of
CCCJ.
2.
The Appeals Committee shall elect one chairperson, who shall preside
over the hearings.
3
3.
The Appeals Committee may adopt any rules or procedures for appeals
hearings in addition to those described in these Guidelines. All appeals
hearings will be tape-recorded.
4.
Standard. The Appeals Committee has full authority to decide whether or
not the appellant should receive funding. The Appeals Committee shall
base their decisions on the following considerations:
a. Did OES follow the criteria or priorities, as specified in the applicable
RFP, in making the funding decision regarding the appellant’s RFP
application?
b. If the criteria or priorities were not followed, does such a failure
constitute a sufficiently substantial error to justify a change in the
funding decision, taking into consideration the impact to any
contingently funded project and other related considerations?
5.
The Appeals Committee shall only consider the matter(s) presented in the
Appeals Justification Statement. In rendering its decision, the Appeals
Committee may consider the following documents, as well as any oral
presentation(s) and other relevant materials it approves to be presented at
the appeals hearing:
a. The applicable OES Request for Proposal (RFP);
b. Appellant’s RFP application or Project Summary, if applicable;
c. Affected Contingently Funded Project’s application or Project
Summary, if applicable;
d. The preliminary funding denial letter which includes, if applicable, the
total points received by the appellant and the average score by category
for the appellant;
e. The appellant’s Notice of Intent to Appeal and Appeals Justification
Statement; and
f. OES’s response letter to the Notice and Appeals Justification
Statement.
B.
Oral Presentations at the Hearings. Appeals where the merits of the issues granted
standing are disputed will involve oral and/or written presentations by both the
appellant and OES (and/or the applicable advisory group or committee) on the
merits.
A.
1.
Written Presentation. Both the OES and appellant may submit written
argument on the matters at issue contained in the Notice of Intent of
Appeal and Justification Statement. Written argument is limited to five
typewritten pages, excluding attached relevant documents.
2.
Appellant’s Oral Presentation. The appellant shall make an oral
presentation at the hearing and may include presentations by as many
4
individuals as an appellant may desire, but in no case will an appellant be
allowed more than fifteen (15) minutes total time for such oral
presentations.
a) The appellant may present supporting documentation, as permitted
by the Appeals Committee.
b) If a point is not raised in the appellant’s Appeals Justification
Statement, that issue shall not be considered by the Appeals
Committee inasmuch as the appellant has effectively failed to
provide the Committee with notice of that issue.
c) The appellant also will have five (5) minutes for rebuttal. In
rebuttal the appellant shall only address the issues raised in OES’s
and/or the applicable advisory committee’s or group’s response.
V.
3.
OES/State Advisory Committee/State Advisory Group. OES or, when
applicable, the state advisory committee or advisory group, will have
fifteen (15) minutes to respond to the appellant’s initial presentation.
4.
Contingently Funded Project. There is no formal presentation required of
contingently funded projects. However, contingently funded projects may
be questioned with regard to their program or proposal by the Appeals
Committee as part of the Committee’s consideration of whether to fund
the appellant.
5.
If OES (and/or the applicable state advisory group or committee) does not
dispute the merits of the issue(s) granted standing, presentations under
Section IV B (1)-(3) above shall not be necessary. However, if necessary,
a hearing will be conducted and the Appeals Committee may question the
contingently funded project under Section IV B(4).
APPEALS COMMITTEE’S DECISIONS
A.
Additional Information. After the presentations have been made, the Appeals
Committee shall consider whether the appellant should receive funding. The
appellant and contingently funded project should be prepared to respond to
questions from the Appeals Committee concerning their own project or proposal.
OES (and/or the applicable state advisory group or committee) shall also be
prepared to respond to questions from the Appeals Committee concerning both
projects and/or their proposals, and concerning the RFP. At the conclusion of the
discussion concerning funding, there must be a motion to vote on the granting of
funding to the appellant made by an Appeals Committee member and seconded by
another member. If no motion is made, or if a motion is made but not seconded,
the result is a denial of funding. If a motion is made and seconded, the Committee
shall then vote on whether to grant or deny funding to the appellant.
5
B.
Notification of Decision. The appellant, the affected contingently funded
project(s), the Executive Director of OES, and if applicable, the Chair of the
applicable state advisory committee or group, shall be mailed notification in
writing, by the Chair of the Appeals Committee or his/her designee, of the results
of the hearing within ten (10) calendar days of the Appeals Committee’s decision.
Inquiries may be directed to:
c/o Chief Legal Counsel
Office of Emergency Services
3650 Schriever Avenue
Mather, California 95655
Attn: Chair, California Council on Criminal Justice
6