U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY FISCAL YEAR 2009 REGIONAL CATASTROPHIC PREPAREDNESS GRANT PROGRAM GUIDANCE AND APPLICATION KIT NOVEMBER 2008 U.S.DEPARTMENT OFHOMELANDSECURITY Title of Opportunity: Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program (RCPGP) Funding Opportunity Number: DHS-09-NPD-111-1967 Federal Agency Name: FEMA Grant Programs Directorate (GPD) Announcement Type: Initial Dates: Completed applications must be submitted no later than 11:59 PM EDT, March 20, 2009. Additional overview information: The program focus of the Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program (RCPGP) will expand in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 as the second cycle for the grant program begins. The FY 2009 Senate Report 110 – 396 highlighted the need for a regional approach to responding to catastrophic disasters, particularly with regard to mass evacuations. The following priorities and expected outcomes, which build upon projects in the first cycle (FY 2008) of the program, have been identified for FY 2009: • Ensure the integration of planning and synchronization of plans through the use of national planning systems and tools • Share best practices in support of a robust national planning community • Implement citizen and community preparedness campaigns with a focus on educating citizens about catastrophic events and the necessary steps for preparedness • Planning for and pre-positioning of needed commodities and equipment1 • Implement the principles and processes identified in CPG-1012 for the development of plans consistent with the Integrated Planning System • Address shortcomings in existing plans and processes Each of these priorities must take into account both the area at risk of an attack or catastrophic event and those communities likely to host evacuees or support long-term operations. RCPGP is an important part of the larger, coordinated effort to strengthen homeland security preparedness. RCPGP helps to implement objectives addressed in a series of post-9/11 laws, strategy documents, plans and Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPDs). FEMA expects our State, local and tribal partners – including recipients of RCPGP grants – to be familiar with this National Preparedness architecture and to incorporate elements of this architecture into their planning, operations and 1 Note that pre-positioning contracts are not eligible to be paid from RCPGP funds; however, all of the planning necessary to inform those contracts is an eligible activity. 2 CPG-101 – Producing Emergency Plans: A Guide for All-Hazard Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Governments (Interim), http://www.fema.gov/about/divisions/cpg.shtm i investments. Consistent with Annex I to HSPD-8, each priority must integrate as appropriate all mission areas (i.e., prevention, protection, response, and recovery). Plans developed must be consistent with the guidance in Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG)-101 and be able to integrate with Federal regional plans developed under the Integrated Planning System (IPS). The National Preparedness Guidelines and its supporting documents were published in final form and released on September 13, 2007. The Guidelines are available at: http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/publications. A list of the specific deliverables associated with these priorities can be found below, grouped by the related program objective. Fix Shortcomings in Existing Plans: • Develop a synchronization matrix3 for all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds • Document best practices and lessons learned identified through RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 projects • Integrate fusion centers and infrastructure programs in support of a coordinated regional plan that integrates across all mission areas, to include establishing connectivity and where appropriate integrated operations between fusion centers and emergency operations centers • Establish a citizen and community preparedness campaign that supports all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 funds • Complete and document an all-hazards risk assessment that will include but not be limited to consideration of the National Planning Scenarios and other man- made or natural hazards of special concern to the region (as an essential foundation for regional planning, the all-hazards risk assessment will identify priority vulnerabilities and corresponding gaps in regional capabilities essential to addressing those gaps) Build Regional Planning Process and Planning Communities: • Develop mutual aid agreements, with a particular focus on host communities • Work with States to develop State-wide agreements to assist with host community planning • Continue creating an environment through regular working groups and workshops that ensures coordination among homeland security planners throughout the region • Formalize long-term continuation of the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team (RCPT) 3 The synchronization matrix process shows how operational plans across the various levels of government and across jurisdictions align over a time-phased implementation. ii • Clearly integrate planning activities with other regional working groups (e.g., Regional Transit Security Working Group, Area Maritime Security Committee, Local Emergency Planning Committee) • Participate in regional and national workshops focused on planning and the development of a standardized national planning process and integration system Link Operational and Capabilities-Based Planning for Resource Allocation: • Implement plans to address capability shortfalls identified through RCPGP FY 2008 projects • In coordination with the State, develop plans that further address logistics and pre-positioning of commodities related to plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds • Identify how plans will help achieve performance objectives set forth within the applicable Capabilities of the Target Capabilities List and develop actual metrics of measurement that indicate achievement iii CONTENTS Contents........................................................................................................................ 1 Part I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION......................................................... 2 Funding Priorities............................................................................................... 4 Part II. AWARD INFORMATION .................................................................................. 10 Part III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .......................................................................... 13 A. Eligible Applicants................................................................................. 13 B. Cost Sharing .......................................................................................... 13 C. Restrictions ............................................................................................ 14 D. Other ....................................................................................................... 14 Part IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ...................................... 21 A. Address to Request Application Package ........................................... 21 B. Content and Form of Application ......................................................... 21 C. Submission Dates and Times ............................................................... 26 D. Intergovernmental Review .................................................................... 26 E. Funding Restrictions............................................................................. 26 Part V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ........................................................ 29 A. Review Criteria....................................................................................... 29 B. Review and Selection Process ............................................................. 31 C. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates .................................... 31 Part VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION.................................................32 A. Notice of Award ..................................................................................... 32 B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements ............................. 32 C. Reporting Requirements ....................................................................... 39 Part VII. FEMA CONTACTS.........................................................................................43 Part VIII. OTHER INFORMATION ............................................................................... 46 Appendix A Allowable Costs List ............................................................................ A-1 Appendix B Site Maps and Descriptions................................................................. B-1 1 PART I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION The FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program (RCPGP) builds on the goals of several initiatives, including the FY 2008 RCPGP, Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101 (CPG-101), and the Integrated Planning System (IPS). The National Academy for Public Administration described emergency preparedness planning as the “Achilles Heel of homeland security.”4 Homeland security is highly distributed, and depends on State and local governments for the majority of the Nation’s security and resilience resources. This increases our reliance on the quality and currency of our plans and collaborative planning as authorized by the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veteran’s Care, Katrina Recovery and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-28) and the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329). We must ensure that our planning practices are not outmoded and encumbered by hierarchical, compartmentalized processes that inhibit networking, interaction and collaboration. We must also ensure that planning cycles are not too long and inflexible to keep up with rapidly changing requirements and that authoritative data is not stove- piped and is readily accessible to planners. Finally, we must ensure that we have the best possible approaches in place that allow us to not only integrate our planning processes across all levels of government but also to be able to synchronize the plans in a way that maximizes our capabilities across all mission areas. Participants in the RCPGP have already begun taking the necessary first steps to support a national modernization of planning and the establishment of a strong planning community. During the first year of the Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program (RCPGP), FEMA National Preparedness Directorate (NPD) funded over $60 million in projects from 10 (ten) sites, which focused on a variety of capabilities ranging from Mass Evacuation, to Debris Removal, to Cyber Attack Coordination. Prior to identifying focus areas, sites selected National Planning Scenarios on which to focus, thus ensuring that proposed projects addressed many of the primary threats facing the sites. Scenario selections collectively spanned all 15 National Planning Scenarios, with the most common scenario threats identified as Bombing Using IED, Aerosol Anthrax, Major Earthquake, and Pandemic Influenza.5 At the end of the FY 2008 grant cycle, all 10 sites will have developed new regional plans focused on the scenarios deemed most likely for those sites. Over 20 percent of funded projects focus on planning for Mass Evacuation, while almost 14 percent focus 4 Managing Intergovernmental Relations for Homeland Security, NAPA, February 2004. 5 Common scenario threat measure based on 50 percent or more sites selecting the scenario in the Hazard Analysis/Risk Assessment section of the FY 2008 Investment Justification. 2 on aspects of Commodities and Resource Management. Other project focus areas include Mass Care and Sheltering, Regional Coordination and Logistics, Economic Recovery Planning, Citizen Preparedness, Disaster Housing, Debris Management, and Pandemic Influenza. In addition to the development of new regional plans, all sites will have completed several program deliverables by the end of the FY 2008 grant cycle. Examples of specific deliverables each site will produce include: a capability analysis and development of an action plan; development of a process for the coordination of prevention and protection activities throughout the region, and how those activities will be linked with response and recovery planning; regional mutual aid compacts; and a training strategy for developing a planning capability throughout the impacted region. RCPGP continues its focus on high risk Urban Areas and surrounding regions where its impact will have the most significant effect on our Nation’s collective security and resilience. It complements ongoing State and Urban Area efforts, addresses Post- Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (Public Law 109-295) (PKEMRA) mandates, and supports initiatives underway within FEMA’s Disaster Operations (DOD), Disaster Assistance (DAD), Mitigation and Logistics Directorates, the DHS Incident Management Planning Team (IMPT), the DHS Office of Infrastructure Protection and other Federal planning and preparedness agencies. RCPGP is one tool among a comprehensive set of measures authorized by Congress and implemented by the Administration to help strengthen the Nation against risks associated with catastrophic events. Annex I to HSPD-8 establishes a requirement for a standardized national planning process and integration system. Currently comprised of CPG-101 and IPS, this system establishes a defined, structured planning process based on sound fundamentals that supports vertically integrated planning across all threats and hazards. Both of these planning documents are currently published in an interim form, but will soon be finalized and will incorporate all four mission areas – prevention, protection, response, and recovery. CPG-101 and IPS are consistent and complementary in their approach to planning. The purpose of this package is to provide: (1) an overview of the RCPGP; and (2) the formal grant guidance and application materials needed to apply for funding under the program. The package outlines FEMA management requirements for a successful application. It also reflects changes called for in the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53) (hereafter “9/11 Act”). Making an application for significant Federal funds under programs such as this can be complex. Our job at FEMA is to provide clear guidance and efficient application tools to assist applicants. Our customers are entitled to effective assistance during the application process, and transparent, disciplined management controls to support grant awards. We intend to be good stewards of precious Federal resources, and commonsense partners with our State and local colleagues. We understand that grant applicants will have unique needs and tested experience about how best to reduce risk locally. Our subject matter experts will come to the task 3 with a sense of urgency to reduce risk, but also with an ability to listen carefully to local needs and approaches. In short, we commit to respect flexibility and local innovation as we fund national homeland security priorities. Funding Priorities RCPGP grantees have existing plans, planning relationships, and some standing agreements to share resources. However, recent assessments of catastrophic event planning and preparedness clearly highlight the need for improved and expanded regional collaboration. As part of the FY 2008 grant cycle, RCPGP sites focused primarily on the development of new regional plans and annexes for catastrophic incidents, development of regional planning communities and processes, and identification of capability gaps and development of a plan of action to address the shortfalls. Priorities for the RCPGP FY 2009 grant cycle promote regional coordination and implementation of the projects developed in the RCPGP FY 2008 grant cycle. Projects proposed for the FY 2009 grant cycle should build upon approved projects from the FY 2008 grant cycle, focusing specifically on the FY 2009 priority areas listed below: • Ensure the integration of planning and synchronization of plans through the use of national planning systems and tools • Share best practices in support of a robust national planning community • Implement citizen and community preparedness campaigns with a focus on educating citizens about catastrophic events and the necessary steps for preparedness • Planning for and pre-positioning of needed commodities and equipment6 • Implement the principles and processes identified in CPG-1017 for the development of plans consistent with the Integrated Planning System • Address shortcomings in existing plans and processes Additionally, applicants are strongly encouraged to develop plans in a manner consistent with the principles and doctrine outlined in CPG-101, Producing Emergency Plans: A Guide for All-Hazard Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Local and Tribal Governments (Interim) and the Integrated Planning System. The three central objectives of RCPGP and their associated deliverables are listed below. 1. Fix Shortcomings in Existing Plans Activities within this program must address shortcomings in existing plans to address regional catastrophic planning issues. These include the establishment of a flexible, adaptable, and robust regional network of plans for each grantee to address catastrophic events. Plans will include a process for establishing an incident 6 Note that pre-positioning contracts are not eligible to be paid from RCPGP funds; however, all of the planning necessary to inform those contracts is an eligible activity. 7 CPG-101 – Producing Emergency Plans: A Guide for All-Hazard Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Governments (Interim), http://www.fema.gov/about/divisions/cpg.shtm 4 command structure and will also identify roles and responsibilities for each organization. Additionally, grantees will develop plans that are consistent with both the national Integrated Planning System required by Annex I to HSPD-8 and the broad response doctrine and responsibilities described in the National Response Framework (NRF). Planners should ensure that plans are not solely response-focused; as indicated in the Annex, the Nation must develop integrated and coordinated plans across the spectrum of homeland security mission areas (i.e., prevention, protection, response, and recovery) using a common planning process. Plans should be developed that identify detailed resource, personnel, and asset allocations in order to execute strategic objectives and translate strategic priorities into operational execution. These plans should apply existing target capabilities and assist in assessing gaps in needed capabilities. Planning should focus on the eight (8) "Key Scenario Sets" in concert with a hazard identification / risk assessment process as identified in the NRF. Additionally, these plans and the related assessments should support the overall national preparedness assessment system identified in HSPD-8. Grantees are also expected to employ a process that identifies and addresses conflicts, omissions, and disparities between two or more plans that will be simultaneously executed for one incident, but do not have a common “owner” or “parent plan” to integrate and synchronize operations. The planning process must clarify and document authorities, roles and responsibilities; ensure the scope and concept of operations of the collective plans are sufficient to accomplish the range of assigned tasks and missions; validate planning assumptions; and synchronize resource requirements to ensure that the same resource is not dual allocated across multiple plans. Grantees are also expected to use a “bridging” mechanism such as an integrated execution timeline or a synchronization matrix to ensure respective operational actions are synchronized in purpose, place and time. Finally, plans must both meet or exceed the consensus guidelines established in CPG-101 and integrate prevention8 and protection activities where appropriate. During the FY 2008 grant cycle, the “Fix” objective required RCPGP grantees to focus primarily on the identification of gaps in the region’s catastrophic incident plans and the development of regional plans and processes. These included development of a Regional Operations or Coordination plan, development of specific annexes or appendices to the regional plan, completion and documentation of a Hazard Identification/Risk Assessment process, documentation of a regional process for coordinating protective action decisions, and development of a regional process for coordinating activities across the four mission areas. For the FY 2009 grant cycle, RCPGP grantees will continue working towards the development of regional plans and processes for catastrophic incidents; however, the focus will expand from the initial gap identification and development of plans and 8 Recipients are strongly encouraged to use Universal Adversary Program products to support any prevention planning activities. E-mail rcpgp@dhs.gov for further information. 5 processes to the synchronization, coordination, and implementation required to support the success of the plans developed. Additionally, while not a specific deliverable of the program, participants are strongly encouraged to begin examining and addressing the catastrophic disaster housing issue as part of the FY 2009 grant cycle. This planning should include working with the State to form a State Disaster Housing Task Force comprised of agencies with a housing-related function. Additional guidance on this topic will be distributed at a later date. Specific deliverables for the FY 2009 grant cycle shall include: • Develop a synchronization matrix9 for all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds • Document best practices and lessons learned identified through RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 projects • Integrate fusion centers and infrastructure programs in support of a coordinated regional plan that integrates across all mission areas, to include establishing connectivity and where appropriate integrated operations between fusion centers and emergency operations centers • Establish a citizen and community preparedness campaign that supports all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 funds • Complete and document an all-hazards risk assessment that will include but not be limited to consideration of the National Planning Scenarios and other man-made or natural hazards of special concern to the region (as an essential foundation for regional planning, the all-hazards risk assessment will identify priority vulnerabilities and corresponding gaps in regional capabilities essential to addressing those gaps) 2. Build Regional Planning Process and Planning Communities Grantees in the program are expected to establish the simplest achievable processes, networks and community that can successfully accomplish planning, preparedness, data exchange, and operational resource and asset management within RCPGP sites and among regional planning partners. Grantees must ensure that these processes, networks and communities are fully integrated with other established planning efforts, such as Area Maritime Security Plans (AMSPs) for port areas and Buffer Zone Plans (BZPs) for critical infrastructure, and Citizen Corps Councils for community preparedness. In addressing this focus area, jurisdictions must consider the following elements: • Planning process. Establishment of a set of mutually agreed to regional planning policies and procedures established and supported by technology/tools that provide planners with a capability to plan and conduct combined homeland security operations. 9 The synchronization matrix process shows how operational plans across the various levels of government and across jurisdictions align over a time-phased implementation. 6 • Planning network. Establishment of a formal means to coordinate and jointly determine the best method of accomplishing required tasks and actions necessary to accomplish roles, responsibilities and mission(s) identified in respective plans. • Planning community. Establishment of a regional planning community, including parties involved in the training, preparation, operations, support, and sustainment of operations in the event of a catastrophic event. • Mutual aid. Establishment or updating of mutual aid agreements which obligate communities to fulfill roles and responsibilities identified through regional planning processes and networks. • Trained planners. Access to sufficient numbers of trained planners to meet and sustain planning requirements. • Best planning practices. Adoption of the most effective planning processes, tools and technology and sharing of best practices and products on a regional and national basis. During the FY 2008 grant cycle, the “Build” objective required RCPGP grantees to focus primarily on the establishment of a regional planning community and regional planning processes. Specifically, grantees were expected to establish a formal governance process for regional planning and coordination, foster regional coordination through regular working group meetings, develop mutual aid compacts, and develop a training strategy for developing a planning capability. For the FY 2009 grant cycle, RCPGP grantees are expected to maintain and formalize the established regional planning community. Additionally, grantees are required to focus on updating and/or developing mutual aid agreements, with a specific focus on coordination with host communities (e.g., evacuation processes, sheltering, resources), and working with States to develop State-wide agreements to assist with host community planning. Grantees are also required to focus on integrating RCPT planning activities with other regional working groups. Specific deliverables for the FY 2009 grant cycle shall include: • Develop mutual aid agreements, with a particular focus on host communities • Work with States to develop State-wide agreements to assist with host community planning • Continue creating an environment through regular working groups and workshops that ensures coordination among homeland security planners throughout the region • Formalize long-term continuation of the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team (RCPT) • Clearly integrate planning activities with other regional working groups (e.g., Regional Transit Security Working Group, Area Maritime Security Committee, Local Emergency Planning Committee) 7 • Participate in regional and national workshops focused on planning and the development of a standardized national planning process and integration system 3. Link Operational and Capabilities-Based Planning for Resource Allocation Grantees will focus on collaborative planning that will organize actions among the Urban Areas and include participating governments, and non-governmental entities to accomplish operational objectives, achieve unity of effort, and employ specific target capabilities within a given time and space. Planning activities within this program will identify capability requirements (shortfalls) among grantees that will aid in resource allocation. These requirements will consider the needs of all grantees, including those of host communities or States that would expect to receive and provide support for evacuees from a catastrophically affected Urban Area. Capabilities-based planning provides a common reference system to develop requirement statements (e.g., Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) Investment Justifications). As such, grantees will be successful when capability requirements are defined, documented, analyzed, adjusted and approved to arrive at the basis for resource allocation requests, as inputs to preparedness programs, activities and services (e.g., training and exercises). Since requirements generally exceed available resources, risk must be identified and assessed, analytic decisions made, and control measures instituted and documented. The outcome of these efforts will contribute to synchronization with Federal planning and plans; formalization of roles and responsibilities in the event of a catastrophe, and development of the comprehensive assessment system and State Preparedness Reports required by PKEMRA. During the FY 2008 grant cycle, the “Resource” objective required RCPGP grantees to conduct an assessment of a select set of current capabilities in the region to determine the shortfalls and provide a specific plan of action to address those shortfalls. For the FY 2009 grant cycle, RCPGP grantees are expected to focus on aligning existing resources to the plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds. This includes executing the action plan developed with FY 2008 funds to fill capability gaps as appropriate, and determining the most valuable placement of resources for use in a catastrophe. Additionally, the Target Capabilities List (TCL) version 2.0 should be used to compare existing plans, performance levels, and resources, including those available through mutual aid, to the jurisdiction’s requirements to achieve the performance objectives for the applicable 37 Target Capabilities. As Capability Frameworks are refined and updated during the maintenance of the TCL, more specific planning objectives will be available to be uniquely tailored to jurisdictions to meet the performance objectives for each Capability. 8 Finally, it is key in any catastrophic event that effective logistics and commodities planning - including pre-positioning - be addressed by planners at all levels of government. Any commodities management planning undertaken by participants in RCPGP must account for a viable inventory management plan, an effective distribution strategy, sustainment costs for such an effort, additional plans or procedures deemed necessary, and the logistics and distribution expertise to avoid situations where funds are wasted because supplies are rendered ineffective due to lack of planning. Approval for these plans must be sought from and received by FEMA NPD HQ or a designee prior to leveraging these plans for the acquisition of critical emergency supplies through this program. Specific deliverables for the FY 2009 grant cycle shall include: • Implement plans to address capability shortfalls identified through RCPGP FY 2008 projects • In coordination with the State, develop plans that further address logistics and pre-positioning of commodities related to plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds • Identify how plans will help achieve performance objectives set forth within the applicable Capabilities of the Target Capabilities List and develop actual metrics of measurement that indicate achievement 9 PART II. AWARD INFORMATION This section summarizes the award period of performance and the total amount of funding available under the FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program, describes the basic distribution method used to determine final grants awards, and identifies all eligible applicants for FY 2009 funding. Award Period of Performance The period of performance of this grant is 24 months. Extensions to the period of performance will be considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and compelling justifications why an extension is required. Available Funding In FY 2009, the total amount of funds distributed under the Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program will be $31,002,500 and an additional $3,000,000 will be used to support Technical Assistance related to catastrophic planning for a total amount of $34,002,500.10 FY 2009 RCPGP funds will be allocated based on the risk of a catastrophic incident occurring in the region and the anticipated effectiveness of the proposed projects upon completion of the application review process. The anticipated start date for the FY 2009 period of performance is early July 2009. RCPGP will operate under a grant structure in FY 2009. 1. FY 2009 RCPGP Grant Award Allocations One non-competitive award will be made to each of the pre-designated eleven (11) Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Urban Areas within the ten (10) RCPGP sites that received funding under RCPGP in the FY 2008 grant cycle, provided their application meets the minimum standards specified for FY 2009. Each of the seven (7) pre-designated Tier 1 Urban Areas will receive an allocation of $3,617,000 under the FY 2009 funds. Additionally, each of the four (4) pre-designated Tier 2 Urban Area participants will be allocated $1,420,875. These four (4) Tier 2 Urban Areas include the Boston Area, Seattle Area, Norfolk Area, and Honolulu Area, and were selected to be representative of the risks, hazards, and operational structures around the Nation. These Tier 2 Urban Areas were selected based on the criteria requirement of appropriations language to focus on all hazard and catastrophic events. Criteria also included exposure to large-scale / catastrophic terrorism threat (as defined by UASI risk formula) and the greatest significant potential for a catastrophic natural-hazard (using mitigation and other hazard identification and risk 10 Pursuant to Title III of the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329), RCPGP was appropriated $35,000,000 for FY 2009. Of the $35,000,000, $997,500 will be retained for M&A, $31,002,500 will be awarded to the sites, and $3,000,000 will be retained for Technical Assistance. 10 assessment data to aid in identification). Additionally, DHS identified sites where catastrophic planning did not conflict with other planning initiatives (e.g., New Madrid Seismic Zone planning effort) and could reinforce Integrated Planning System planning efforts and national preparedness priorities. Table 1 – FY 2009 Tier 1 RCPGP Allocations Tier 1 RCPGP Site11 Associated UASI Urban Area FY 2009 Allocation Bay Area (to include 11 counties and 23 principal cities spanning central western CA) Bay Urban Area $3,617,000 Chicago Area (to include 16 counties and 15 principal cities spanning northeastern IL, northwestern IN, and southeastern WI) Chicago Urban Area $3,617,000 Houston Area (to include 13 counties and 6 principal cities in eastern TX, as defined for the FY 2008 grant cycle) Houston Urban Area $3,617,000 Los Angeles / Long Beach Area (to include 5 counties and 38 principal cities spanning southwestern CA) Los Angeles/ Long Beach Urban Area $3,617,000 National Capital Region (to include 26 counties and 16 principal cities spanning Washington, D.C., northern VA, central and southern MD, eastern WV, and representatives from DE and PA) National Capital Region Urban Area $3,617,000 New York City / Northern New Jersey Area (to include 30 counties and 21 principal cities that span eastern CT, northern NJ, southeastern NY, and northeastern PA)12 New York City Urban Area $3,617,000 Jersey City/ Newark Urban Area $3,617,000 11 RCPGP sites are defined as established in the approved RCPT Charter for the RCPGP FY 2008 grant cycle. If adjustments to the site’s footprint are needed for the FY 2009 grant cycle to better support existing catastrophic planning activities, the site must present a strongly compelling reason in writing to FEMA NPD HQ and receive approval of this adjustment prior to submittal of the Investment Justification. A map of each RCPGP site and a list of included jurisdictions can be found in Appendix B. 12 The New York City Urban Area and Jersey City/Newark Urban Area are expected to work together as the New York/Northern New Jersey Area RCPGP Site to carry out the program goals and objectives. 11 Table 2 – FY 2009 Tier 2 RCPGP Allocations Tier 2 RCPGP Site13 Associated UASI Urban Area FY 2009 Allocation Boston Area (to include 17 counties and 17 principal cities spanning most of eastern MA, southern NH, and all of RI) Boston Urban Area $1,420,875 Honolulu Area (to include the four counties of HI, including the principal city of Honolulu) Honolulu Urban Area $1,420,875 Norfolk Area (to include 15 counties and 9 principal cities, as defined for the FY 2008 grant cycle, spanning central eastern and southeastern VA as well as northeastern NC) Norfolk Urban Area $1,420,875 Seattle Area (to include 7 counties and 11 principal cities spanning central WA) Seattle Urban Area $1,420,875 2. FY 2009 Technical Assistance Deliveries Overall, $3,000,000 has been set aside to provide for Technical Assistance (TA). Technical Assistance for this program will focus on the following: • Logistics and Commodities Management Workshops. Conduct a series of workshops for the 10 sites focusing on identifying and developing solutions for logistics and commodities management issues in catastrophic events. • Public Preparedness Campaign. Leverage RCPGP activities to develop and validate materials for use nationally addressing the unique aspects of citizen preparedness for catastrophic events. • National Planning System. Provision for funds to conduct national planning workshops involving all ten sites to aid in information sharing and coordination. Funds will also aid in developing templates, guidance, and checklists to support State and local planning. Finally, funds will aid where appropriate in the direct development of plans to assure vertical integration. • Catastrophic Housing Planning. Develop technical assistance and support materials, including facilitated workshops, to aid in planning for large-scale evacuations. • Catastrophic Planning Research. Work with FFRDCs / Centers of Excellence to conduct necessary research (based on the needs of the sites) related to catastrophic events and planning across the mission areas. Additional TA service requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 13 RCPGP sites are defined as established in the approved RCPT Charter for the RCPGP FY 2008 grant cycle. If adjustments to the site’s footprint are needed for the FY 2009 grant cycle to better support existing catastrophic planning activities, the site must present a strongly compelling reason in writing to FEMA NPD HQ and receive approval of this adjustment prior to submittal of the Investment Justification. A map of each RCPGP site and a list of included jurisdictions can be found in Appendix B. 12 PART III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION A. Eligible Applicants To be eligible to receive FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program funding, applicants must meet NIMS compliance requirements. The NIMSCAST will be the required means to report FY 2008 NIMS compliance for FY 2009 preparedness award eligibility. All State and territory grantees were required to submit their compliance assessment via the NIMSCAST by September 30, 2008 in order to be eligible for FY 2009 preparedness programs. The State or territory department/agency grantee reserves the right to determine compliance reporting requirements of their subawardees (locals) in order to disperse funds at the local level. For FY 2009 there are no new NIMS compliance objectives. If FY 2008 NIMS compliance was reported using NIMSCAST and the grantee has met all NIMS compliance requirements, NIMSCAST will only require an update in FY 2009. Additional information on achieving compliance is available through the FEMA National Integration Center (NIC) at http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/. Eligible applicants include the seven (7) pre-designated Tier 1 and four (4) predesignated Tier 2 UASI Urban Areas within the ten (10) RCPGP sites, as listed in Tables 1 and 2 in Part II. Detailed site maps and descriptions of each site are included in Appendix B. The Governor of each State and Territory is required to designate a State Administrative Agency (SAA) to apply for and administer the funds awarded under RCPGP. The SAA is the only entity eligible formally to apply for RCPGP funds. DHS requires that the SAA be responsible for obligating RCPGP funds to local units of government and other designated recipients within 45 days after receipt of funds.14 B. Cost Sharing RCPGP requires a cash or in-kind contribution of non-federal funds totaling 25 percent of the proposed project such that the federal share of each project is 75 percent. The non-federal contribution may be cash or in-kind as defined under 44 C.F.R. 13.24. 14 As defined in the Committee Reports accompanying the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329) the term “local unit of government” means “any county, city, village, town, district, borough, parish, port authority, transit authority, intercity rail provider, commuter rail system, freight rail provider, water district, regional planning commission, council of government, Indian tribe with jurisdiction over Indian country, authorized tribal organization, Alaska Native village, independent authority, special district, or other political subdivision of any State.” 13 C. Restrictions Please see Part IV.E. for Management & Administration (M&A) limits and allowable/unallowable costs guidance. D. Other Regional Catastrophic Planning Team Grantees in this program are expected to maintain the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team (RCPT) established in the FY 2008 grant cycle to guide and manage the RCPGP effort. The primary responsibilities of the RCPT related to RCPGP are to: • Represent the interests and needs of the RCPGP site • Ensure the three central objectives of the RCPGP are being met: (1) Fix shortcomings in existing plans; (2) Build a regional planning process and planning community; and, (3) Link operational and capability-based planning for resources allocation • Coordinate the development and implementation of all program initiatives with the Urban Area Working Group (UAWG) and the State Emergency Management Agency (EMA) • Oversee, direct, and monitor the site’s RCPGP projects Representation on the RCPT As with the FY 2008 grant cycle, all jurisdictions that comprise the defined RCPGP site must be directly or indirectly represented in the RCPT.15 Direct representation refers to the inclusion of government personnel from the associated jurisdiction, whereas indirect representation refers to the inclusion of representatives from outside of the jurisdiction that have been granted the authority to represent the jurisdiction. Indirect representation must be clearly delineated in the RCPT Membership List. Additionally, the table below lists required and recommended SME representation to be included on the RCPT.16 SME Representation to RCPT Required RCPT Representation • Representatives from appropriate State and local agencies and organizations • Tribal and regional representatives • Critical Infrastructure owners and operators • Local Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) representatives • Private sector representatives • Citizen Corps Council representatives 15 At a minimum, each RCPGP site must include direct or indirect representation from each of the jurisdictions that comprised the site footprint in the FY 2008 grant cycle. Each RCPGP site is not limited to the specified group of jurisdictions, and can incorporate additional jurisdictions, as the UAWG and RCPT deem appropriate. A map of each RCPGP site and a list of included jurisdictions can be found in Appendix B. 16 A jurisdictional or SME representative may fulfill more than one capacity/ requirement. 14 SME Representation to RCPT Required RCPT Representation • Representatives from contiguous jurisdictions • Mutual aid partners • Local and State Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency representatives Recommended RCPT Representation • Fire representatives • Hazmat representatives • Medical representatives • Environmental representatives • Law enforcement representatives • Public Health representative • Other representatives, as appropriate Primary Responsibilities of the RCPT through Submission of Grant Application Package The RCPT is the primary party responsible for managing the RCPGP effort and developing the RCPGP Grant Application Package. Prior to submission of the Grant Application Package, the RCPT must complete several critical tasks. The primary responsibilities of the RCPT are listed below, and Figure 1 on the following page presents the high-level process for completing these responsibilities. • Revise the existing RCPT Charter and Membership List, as necessary (See Part IV.B. for specific requirements) • Select projects that fulfill FY 2009 objectives and deliverables, building upon projects established in FY 2008 • Develop the RCPGP Investment Justification and associated documents (See Part IV.B. for specific requirements) • Submit draft Investment Justification and associated project plan(s) to the FPC for Mid-term Review and incorporate edits received (optional) • Submit the RCPGP Investment Justification and all required documents to the SAA for submission to DHS 15 March 20 - - * Dates are suggested milestones - - *Feb 9, 2009 – Feb 20, 2009 RCPT Process Through Submission of Grant Application Package March 20- - * Dates arMid-term Review Process Feb 9 Feb 20 RCPT sends IJ and project plan(s) to FPC Feb 13 FPC contacts RCPT and discusses review details FPC submits completed checklist to FEMA NPD HQ FPC briefs RCPT on Mid term Review results FEMA NPD HQ reviews checklist and returns to FPC Feb 19 FPC completes review using the Mid term Review Checklist SAA submits completed grant applications to DHS Submit IJ, project plan(s), and all other required documents to SAA Select FY 2009 projects Develop IJ and associated project plan(s) Update RCPT Charter and Membership List as appropriate Incorporate edits from Mid term Review (optional) Participate in Mid term Review (optional) e suggestedmilestones- - *Feb9, 2009 –Feb 20, 2009March 20 - - * Dates are suggested milestones - - *Feb 9, 2009 – Feb 20, 2009 RCPT Process Through Submission of Grant Application Package March 20- - * Dates arMid-term Review Process Feb 9 Feb 20 RCPT sends IJ and project plan(s) to FPC Feb 13 FPC contacts RCPT and discusses review details FPC submits completed checklist to FEMA NPD HQ FPC briefs RCPT on Mid term Review results FEMA NPD HQ reviews checklist and returns to FPC Feb 19 FPC completes review using the Mid term Review Checklist SAA submits completed grant applications to DHS Submit IJ, project plan(s), and all other required documents to SAA Select FY 2009 projects Develop IJ and associated project plan(s) Update RCPT Charter and Membership List as appropriate Incorporate edits from Mid term Review (optional) Participate in Mid term Review (optional) e suggestedmilestones- - *Feb9, 2009 –Feb 20, 2009 Figure 1: Primary Responsibilities of the RCPT Prior to Submission of the Grant Application Package RCPTs are encouraged to request a Mid-term Review of the draft Investment Justification and associated project plan(s), which will be conducted by the appropriate FPC. The purpose of this review is to provide the RCPT with initial feedback on the completeness and quality of the Investment Justification and project plan(s), prior to submission on March 20, 2009. In order to participate in the Mid-term Review, RCPGP sites must submit the draft Investment Justification and project plan(s) to the FPC for review by COB February 9, 2009. The FPC is required to complete the Mid-term Review using the checklist provided, and to return the completed checklist to FEMA NPD HQ by COB February 13, 2009. FEMA NPD HQ will review the results of the Mid-term Review, provide any additional feedback, and return the information to the FPC. The FPC will brief the results to the site on or around February 20, 2009, allowing sufficient time to make edits prior to the submission deadline of March 20, 2009. The FPC and RCPT are responsible for communicating directly to coordinate the exchange of the draft documents and the Mid-term Review results. Responsibilities of the RCPT after Submission of the Grant Application Package The RCPT will continue to play an integral role in the RCPGP after the submission of the Grant Application Package. Some of the RCPT’s key responsibilities after submission can be found below. • Allocation of Grant Money: The RCPT will be responsible for allocating grant money received. The RCPT must reach consensus on all RCPGP funding 16 allocations within 45 days of award. If consensus cannot be reached within the 45 day time period allotted for the State to obligate funds to sub-grantees, the primary SAA must make the allocation determination. The SAA must provide written documentation verifying consensus of the RCPT, or the failure to achieve consensus, on the allocation of funds and submit it within 45 days after the grant award date. • Oversee the Implementation of Funded Projects: The RCPT will be responsible for executing approved and funded projects and completing them within the period of performance. In addition to the project deliverables, each RCPT will be responsible for fulfilling program deliverables. A list of the key deliverables can be found below, grouped by the related program objective. Fix Shortcomings in Existing Plans: o Develop a synchronization matrix17 for all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds o Document best practices and lessons learned identified through RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 projects o Integrate fusion centers and infrastructure programs in support of a coordinated regional plan that integrates across all mission areas, to include establishing connectivity and where appropriate integrated operations between fusion centers and emergency operations centers o Establish a citizen and community preparedness campaign that supports all plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 and FY 2009 funds o Complete and document an all-hazards risk assessment that will include but not be limited to consideration of the National Planning Scenarios and other man-made or natural hazards of special concern to the region (as an essential foundation for regional planning, the all-hazards risk assessment will identify priority vulnerabilities and corresponding gaps in regional capabilities essential to addressing those gaps) Build Regional Planning Process and Planning Communities: o Develop mutual aid agreements, with a particular focus on host communities o Work with States to develop State-wide agreements to assist with host community planning o Continue creating an environment through regular working groups and workshop that ensures coordination among homeland security planners throughout the region 17 The synchronization matrix process shows how operational plans across the various levels of government and across jurisdictions align over a time-phased implementation. 17 o Formalize long-term continuation of the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team (RCPT) o Clearly integrate planning activities with other regional working groups (e.g., Regional Transit Security Working Group, Area Maritime Security Committee, Local Emergency Planning Committee) o Participate in regional and national workshops focused on planning and the development of a standardized national planning process and integration system Link Operational and Capabilities-Based Planning for Resource Allocation: o Implement plans to address capability shortfalls identified through RCPGP FY 2008 projects o In coordination with the State, develop plans that further address logistics and pre-positioning of commodities related to plans developed with RCPGP FY 2008 funds o Identify how plans will help achieve performance objectives set forth within the applicable Capabilities of the Target Capabilities List and develop actual metrics of measurement that indicate achievement • Strategic Guidance: The RCPT should support and be closely coordinated with other State or regional efforts. For example, the RCPT may support State efforts to develop the State Preparedness Report (SPR), particularly as it relates to the RCPGP site’s activities. • Program Evaluation: The RCPT will be responsible for monitoring the status of its projects and supporting the program evaluation efforts for both FY 2008 and FY 2009 grant cycles. Program evaluation requires the RCPT to collect and store various program and project related data. The RCPT is also required to identify project-related risks and appropriate risk management strategies, and to communicate them to the FPC as appropriate. Role of the Federal Preparedness Coordinators The Federal Preparedness Coordinators (FPCs) play a key role in the RCPGP, providing support to the RCPT from the beginning of the process through grant closeout.18 The FPCs will serve as strategic advisors to the RCPT and will work with the grantees and FEMA Headquarters to ensure Federal interagency support is made available to the RCPT. Additionally, FPCs will serve as the primary point of contact for FEMA regarding the implementation of the project plans. The FPC may choose to involve the Preparedness and Planning Officer (PAPO) in the RCPGP effort. The PAPO may work in tandem with the FPC, or may be designated to fulfill the FPC’s role in the program. 18 In addition to the FPC, individual RCPGP sites may have other key representatives that should be consulted. For example, the Director of the Office of National Capital Region Coordination should be consulted for the National Capital Region RCPGP site. 18 19 National Planning Scenario Sets Federal National Concept Plans Federal Regional Concept Plan State and Local Plans .. Set 1: Explosive Attack .. Set 2: Nuclear Attack .. Set 3: Radiological Attack .. Set 4: Biological Attack .. Set 5: Chemical Attack .. Set 6: Natural Disaster .. Set 7: Cyber Attack .. Set 8: Pandemic Influenza .. New Scenarios or Scenario Sets .. Set 1: Explosive Attack .. Set 2: Nuclear Attack .. Set 3: Radiological Attack .. Set 4: Biological Attack .. Set 5: Chemical Attack .. Set 6: Natural Disaster .. Set 7: Cyber Attack .. Set 8: Pandemic Influenza .. Nationally Significant Event .. New Scenarios or Scenario Sets .. Individual Hazard or Threat Annexes: .. One per Federal Concept Plan for the National Planning Scenario Sets .. Nationally Significant Event .. Special Preparedness Programs .. Hazards of State or Local Concern (not otherwise addressed) .. Individual Hazard or Threat Annexes: .. As determined by hazard identification and risk assessment processes .. Special Preparedness Programs .. Special or Locally Significant Event Plans Most importantly, the FPC will be responsible for working with the SAA and the RCPT to ensure that the planning activities are vertically integrated with planning activities at the Regional level. The FEMA Region is the interface point between the Federal and State, planning processes. The FEMA Region serves as the translator between national-level planning requirements and State planning requirements. As described in CPG-101, State and Local needs are determined as part of their planning process. FEMA Regions determine capability gaps, resource shortfalls, and State expectations for Federal assistance through the process of gap analysis. The FPCs and FEMA Regions conduct these gap analyses using whatever method best fits the requirement. To ensure a common operational concept, each Regional CONPLAN should include an annex that summarizes the concept of operations, operational priorities, and operational concerns and needs for each State within their jurisdiction. In summary, the relationships established between the FEMA Region and the Federal- National and State and local partners are the foundation for ensuring effective combined operations. The resulting plan integration helps each operational level know what is expected of it, what to do during operations, and what others are doing at the same time. Role of the Urban Area Working Group and State Administrative Agency The applicable Urban Area Working Group (UAWG) will be responsible for the administration of the RCPGP. The UAWG will serve as the primary decision making authority for the program, and will oversee the RCPT. Additionally, the UAWG will designate a primary POC to work with the State Administrative Agency (SAA) and the Figure 2: Linkages between Federal, Regional, and State and Local Planning State Emergency Management Agency to ensure that appropriate representation is included in the RCPT. The SAA for the core Urban Area will serve as the primary SAA for the site. The SAA will serve primarily as an advisor to the RCPT and should ensure that the RCPT and UAWG decisions do not conflict with other State efforts. The SAA can also provide additional support, as requested by the UAWG. 20 PART IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION A. Address to Request Application Package DHS participates in the Administration’s e-government initiative. As part of that initiative, all applications must be filed using the Administration’s common electronic “storefront” --grants.gov. Eligible SAAs must apply for funding through this portal, accessible on the Internet at http://www.grants.gov. To access application forms and instructions, select “Apply for Grants,” and then select “Download Application Package.” Enter the CFDA and/or the funding opportunity number located on the cover of this announcement. Select “Download Application Package,” and then follow the prompts to download the application package. To download the instructions, go to “Download Application Package” and select “Instructions.” If you experience difficulties or have any questions, please call the grants.gov customer support hotline at (800) 518-4726. B. Content and Form of Application 1. On-line application. The on-line application must be completed and submitted using grants.gov after Central Contractor Registry (CCR) registration is confirmed. The on-line application includes the following required forms and submissions: • Investment Justification (completed using provided template) • Detailed Project Plan (for each project submitted) • RCPT Charter • RCPT Membership List • Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance • Standard Form 424A, Budget Information • Standard Form 424B Assurances • Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities The program title listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) is “Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program.” The CFDA number is 97.111. 2. Application via grants.gov. FEMA participates in the Administration’s e- government initiative. As part of that initiative, all applicants must file their applications using the Administration’s common electronic “storefront” --grants.gov. 21 Eligible SAAs must apply for funding through this portal, accessible on the Internet at http://www.grants.gov. 3. DUNS number. The applicant must provide a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number with their application. This number is a required field within grants.gov and for CCR Registration. Organizations should verify that they have a DUNS number, or take the steps necessary to obtain one, as soon as possible. Applicants can receive a DUNS number at no cost by calling the dedicated toll-free DUNS Number request line at (866) 705-5711. 4. Valid Central Contractor Registry (CCR) Registration. The application process also involves an updated and current registration by the applicant. Eligible applicants must confirm CCR registration at http://www.ccr.gov, as well as apply for funding through grants.gov. 5. Investment Justification. As part of the FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program application process, applicants must develop a formal Investment Justification that addresses each initiative being proposed for funding. These Investment Justifications must demonstrate how proposed projects address gaps and deficiencies in current programs and capabilities. The Investment Justification must demonstrate the ability to provide enhancements consistent with the purpose of the program and guidance provided by FEMA. Applicants must ensure that the Investment Justification is consistent with all applicable requirements outlined in this application kit. To apply for FY 2009 RCPGP funds, eligible applicants are required to complete the Investment Justification in the template provided. The Investment Justification is a method for the applicant to demonstrate their planned use of funds and describe specific funding and implementation approaches over the 24 month grant period of performance that will help enhance and sustain capabilities and achieve outcomes aligned with the National Preparedness Guidelines, their respective State/Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy, and their State Preparedness Report. The Investment Justification should address all criteria outlined in this application kit, providing specific information on what planning activities will be implemented, what outcomes will be achieved, how the program will be managed, and how the activities will be coordinated with relevant State and local authorities. Allowable costs will focus on planning activities in support of this initiative’s objectives. Funding could be used for hiring and training planners, establishing and maintaining a program management structure, identifying and managing projects, conducting research necessary to inform the planning process, and developing plans that bridge mechanisms/documents, protocols and procedures. See Appendix A for a list of allowable costs. 22 Instructions for Developing the Investment Justification The Investment Justification (IJ) Template is a MS Word document that includes several sections, outlined below. Detailed instructions for each section are provided in the template. Section I: Overview This section provides FEMA NPD HQ with general information related to the RCPGP site, such as the site name, the associated UASI Urban Area, and the primary SAA, as well as a summary of the projects proposed in the Investment Justification. Additionally, any changes to the site’s geographic area must be detailed in this section.19 This section is structured like a form, with specific questions and designated areas for response. Section II: Background This section provides FEMA NPD HQ with an overview of any changes made to the RCPGP site’s RCPT and an overview of the RCPGP site’s current regional planning effort, including key gaps. This section is structured like a form, with specific questions and designated areas for response. Section III: Project Details and Project Management This section provides FEMA NPD HQ with a detailed description of each proposed project. This section is free-form, allowing the RCPT maximum flexibility in the presentation of the proposed project(s). This section should be split into two subsections for each proposed project: Project Details sub-section and Project Management sub-section. Each sub-section must include all information specified in the Instructions section of the IJ Template, but the format and length of the response is at the discretion of the RCPT. • The Project Details sub-section provides FEMA NPD HQ with a detailed description of the proposed project, including the project’s estimated cost, an explanation of how the 25 percent cost share will be met, the project’s expected outcomes and accomplishments, an explanation of how the project meets several program requirements to include any target capabilities addressed, and an explanation of how the activities will be coordinated with relevant entities. • The Project Management sub-section provides FEMA NPD HQ with additional information regarding how the proposed project will be implemented. This includes a list of key project milestones, a high-level description of the project’s leadership team and other key resources, and a description of project-related risks, including their probability of occurrence and potential impact, and the risk management strategy identified. 19 RCPGP sites are defined as established in the approved RCPT Charter for the RCPGP FY 2008 grant cycle. If adjustments to the site’s geographic area are needed for the FY 2009 grant cycle to better support existing catastrophic planning activities, the site must present a strongly compelling reason in writing to FEMA NPD HQ and receive approval of this adjustment prior to submittal of the Investment Justification. A map of each RCPGP site and a list of included jurisdictions can be found in Appendix B. 23 6. Detailed Project Plan. Each RCPGP site is expected to practice effective project management in order to plan and execute projects successfully within the period of performance. As part of the FY 2009 grant cycle, all applicants must submit a detailed project plan for each proposed project. The initial project plan is expected to be a best estimate of the tasks and time required to complete the proposed projects. It must include all major milestones and tasks, and must account for all project and program deliverables. It is understood that task specifics and dates may change and evolve over time. Project Plan Requirements RCPGP sites must create a project plan for each proposed project. Sites are not required to use a specific software package to develop the project plan; however a Sample Project Plan in MS Excel format will be provided to demonstrate the details required and may be used as a template. While the plan’s format is flexible, each project plan must include all information outlined below. • Project Name, as indicated in the Investment Justification submittal • Project Start Date & End Dates that are within the grant’s 24 month period of performance • Project Milestones, deliverables, and tasks that represent significant events in the project and which can be used to effectively track the project’s progress, including the following: o All project deliverables and their sub-tasks o All program deliverables (specified in Part I) and their sub-tasks • Percent Complete for each milestone, deliverable, and task • Work (labor) hours required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task • Duration (business days) required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task • Start and End Dates for each milestone, deliverable, and task • Dependencies for each milestone, deliverable and task (Other project plan items that are directly linked to the item (e.g., a task must be completed before another task may begin)) • Resources (personnel) required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task The project plan must account for all program deliverables specified in Part I. All program deliverables and their sub-tasks must be clearly labeled in the project plan. 7. RCPT Charter and Membership List. Each site must update their RCPT Charter (or other standard operating procedure (SOP) document) and Membership List and submit them as part of the Grant Application Package. 24 Charter Requirements The charter or SOP should be developed in Microsoft Word and must address, at a minimum, the topics listed below. The charter must be available to all RCPT members prior to submission to promote transparency in decision-making related to the RCPGP. • Purpose of the RCPT • Goals and objectives for the RCPT (e.g., enhance collaboration between Public Health and Emergency Management) • Membership • Expectations of members (e.g., time commitment, providing timely responses) • Membership attendance policy • Frequency of meetings (bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, etc.) • Governance structure (e.g., which members have the authority for what) • Voting rights (e.g., how decisions will be made) • Grant management and administration responsibilities (e.g., who will be responsible for grant management and administration and how the funds will be allocated) • Methodology for determining project priorities (e.g., how agreement will be reached on project priorities) • Documentation and sharing of decisions (e.g., how decisions made at RCPT meetings will be documented and shared with RCPT members) • Process for making changes to the charter Membership List Requirements Additionally, the RCPT Membership List must be updated as appropriate and submitted as part of the Grant Application Package. The RCPT Membership List must account for all required RCPT members, outlined in Part III.C. Indirect representation must be clearly delineated. The RCPT Membership List must include the following information for each RCPT member: • Member’s name • Jurisdictions/agencies represented • Professional title • Associated discipline(s) 25 C. Submission Dates and Times 1. Mid-term Review Submission - Optional The Mid-term Review will occur during the week of February 9, 2009 and is optional, but highly encouraged. On February 9, 2009, the draft Investment Justification is due to each site’s FPC for review. Any Investment Justification submitted late for the Mid-term Review will inhibit the FPC review process and ultimately delay Midterm Review feedback to the sites for Investment Justification edits prior to the March 20, 2009 final submission deadline. 2. Grant Application Submission - Required Completed applications must be submitted electronically through www.grants.gov no later than 11:59 PM EDT, March 20, 2009. Late applications will neither be considered nor reviewed. Upon successful submission, a confirmation e-mail message will be sent with a grants.gov tracking number, which is needed to track the status of the application. An application is considered complete if it includes all necessary standard forms, the Investment Justification, and all required attachments (Detailed Project Plan(s), RCPT Membership List, and RCPT Charter). D. Intergovernmental Review Executive Order 12372 requires applicants from State and local units of government or other organizations providing services within a State to submit a copy of the application to the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC), if one exists, and if this program has been selected for review by the State. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to determine if the program has been selected for State review. Executive Order 12372 can be referenced at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executiveorder/ 12372.html. The names and addresses of the SPOCs are listed on OMB’s home page available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html. E. Funding Restrictions The applicable Urban Area Working Group (UAWG) will be responsible for administration of the RCPGP. In administering the program, the UAWG must work with the RCPT to comply with the following general requirements: 1. Management and Administration (M&A) Limits. A maximum of up to three percent (3%) of funds awarded may be retained by the State, and any funds retained are to be used solely for management and administrative purposes associated with the RCPGP award. States may pass through a portion of the State M&A allocation to local sub-grantees to support local management and administration activities (not to exceed 3%). Applicants must justify their M&A expenses in the Investment Justification. 26 2. Allowable Costs. The following pages outline allowable costs for RCPGP. A detailed list of allowable costs can be found in Appendix A. Planning RCPGP Sites may use RCPGP funds for planning efforts to address catastrophic events, including developing support tools that enable catastrophic planning and developing contingency agreements/emergency contracts that address logistics and pre-positioning of commodities related to plans developing with RCPGP FY 2008 funds. These efforts must enable the prioritization of needs, building of capabilities, updating of preparedness strategies, allocation of resources, and delivery of preparedness programs across disciplines (e.g., law enforcement, fire, emergency medical service (EMS), public health, behavioral health, public works, agriculture, and information technology) and levels of government. Working through Citizen Corps Councils, all jurisdictions are encouraged to include non-governmental entities and the general public in planning and associated training and exercises.20 Examples of allowable planning costs for the individual RCPGP activities can be found at http://www.fema.gov/grants. Personnel Hiring, overtime, and backfill expenses are allowable under this grant only to perform programmatic activities deemed allowable under existing guidance. Supplanting, however, is not allowed. Grantees may hire staff only for program management functions, not operational duties. See Appendix A for allowable hiring expenditures. RCPGP funds may not be used to support the hiring of sworn public safety officers for the purposes of fulfilling traditional public safety duties or to supplant traditional public safety positions and responsibilities. The following are definitions for the terms as used in this grant guidance: • Hiring – State and local entities may use grant funding to cover the salary of newly hired personnel who are exclusively undertaking allowable FEMA program activities as specified in this guidance. This may not include new personnel who are hired to fulfill any non-FEMA program activities under any circumstances. Hiring will always result in a net increase of FTEs. • Overtime – These expenses are limited to the additional costs which result from personnel working over and above 40 hours of weekly work time as a direct result of their performance of FEMA-approved activities specified in this guidance. Overtime associated with any other activity is not eligible. • Backfill-related Overtime – Also called “Overtime as Backfill,” these expenses are limited to overtime costs which result from personnel who are working overtime (as identified above) to perform the duties of other personnel who are 20 Non-governmental entities include the private sector and private non-profit, faith-based, community, volunteer and other non-governmental organizations. 27 temporarily assigned to FEMA-approved activities outside their core responsibilities. Backfill-related overtime only includes the difference between the overtime rate paid and what would have otherwise been paid to the backfilling employee for regular time. Under no circumstances should the entire amount of backfill overtime expense be charged to an award. Neither overtime nor backfill expenses are the result of an increase of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) employees. • Supplanting – Replacing a current State and/or local budgeted position with one or more full-time employees contracted or supported in whole or in part with Federal funds. Supplanting is prohibited with grant funds. Critical Emergency Supplies Once key requirements have been met, a participant in the RCPGP program may request permission to use funds to acquire critical emergency supplies. These supplies include meals, water, and basic medical supplies. 28 PART V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION A. Review Criteria DHS will evaluate and act on applications within 90 days following close of the application period. To determine grant awards, FEMA NPD HQ and the FPCs will review each Grant Application Package for completeness, quality, and continuity of proposed projects with FY 2008 funded projects. FEMA NPD HQ and the FPCs will complete a checklist for each Grant Application Package to ensure the submitted package meets all required criteria. Grant Application Packages must meet all required criteria in order for the associated RCPGP site to receive funding. To be considered complete, the Grant Application Package must include all of the following required documents, uploaded to grants.gov as separate files using the naming convention RCPGP Document Title_Site Name.doc. Investment Justification (developed using the provided MS Word template) Detailed Project Plan (for each project submitted) RCPT Charter RCPT Membership List Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance Standard Form 424A, Budget Information Standard Form 424B Assurances Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Each Grant Application Package must meet minimum requirements in order to obtain non-competitive funding. The high-level topic areas for minimum requirements are outlined below. Administrative Requirements: • Investment Justification must be written using the provided template • Grant Application Package must include all standard forms as well as a detailed Project Plan, RCPT Membership List, and RCPT Charter (For a list of standard forms, refer to Part IV) • Applicant must submit a State Preparedness Report • Grant application must acknowledge use of technology requirements and comply with administrative requirements (Refer to Part IV.A.3 and Part IV.A.4 for details) 29 Content Requirements: • The Investment Justification must: o Include basic applicant information, a description of the site’s geographical area, and a summary of the proposed projects o Specify any updates to the RCPT and provide an overview of the current regional planning effort, including details regarding the FY 2008 funded projects and how the proposed FY 2009 projects build upon those started in FY 2008 o Include a detailed description of all proposed projects and how they satisfy the stated requirements, as well as an overview of coordination with State, regional, tribal and local entities (For more details regarding the project details minimum requirements, see the Instructions section of the IJ template) o Include details regarding how each project will be managed, including all critical information outlined in the Instructions section of the IJ template (e.g., estimated project cost, major milestones, key project risks) o Clearly account for all program deliverables outlined in this document o Justify the applicants M&A expenses o Explain how the 25 percent cost share requirement will be met • The Detailed Project Plan must: o Clearly account for all program deliverables outlined in this document o Clearly account for all project deliverables specified in the Investment Justification o Include project milestones, deliverables, and tasks that represent significant events in the project and which can be used to effectively track the project’s progress o Include a field to specify the percent complete for each milestone, deliverable, and task (this field will be empty in this version) o Include the work (labor) hours required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task o Include the duration (business days) required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task o Specify the start and end dates for each milestone, deliverable, and task o Specify the dependencies for each milestone, deliverable and task (Other project plan items that are directly linked to the item (e.g., a task must be completed before another task may begin)) o Specify the resources (personnel) required to complete each milestone, deliverable, and task 30 B. Review and Selection Process The Grant Application Review will begin on or around March 30, 2009, when FEMA NPD HQ and the FPCs for each site begin reviewing the Grant Application Package submissions and completing the requirements checklist. The FPCs are expected to submit completed checklist(s) for their site(s) to FEMA NPD HQ at RCPGP@dhs.gov no later than Thursday, April 23. A meeting between the FPCs and FEMA NPD HQ will be held on or around April 30 to discuss results and recommendations for award. The review panel will consist of FPCs from each of the pre-designated ten (10) RCPGP sites, in conjunction with Federal staff from FEMA NPD HQ. The FPCs will review the Grant Application Package from only their applicable site(s), while FEMA NPD HQ will review Grant Application Packages from all sites. To determine grant awards, FEMA NPD HQ and the FPCs will review each Grant Application Package for completeness, quality, and continuity of proposed projects with FY 2008 funded projects. Note: Upon award, the recipient may only fund Investments that were included in the FY 2009 Investment Justification that was submitted to FEMA and evaluated through the Grant Application Review process. C. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates FEMA will evaluate and act on applications within 90 days following close of the application period, consistent with the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329). Awards will be made on or before September 30, 2009. 31 PART VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION A. Notice of Award Upon approval of an application, the grant will be awarded to the grant recipient. The date that this is done is the “award date.” Notification of award approval is made through the Grants Management System (GMS). Once an award has been approved, a notice is sent to the authorized grantee official. Follow the directions in the notification and log into GMS to access the award documents. The authorized grantee official should carefully read the award and special condition documents. If you do not receive a notification, please contact your Program Analyst for your award number. Once you have the award number, contact the GMS Help Desk at (888) 549-9901, option 3, to obtain the username and password associated with the new award. The period of performance is 24 months. Any unobligated funds will be de-obligated at the end of the 90 day close-out period. Extensions to the period of performance will be considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and compelling justifications why an extension is required. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. State Preparedness Report. The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-295) requires any State that receives Federal preparedness assistance to submit a State Preparedness Report to DHS. FEMA will provide additional guidance on the requirements for updating State Preparedness Reports. Receipt of this report is a prerequisite for applicants to receive any FY 2009 DHS preparedness grant funding. 2. Standard Financial Requirements. The grantee and any sub-grantee shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. A non-exclusive list of regulations commonly applicable to DHS grants are listed below: 2.1 -- Administrative Requirements. • 44 CFR Part 13, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments • 2 CFR Part 215, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A-110) 32 2.2 -- Cost Principles. • 2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments (OMB Circular A-87) • 2 CFR Part 220, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (OMB Circular A-21) • 2 CFR Part 230, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A-122) • Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Part 31.2 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, Contracts with Commercial Organizations 2.3 -- Audit Requirements. • OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations 2.4 -- Duplication of Benefits. There may not be a duplication of any federal assistance, per A-87, Basic Guidelines Section C.3 (c), which states: Any cost allocable to a particular Federal award or cost objective under the principles provided for in this Circular may not be charged to other Federal awards to overcome fund deficiencies, to avoid restrictions imposed by law or terms of the Federal awards, or for other reasons. However, this prohibition would not preclude governmental units from shifting costs that are allowable under two or more awards in accordance with existing program agreements. 3. Non-supplanting Requirement. Grant funds will be used to supplement existing funds, and will not replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the same purpose. Applicants or grantees may be required to supply documentation certifying that a reduction in non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or expected receipt of Federal funds. 4. Technology Requirements. 4.1 -- National Information Exchange Model (NIEM). FEMA requires all grantees to use the latest NIEM specifications and guidelines regarding the use of Extensible Markup Language (XML) for all grant awards. Further information about the required use of NIEM specifications and guidelines is available at http://www.niem.gov. 4.2 -- Geospatial Guidance. Geospatial technologies capture, store, analyze, transmit, and/or display location-based information (i.e., information that can be linked to a latitude and longitude). FEMA encourages grantees to align any geospatial activities with the guidance available on the FEMA website at http://www.fema.gov/grants. 4.3 -- 28 CFR Part 23 Guidance. FEMA requires that any information technology system funded or supported by these funds comply with 28 CFR Part 23, Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies, if this regulation is determined to be applicable. 33 5. Administrative Requirements. 5.1 -- Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FEMA recognizes that much of the information submitted in the course of applying for funding under this program or provided in the course of its grant management activities may be considered law enforcement sensitive or otherwise important to national security interests. While this information under Federal control is subject to requests made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552, all determinations concerning the release of information of this nature are made on a case-by-case basis by the FEMA FOIA Office, and may likely fall within one or more of the available exemptions under the Act. The applicant is encouraged to consult its own State and local laws and regulations regarding the release of information, which should be considered when reporting sensitive matters in the grant application, needs assessment and strategic planning process. The applicant may also consult FEMA regarding concerns or questions about the release of information under State and local laws. The grantee should be familiar with the regulations governing Sensitive Security Information (49 CFR Part 1520), as it may provide additional protection to certain classes of homeland security information. 5.2 -- Protected Critical Infrastructure Information (PCII). The PCII Program, established pursuant to the Critical Infrastructure Information Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) (CII Act), created a new framework, which enables State and local jurisdictions and members of the private sector to voluntarily submit sensitive information regarding critical infrastructure to DHS. The Act also provides statutory protection for voluntarily shared CII from public disclosure and civil litigation. If validated as PCII, these documents can only be shared with authorized users who agree to safeguard the information. PCII accreditation is a formal recognition that the covered government entity has the capacity and capability to receive and store PCII. DHS encourages all SAAs to pursue PCII accreditation to cover their State government and attending local government agencies. Accreditation activities include signing a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with DHS, appointing a PCII Officer, and implementing a self- inspection program. For additional information about PCII or the accreditation process, please contact the DHS PCII Program Office at pcii-info@dhs.gov. 5.3 -- Compliance with Federal civil rights laws and regulations. The grantee is required to comply with Federal civil rights laws and regulations. Specifically, the grantee is required to provide assurances as a condition for receipt of Federal funds that its programs and activities comply with the following: • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000 et seq. – no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin will be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. 34 • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §794 – no qualified individual with a disability in the United States, shall, by reason of his or her disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. • Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended, 20 U.S.C. §1681 et seq. – discrimination on the basis of sex is eliminated in any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. • The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, 20 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq. – no person in the United States shall be, on the basis of age, excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of or subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Grantees must comply with all regulations, guidelines, and standards adopted under the above statutes. The grantee is also required to submit information, as required, to the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties concerning its compliance with these laws and their implementing regulations. 5.4 -- Services to limited English proficient (LEP) persons. Recipients of FEMA financial assistance are required to comply with several Federal civil rights laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. These laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, natural origin, and sex in the delivery of services. National origin discrimination includes discrimination on the basis of limited English proficiency. To ensure compliance with Title VI, recipients are required to take reasonable steps to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to their programs. Meaningful access may entail providing language assistance services, including oral and written translation, where necessary. The grantee is encouraged to consider the need for language services for LEP persons served or encountered both in developing their proposals and budgets and in conducting their programs and activities. Reasonable costs associated with providing meaningful access for LEP individuals are considered allowable program costs. For additional information, see http://www.lep.gov. 5.5 -- Integrating individuals with disabilities into emergency planning. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in all aspects of emergency mitigation, planning, response, and recovery by entities receiving financial from FEMA. In addition, Executive Order 13347, Individuals with Disabilities in Emergency Preparedness signed in July 2004, requires the Federal Government to support safety and security for individuals with disabilities in situations involving disasters, including earthquakes, tornadoes, fires, floods, hurricanes, 35 and acts of terrorism. Executive Order 13347 requires the Federal government to encourage consideration of the needs of individuals with disabilities served by State, local, and tribal governments in emergency preparedness planning. FEMA has several resources available to assist emergency managers in planning and response efforts related to people with disabilities and to ensure compliance with Federal civil rights laws: • Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 301 (CPG-301): Interim Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations: CPG-301 is designed to aid tribal, State, territorial, and local governments in planning for individuals with special needs. CPG301 outlines special needs considerations for: Developing Informed Plans; Assessments and Registries; Emergency Public Information/Communication; Sheltering and Mass Care; Evacuation; Transportation; Human Services/Medical Management; Congregate Settings; Recovery; and Training and Exercises. CPG-301 is available at http://www.fema.gov/pdf/media/2008/301.pdf. • Guidelines for Accommodating Individuals with Disabilities in Disaster: The Guidelines synthesize the array of existing accessibility requirements into a user friendly tool for use by response and recovery personnel in the field. The Guidelines are available at http://www.fema.gov/oer/reference/. • Disability and Emergency Preparedness Resource Center: A web- based “Resource Center” that includes dozens of technical assistance materials to assist emergency managers in planning and response efforts related to people with disabilities. The “Resource Center” is available at http://www.disabilitypreparedness.gov. • Lessons Learned Information Sharing (LLIS) resource page on Emergency Planning for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs: A true one-stop resource shop for planners at all levels of government, non-governmental organizations, and private sector entities, the resource page provides more than 250 documents, including lessons learned, plans, procedures, policies, and guidance, on how to include citizens with disabilities and other special needs in all phases of the emergency management cycle. LLIS.gov is available to emergency response providers and homeland security officials from the Federal, State, and local levels. To access the resource page, log onto http://www.LLIS.gov and click on Emergency Planning for Persons with Disabilities and Special Needs under Featured Topics. If you meet the eligibility requirements for 36 accessing Lessons Learned Information Sharing, you can request membership by registering online. 5.6 -- Compliance with the National Energy Conservation Policy and Energy Policy Acts. In accordance with the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329), grant funds must comply with the following two requirements: • None of the funds made available shall be used in contravention of the Federal buildings performance and reporting requirements of Executive Order 13123, part 3 of title V of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §8251 et seq.), or subtitle A of title I of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (including the amendments made thereby). • None of the funds made available shall be used in contravention of section 303 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. §13212). 5.7 -- Environmental and Historic Preservation Compliance. FEMA is required to consider the potential impacts to the human and natural environment of projects proposed for FEMA funding. FEMA, through its Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP) Program, engages in a review process to ensure that FEMA-funded activities comply with various Federal laws including: National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, and Executive Orders on Floodplains (11988), Wetlands (11990) and Environmental Justice (12898). The goal of these compliance requirements is to protect our nation’s water, air, coastal, wildlife, agricultural, historical, and cultural resources, as well as to minimize potential adverse effects to children and low-income and minority populations. The grantee shall provide any information requested by FEMA to ensure compliance with applicable Federal EHP requirements. Any project with the potential to impact EHP resources cannot be initiated until FEMA has completed its review. Grantees may be required to provide detailed information about the project, including the following: location (street address or map coordinates); description of the project including any associated ground disturbance work, extent of modification of existing structures, construction equipment to be used, staging areas, access roads, etc.; year the existing facility was built; natural, biological, and/or cultural resources present in the project vicinity; visual documentation such as site and facility photographs, project plans, maps, etc; and possible project alternatives. For certain types of projects, FEMA must consult with other Federal and State agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, State Historic Preservation Offices, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as well as other agencies and organizations responsible for protecting natural and cultural resources. For 37 projects with the potential to have significant adverse effects on the environment and/or historic properties, FEMA’s EHP review and consultation may result in a substantive agreement between the involved parties outlining how the grantee will avoid the effects, minimize the effects, or, if necessary, compensate for the effects. Because of the potential for significant adverse effects to EHP resources or public controversy, some projects may require an additional assessment or report, such as an Environmental Assessment, Biological Assessment, archaeological survey, cultural resources report, wetlands delineation, or other document, as well as a public comment period. Grantees are responsible for the preparation of such documents, as well as for the implementation of any treatment or mitigation measures identified during the EHP review that are necessary to address potential adverse impacts. Grantees may use these funds toward the costs of preparing such documents and/or implementing treatment or mitigation measures. Failure of the grantee to meet Federal, State, and local EHP requirements, obtain applicable permits, and comply with any conditions that may be placed on the project as the result of FEMA’s EHP review may jeopardize Federal funding. Recipient shall not undertake any project having the potential to impact EHP resources without the prior approval of FEMA, including but not limited to communications towers, physical security enhancements, new construction, and modifications to buildings, structures and objects that are 50 years old or greater. Recipient must comply with all conditions placed on the project as the result of the EHP review. Any change to the approved project scope of work will require re-evaluation for compliance with these EHP requirements. If ground disturbing activities occur during project implementation, the recipient must ensure monitoring of ground disturbance, and if any potential archeological resources are discovered, the recipient will immediately cease construction in that area and notify FEMA and the appropriate State Historic Preservation Office. Any construction activities that have been initiated without the necessary EHP review and approval will result in a non-compliance finding and will not eligible for FEMA funding. For more information on FEMA’s EHP requirements, SAAs should refer to FEMA’s Information Bulletin #271, Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Requirements for Grants, available at http://ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/info271.pdf. Additional information and resources can also be found at http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp/ehp-applicant-help.shtm. 5.8 -- Royalty-free License. Applicants are advised that FEMA reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, for Federal government purposes: (a) the copyright in any work developed under an award or sub-award; and (b) any rights of copyright to which an award recipient or sub-recipient purchases ownership with Federal support. Award recipients must agree to consult with 38 FEMA regarding the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are purchased with, this funding. 5.9 -- FEMA NPD Publications Statement. Applicants are advised that all publications created with funding under any grant award shall prominently contain the following statement: "This document was prepared under a grant from FEMA’s National Preparedness Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of FEMA’s National Preparedness Directorate or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security." 5.10 -- Equipment Marking. Applicants are advised that, when practicable, any equipment purchased with grant funding shall be prominently marked as follows: "Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security." 5.11 -- Disadvantaged Business Requirement. Applicants are advised that, to the extent that recipients of a grant use contractors or subcontractors, such recipients shall use small, minority, women-owned or disadvantaged business concerns and contractors or subcontractors to the extent practicable. 5.12 -- National Preparedness Reporting Compliance. The Government Performance and Results Act (Public Law 103-62) (GPRA) requires that the Department collect and report performance information on all programs. For grant programs, the prioritized Investment Justifications and their associated milestones provide an important tool for assessing grant performance and complying with these national preparedness reporting requirements. FEMA will work with grantees to develop tools and processes to support this requirement. FEMA anticipates using this information to inform future-year grant program funding decisions. Award recipients must agree to cooperate with any assessments, national evaluation efforts, or information or data collection requests, including, but not limited to, the provision of any information required for the assessment or evaluation of any activities within their grant agreement. This includes any assessments, audits, or investigations conducted by the Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Inspector General, or the Government Accountability Office. C. Reporting Requirements Reporting requirements must be met throughout the life of the grant (refer to the program guidance and the special conditions found in the award package for a full explanation of these requirements). Please note that FEMA Payment and Reporting System (PARS) contains edits that will prevent access to funds if reporting requirements are not met on a timely basis. 39 1. Financial Status Report (FSR) -- required quarterly. Obligations and expenditures must be reported on a quarterly basis through the FSR, which is due within 30 days of the end of each calendar quarter (e.g., for the quarter ending March 31, FSR is due no later than April 30). A report must be submitted for every quarter of the period of performance, including partial calendar quarters, as well as for periods where no grant activity occurs. Future awards and fund draw downs may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. The final FSR is due 90 days after the end date of the performance period. FSRs must be filed online through the PARS. Reporting periods and due dates: • October 1 – December 31; Due January 30 • January 1 – March 31; Due April 30 • April 1 – June 30; Due July 30 • July 1 – September 30; Due October 30 2. Categorical Assistance Progress Report (CAPR). Following an award, the awardees will be responsible for providing updated obligation and expenditure information on a semi-annual basis. The applicable SAAs are responsible for completing and submitting the CAPR reports. Awardees should include a statement in the narrative field of the CAPR that reads: See BSIR. The CAPR is due within 30 days after the end of the reporting period (July 30 for the reporting period of January 1 through June 30; and January 30 for the reporting period of July 1 though December 31). Future awards and fund draw downs may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. CAPRs must be filed online at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov. Guidance and instructions can be found at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov/gmsHelp/index.html. Required submission: CAPR (due semi-annually). 3. Biannual Strategy Implementation Reports (BSIR). Following an award, the awardees will be responsible for providing updated obligation and expenditure information on a semi-annual basis. The applicable SAAs are responsible for completing and submitting the BSIR reports which is a component of the CAPR. The BSIR submission will satisfy the narrative requirement of the CAPR. SAAs are still required to submit the CAPR with a statement in the narrative field that reads: See BSIR. The BSIR is due within 30 days after the end of the reporting period (July 30 for the reporting period of January 1 through June 30; and January 30 for the reporting period of July 1 though December 31). Updated obligations and expenditure information must be provided with the BSIR to show progress made toward meeting 40 strategic goals and objectives. Future awards and fund draw downs may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. Required submission: BSIR (due semi-annually). 4. Financial and Compliance Audit Report. Recipients that expend $500,000 or more of Federal funds during their fiscal year are required to submit an organization- wide financial and compliance audit report. The audit must be performed in accordance with the U.S. General Accountability Office, Government Auditing Standards, located at http://www.gao.gov/govaud/ybk01.htm, and OMB Circular A133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations, located at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a133/a133.html. Audit reports are currently due to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse no later than nine months after the end of the recipient’s fiscal year. In addition, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Comptroller General of the United States shall have access to any books, documents, and records of recipients of FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program assistance for audit and examination purposes, provided that, in the opinion of the Secretary or the Comptroller, these documents are related to the receipt or use of such assistance. The grantee will also give the sponsoring agency or the Comptroller, through any authorized representative, access to, and the right to examine all records, books, papers or documents related to the grant. The State shall require that sub-grantees comply with the audit requirements set forth in OMB Circular A-133. Recipients are responsible for ensuring that sub- recipient audit reports are received and for resolving any audit findings. 5. Quarterly Progress Reviews. The recipient will participate in quarterly project progress reviews. Monitoring Grant recipients will be monitored periodically by FEMA staff, both programmatically and financially, to ensure that the project goals, objectives, performance requirements, timelines, milestone completion, budgets, and other related program criteria are being met. Programmatic monitoring may also include the Regional Federal Preparedness Coordinators, when appropriate, to ensure consistency of project investments with Regional and National goals and policies, as well as to help synchronize similar investments ongoing at the Federal, State, and local levels. Monitoring will be accomplished through a combination of office-based reviews and on- site monitoring visits. Monitoring will involve the review and analysis of the financial, programmatic, performance and administrative issues relative to each program and will identify areas where technical assistance and other support may be needed. The recipient is responsible for monitoring award activities, to include sub-awards, to provide reasonable assurance that the Federal award is administered in compliance 41 with requirements. Responsibilities include the accounting of receipts and expenditures, cash management, maintaining of adequate financial records, and refunding expenditures disallowed by audits. Grant Close-Out Process Within 90 days after the end of the period of performance, grantees must submit a final FSR and final CAPR detailing all accomplishments throughout the project. After these reports have been reviewed and approved by FEMA, a close-out notice will be completed to close out the grant. The notice will indicate the project as closed, list any remaining funds that will be de-obligated, and address the requirement of maintaining the grant records for three years from the date of the final FSR. The grantee is responsible for returning any funds that have been drawn down but remain as unliquidated on grantee financial records. Required submissions: (1) final SF-269a, due 90 days from end of grant period; and (2) final CAPR, due 90 days from the end of the grant period. 42 PART VII. FEMA CONTACTS This section describes several resources that may help applicants in completing a FEMA grant application. During the application period FEMA will identify multiple opportunities for a cooperative dialogue between the Department and applicants through such processes as the mid-term review. This commitment is intended to ensure a common understanding of the funding priorities and administrative requirements associated with the FY 2009 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program and to help in submission of projects that will have the highest impact on reducing risks. 1. Centralized Scheduling & Information Desk (CSID) Help Line. CSID is a non- emergency resource for use by emergency responders across the nation. CSID is a comprehensive coordination, management, information, and scheduling tool developed by DHS through FEMA for homeland security terrorism preparedness activities. CSID provides general information on all FEMA grant programs and information on the characteristics of CBRNE, agro-terrorism, defensive equipment, mitigation techniques, and available Federal assets and resources. CSID maintains a comprehensive database containing key personnel contact information for homeland security terrorism preparedness programs and events. These contacts include personnel at the Federal, State and local levels. CSID can be contacted at (800) 368-6498 or askcsid@dhs.gov. CSID hours of operation are from 8:00 am–6:00 pm (EST), Monday-Friday. 2. Grant Programs Directorate (GPD). FEMA GPD will provide fiscal support, including pre- and post-award administration and technical assistance, to the grant programs included in this solicitation. Additional guidance and information can be obtained by contacting the FEMA Call Center at (866) 927-5646 or via e-mail to ASK-GMD@dhs.gov. 3. GSA’s State and Local Purchasing Programs. The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) offers two efficient and effective procurement programs for State and local governments to purchase products and services to fulfill homeland security and other technology needs. The GSA Schedules (also referred to as the Multiple Award Schedules and the Federal Supply Schedules) are long-term, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity, government-wide contracts with commercial firms of all sizes. 43 • Cooperative Purchasing Program Cooperative Purchasing, authorized by statute, allows State and local governments to purchase a variety of supplies (products) and services under specific GSA Schedule contracts to save time, money, and meet their everyday needs and missions. The Cooperative Purchasing program allows State and local governments to purchase alarm and signal systems, facility management systems, firefighting and rescue equipment, law enforcement and security equipment, marine craft and related equipment, special purpose clothing, and related services off of Schedule 84 and Information Technology products and professional services off of Schedule 70 and the Consolidated Schedule (containing IT Special Item Numbers) only. Cooperative Purchasing for these categories is authorized under Federal law by the Local Preparedness Acquisition Act (Public Law 110-248) and Section 211 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107347). Under this program, State and local governments have access to GSA Schedule contractors who have voluntarily modified their contracts to participate in the Cooperative Purchasing program. The U.S. General Services Administration provides a definition of State and local governments as well as other vital information under the frequently asked questions section on its website at http://www.gsa.gov/cooperativepurchasing. • Disaster Recovery Purchasing Program GSA plays a critical role in providing disaster recovery products and services to Federal agencies. Now State and Local Governments can also benefit from the speed and savings of the GSA Federal Supply Schedules. Section 833 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364) amends 40 U.S.C. §502 to authorize GSA to provide State and Local governments the use of ALL GSA Federal Supply Schedules for purchase of products and services to be used to facilitate recovery from a major disaster declared by the President under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act or to facilitate recovery from terrorism or nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack. GSA provides additional information on the Disaster Recovery Purchasing Program website at http://www.gsa.gov/disasterrecovery. State and local governments can find a list of contractors on GSA’s website, http://www.gsaelibrary.gsa.gov, denoted with a or symbol. Assistance is available from GSA on the Cooperative Purchasing and Disaster Purchasing Program at the local and national levels. For assistance at the local level, visit http://www.gsa.gov/csd to find a local customer service director in your area. For assistance at the national level, contact Tricia Reed at 44 tricia.reed@gsa.gov, (571) 259-9921. More information is available on all GSA State and local programs at: www.gsa.gov/stateandlocal. 4. Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program. The Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program (HSPTAP) provides direct support assistance on a first-come, first-served basis (and subject to the availability of funding) to eligible organizations to enhance their capacity and preparedness to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist and all hazard threats. In addition to the risk assessment assistance already being provided, FEMA also offers a variety of other direct support assistance programs. More information can be found at http://www.fema.gov/about/divisions/pppa_ta.shtm. 5. Lessons Learned Information Sharing (LLIS) System. LLIS is a national, online, secure website that houses a collection of peer-validated lessons learned, best practices, AARs from exercises and actual incidents, and other relevant homeland security documents. LLIS facilitates improved preparedness nationwide by providing response professionals with access to a wealth of validated front-line expertise on effective planning, training, equipping, and operational practices for homeland security. The LLIS website also includes a national directory of homeland security officials, as well as an updated list of homeland security exercises, events, and conferences. Additionally, LLIS includes online collaboration tools, including secure email and message boards, where users can exchange information. LLIS uses strong encryption and active site monitoring to protect all information housed on the system. The LLIS website is https://www.llis.gov. 6. Information Sharing Systems. FEMA encourages all State, regional, local, and Tribal entities using FY 2009 funding in support of information sharing and intelligence fusion and analysis centers to leverage available Federal information sharing systems, including Law Enforcement Online (LEO) and the Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN). For additional information on LEO, contact the LEO Program Office at leoprogramoffice@leo.gov or (202) 324-8833. For additional information on HSIN and available technical assistance, contact the HSIN Help Desk at (703) 674-3003. 45 PART VIII. OTHER INFORMATION RCPGP Focus In its first year of existence, the Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program focused on fixing shortcomings in existing plans, building regional planning processes and planning communities, and linking operational and capabilities-based planning for resource allocation. While these core objectives have not changed, the focus has expanded in FY 2009 from establishing regional planning communities and preparing plans for regional catastrophic response, to ensuring the effectiveness of those plans through coordination and implementation. Resources The following resources have been identified as potentially helpful to sites during the implementation of FY 2008 projects and planning for creation of FY 2009 projects that build upon those established in FY 2008. • FEMA Library - http://www.fema.gov/library/index.jsp • Mitigation Planning Guidance - http://www.fema.gov/plan/mitplanning/planning_resources.shtm#1 • National Response Framework -http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/ • National Scenarios - https://www.llis.dhs.gov/index.do • National Strategy for Homeland Security - http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/homeland/nshs/2007/index.html • NIMS -http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/index.shtm • NIPP -http://www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/editorial_0827.shtm • Target Capabilities List - https://www.llis.dhs.gov/index.do 46 APPENDIX A ALLOWABLE COSTS LIST Allowable Planning Costs • Public Education and Outreach • Develop and implement homeland security support programs and adopt ongoing DHS National Initiatives, including State Preparedness Reports • Develop and enhance plans and protocols • Develop or conduct assessments • Establish, enhance, or evaluate Citizen Corps related volunteer programs • Hiring of full-time, part-time, or contract planners or consultants to assist with planning activities (not for the purpose of hiring public safety personnel fulfilling traditional public safety duties) • Conferences to facilitate planning activities • Materials required to conduct planning activities • Travel/per diem related to planning activities • Overtime and backfill costs for planners (IAW operational Cost Guidance) • Other project areas with prior approval from FEMA Allowable Organizational Activities • Hiring or use of full- or part-time staff or contractors for organizational planning activities Allowable Management and Administrative Costs • Hiring of full- or part-time staff or contractors/consultants to assist with the management of the respective grant program, application requirements, compliance with reporting and data collection requirements • Development of operating plans for information collection and processing necessary to respond to FEMA data calls • Overtime and backfill costs • Travel • Meeting related expenses • Authorized office equipment A-1 • Recurring expenses such as those associated with cell phones and faxes during the period of performance of the grant program • Leasing or renting of space for newly hired personnel during the period of performance of the grant program Allowable Equipment • Critical emergency supplies (shelf-stable foods, water, basic medical supplies) A-2 APPENDIX B SITE MAPS AND DESCRIPTIONS Figure 3 presents a National overview of the ten RCPGP sites, with each site outlined in red. Additionally, the table below lists each of the RCPGP sites and all States that fall within one of the ten sites. Maps and descriptions of each individual RCPGP site can be found on the following pages. Note: The sites outlined in this appendix depict the sites as they are currently operating, as some sites chose to change their footprint during the FY 2008 grant application process. Seattle Area Boston Area New York/ New Jersey Area National Capital Region Norfolk Area Chicago Area Bay Area Los Angeles/ Long Beach Area Houston Area Honolulu Area Tier 1 Tier 2 Figure 3: Map of all RCPGP Sites National Overview of RCPGP Sites Site Names States • Bay Area • California • New Jersey • Boston Area • Connecticut • New York • Chicago Area • District of Columbia • North Carolina • Honolulu Area • Hawaii • Pennsylvania • Houston Area • Illinois • Rhode Island • Los Angeles/Long Beach Area • Indiana • Texas • National Capital Region • Maryland • Virginia • New York/New Jersey Area • Massachusetts • Washington • Norfolk Area • New Hampshire • West Virginia • Seattle Area • Wisconsin B-1 Bay Area Site Overview The Bay Area RCPGP site includes 11 counties and 23 principal cities in western California. Figure 4 presents a map of the Bay Area RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 4: Map of the Bay Area RCPGP Site Bay Area RCPGP Site Counties Included Principal Cities Included California • Alameda County • Contra Costa County • Marin County • Napa County • San Benito County • San Francisco County • San Mateo County • Santa Clara County • Santa Cruz County • Solano County • Sonoma County • Berkeley • Cupertino • Fairfield • Fremont • Hayward • Milpitas • Mountain View • Napa • Oakland • Palo Alto • Petaluma • Pleasanton • Redwood City • San Francisco • San Jose • San Leandro • San Mateo • San Rafael • Santa Clara • Santa Cruz • Santa Rosa • South San Francisco • Sunnyvale B-2 Boston Area Site Overview The Boston RCPGP site includes 17 counties and 17 principal cities that span most of eastern Massachusetts, southern New Hampshire, and all of Rhode Island. Figure 5 presents a map of the Boston RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 5: Map of Boston RCPGP Site Boston RCPGP Site Components Counties Included Principal Cities Included Massachusetts • Bristol County • Essex County • Middlesex County • Norfolk County • Plymouth County • Suffolk County • Worcester County • Boston • Cambridge • Fall River • Framingham • New Bedford • Newton • Peabody • Quincy • Waltham • Worcester New Hampshire • Belknap County • Hillsborough County • Merrimack County • Rockingham County • Strafford County • Concord • Laconia • Manchester • Nashua Rhode Island • Bristol County • Kent County • Providence County • Newport County • Washington County • Cranston • Providence • Warwick B-3 Chicago Area Site Overview The Chicago RCPGP site includes 16 counties and 15 principal cities that span northeastern Illinois, northwestern Indiana, and southeastern Wisconsin. Figure 6 presents a map of the Chicago RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 6: Map of Chicago RCPGP Site Chicago RCPGP Site Counties Included Principal Cities Included Illinois • Cook County • DeKalb County • DuPage County • Grundy County • Kankakee County • Kane County • Kendall County • Lake County • McHenry County • Will County • Arlington Heights • Bradley • Chicago • Des Plaines • Elgin • Evanston • Hoffman Estates • Joliet • Kankakee • Naperville • Schaumburg • Skokie Indiana • Jasper County • Lake County • LaPorte County • Newton County • Porter County • Gary • La Porte • Michigan City Wisconsin • Kenosha County B-4 Honolulu Area Site Overview The Honolulu RCPGP site includes four counties, which make up the State of Hawaii, and the principal city of Honolulu. Figure 7 presents a map of the Honolulu RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 7: Map of Honolulu RCPGP Site Honolulu RCPGP Site Counties Included Principal Cities Included Hawaii • Hawaii • Kauai • Maui • Oahu • Honolulu B-5 Houston Area Site Overview The Houston RCPGP site includes 13 counties and 6 principal cities that span eastern Texas. Figure 8 presents a map of the Houston RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 8: Map of Houston RCPGP Site Houston RCPGP Site Counties Included Principal Cities Included Texas • Austin County • Brazoria County • Chambers County • Colorado County • Fort Bend County • Galveston County • Harris County • Liberty County • Matagorda County • Montgomery County • Waller County • Walker County • Wharton County • Bay City • Baytown • Galveston • Houston • Huntsville • Sugar Land B-6 Los Angeles/ Long Beach Area Site Overview The Los Angeles/Long Beach RCPGP site includes 5 counties and 38 principal cities that span southwestern California. Figure 9 presents a map of the Los Angeles/Long Beach RCPGP site, and the following table lists the counties and principal cities encompassed. Figure 9: Map of Los Angeles/Long Beach RCPGP Site Los Angeles/ Long Beach RCPGP Site Counties Included Principal Cities Included California • Los Angeles County • Anaheim • Glendale • Pomona • Orange County • Arcadia • Hemet • Redlands • Riverside County • Burbank • Irvine • Riverside • San Bernardino County • Camarillo • Los Angeles • San Bernardino • Ventura County • Carson • Cerritos • Chino • Colton • Compton • Costa Mesa • Fountain Valley • Fullerton • Gardena • Long Beach • Montebello • Monterey Park • Newport Beach • Ontario • Orange • Oxnard • Paramount • Pasadena • San Buenaventura (Ventura) • Santa Ana • Santa Monica • Victorville • Temecula • Thousand Oaks • Torrance • Tustin B-7 National Capital Region Site Overview The N