Contact Scot Williamson, info@rcngrants.org or 802/748-6717 for more information on application procedures. For technical consultation on priority topic areas, contact the technical coordinator listed in each project description.

You may begin work once federal compliance is met, and you have received written notification from WMI of your final grant award. However, WMI advises grantees NOT to begin work until all required and necessary permits are obtained for the activities identified in their project proposal. Please note that grantees may not request or receive any reimbursement payments prior to completion of federal compliance.

Applications that score high enough to be selected to receive an award will receive written notification from WMI acknowledging a ÒconditionalÓ grant award. Conditional grant awards will be subject to federal State Wildlife Grants Program compliance as administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Once federal compliance is met, grantees will receive written notification from WMI acknowledging final approval of the grant award.

1. What is the geographic scope of the proposal and its subsequent impacts/benefits?

   a. 0-1 = Only localized benefits within a Region.

   b. 3-5 = Benefits to majority of states within a Region.

   c. 7-10 = Benefits to all states within a Region.

2. Is sound science used to develop the proposed methodology and will these methods accomplish/produce the proposed project objectives/goals?

   a. 0 = sound science not used to develop methodology; objectives cannot be accomplished using the proposed methodology.

   b. 1-4 = evaluation of the relative level of scientific rigor and objectivity of methodology.

   c. 5 = sound science used to develop methodology; objectives can clearly be accomplished using the proposed methodology.

3. Will/can the proposed objectives and methodology produce the desired outcomes identified in the RCN under which this proposal was submitted?

   a. 0 = objectives and methodology will not/cannot produce the desired products identified in the RCN under which this proposal was submitted.

   b. 1-4=evaluation of the relative likelihood that objectives and methodology will/can produce the desired products identified in the RCN under which this proposal was submitted.

   c. 5 = objectives and methodology will/can clearly produce the desired products identified in the RCN under which this proposal was submitted.

4. Are the project objectives clearly defined, achievable, measurable, and connected to specific goals, milestones/deliverables, and timelines (i.e., a work plan) for completion?

   a. 0 = project objectives are ambiguous; project lacks specific goals linked to milestones/timelines for project completion.

   b. 1-4 = evaluation of the relative merits of project objectives.

   c. 5 = project objectives are clear, concise, and outline specific goals which are linked to milestones/timelines for project completion.

5. Are the proposed project costs reasonable and is the project´s cost-benefit ratio reasonable?

   a. 0 = project is too expensive for objectives/benefits; cost is too high for benefits received/produced.

   b. 1-4 = evaluation of the relative reasonableness of proposed project costs.

   c. 5 = project costs are reasonable for objectives/benefits; cost is reasonable for benefits received/produced.

6. Does the proposed project address the desired products described in the RCN under which this proposal was submitted, and does the proposal clearly explain the project´s anticipated successes?

   a. 0 = project does not address the desired and measurable products described in the RCN and does not explain the project´s anticipated successes.

   b. 1-4 = relative evaluation of product delivery and anticipated success.

   c. 5 = project clearly addresses the desired and measurable products described in the RCN and clearly explains the project´s anticipated successes.

7. What is the anticipated, extended use/life of the project´s results/products/services after the project is completed, and are they clearly stated in the proposal?

   a. 0 = usefulness of project results ends when the project ends.

   b. 1-4 = relative evaluation of project benefit lifespan.

   c. 5 = usefulness of project results continues for years after the project ends and is clearly stated and described in the proposal.

8. What is the technical/social/legal feasibility of the project?

   a. 0 = Project does not use proven methods; permits to complete project are difficult or unlikely to obtain; project has significant stakeholder opposition.

   b. 3 = Project uses proven methods and techniques, or legitimate innovate technology; project does not require permitting that exceeds NEPA thresholds; project has stakeholder and public support, or does not engender social opposition.

   c. 5 = Project uses proven methods and techniques, or legitimate innovative technology; applicant possesses required permits or project does not require permits or special legal permissions not included in the application package; project has stakeholder and public support, or does not engender social opposition.

1. All applications received by the due date will be reviewed by WMI for completeness and eligibility.
2. All projects that are deemed complete and eligible by NEAFWA will be forwarded to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for federal compliance screening. Projects reviewed by the USFWS that are deemed unable to pass federal compliance requirements will be disqualified.
3. Applications that are deemed by the USFWS to pass federal compliance screening will be evaluated by Northeast RCN Technical Coordinators and Northeast RCN Review Teams based using the General Scoring Criteria provided below.

Costs related to the preparation of this application or any other costs incurred prior to notification from NEAFWA acknowledging final approval of the grant award, are NOT eligible for reimbursement and cannot be used as match. Costs related to land acquisition, purchase of development rights, and purchases of easements are not eligible for reimbursement under this program. These costs are not eligible as matching costs, either. Generally speaking, education and law enforcement activities are not eligible for funding or match under this program.

Grant reimbursement payments will be based on actual expenditures incurred by the grantee that are necessary and reasonable to the accomplishment of the work. Grantees will be required to provide documentation of project-related costs, including submission of copies of invoices and cancelled checks, with each payment request. Grantees will be required to certify appropriate matching expenses from non-federal funding sources, including volunteer labor. Applicants are advised to review 2CFR225 “Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments (OMB Circular A–87)” found at the following web site:
http://training.fws.gov/fedaid/toolkit/2cfr225.pdf

or 2CFR230 “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A–122)” found at the following web site:
http://training.fws.gov/fedaid/toolkit/2cfr230.pdf

Applicant budgets may include billable expenses and matching costs related to the project in the following categories:

• Personal services: includes salary of project staff employed by the applicant organization.
• Fringe Benefits: The fringe benefits such as health care and retirement provided to permanent employees of the applicant organization. State employees must use the approved federal rates for their agency. Fringe benefits are normally calculated as a percentage of an employee’s salary.
• Indirect/Overhead: The costs of maintaining the offices for project personnel such as utilities, support services, rent, etc. This is normally calculated as a percentage added to the salary and fringe benefits of an employee.
• Travel and Equipment Usage: Vehicle mileage at the federal rate, fuel costs, commercial carrier costs, and other similar expenses. Equipment usage covers the equivalent cost of the use of equipment such as tractors, brush clearing equipment, research vessels, etc.
• Supplies and Materials: Office supplies, consumable field gear such as flagging tape and stakes, non-retrievable animal tags, nets, software, etc.
• Contractual Services: If you are a not-for-profit organization and you subcontract out for services such as data entry or laboratory analysis, you must be able to provide proof that those costs are necessary and reasonable to the accomplishment of the work.

Grantees must meet federal eligibility requirements under this grant program. All funds awarded through this RFP are contingent upon the applicant meeting all federal permitting requirements. NEAFWA reserves the right to reallocate grant awards in the event that the project applicant cannot meet the federal or state grant and/or permitting requirements. Applicants are encouraged to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for technical assistance on projects that may impact federally listed species. NEAFWA reserves the right to require minor revisions to selected applicant´s scope of work pending federal compliance review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff. Modifications will not result in any increase in the award amount. Applicants selected to receive a grant may also have their proposed budgets revised pending federal review of eligibility of costs and matching funds. These revisions will not result in any increase in the award amount. Award amounts may be decreased as a result of disqualification of matching costs through the federal review process. It is the applicant´s responsibility to investigate the permits that may be required to carry out their proposal, and obtain all applicable federal or state permits.

Yes, partnerships in funding and/or delivery of project products are encouraged.

Yes, single organizations can submit multiple pre-proposals within one priority topic area, or may submit pre-proposals to more than one priority topic area.

Pre-proposals should be emailed in MS Word format to info@rcngrants.org

The RCN Grants Program is a reimbursement program. Applicants must be prepared to fully fund their projects in the first instance and submit payment requests to WMI for reimbursement. Grant recipients will be required to enter into a service contract with WMI in order to receive payment. Payment requests may be submitted to WMI on a quarterly basis. No advance payments will be provided. WMI will retain 10% of the grant amount pending receipt of all contract deliverables. Upon NEAFWA´s approval of said deliverables, the final 10% retainage will be released to the grantee.

Yes. A minimum of 50% of project funds must be generated through certified non-federal match. In-kind match is allowed.

The source of funding for Northeast RCN grants is from federal funds apportioned to the states through the State Wildlife Grant program.

Funding priority will be placed upon projects that are feasible and practical in 1-2 year time periods, are designed to address priority topics, and that leverage other sources of non-federal matching funds. Funds cannot be used to support political lobbying or capacity building of organizations.

Priority Project Topics will be developed in the fall by the NEWDTC, vetted by agencies in the winter and approved by NEAFWA Directors at their spring meeting. An RFP for pre-proposals will be generated and announced by early January. Pre-proposals are due by February 15. Applicants who are selected to submit full proposals will be notified in late May. Full proposals are due to WMI by late June. Funding decisions will be made by the NEAFWA Directors at their fall meeting and funds will be available in early January.

Eligible applicants include individuals, non-governmental organizations, state and federal agency employees, members of academia, and for-profit corporations.

Each U.S. jurisdiction in the NEAFWA has dedicated 4% of their annual State Wildlife Grant apportionment to RCN projects. Pre-proposals for projects addressing Priority Project Topics will be accepted until February 15, 2008. Pre-proposals will be reviewed by the Northeast Wildlife Diversity Committee, Northeast Wildlife Administrators and the Northeast Fisheries Administrators. Authors of the highest ranking pre-proposals will be invited to submit a full proposal for review. Final project awards will be decided by the Directors of the NEAFWA.

Priority Project Topics were developed through a facilitated workshop of agency technical staff familiar with the development and implementation of State Wildlife Action Plans.