|
In the News
Emergency Management and Homeland Security Using Grant Funds to Support Implementation of Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 8
The source of this information is: ODP Information Bulletin No. 174 June 02, 2005.
This ODP Information Bulletin provides specific examples of areas in which grantees can use current and previous fiscal year funding to meet the new requirements associated with implementation of HSPD-8, the Interim National Preparedness Goal, and the National Preparedness Guidance.
Where States and local jurisdictions may incur costs they are encouraged to leverage existing Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) grant funds provided through the Homeland Security Grant Program.
Planning Activities
Many of the near-term activities associated with HSPD-8 implementation for FY 2005 fall within the planning category. Consequently, the FY 2005 State Homeland Security Program and the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) program guidance specifically highlight the costs associated with implementing and adopting HSPD-8 as an allowable planning expenditure. rantees may also use remaining funds from previous years to support HSPD-8 implementation planning activities, including:
- FY 2004 HSGP
- FY 2004 UASI
- FY 2003 State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP) I & II
- FY 2003 UASI I & II
Hiring Personnel
Appendix A of the FY 2005 HSGP guidance notes that the hiring of full- or part-time staff or contractors/consultants to assist with planning activities is allowable under all six programs included in the HSGP. While grantees may not use funds to hire sworn public safety personnel to fulfill traditional public safety duties, they can hire staff (to include sworn public safety personnel) to assist with allowable HSGP program implementation activities, including HSPD-8 related initiatives. These allowances also apply to previous fiscal year programs, including:
- FY 2004 HSGP
- FY 2004 UASI
- FY 2003 SHSGP I & II
- FY 2003 UASI I & II
Additional questions on allowable costs should be directed to your assigned Preparedness Officer for further clarification.
TEA-21 Re-Authorization Being Developed
The re-authorization of the TEA-21 Program is currently being developed by Congress. It is anticipated that a significant number of small city projects will be eligible for the new federal funds.
Since 1996, the TIB has set aside over $9.0 million in Small City Program (SCP) funds to provide the local match for federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) projects authorized under ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act) and TEA-21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century). The matching funds are typically 13.5% of the total project cost. The set-asides were provided from funding that would have otherwise been dedicated to the Small City Program. To date, over 160 ISTEA/TEA-21 projects have been approved for SCP matching funds, leveraging more than $83.7 million in federal funds.
By all accounts the Federal Match program has been very successful. TIB benefits by completing projects for 13.5% that otherwise would be funded for 95% to 100% of the total project cost. Small cities benefit by not having to divert maintenance money to secure a federal grant. www.tib.wa.gov/SmallCity/CHAP.htm.
Need to know more about Washington’s drought?
For more information about the drought visit:
CDBG Funds Appropriated & Will Remain in HUD
From: Marilyn Mohrman-Gillis, Director, Policy and Federal Relations - National League of Cities
"I am pleased to report that the House Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development FY 2006 appropriations bill, marked up in subcommittee this morning, contains funding for CDBG in HUD. According to the appropriations news release, "The Committee did not agree to the proposal to eliminate this program, consolidate its functions and transfer the implementation to the Department of Commerce." This is a clear victory for our campaign to keep CDBG in tact and in HUD".
Not unexpectedly the House subcommittee did propose cuts to the CDBG program. Overall funding would be reduced from $4.7 billion to $4.2 billion and, most importantly for cities, the formula grants would be decreased by $250 million from $4.1 billion to $3.86 billion.
[ return
to top ]
[
next article ]
|
