1. # of Grants currently open
Recommend printing on 11x17 paper
Using Salmon &Water Quality Dollars Better
DRAFT
- This is a current snapshot of some preliminary thinking
- It needs major input from others, particularly those out in the field
- Our goal is to work toward a common, shared understanding
Owner: Michelle/Tara Reviewers: (Goal 3)
Date: 1/13/ Version 2-3
BACKGROUND
Washington is a national leader in protecting & restoring salmon &water quality through a suite of state grant programs.
Ecology and the State Recreation and Conservation Office are the largest grantors of state resources to protect water quality, restore salmon and their habitats, protect and enhance floodplains, and support local communities in these efforts.
Supported by partner agencies who help guide how and where some of these funds should be invested; partners include Fish & Wildlife, State Conservation Commission, Dept. of Natural Resources, and Puget Sound Partnership.
Coordination among state grant programs is essential to maximize the benefits of public investment, while minimizing administrative burdens on local recipients. Experience in coordinating state programs will enhance our capability to improve coordination with federal and NGO funding programs that support local actions to restore habitat and water quality.
ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS: What’s really going on?
CURRENT STATE
SCOPE OF GRANTS:
HYPOTHESIS: If we start right in & make some obvious improvements during the current cycle, we can 1) make things better, 2) learn about how to make things better, and 3) learn more about what our customers need from us, simultaneously.
Grant Program
Agency
Annual $
# of Grants currently open
Water Quality Combined~
Ecology
$187M
600
Salmon Recovery Funding Combined^
RCO, WDFW, PSP
$69M
1043 (from PRISM “in-progress”)
Conservation Districts~
Conservation Commission
$13M
47 districts
Floodplains by Design
$11.5M*
20+
COUNTERMEASURES:
“Cost”
Benefit
Task
Owner L M
#1 “Single Schedule” (for customers and us): List of grant programs, Requirements, Timelines
Pat/Tara
#2 Share progress reporting from grantees (not one big system; print out EAGL report & send it in)
Tara
#3 Single definitions of: readiness to proceed/construct; (others)   L  M
#4 Design Standards, including definitions of deliverables
Tara/Paul  H
#5 Unified Process for Acquisitions (adopt RCO’s manual as default)
Tara 
#6 Coordinate Technical Review Resources by sharing comments (etc.)  H
#7 Unified List of agencies and grantees to identify overlap
Scott
#8 Identify opportunities to reform (return to initial intent) the match system and make it less painful
#9 Legislative story-telling coordination H 
#10 Align Outcomes and Reporting Metrics
#11 Shared budget structure (grantee has whole budget, grantors see all and their piece)
Paul
#12 Sharing announcements, pre-application site visits
~includes SRF, Centennial, 319, Stormwater
^ includes SRFB, PSAR, ESRP, FFFPP, and others listed on website
~ SCC #’s based on Strategic Plan where $26M for biennia to CDs for both operations and technical and financial assistance to land managers
*FbD = $11M + $35M for 2 biennia = ~$11.5M per year. (Note - I did not include the other $39M of 1st biennia bc that money did not go to grants, it went to provisoed and other identified projects.)
+FbD awarded 13 grants, then 7, for a total of 20. Has only been a program for 2 years.
WHAT GOES “WRONG”:
NEXT STEPS
WHO (lead bold)
WHAT
BY WHEN
Michelle
Lead weekly huddle w/ task leads and work with Jeannie off-line.
Ongoing
Move this process along (plan/implement).
Pat
Task # 1 - Confirm if have all individual grant info. Work with Jeannie to format, use SCC example?
1/20/16
Tara
Task #2 – think tank with Scott and Pat for input on plan to complete.
Scott
Task #7 – get SCC’s list to complete compilation and begin drafting a unified list.
Task Owners
Paul to do #4?
All highlighted tasks to have a one-pager that includes: statement of purpose, homework assignments, plan to complete.
1/27/16
Jay
Draft abstract for Salish Sea “voice of the customer” workshop.
3/2/16
TARGETS:
Improve “efficiency” of grant process (reduce time & difficulty for grantees) [measures need to be developed!]
Improve “return on investment” of grant dollars; eliminate duplication of effort & missed opportunities in projects
(BONUS) Reduce internal staff time administering grants & responding to questions
FOLLOW-UP / CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Establish on-going ownership of grant process coordination and improvement.