Never Forget 343 Gave It All On 9-11-2001
2005 Assistance to Firefighter Grant Program (AFGP)
Top Reasons Why Applications Do Not Make it to Panel
Top Reasons Why Applications Are Not Awarded at Panel
Top Reasons Why Applications Do Not Make it to Panel
10. Fail to meet basic requirements of Wellness
Program for wellness activity requests.
9. Request construction funding (change to building footprint).
8. Request funds for fixed/non-portable training simulators.
7. Community demographics (R/U/S).
6. Vehicle inventory shows newer aged fleet.
5. Call volume too low to substantiate request.
4. Request for new mission area.
3. Inconsistency or incomplete information throughout grant application.
2. Request for low priority project or project with no statutory requirement.
1. COMPETITION!
9. Request construction funding (change to building footprint).
8. Request funds for fixed/non-portable training simulators.
7. Community demographics (R/U/S).
6. Vehicle inventory shows newer aged fleet.
5. Call volume too low to substantiate request.
4. Request for new mission area.
3. Inconsistency or incomplete information throughout grant application.
2. Request for low priority project or project with no statutory requirement.
1. COMPETITION!
Comments:
10. Does not meet the program initiatives that require entry and ongoing physical exams in addition to job related immunizations. This is a requirement in the program guidance to sustain a formal fitness and injury prevention program.9. Concrete pads for generators / training rooms / bunk rooms / communication centers / erection of radio & repeater towers / buildings for generators/compressors above normal housing / apparatus bays / roof repairs=none of these projects would be eligible.
8. Non-Portable flash/fire/confined space trailers
7. Not accurately portraying Rural/Urban/Suburban demographics in relation to vehicle award. Some factors include tanker request with demographic information that show 10% undeveloped and 100% community protection with hydrants… Brush trucks for a community with 89% residential and 10% industrial.
6. Current age of apparatus inventory is of newer age. It is difficult to substantiate a request for a 2004 CAFS pumper with a 2001 E-One 1250 gpm pumper & 1995 102’ Aerial… Competition then takes precedence when being rated against communities with a 1971 Army surplus tanker
5. Call volume make and breaks a department. Can we justify funding a $500k aerial on a community with 6 calls annually?
4. If the community has identified a mission area and is unwilling to fund outside of federal grant award, what is the basis for justification
3. Continuity of information paramount. Demographics and characteristics should match request information (firefighter PPE should match active firefighters / SCBA should be consistent with riding positions etc…)
2. Comprehension of the program goals and priorities are paramount prior to beginning an application request.
1. COMPETITION --- Need we say more???
Top Reasons Why Applications Are Not Awarded at Panel
10. Use of template
narratives provided by others.
9. Inconsistency in answers to request details questions and narrative.
8. Lack of long term commitment to proposal.
7. Using national rather than local data.
6. Mixing high and low priority items.
5. No clear vision of project.
4. Mistakes (which would have been detected by third-party review).
3. Insufficient details (project, budget, etc.).
2. Unreasonable request (high volume request for a low volume department).
1. Lack of financial need details.
9. Inconsistency in answers to request details questions and narrative.
8. Lack of long term commitment to proposal.
7. Using national rather than local data.
6. Mixing high and low priority items.
5. No clear vision of project.
4. Mistakes (which would have been detected by third-party review).
3. Insufficient details (project, budget, etc.).
2. Unreasonable request (high volume request for a low volume department).
1. Lack of financial need details.
NOTES:
10. Advise applicants not to use templates written by companies, vendors, or grant writers that does not reflect local data and information.
9. Answers to the questions in “Request Details” will provide a response that does not match to what is written in application (number of vehicles, number of incidents, why they need the items etc.)
8. Applicant will make case for need and request 1 year funding, but never mention that they will fund the program beyond the grant year.
7. Peer reviewers want to know about the applicants community, not what the national trends are for fire incidents etc.
6. Mixing high and low priorities tend to communicate to the evaluator that the cost/benefit to the application is low, and the applicant is asking for more than they really need.
5. It is important to communicate what the applicant is attempting to accomplish with their request. What is the risk, how do you plan to respond to it, and what will be the result?
4. Many times omissions or a lack of sufficient details in why the items are needed will be noted in the narratives. Misspelled words or incomplete sentences interfere with positive review.
3. Insufficient details in the project description and budget details leave the peer reviewer with unanswered questions, and unable to fairly rate the application.
2. Applicant request an aerial ladder for a community with very few large or tall structures. A high dollar scba fill station is requested for a station that has low call volume and does not discuss the distance to the next nearest fire station, or how they will share with others.
1. Applicant makes a great case for the risk, and provides excellent details, and an implementation plan, however, does not discuss why they need Federal assistance.