How many SAFER grants are being turned down?

[DaSharkie]

These grant requests shouldn't have even been considered without checking to see it they had gone through their municipal boards to begin with. They should have never made it out of the first review. :

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding. Right on target man.

Not necessarily a popular thought, but it is true.

[bummer]

Safer

These grant requests shouldn't have even been considered without checking to see it they had gone through their municipal boards to begin with. They should have never made it out of the first review. :

[DaSharkie]

One thing that I have seen pop up with SAFER and FIRE Act is that chiefs are applying for these grants without running them by town or city councils first.

Then they get approved by the Feds, and go to the town fathers and get chastised for doing so - as they should be.

Get your ducks in a row before you do these things and you won't get smacked down.

[cozmosis]

I'd wish they'd shift some of the refused money towards us. We applied for three, which would give us enough people to split our one station into two companies... But have heard nothing.

[onebugle]

There have been quite a few SAFER grants that have been turned back in due to the financial committment required by the municipalities. Some of the cases involve departments that sent applications without the knowledge of the municipality. When a department recieves the award the municipality turns it down due to the financial impact. They refuse it to protect themselves from defaulting on the grant which impacts their ability to apply in the future.

The biggest mistake is that departments do no read the program guidances carefully, before submitting an application.

The 2006 SAFER PG states the following:

The long-term nature of the eligible activities under these grants makes it essential that an applicant’s local governing body be involved in the application process. As such, each applicant certifies in their application that their governing body has been informed of the applicant’s intention to submit a SAFER grant request, that the local governing body acknowledges the commitment required for the grant if awarded, and that appropriate financial support will be secured for the applicant’s cost-sharing obligations.

This is early on in the PG. Departments that ignore this part have been the ones to refuse the grant.

[FF41230]

Yeah really. Sounds kinda pointless to apply for a grant if you cant support it. We applied for one for 3 firefighters the past couple years and havent heard a thing.

[ullrichk]

not for nothing but why did you put in for a grant for the 6 firefighters if your municipality can't afford them?

A fair question - and I don't know. I expect it was a case of "We don't stand a chance of getting this, but let's try anyway and worry about the matching funds if we get it."

[drparasite]

not for nothing but why did you put in for a grant for the 6 firefighters if your municipality can't afford them?

[ullrichk]

My department and a neighboring department were awarded SAFER grants for 6 firefighters apiece. Both departments are likely to turn them down because of the cost to the municipalities. I'm just curious if this is turning out to be a common problem. Any other cases?