Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SAFER Round 3

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SAFER Round 3

    SAFER Round 3 came out today and is posted on the SAFER Awards page.

    7 Awards
    $9,396,123.00
    All for Hiring, no Recruitment.

  • #2
    Wow, those are all pretty big too. Five with 12 hires, one for 14 and one for 18.

    Good luck to those of us who remain. (Especially Culpster and me!!)

    earl

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Greenacres2
      Good luck to those of us who remain. (Especially Culpster and me!!)
      ME TOO !!!!

      - Received number on 1199A
      - Received 10 Questions
      - Received reduction

      But no award yet.....

      Comment


      • #4
        If a departmetn can afford to take over the funding for 18 persons in 5 years, why couldn't the ask for a smaller number and fully fund a few more starting now. If they don't have the money now, they probably won't in the future.

        Comment


        • #5
          I agree; I think that these numbers are NOT what this program should be about. These are staggaring numbers. These numbers look like they are filling full houses here. What about the little guy??? Wisconsin STILL has no SAFER awards!!! And I don't think we will...

          good luck earl

          Comment


          • #6
            We had the SAFER award number show up on the AFG 1199A almost 1 month ago. We applied for 1 ff and Recuitment and retention. The wait is getting to me! We hope to hire our first full time firefighter working Monday - Friday when our response numbers are so low.

            Comment


            • #7
              Just like in AFG, if you met the priorities of the program and had proper need explained, you got funded. If it took 12 firefighters to meet NFPA1910,then that is what you needed to write for to get funded.

              It is kind of like the statement in AFG where you are asking for turnouts and you have 35 FFs and all of them needed gear; you only asked for 25 sets in an attempt not to look greedy. You failed because the program stated they wanted 100% of FFs in NFPA compliant gear and your appliciation failed to meet that standard.

              It sounds as though you are complaining because DHS funded them; that was what the money was put there for. DHS didn't score these grants; you and your brother Chiefs sitting on peer review panels scored them. The application had to be agreed upon by three reviewers so, you should not be pointing fingers at the program.

              Without reading each of these departments applciations it is patently unfair to say that they are being "excessive" or "filling a full house". I have had success with SAFER applications from a simple $10k grant that was funded to pay for a babysitter for the volunteers children while they answered calls, to 12 firefighters at $100K a year and it simply boils down to reading, comprehending and addressing the priorities of the program.

              Do a good job at it, have sufficient need and the result is " funded".
              Last edited by ktb9780; 10-21-2006, 07:55 AM.
              Kurt Bradley
              Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
              " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

              Comment


              • #8
                With this last round putting out so much, how much is left? We applied for three guys just to have four on the engine, and we stay pretty busy.

                Comment


                • #9
                  $42,741,007 out of $110 million has been awarded. Around another $10 mil has been 1199A'd, so about half of the awardees haven't been notified yet. Plenty of time and dough.
                  Brian P. Vickers
                  www.vickersconsultingservices.com
                  Emergency Services Consulting
                  Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
                  Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by ktb9780
                    Just like in AFG, if you met the priorities of the program and had proper need explained, you got funded. If it took 12 firefighters to meet NFPA1910,then that is what you needed to write for to get funded.

                    It is kind of like the statement in AFG where you are asking for turnouts and you have 35 FFs and all of them needed gear; you only asked for 25 sets in an attempt not to look greedy. You failed because the program stated they wanted 100% of FFs in NFPA compliant gear and your appliciation failed to meet that standard.

                    It sounds as though you are complaining because DHS funded them; that was what the money was put there for. DHS didn't score these grants; you and your brother Chiefs sitting on peer review panels scored them. The application had to be agreed upon by three reviewers so, you should not be pointing fingers at the program.




                    Without reading each of these departments applciations it is patently unfair to say that they are being "excessive" or "filling a full house". I have had success with SAFER applications from a simple $10k grant that was funded to pay for a babysitter for the volunteers children while they answered calls, to 12 firefighters at $100K a year and it simply boils down to reading, comprehending and addressing the priorities of the program.

                    Do a good job at it, have sufficient need and the result is " funded".

                    BINGO and a Bulleyes well said Kurt ..I would think most who followed the guidelines will be pleased this year
                    [FONT=Times New Roman]Douglas R. Patton
                    IACOJ
                    "Omnis Cedo Domus"
                    I am now a former Chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone.
                    Isaiah 6:8

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      To be fair??? Well; I think that this program is not funded well enough yet to allow these kind of awards. As I have been saying, there are 3 states that havent recieved any funding since the grants (SAFER) existance, and looks as if those three states will not recieve any funding (just a guess because of lack of activity from these states, Wisconsin being one of them).

                      If they want to be funding departments these kind of numbers (personell wise) this program has to have the funding the same as AFG. With the amount that SAFER is giving out, it only allows for what, about 1,000 firefighters this year??? Last year it was about 500 FF's. Now I am no math wiz but shouldnt that constitute to about 20 Firefighters per state???

                      Now here is my beef; program guidance clearly states (and I quote):The purpose of the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grants is to help fire departments increase their cadre of firefighters. The program’s goal is to enhance the local fire departments’ ability to attain and maintain 24-hour staffing, thus assuring their communities have adequate protection from fire and fire-related hazards. The SAFER grants have two activities that will help grantees in this endeavor: (1) hiring of firefighters and (2) recruitment and retention of volunteer firefighters.

                      I would like to re-iterate on the fact of TO HELP FIRE DEPARTMENTS INCREASE OF FIREFIGHTERS. Not jackets right Earl!!!

                      Now getting back to my main point, 20 FF's per state is not much at all, as we all know!!! Now if they are going to award these kind of numbers, they damn well should be able to award those who do need 1 or 2 FF's that CAN make a difference, no excuse. Last year there was a round that they awarded these numbers; 1 department (Paterson Fire Department, NJ probably remnance of 9-11?) was awarded over 6M for 64 FF's. If they are giving one department 64 FF's why cant I have one of those that will probably mean more to us if they were to be awarded 63 FF's.

                      There does have to be some sort of cap on this, local governments must also take SOME responsibility...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Safer

                        I agree. Where are the awards for Wisconsin? This program should not be about putting on 64 for one department

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          But that's the stated purpose and scope of the grant program, like it or not. Increased the cadre of firefighters, no stipulations to limit how many or how few that may be.

                          Wisconsin may never see a SAFER award. There's nothing that says WI has to get one. Nothing says anyone has to get one, that's why it's called a fair and impartial process. If that means some states never get certain awards, then that's how the cookie crumbled.

                          We're not in a welfare program folks, if an application isn't scored high enough when compared to the priorities to overcome other applications, it won't get awarded. You can follow all of the guidelines, put in all of the right information, and still not be awarded. That's what happens when there are more requests than money available. All you can do is put out the best and most accurate picture of your need and solution and hope it is greater than those of others. If so, awarded. If not, try again.
                          Brian P. Vickers
                          www.vickersconsultingservices.com
                          Emergency Services Consulting
                          Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
                          Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            All I am saying Brian is that this is a Nation wide problem, it should be a nation wide solution, and it isn't. And the idea of this being an impartial grant is kind of hard to take. We all know how much politics play into this, and I think that those of us who would like to believe that politics DON'T play into this is being blind.

                            AFG is well funded (even though we would like to see more), and this program (SAFER) just isn't funded to be fair to everyone. Now I agree that this isn't a "welfare" program, hell, I know of many departments that have recieved grants that are so well equiped, and over staffed, that are still getting grants!!!

                            You said it yourself Brian, this is to "increase the cadre of firefighters" and I too believe that. But who is to say those of us in Wisconsin, or Bum-#$%^ Nebraska's needs aren't as important to as those that were just hired in FLA.

                            Now I know I wrote a good grant, and I know that I wrote it to the PG to-a-tee, but that doesn't make this problem go away. This program, to be affective, needs to have the funding that the AFG has to be affective, and it doesn't. Am I saying that this program is a failure?? No I am not... What I am saying is we need to lobby fo more $$$$. We also have to make our own communities aware of these problems of "non-compliance" and hold them accountable for the lack of staffing throughout the nation.

                            I do believe that SAFER isn't the fix all solution, but we need to sread it out more to everyone that needs this assitance, and not just have a "select few."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              But how do you suggest spreading the money around without compromising standards? If it took 12 for some departments to meet the standard, how can you say that giving them 6 is fine in order to give you 1 to meet the same standard? So you meet the standard and they don't have to? That doesn't make any sense at all.

                              And you're contradicting yourself. Agreeing it isn't welfare but then saying the funds need to be spread out more? They'd be spread out more if the applications that score higher are spread out more. And since there's no way to predict that, the process is doing it's job in awarding those that have higher needs. A department that needs 4 to meet standards is in more need than someone that needs 1. It doesn't mean that all apps for higher numbers will score higher in the end. There are several awards for 1-3 FFs in there already so I'm not finding where it's being skewed towards any one type or size department.

                              WI only put in 26 apps out of nearly 1800. ND only 7. VT 5. CT put in 21, and I know of at least 1 R&R pending and 1 already announced. MA put in 50, TX 116. If some states want more awards, they need to apply.

                              And for the millionth time, politics is only involved in putting money in the program. It has nothing to do with AFG, SAFER, or FP&S. Homeland Security "Grant" Program? Yep, that's all that whole program is.
                              Brian P. Vickers
                              www.vickersconsultingservices.com
                              Emergency Services Consulting
                              Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
                              Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

                              Comment

                              300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                              Collapse

                              Upper 300x250

                              Collapse

                              Taboola

                              Collapse

                              Leader

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X