Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FP Update

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

  • FP Update

    UPDATE
    The application period for the Fiscal Year 2006 Fire Prevention and Safety Grants will open at 8:00 a.m. EDT on December 4, 2006 until 5:00 p.m. EDT on January 12, 2007. Please review the 2006 FP&S program guidance for more details. (Posted: 11/22/2006)
    Let the fun begin.
    Last edited by onebugle; 11-22-2006, 03:33 PM.

  • #2
    Say it ain't so

    Finally, a ray of light.

    Comment


    • #3
      Ray of light? How about ray of lots of work? That will only leave 2 weeks between FP and AFG application periods. Good thing sleep is over-rated.
      Brian P. Vickers
      www.vickersconsultingservices.com
      Emergency Services Consulting
      Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
      Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

      Comment


      • #4
        Brian,

        Ok..I have been working a bunch of night shifts so I am a bit hazy..but if I read this correctly; FP&S ends, and 2wks later SAFEER starts?

        and what is sleep exactly

        Comment


        • #5
          Not SAFER. Main AFG has always started the 1st Monday of the 1st full week in March. 30 days from Jan 12 puts us at Feb 16th as a close date for FPS. March 5th is the 1st Monday. Oy.

          SAFER should still be in the June/July range.
          Brian P. Vickers
          www.vickersconsultingservices.com
          Emergency Services Consulting
          Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
          Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BC79er
            Not SAFER. Main AFG has always started the 1st Monday of the 1st full week in March. 30 days from Jan 12 puts us at Feb 16th as a close date for FPS. March 5th is the 1st Monday. Oy.

            SAFER should still be in the June/July range.
            Look at that again Brian, it will be about six weeks. The notice stated the FPS would close on 01/12/2007; open date was 12/04/2006.

            Comment


            • #7
              Oops. This is what happens why you try and read emails while entertaining a teething 10 month old.
              Brian P. Vickers
              www.vickersconsultingservices.com
              Emergency Services Consulting
              Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
              Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

              Comment


              • #8
                BIG CHANGE this year. Surprise, surprise ; cost share requirment for fire departments at same level as AFG. During the last two years the matching dollar requirment was waived and it appears that they have tacked on a cost share requirement for this year. Wonder what caused that little tidbit to change this year? Asso noticed that there was absolutely no mention of that in the previous discussions , tutorial and I don't even recall a grapevine rumor of that occuring for this year's program.
                Kurt Bradley
                Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
                " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ktb9780
                  BIG CHANGE this year. Surprise, surprise ; cost share requirment for fire departments at same level as AFG. During the last two years the matching dollar requirment was waived and it appears that they have tacked on a cost share requirement for this year. Wonder what caused that little tidbit to change this year? Asso noticed that there was absolutely no mention of that in the previous discussions , tutorial and I don't even recall a grapevine rumor of that occuring for this year's program.
                  Saw that Kurt and I have mixed feelings. Sure, we need equipment to do our jobs - both before and after a fire. My only issue is that we must spend more of our hard-earned and fundraised money we need to make apparatus payments and such to meet a cost share requirement for equipment that may not even be for the FD, such as a smoke detector program.

                  Don't get me wrong - we're all for supporting our community and the safety of it, but I can forsee this to be an obstacle for many fire departments.

                  This is where you need to have a business in your community sponsor the program or your local municipality should help you meet the cost share!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Vulnerable to political pressure

                    The change in the FP&S evaluation criteria must have come about after the pressure from the New York delegation about other homeland security money.

                    vfd capn


                    Page 15:

                    "Vulnerability Statement: The assessment of risk is a critical component of the
                    DHS risk analysis target capability. As such, the presence of a process that
                    takes into account the characteristics of a jurisdiction (e.g., population
                    features) are important in an objective or reasoned approach to addressing
                    the fire hazard in a community. Therefore, the applicant should summarize
                    the vulnerability the project will address in a concise statement including how
                    the vulnerability was determined and how the target population was identified.
                    The methodology for identification of the vulnerability should be discussed.
                    Identification of the vulnerability that will be addressed with the proposed
                    project can be established through a formal or informal risk assessment....."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      FP has always had the informal or formal assessment requirement in it, but they've never elaborated what exactly that meant until recently. This is why hard numbers as in X students between the ages of 6 and 14 are in our first due, or out of the 80 apartment buildings over half do not have a central alarm system because of their ag, resulting in 3 civilian injuries, etc, etc. Something that shows that there really is a situation that needs addressing, not just that a department wants something. There has to be a lack of whatever the project is addressing in existence.
                      Brian P. Vickers
                      www.vickersconsultingservices.com
                      Emergency Services Consulting
                      Westlake VFD - Houston, TX
                      Proud Member IACOJ - Redneck Division

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        gotta vent a little

                        Okay, according to the PG-Fire departments are required to put up a cost share portion for this grant but here is a little note straight from page 2-

                        Please Note: There is no cost share for grants under this activity (Fire Prevention and Safety) to eligible national, regional, state, local or community organizations.

                        Why does it seem like they are penalizing the fire departments? I just do not think it is fair to make the fire departments pay to help save lives in their communities when they are giving it away to other organizations.

                        It just isn't right. Either all is cost share or none, this is absurd!!!!! How does everyone else feel on this?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ncfscd6
                          Okay, according to the PG-Fire departments are required to put up a cost share portion for this grant but here is a little note straight from page 2-

                          Please Note: There is no cost share for grants under this activity (Fire Prevention and Safety) to eligible national, regional, state, local or community organizations.

                          Why does it seem like they are penalizing the fire departments? I just do not think it is fair to make the fire departments pay to help save lives in their communities when they are giving it away to other organizations.

                          It just isn't right. Either all is cost share or none, this is absurd!!!!! How does everyone else feel on this?

                          IMHO for the answer to that you need to note who the large awards went to last year and who the "annual" big winners are in this grant and what the cost share would be for them. Not saying it is right but....look at who those organizations are that got the $1 million dollar grants and I think you will have your answer. There also may be some validity in "assessing" the cost share for those large national organizations. How would you " determine" the population group or would you just consider all of them to be 20%?
                          Kurt Bradley
                          Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
                          " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I know, the entire time I was reading that I was remembering the large national organizations awarded last year. It is like they are trying to turn it into (large organization grants and not assistance to fire departments grants). It is frustrating because here in rural MS, we are not receiving the benefits from those large organizations being awarded and desperately need smoke alarms. We have a smoke alarm program that we provide for those in need. We go without, just to buy alarms for those who need it. We have found that 2 out of every 5 homes do not have alarms here. We need funding for a large program to be able to reach everyone we need to. Oh, I have applied in the past and will continue to, it is just frustrating tho. It seems like instead of patting the fire departments on the back-they are telling them to turn around and slapping them in the face. Unfortunately, it is the communities that suffer and not the fire departments. We see way too many fire deaths. Most of those occur in homes without working smoke alarms. A little bit of funding for alarms and education could go a long way. I just hate to see the citizens come up on the short end of this deal.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Most of the complaints on the lack of matching came from smaller departments claiming that they couldn't compete with the cost-benefit of larger populations so FP was turning into a free urban smoke detector program. The perception was that these departments were applying only because there was no matching. Not true, but apparently to appease the masses the matching re-appeared. In 2004 it was 30% for populations over 50k, 10% under.
                              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