[Federal Register: May 26, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 101)] [Notices] [Page 28504-28508] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26my99-99] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service North American Wetlands Conservation Act: Request for Evaluation Grant Proposals for Year 2000 AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of request for proposals. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to advise the public that over the period June 1, 1999, to July 15, 1999, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), will entertain proposals that request matching funds for projects that evaluate the success of North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) projects, or that will ensure the success of future NAWCA projects by improving strategic conservation planning capabilities. We will give funding priority to projects related to existing wetland conservation implementation plans, to be conducted in a partnership mode by wetland managers and scientists. Project criteria, proposal formatting and other essential application information is provided here. Funding is limited to projects located in the United States. DATES: Initial proposals (pre-proposals) must bear postmarks no later than Thursday, July 15, 1999. ADDRESSES: Address proposals to: North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 110, Arlington, Virginia, 22203, Attn: Evaluation Grants Coordinator. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Rex R. Johnson, Evaluation Grants Coordinator, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, 11510 American Holly Drive, Laurel, Maryland, 20708-4017, 301/497-5674; facsimile 301/497-5706, rex--johnson@fws.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: North American Wetlands Conservation Act Evaluation Grants 1. Introduction Since its inception in 1989, the North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA or Act) has added a new dimension to the conservation of wetland-associated migratory birds and the diverse wetland ecosystems upon which they and many other fish and wildlife species depend. Never before had Federal legislation been passed with the express purpose of creating partnerships among Federal and non- Federal wetland conservationists or with the explicit goal of implementing management plans emanating from international treaties and conventions. The Act was precedent-setting in its support of the new and innovative partnerships that were emerging from implementation of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and visionary in its anticipation of major national and international conservation initiatives for nongame migratory birds. Moreover, an institutional framework was created for garnering additional resources and pooling them to implement, via partnerships, high priority wetland conservation projects across Canada, the United States, and Mexico. Over the past eight years, $249 million of NAWCA grant funds have been leveraged with $516 million of partner funds and allocated through a highly competitive process to 588 projects in North America. However, the success of NAWCA involves more than the efficient allocation of limited Federal financial resources to support partner projects. The ultimate success of the Act hinges on efficiency and effectiveness in the attainment of biological ends--the conservation of migratory birds and the North American wetland ecosystems upon which many species of migratory birds and other wildlife depend. The evaluation grants program, described below, is designed to address how successfully the program is delivering the migratory bird and other wildlife resource benefits anticipated by the Act. 1.1 The Purposes of the Act Any strategy for implementing NAWCA or procedures for monitoring and evaluating its effectiveness must arise from the purposes of the Act: * * * To encourage partnerships among public agencies and other interests-- (1) To protect, enhance, restore, and manage an appropriate distribution and diversity of wetland ecosystems and other habitats for migratory birds and other fish and wildlife in North America; (2) To maintain current or improved distributions of migratory bird populations; and (3) To sustain an abundance of waterfowl and other migratory birds consistent with the goals of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the international obligations contained in the migratory bird treaties and conventions and other agreements with Canada, Mexico, and other countries. These purposes infer an explicit and measureable relationship between wetland conservation and wetland-wildlife management and values at a North American scale. While habitat benefits for all wetland- associated fish and wildlife are recognized, the stated emphasis on the Act is on ``current or improved distributions of migratory bird populations'' consistent with ``international obligations.'' The international migratory patterns of these birds is the thread which binds the patchwork of regional and national conservation work into a truly continent-wide quilt of wetland conservation. 1.1.1 Improving NAWCA Implementation Through Evaluation Section 19 of the 1994 amendments to NAWCA called for the development of ``a strategy to assist in implementation of the Act'' and ``procedures to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of wetlands conservation projects completed under this Act.'' Specifically * * * Not later than January 31, 1996, the Secretary, in cooperation with the [North American Wetlands Conservation] Council, to further the purposes of the Act shall-- (1) Develop and implement a strategy to assist in the implementation of this Act in conserving the full complement of North American wetlands systems and species [[Page 28505]] dependent on those systems, that incorporates information existing on the date of the issuance of the strategy in final form on types of wetlands habitats and species dependent on the habitats; and (2) Develop and implement procedures to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of wetlands conservation projects completed under this Act. The wording of Section 19 is consistent with the principles of adaptive resource management in which planning, implementation and evaluation function as interrelated parts of an iterative cycle. Planning has merit only to the extent it provides a strategy for implementation; and evaluation, only to the extent it allows refinements in future planning. Thus, the greatest benefits of planning, evaluation, or implementation cannot be realized without integrated progress in all three elements. 2. Evaluation Grant Goals To foster persistent partnerships among wetland and wildlife managers and scientists to generate reliable information through evaluation that is used to enhance future Act effectiveness through improved biological planning or partnering strategies. It cannot be overemphasized that the purpose of Evaluation Grants is to maximize the effectiveness of future wetlands conservation projects completed under the Act. Evaluation need should be identified by wetland or migratory bird managers who have traditionally implemented conservation activities under the Act. Thus, Evaluation Grant proposers should be past or potential NAWCA grant recipients (including, but not limited to, NAWMP Joint Venture representatives) partnered with technically-capable scientists. This partnering approach to evaluation will help ensure that Evaluation Grant projects: (1) originate from priority management information needs for strategic conservation delivery; (2) are derived from and support established habitat conservation plans or objectives; (3) are sound and scientifically-based; and (4) are used to direct future NAWCA wetland conservation implementation. 2.1 Priority Projects Proposed projects should evaluate the effectiveness of past or current NAWCA projects in achieving explicit program objectives, or should result in a refined understanding of wetland/landscape function, or migratory bird responses to wetland habitat management, in ways that enhance future NAWCA conservation delivery. Migratory bird functions should be evaluated in the context of wetland characteristics and landscape structure. Projects that evaluate the composition, management, or dynamics of established conservation partnerships such as NAWMP Joint Ventures with a goal of improving partnering strategies also will be favorably considered. 2.2 Eligibility Funding is limited to U.S. project proposals. 2.3 Project Duration Projects of 1-2 years in duration may be proposed. Projects spanning 3 years will be considered but are not encouraged. Three-year project proposals must include an explicit justification for the extended duration. 2.4 Available Funds The total funding package presented to the North American Wetlands Conservation Council (Council) in FY2000 will not total <ls-thn-eq>$500,000 of NAWCA funds. Selected projects will be funded for their full duration from the FY2000 allocation. A maximum project funding limit has not been established; however, proposals requesting a total of <ls-thn-eq>$100,000 of NAWCA funds are most likely to be selected. 2.4.1 Matching Funds Requirements Project partners must match grant requests with non-federal funds or other contributions by at least a 1-to-1 ratio. Acceptable matching contributions are described in Appendix A. 3. Proposal Development Proposal development will proceed in 2 stages beginning with the preparation and review of brief (3-5 page) preproposals. Preproposals will be screened by Council representatives, who will then work with successful applicants to develop a limited number into full proposals with objectives, partnerships, products, and outcomes mutually agreed upon by the Council and grant applicants. A Principal Investigator (PI) and a Project Officer (PO) that will administer the grant agreement, should be identified for each project. The PI and PO may be the same person. All written correspondence will be sent to the PI and PO; however, the PO must be: (1) affiliated with the PI's organization; (2) knowledgeable about biological, partnership, and administrative aspects of the proposal; and (3) readily available to provide information. Preproposals and full proposals should be accompanied by a cover page with the following information: A. Project Title B. Principal Investigator's 1. Name 2. Title 3. Organization 4. Address 5. Telephone number 6. Facsimile number 7. E-mail address 3.1 Project Justification A detailed project justification should be included in preproposals and full proposals. The justification should be derived from and refer to an established conservation organization's biological foundation and explicit objectives for past or current habitat projects, or for populations. The justification should be developed in light of Evaluation Grant goals and review criteria (section 4.2). Achieving Evaluation Grant project objectives should result in fulfilling the evaluation needs described in the justification. 3.2 Preproposals Five copies of preproposals must be submitted by July 15, 1999, and should provide a project a set of explicit objectives, preliminary methods, and a budget with a source of matching funds. Preproposals should adhere to the following outline: A. Justification (project description, explicit objectives) B. Preliminary Methods C. Preliminary Budget (see Appendix B) and Source of Matching Funds (letters of committment not required for preproposals) 3.3 Full Proposals Five copies of full proposals are due by November 1, 1999. Full proposals should adhere to the following outline: A. Abstract B. Project Description 1. Justification 2. Objectives 3. Methods Study Area (if appropriate) Data Acquisition Data Analysis 4. Products and Future Applications 5. Management Outreach C. Project Partners and Management D. Budget--(see Appendix B) 1. Funds Requested 2. Matching Funds or Services 3. Total Project Budget E. Project Timetable F. Literature Cited G. Appendix A--Investigator Qualifications [[Page 28506]] H. Appendix B--Letters of Matching Commitment from Partners (see Appendix C) 4. Preproposal and Full Proposal Review Council representatives will review preproposals and full proposals, and will present funding recommendations based on full proposal reviews to the Council. 4.1 How To Submit a Proposal Preprosals and full proposals should be submitted by the required deadlines (section 6) to: Evaluation Grants Coordinator, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 110, Arlington, VA 22203. 4.2 Review Team The review team will consist of the Evaluation Grants Coordinator, 2 North American Wetlands Conservation Council Staff, and 1 USGS- Biological Resources Division scientist with expertise in wetlands and landscape ecology. Other individuals will be enlisted to review preproposal and full proposal methods related to their areas of expertise when necessary. 4.3 Review Criteria At a minimum, preproposals and full proposals should address the following issues, which will constitute the general review criteria. A rigid ``scoring'' system will not be used to determine which preproposals and full proposals are most meritorious. The review team will use sound professional judgment to evaluate proposals, in the context of communication among qualified professionals. Partnerships: The Act is predicated on the power of partnerships to deliver wetlands conservation. Proposals for evaluation and planning should likewise include strong partnerships. Prospective grantees are expected to build upon existing wetlands conservation partnerships to maximize the use of and coordination with existing planning, implementation and evaluation infrastructures rather than seek to develop new or competing organizations. Contribution to increasing the effectiveness of the Act: Act funds have been used to varying degrees to fund wetlands conservation projects across the country. Some regions have received little Act funding while others have applied many millions of dollars to implement projects. Proposals will be judged on the extent to which they evaluate and affect NAWCA projects, past and future. Thus, priorities will be on: evaluation/planning for areas with a large number of projects; large affected acreages and/or significant investment of Act funds; and/or projects or methods related to critical wetland conservation approaches for that region. Contribution to integration of migratory bird conservation: Delivering NAWCA implementation funds to projects best fulfilling the purposes of the Act requires integration of NAWMP goals with those of other major bird initiatives. The extent to which the proposals advance integrated conservation of waterfowl, neotropical migratory birds, shorebirds, and other wetland-associated migratory birds will be a principal criterion in proposal evaluation. Contribution to a landscape-level context for wetland conservation: Evaluation units should be ecologically based and appropriate in scale to address regional wetlands conservation goals and objectives and facilitate a meaningful linkage to continental migratory bird population objectives, and those of other wetlands-dependent wildlife as available. Therefore, proposals should address the evaluation needs for wetland habitats in the context of ecologically-based landscapes as opposed to an individual wetland. Status of biological planning and evaluation: Biological planning, evaluation and monitoring is relatively advanced in some regions of the U.S., and almost non-existent in others. Proposals addressing the full range of planning and evaluation consistent with Council goals are encouraged. These may range from initiation of the adaptive management process in areas currently using little or no proactive, integrated, biological planning, to evaluation of progress toward fulfilling objectives derived from ongoing biological planning efforts. Contribution to the biological foundation for wetland and associated migratory bird conservation: Projects should facilitate the linkage of regional or continental migratory bird population responses to landscape-level habitat conservation objectives. This linkage represents a fundamental principle in the Council's evaluation strategy, and projects seeking to establish or significantly improve that linkage will be a priority. Contributions to the effectiveness of future partnerships: The success of future NAWCA implementation is dependent on strong partnerships backed by sound biological planning. The evolution and composition of partnerships dictates their success in delivering migratory bird conservation under NAWCA. Projects that evaluate the dynamics of past NAWCA partnerships with the goal of increasing the effectiveness of future partnerships will be seriously considered. Commitment to long-term regional planning and evaluation: The extent to which applicants demonstrate the likelihood of ``institutionalizing'' the planning and evaluation efforts for which Act funding is sought is a significant consideration. The Council seeks to insure that Act funds are used to catalyze these efforts, and will deprioritize proposals in which the partners in the planning and evaluation effort are clearly dependent upon the Act for continued future progress. This criterion can be viewed as analogous to the ``long-term'' criterion used to evaluate implementation projects. 5. Grants Administration and Performance Reporting Evaluation Grants will be administered by NAWWO staff, and evaluation grant recipients will be required to provide detailed annual and project completion reports (see Appendix D for reporting formats) by October 1 each year through project termination. Annual and final reports will be presented to the Council and Council Staff by the Council Coordinator or Evaluation Grants Coordinator at their November/ December meetings. 6. Schedule The following schedule will be adhered to in soliciting, reviewing, and funding Evaluation Grants proposals: Request for Proposals............ 1 June 1999. Due Date for Proposals........... 15 July 1999. Preproposal Reviews Completed and 15 August 1999. Proposers Notified. Full Proposals Due............... 1 November 1999. Funding Recommendations Presented December 1999. to Council. Evaluation Grant Awards Announced January/February 2000. and Funds Disbursed. [[Page 28507]] Appendix A--Matching Contributions Acceptable Matching Contributions-- Direct project-related expenditures for: Equipment/Supplies Labor (non-Federal employees) Travel Cash (non-Federal sources) Related evaluation/implementation expenditures (non-Federal funds) incurred within previous 2 years (consult Evaluation Grants Coordinator) Other (consult Evaluation Grants Coordinator) Waiver-of-Overhead (within non-Federal agency/organization established policy guidelines) Unacceptable Contributions-- Contributions of Federal employee staff time Federal Aid in Wildlife/Sport Fish Restoration grants to States Funds that have a Federal origin Evaluation/implementation costs incurred> 2 years before project performance period Any contribution used to match a previous Federal or non-Federal grant Other contributions determined to be not acceptable (consult with Evaluation Grants Coordinator) Appendix B--Budgets Preproposal Budget Format ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FY00 FY01 FY02 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NAWCA Funds Requested........................................... .............. .............. .............. Matching Contributions.......................................... .............. .............. .............. ----------------------------------------------- Total....................................................... .............. .............. .............. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Full Proposal Budget Format -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FY00 FY01 FY02 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NAWCA Match NAWCA Match NAWCA Match -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Personnel............................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Jane Doe @ x FTE...................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Equipment............................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Supplies *.............................................. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Travel.................................................. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Other................................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. Indirect Costs.......................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total............................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Criteria for supplies. Appendix C--Sample Letter for Commitment of Matching Contributions April 19, 1999. Mr. David A. Smith, Coordinator, North American Wetlands Conservation Council, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Rm 110, Arlington, VA 22203 Dear Mr. Smith: The <insert name of contributing agency or organization> is committed to providing funds to match the grant request entitled <insert proposal name> submitted by <insert name of proposing agency or organization>. Contributions meet the eligibility requirements explained in the Request for Proposals for the North American Wetlands Conservation Act Evaluation Grants. The contribution does not include funds from the Federal Aid in Wildlife/Sport Fish Restoration grants to State programs or other Federal monies. Following is an explanation of contributions: We intend to provide <$$> in FY00 and <$$> in FY01. Of these funds, <$$> will be used for <insert staff/services to be provided by contractual or temporary hires>. This is the fair market value of these services. <$$> will be used for <insert direct expenditures for purchases, travel/transportation>. This is the fair market value of these expenditures. <$$> are in-kind contributions that will be used for <insert staff/services related to the proposed project>. This is the fair market value of these services. <insert name of contributing agency or organization> is pleased to be a partner in <insert proposal name> and this match is put forward with full knowledge and support to leverage other non- Federal and Federal grant funds. Sincerely, <insert name of agency/organization representative> <insert title> Appendix D--Reporting Formats Return 3 copies to: Evaluation Grants Coordinator, North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Rm 110, Arlington, VA 22203. A. Annual Performance Reporting-- I. Cover Page: Project Title Reporting Period PO and PI names and addresses II. Executive Summary III. Project Justification IV. Objectives V. Methods VI. Accomplishments/Summary of Findings to date VII. Management Outreach to date VIII. Grant Funds Expended/Remaining IX. Projected Activities/Time Table X. Literature Cited B. Project Completion Report-- I. Cover Page: Project Title Reporting Period PO and PI names and addresses II. Executive Summary III. Project Justification IV. Objectives V. Methods VI. Results and Discussion/Products<SUP>a</SUP> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \a\ Include<gr-thn-eq> 3 hard copies of cartographic products that result from NAWCA Evaluation Grant projects. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VII. Management Outreach and Impacts to date VIII. Future Management Outreach and Outcomes IX. Continuing Evaluation Needs-- Institutionalizing the Evaluation Project Future Evaluation--the next steps X. Literature Cited The detailed description of the submission and review schedule, format for pre-proposals and full proposals, and proposal review criteria, contained herein, may also be viewed and downloaded from the North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office (NAWWO) internet web site at: http://www.fws.gov/r9nawwo/nawcahp.html after June 1, 1999, or by calling the NAWWO secretary at 703/358-1784. Pre-proposals and full proposals must contain all required components on the postmarked date. Pre-proposals and full [[Page 28508]] proposals lacking required components are subject to being declared ineligible and not further considered for funding. We have submitted information collection requirements for the NAWCA Evaluation Grants Program to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. The OMB control number is 1018-0100. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information request unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The information solicited: is necessary to gain a benefit in the form of a grant, as determined by the North American Wetlands Conservation Council and Migratory Bird Conservation Commission; is necessary to determine the eligibility and relative value of evaluation projects; and results in an approximate paperwork burden of 8 hours for each pre-proposal and 40 hours for each proposal; and does not carry a premise of confidentiality. The information collected in this program will not be part of a system of records covered by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552(a)). Dated: May 21, 1999. Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 99-13424 Filed 5-25-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P