FY24 Marine Debris Removal Full Proposal Applicant Webinar

[SLIDE 1] Welcome everyone to the NOAA Marine Debris Program FY24 Marine Debris Removal Under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Grant Applicant Webinar. My name is Amanda Dwyer and I am a grants management specialist with the NOAA Marine Debris Program and the competition manager for this competition. I’m joined today by my NOAA Marine Debris Program Grant team colleagues Sarah Lowe, Tom Barry, & Gina Digiantonio.

[SLIDE 2] For today’s presentation, we will be providing an overview of the competition priorities, application content, information on how the applications will be evaluated, tips and submission instructions, and available resources for preparing your application, as well as the anticipated timeline for this competition. This is a pre-recorded version of the webinar presentation, and you will be able to find a document of the questions asked and responses provided during the live webinar on our website. 

[SLIDE 3] Through this webinar today, our goals are to communicate our expectations for proposals, give an overview of the submission process and timeline of the overall award process, and answer questions. 

[SLIDE 4] For this competition, up to $24M will be available to award to meritorious removal projects and individual removal projects should request at least $800,000, but no more than $6M and we expect typical awards to range from $1M to $4M dollars. 

[SLIDE 5] As stated in the Notice Of Funding Opportunity there is no non-federal matching requirement for this competition, but it is strongly encouraged. Cost sharing, leveraged funds, and/or in-kind support will make projects more competitive and is an element in the evaluation criteria. Cost-sharing and match contributions are an important aspect of our grant programs, and are helpful in leveraging federal dollars for our program to continue providing future grant opportunities. This is why it is important that every effort should be taken to obtain match funds. This goal is to encourage the involvement of different groups in meaningful ways, and there are a variety of ways to do this which include but are not limited to: 

-public or private partnerships 

-volunteer time - which can be calculated by finding your state’s average volunteer rate, documenting the source of this value in your application, and providing an estimate of the number of volunteers and the hours that they will spend on proposed project activities. We suggest that you find the volunteer rate for your state on independentsector.org

-Another option is personnel time or benefits. If there are individuals who do not need federal funding for salaries or benefits for their time planning or conducting proposed project activities during the award period, this can be valued as in-kind match -And the final example I’ll share is existing equipment such as private boat use or other equipment provided by project partners at no cost. 

[SLIDE 6] The evaluation criteria for cost-share and match will consider if the proposal incorporates formal and/or informal match. Formal cost-share or match is considered any non-federal cost-sharing, match, or in-kind contributions. More information on these policies can be found in the Notice of Funding Opportunity. Formal contributions must be clearly described in both the official budget narrative and the budget tables. Please note that funded applications will be legally bound to provide the full amount of non-federal match funds proposed in the budget. 

Informal contributions would be leveraged funds that don’t qualify as non-federal cost-share or match but demonstrate meaningful contributions to the award. These should be clearly described at the end of the budget narrative, but should not be included in official budget tables. This would include any federal contributions or if the project is part of a larger-related effort. 

No preference for formal or informal contributions will be given for meeting this evaluation criteria. 

[SLIDE 7] Now we will briefly go over the competition priorities. As you’re all aware, the highest priority for this funding opportunity is to support impactful, large marine debris removal projects. This competition considers impactful projects to be those that will have long-lasting, transformational benefits to marine and coastal NOAA Trust Resources, coastal communities, and/or local economies. For the purposes of this funding opportunity, “large debris” is defined as abandoned and derelict vessels (ADVs), derelict fishing gear (DFG), and other debris that is unable to be easily collected by hand. We encourage you to review our website for examples of currently funded projects as NOAA will consider the proposals in the context of already-funded projects, including projects that received funding through previous Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Marine Debris Removal Grants, to avoid duplication of removal efforts in similar locations. If you find other projects proposing similar work in the same region as your proposed project, please include relevant details for how this work will be complementary and not duplicative. 

While large marine debris is the main priority for this funding opportunity, the strongest projects will also prioritize the following priorities.

[SLIDE 8] Priority will be given to applicants that demonstrate clear removal and disposal outcomes. Applicants should identify clear target removal metrics, such as pounds removed, and removals should also be conducted with a focus on alternative disposal methods when possible, which means applicants should use disposal methods that are the most environmentally friendly given the location, availability, and the resources of the specific removal effort. 

[SLIDE 9] Another key priority is prevention. Applicants should include strategies to prevent the reaccumulation of marine debris in the future. Marine debris prevention activities should aim to reduce the recurrence of the debris that is being targeted in the removal efforts. Examples of various prevention activities include, but are not limited to, the development or expansion of state, regionally, or nationally focused marine debris prevention programs, vessel or fishing gear turn-in opportunities, vessel or fishing gear recycling programs, and targeted programs working with boaters, fisherman, or other relevant stakeholders. We do recognize that there are some circumstances where it isn’t possible to have effective prevention efforts on the debris being targeted for removal. For example, the removal of debris that is primarily coming in from offshore rather than locally. In these scenarios, it is appropriate to incorporate general marine debris prevention strategies into your proposal and clearly state why the prevention activities are not directly related to the targeted removals. Having said this, please do keep in mind that while prevention is important, the proposal will be evaluated primarily based on removal outcomes, and as such these projects should clearly focus on removal benefits as the main project and budget components. 

[SLIDE 10] NOAA is also committed to advancing equity and support for underserved communities and applicants are strongly encouraged to incorporate diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility into their projects through proactive and equitable community engagement at various stages of the proposed projects. Applicants should note that greater consideration will be given to projects that propose to work in areas with underserved communities that have been historically marginalized and overburdened by pollution. 

Specifically, applicants should describe any project activities that will take place within, have a portion of the benefits flow to, and/or meaningfully engage Tribal or underserved communities. In this competition, meaningful engagement refers to an intentional exchange between the applicant and the underserved community where both have multiple opportunities to ensure the other is correctly understanding each other’s perspectives and ideas. Please see the notice of funding opportunity for additional details and tools to aid you in this priority. We will also provide additional details on this later in the webinar when discussing the application components. 

[SLIDE 11] Now we will move onto the description of the application itself, starting with the required federal forms that you can find on grants.gov. 

The SF424 is the official application document where you will fill out information about your organization and key project details. 

The SF424A is where you will provide your budget information for both federal and non-federal match funds for your proposed project. Each page asks for a summary of the budget information broken out in different details including overall totals, broken down by budget categories, and broken down by years/quarters. We understand the form can be a bit confusing, so we have prepared an updated SF424A how-to document on our applicant resources page, addressing common areas of confusion for past applicants. 

The SF424B and CD511 are forms that require your signature. 

Since lobbying activities are not allowed under MDP competitions for federally funded activities, the SF-LLL should not be needed in your application. 

[SLIDE 12] Now moving onto the proposal itself, here is an outline of the proposal components. We will walk through the main sections of these next and you can find this list on pages 15-16 of the Notice of Funding Opportunity. 

[SLIDE 13] So the full proposal summary is designed to provide reviewers and the selection committee with a snapshot of the project. You will notice that there will be the same information requested in the summary and in the narrative. Please use the narrative to provide specific details for these components, and the summary to provide a high level overview of these components. 

The proposed activities is intended to be a list of the overarching types of activities that will occur, so that it can be easily identified what type of project is being proposed. So this section should include things like if the project includes: 

-Administering a subaward competition for removals 

-Surveying/prioritizing activities for identifying specific removal targets -The direct removal of already identified targets and if so include the expected type and number of these identified targets 

-And any Prevention and/or monitoring activities

Again, this section is really intended to be just a couple of sentences with the above information, and more detailed descriptions can be provided in the summary description and in the project narrative. 

[SLIDE 14] The project narrative will be where you include the details for your proposed project activities in 15 pages or less. Applicants should not assume that NOAA or any reviewer has any prior knowledge relative to the merits of the project described in the proposal or the applicant. So now we will briefly walk through the following sections. 

[SLIDE 15] So the introduction should be a summary stating the problem the proposed removal work is addressing and how it meets the competition priorities and other key details listed here as well as in the NOFO. Please be as specific as possible with the proposed project outcomes and include at a minimum: an estimate of how many pounds of debris will be removed from the marine/coastal environment, the number and type of ADVs/DFG/other debris items removed, the geographic area in square miles or shoreline miles surveyed. And again, please review the NOFO carefully for more project-specific metrics to include based on your specific project. 

[SLIDE 16] Please also be as specific as possible with the project location. So, if possible, please include maps, and exact coordinates of specific field sites, as well as describe the type of environment that you will be working in, and how you selected your sites. If exact locations are unknown at the time of the application, of creating the application, please describe in as much detail as possible how and when these specific locations will be determined. 

[SLIDE 17] Now we won’t walk through each of the points on this slide individually, but please be sure to refer to all the components requested in the narrative to ensure you are providing all the details needed for reviewers to fully evaluate your award. Specifically, please note the expectations for details included for awards that are proposing specific targeted debris removals and/or subaward competitions. 

[SLIDE 18] As mentioned earlier, the disposal approach and prevention activities associated with the removal work are a priority for the competition and the details of these activities should be clearly explained in your proposal. This includes how these activities will be conducted and what the expected outcomes will be. If there are monitoring activities proposed, these should also be clearly explained with the goals, methods, and outcomes of the monitoring activities, and how it will complement the removal and disposal activities in the proposal.

[SLIDE 19] The NOAA Marine Debris Program will need to complete environmental compliance for all field activities so please provide specific information on site locations, species/habitat to be impacted, and when during the year these on-the-ground activities will take place. Please also be sure to reference and include any existing permits that would be relevant to the proposed work. 

[SLIDE 20] The narrative should incorporate how diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility, or DEIJA as it will be referred to later in the presentation, ensure that these initiatives are built into your proposal as well as a description of any past experience in promoting these efforts or activities. We also ask that you specifically use the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) to identify if any known project locations take place in disadvantaged communities. We do recognize that CEJST may lack information about specific communities, especially those in U.S. territories. We are using this tool because it was developed by the White House for federal agencies to use, but if you have localized tools or other systems you are welcome to reference those in addition to CEJST, especially to provide explanations for why a community may be underserved/disadvantaged that wasn’t indicated as one in CEJST. Please also be very clear about whether or not the work is occurring in a disadvantaged/underserved community and/or if the benefits from the project will be flowing to these communities, and if so, how those benefits will be made and measured. Additionally, the strongest proposals will incorporate meaningful engagement with these communities. Meaningful engagement can occur in the identification, design, and/or implementation of proposed projects and is defined in this competition as an intentional exchange between the applicant and the underserved community where both have multiple opportunities to ensure the other is correctly understanding each other’s perspectives and ideas. This will ensure the Tribal and/or underserved community is an integral part of the visioning, decision-making, and/or leadership for project activities that may affect their environment and/or health and wellbeing. Outreach or communications directed to a Tribal or underserved community without any description for how feedback and ideas from the community receiving the messaging will be incorporated into the project will not be considered meaningful engagement, but are still relevant project activities. Some examples of ways to demonstrate meaningful engagement with a Tribal or underserved community include but are not limited to: 

- Describing how Tribal or underserved communities were/will be engaged in the removal site selection process/removal methods to ensure the removals in their community will be seen as a benefit and there aren’t unintentional consequences by targeting removals located in an underserved community without the input of that community 

- Another example is describing specific project roles that will be conducted by Tribal or underserved community members located in the project area and/or impacted by the targeted debris presence/proposed removal project activities. This description should include how those roles were/will be selected. Ideally, these roles would be included in both the design and execution of the removal activities. 

- Another example is describing engagement with the underserved community to learn about the specific challenges they are facing and how the proposed removal activities can be conducted to help mitigate those challenges. So these examples could be ADV removals that will make a local waterfront safer/more accessible, or that the removal of DFG will enhance local fisheries and improve food security, or the removal of large debris items are expected to restore tourism revenue to improve the local economy, things like that. 

We do recognize this type of work can be challenging to incorporate into these large scale removal projects, and so we encourage applicants to think about relevant partners they could work with to build these types of components into their proposal to directly and meaningfully engage underserved or disadvantaged communities. 

[SLIDE 21] So in your narrative, please also describe the community involvement in the project, such as contributions from community partners, volunteer opportunities, citizen participation, education/outreach/stewardship plans, or efforts to disseminate information on project goals, results, and/or the sources of project funding and support. Letters demonstrating such participation should also be included in the application. If you are working on private land, please include letters of commitment that you have permission to conduct the work in those proposed locations. 

Please provide a detailed project timeline along with the expected milestones throughout your award.

[SLIDE 22] And finally, the final component of the narrative is a description of the applicant organization structure and project staff and a list of references for your proposal. 

[SLIDE 23] The next component is the data sharing plan or data management plan which should be two pages or less and provide a general description of how the data collected or created under the award will be made accessible to the general public. There is specific guidance in the notice of funding opportunity as well as an example on our funding resources page. 

[SLIDE 24] Next we will discuss the budget narrative. This is a very important component of the application and we suggest that you carefully review the guidance on our applicant resources page for how to appropriately organize this information by the budget categories in the SF-424A form, which will help reviewers when evaluating your proposal. Please note that this section includes both written justification and explanation of project costs, as well as an accompanying summary table. A high level of detail is also expected for the budget narrative. Each line item should be explained and please note there is a detailed explanation expected for both federal and match funds. 

And again, please make sure when you submit your application that the numbers in the budget narrative match the SF-424 and SF-424A, as well as any funding information included in the summary or narrative. And just to note, the six page limit applies to the written justification, and not the summary table. 

The budget narrative is also where you should indicate if the proposal has been submitted for funding consideration elsewhere, including the amount requested and/or secured from other sources and if those sources are federal or non-federal. Additionally, if this project is part of a larger project, the overall budget for the entire project should be described for clarity. 

[SLIDE 25] Other information in the narrative should include CVs or resumes for the project team, detailed maps of the project locations and activities, relevant photographs, project designs (when relevant), and letters of support from project partners or other supporters of the project such as local, state, or national elected officials, or community members that would benefit from the proposed project. 

[SLIDE 26] So in addition to the notice of funding opportunity, which you need to read carefully as we weren’t able to cover everything here today, we encourage you to check out our website for additional guidance and resources for your applications. We provide a narrative template, guidance for understanding the notice of funding opportunity content and structure, a table of the evaluation criteria, guidance for meaningful engagement, cost-sharing, letters of support, and the data management plan example and budget guidance documents for both the SF424A and the Budget Narrative. 

[SLIDE 27] It is strongly encouraged to carefully review the evaluation criteria listed in the notice of funding opportunity before, during and after working on your proposal materials to help guide the development of your proposal. This evaluation criteria is what proposal reviewers will use to evaluate and score your proposal. Proposals that incorporate the detailed evaluation criteria included in each of the categories will be most competitive. There are five evaluation criteria: Importance/Relevance and Applicability, Technical Merit, Overall Qualification of Applicant, Project Cost, and Community Support and Outreach. 

[SLIDE 28] The Importance Applicability of Proposal to Program Priorities will focus on the description of the project outcomes related to large marine debris removal including the impactful benefits to NOAA Trust Resources and surrounding communities, prevention strategies, and the DEIJA components including general incorporation of these initiatives throughout the project proposal, if work is proposed in and/or benefits will flow to an underserved/disadvantaged community with reference to CEJST and other relevant tools as appropriate, and if orhow meaningful engagement will occur with these communities. 

[SLIDE 29] The technical merit evaluation criterion will focus on if the proposal is technically sound with clear goals and objectives and how they will be executed, measured, and achieved. 

[SLIDE 30] The overall qualifications of the applicant evaluation criterion looks at the ability and capacity of the applicant to successfully manage and execute the proposed project. 

[SLIDE 31] The project costs evaluation criterion evaluates the federal and non-federal budget components of the application materials as well as the overall cost-effectiveness of the proposed project. 

[SLIDE 32] The final evaluation criterion is community support which is focused on engagement from relevant stakeholders. This section is relevant to all community engagement, even if the communities are not underserved or disadvantaged, although those communities will be prioritized. This evaluation focuses on the importance of the work to the local area and if there are references to localized plans addressing the proposed removal issue and letters of support or commitment from the relevant stakeholders, and how they would benefit from and/or be engaged with the proposed removal and other project activities. 

[SLIDE 33] Our next part of the webinar will focus on a few general application tips. So please note that adobe PDF is the preferred format for application attachments. It is completely acceptable to make budget tables in a spreadsheet platform, but we suggest saving them and submitting them as a PDF to ensure there are no file formatting concerns through the submission process. You can combine files using Adobe, which is helpful to ensure you don’t forget any attachments, and we do encourage you to minimize the number of files uploaded by combining relevant files when possible. 

As mentioned earlier, please carefully review the NOFO for certain details about proposal requirements that we were not able to cover today. And again, we highly encourage you to view the guidance on our Proposal Submission Guidance for Applicants webpage. 

[SLIDE 34] Now we will quickly go over the submission instructions. So, the first step you will need to do is make sure that you are actively registered with grants.gov, eRA Commons, which is NOAA’s new grants management system & SAM.gov. You will not be able to submit your proposal in grants.gov without active registration, so even if your organization is already registered with SAM.gov, please make sure that it is an active registration. Also note, that eRA Commons is NOAA’s new grants management system and this registration is a new requirement for all applicant organizations, so if you are a returning applicant, as well as a new applicant, please be sure your organization completes this additional registration process. 

Again, we will not accept any late submissions, so please submit early to ensure your application enters the system prior to the 11:59 ET deadline. 

[SLIDE 35] For your planning purposes, here is the anticipated timeline for award review and notifications. Again, full proposals are due to grants.gov by 11:59pm ET February 23, 2024. The full proposal review will occur from March through April. We are hoping to recommend projects for funding to our NOAA Grants Management Division and notify those successful and unsuccessful full proposal applicants in May 2024. And finally, awards will receive an official offer and project planning activities which can be expected to begin in late summer/early fall of 2024. The environmental compliance processes can take several months, so it is possible that actual field/removal work may not begin immediately at the start of the award. And please note this timeline is subject to change. 

[SLIDE 36] So, we hope that we have provided helpful information today. Again, there will be a document on our website with the question and answers that were provided during the live webinar. And if you have any questions specific to your project that come up after listening to this recording please reach out to the NOAA MDP grants team via email at grants.marinedebris@noaa.gov. 

[SLIDE 37] We thank you for your time listening to this webinar and hope you have a great rest of your day.