We got our DJ friday for extrication equipment.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 61 to 76 of 76
Thread: Equipment DJs are out
04-18-2010, 05:16 PM #61
04-19-2010, 07:46 AM #62
04-19-2010, 09:15 AM #63
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Johnstown , Pa
Well for the first time in 5 years, got the DJ for my Dept. Also Dj for and Engine for another dept. Funny thing is, thought my depts. application was weak, and it went through peer review, and the engine grant was strong, yet didnt make it to peer. Funny year for sure. Back to the drawing board.
04-19-2010, 11:45 AM #64
04-19-2010, 12:20 PM #65
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
My email looked a little different. I'm having a hard time, I thought the narrative was really good, and everyone who reviewed it did too, so I'm not sure what I need to change. Anyone willing to look over it??
Dear Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program Applicant:
On behalf of the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), thank you for applying for a grant under the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Assistance to Firefighters
Grant (AFG) Program. As you are aware, the AFG is an extremely competitive program. In FY 2009, the
Department received over 19,750 applications, requesting over $3.0 billion in Federal funds. This
extremely high number of applications and finite amount of funding available resulted in many! worthy
applicants not being funded. I regret to inform you that we will not be able to fund your AFG request
for the FY 2009 program.
It is not possible for us to provide a detailed account of how each individual application was rated
in the competitive process. However, we can tell you that your application was reviewed by a peer
review panel. The panelists assigned scores to four elements of your application narrative: (1)
clarity of the project description, (2) demonstration of financial need, (3) demonstration of
benefits to be derived from the grant funds, and (4) effect on daily operations. The peer review
panel's scores indicate that your application was generally lacking in sufficient and compelling
information with respect to one or more of the four elements listed above. A full description of
the application review process is included in the AFG Program Guidance.
The work alrea! dy done to support your FY 2009 AFG application could be a use! ful reso urce for any
future requests for assistance that your department may submit. I encourage you to keep a copy of
your application for your records. You may be able to use it as a reference for a future grant
program, or even share it with your community as the basis for and outline of a strategic plan for
the enhancement of your department. Please check our website often at www.firegrantsupport.com
for information on the grant program and for future funding opportunities.
Your interest in this program clearly demonstrates the need and resourcefulness of America's fire
service. DHS will continue to work closely with fire service organizations to support the vital
work of our Nation's firefighters.
Thank you again for your dedication and commitment.
04-19-2010, 01:32 PM #66
There were areas that probably made them wonder why. It could have left them with unanswered questions towards the need or financials, that were enough to deduct points.
Competitive means just that. You might have to score just one point higher than the next guy to be a winner, even though you may have similar numbers and needs. . Clarity in your narrative may be all that needs to be tweaked so that it doesn't leave those unanswered questions in the peer reviewers minds as they assign a score. They don't spend very much time with each app and need to know the who, what when & why in a clear concise method, without having to hunt for the answers.
After having a few folks read our narrative , and making a few changes to clarify the app, it was submitted the next year and sailed through the process to award.
04-19-2010, 01:33 PM #67
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Catlettsburg, KY
Well, read my paragraph on scoring. THe first paragraph and the last paragraph were the same as yours, But look at the Bold area. FYI...I did have a reduction.
"A panel of your fire service peers reviewed your application. Using the information that you
provided throughout your application, the panelists assigned scores to four elements of your application narrative: (1) clarity of the project description, (2) demonstration of financial need, (3) demonstration of benefits to be derived from the grant funds, and (4) effect on daily operations. The peer review panel's scores indicate that your application was generally good and above average in all four elements, i.e., there was some information that was useful, but it was not sufficiently compelling to be considered for funding on its written merits. A full description of the application review process is included in the AFG Program Guidance. "
That makes absolutely no sense to me. I do not know what to do. The the operation items and the vehicle we applied for this year were pretty much all of the needs we have. All gear, scbas, other equipment and vehicles are good. But the operations grant was to replace a now 11 year old TIC that we can not get fixed, a set of 35+ year old original Hurst that take an ox to use and home made wood cribbing. The Vehicle was to replace a 10 speed with split rear end homemade tanker that we made back in 1984. The tank is about to rust apart. Along with severely degraded wiring on the entire truck. The tanker didn't even make it to peer. Oh, what is meant by not sufficiently compelling. It made it past peer. What other compelling information is needed after that?
Now, we have been fortunate in the past. AFG has helped us tremedously and we would have bought a tanker this year but an engine blew up last year and it wasn't worth sinking more money into it so we had to replace it.
04-19-2010, 01:42 PM #68
04-19-2010, 02:44 PM #69
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
States that voted Demo-rats in 08 $199,905,980 or 64.5%
States that voted Republi-sins in 08 $110,497,098 or 35.5%
STIR, STIR, STIR, HAHAHA!!!!!!
Oh well maybe in 2010 if it ever starts.
04-19-2010, 04:12 PM #70
04-19-2010, 06:02 PM #71
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Did any of those getting cost reductions actually get the 10Qs?
04-19-2010, 06:26 PM #72
While it was good in all areas , it didn't score high enough to make the funding cut.
Have someone from outside the department such as a school teacher or banker in town read the narrative and ask them if they understand clearly the message you were trying to get across to the peer reviewers. We have a high school english teacher and a business professional proof read our apps for clarity and a "non fire perspective".
What makes perfect sense to us maybe a little confusing to an outsider that doesn't know your dept or it's needs. We need to make that easy to understand and answer any questions in the narrative that might pop into the reviewers mind as they read it.
Hope this helps you understand the process.
Don't give up on the program it does pay off if you keep working at it.
Just so you know, I assisted a dept that had been DJ'd for 5 straight years on an ops grant. They weren't following the format given in the Program guidance as they had a municipal grant writer doing their apps. Once they changed their format to follow the rules they were an early round award with the same app that had dj'd previously .
What works fine for one program , won't work for another. Read & reread the PG and follow it religiously.
04-19-2010, 06:42 PM #73
04-21-2010, 12:13 PM #74
I would be very interested to know if any department that has already received an award, also got a DJ letter by mistake this year. That fact, should it bear out true, would be pretty undeniable that there is a flaw in this system.Kurt Bradley
Public Safety Grants Consultant
"Never Trade Skill for Luck"
04-21-2010, 02:13 PM #75
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Portage, MI
We were told there are 12 versions of turn down notices this year because in past years the applicants have requested more detail regarding their application.
04-21-2010, 02:15 PM #76
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Cypress, TX
Wonder how many versions of ones that have typos or reference the wrong type of denial they're counting in that 12...
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By FIRE549 in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 20Last Post: 05-16-2007, 06:15 PM
By Not2L84U2 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & FundingReplies: 0Last Post: 11-14-2005, 10:05 AM
By Maness in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 1Last Post: 10-28-2005, 02:41 PM
By PAVolunteer in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 1Last Post: 09-24-2002, 04:40 PM
By BFD101 in forum Departments Helping DepartmentsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-06-2002, 07:34 AM