Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 43

Thread: Afg 2007

  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber CordovaFire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Cordova, AL
    Posts
    176

    Default Afg 2007

    Any word on when they will release the program guidance and the start date for this year's program for AFG?


  2. #2
    Forum Member bjlffire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Ne Missouri
    Posts
    342

    Default

    bump

    Everyone wants to know.

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Out and About
    Posts
    954

    Default

    At least 3 more weeks. We could see the NOFA published before the guidance.

  4. #4
    Forum Member SLY4420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,961

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k3twpfire View Post
    We could see the NOFA published before the guidance.
    That would be fine with me!

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber LFD1MICHAEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    109

    Default hello any peer reviewers?

    With applications coming some time soon....
    Has anyone who is peer reviewing had their dates changed. I thought I had read in an earlier post, peer was set for end of April.
    Also, are we assured a 5 week application period when it does break?
    Panic, ME, NEVER

  6. #6
    Forum Member 4caster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Loraine, Illinois
    Posts
    259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k3twpfire View Post
    We could see the NOFA published before the guidance.
    You called it!!! Lookie what popped up on the AFG page today...

    http://www.firegrantsupport.com/docs...edRegister.pdf

    Let the fun begin (well, not totally)
    BAClair

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,740

    Default

    Downloaded, printed, read & highlighted.......bring on the rest.

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    34

    Question Differences

    Besides being able to send in two grants, is there any big change for a rural department.
    thanks

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    7

    Thumbs down Major Difference for VFD's

    There is a major difference. Call volume appears to be the leading factor for decisions regardless of demonstrated need! If you dont run a lot of calls, you are up the creek, regardless of your need. This is a difference that DHS has decided to look at that differs with the council that developed the guidance documents.

    Additionally, blending the recomendations of HSPD-8 and AFG together make this a more "homeland security" related grant than its previous intended usage. Homeland Security has there hands all over this one now by making it intended to match more of the presidental directives of CBRNE prepardness than just basic firefighting protection.

    Looks like congress has finally got there fingers on this one! Political influence appears to be showing up with attenpts to sway this money to the needs of communities that have high call volume coupled with CBRNE risk rather than the earlier intended purpose of providing basic firefighting capabilities across the nation.

    My prediction will be that the "big boys" will get the lions share this year and the needy will continue to go without; only leaving them a few scraps to make sure everyone gets a "little of the pie". The direction alone to just allow multiple apparatus applicatons and allowing apparatus to be opened up to those that have previously gotten one goes along with my hunch. I find it hard to believe that with only 9% chance of being awarded an apparatus previously coupled with many, many depts. NEVER getting a chance at a vehicle equates to the rational that it is time to open up applications for a second vehicle by everyone. The highest age a grant truck could be in the US is 5 1/2 years! If you have worn that one out and don't have money to replace it, you probably are not budgetting the right way. How can DHS justify that opening up an additional round in 2007 for a second truck reflects the right needs assessment across the nation when there are still so many unsafe apparatus on the road across America operated by small, rural departments. I think we are truly seeing political pressure causing this program to erode from its original intent.

    The cover story of Firehouse.com today points to FF at greater heart risk while operating that even thought before, but DHS puts a low priority on physical fitness? Go Figure.

    Prove me wrong, but I will keep a copy of this to share with friends following the 2007 awards.

    Good luck to all grant applicants. It could be a long year.
    Last edited by MarcusFD801; 03-22-2007 at 04:29 PM.

  10. #10
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Call volume has always been used in cost-benefit, that's nothing new. The lower the population, the lower the call volume, the lower the cost-benefit in giving one department something when someone else has more people and more calls. More usage in Dept B, so when up for the same thing, B will get it over A.

    And so what if urban and suburan can apply for more than one vehicle. 94% of vehicles awarded in 6 years have gone to rural agencies. Urban & Suburban really don't apply for trucks because they have replacement programs, so the fleet is too new to even make the computer. Plus, what kind of a financial argument can you have when asking for $1 mil worth of trucks, knowing that you need $200K to fund your matching? So you have almost 1 truck in cash, but don't want to spend it to even partially fix a problem? Not going to fly even if it makes Peer.

    Personal opinion on fitness: it's a personal issue. Certainly paid departments have a vested interest in their people, most of the departments around here have no-tobacco rules and a requirement of an hour of exercise per shift. I'm overweight because I've spent the last 10 years living out the Dilbert comic strip and not exercising. Eat bad + no exercise = unhealthy. Staying in shape is a personal decision to do or not do. Even those with mandatory exercise requirements do it and then chow down on the McD's dolalr menu, so there's no in shape there. More accurately it's in A shape (round) not IN shape.

    I plan on reshaping myself after grant season is over. Heart disease in the DNA, so it's my personal decision to do what I can to ensure I'm around to walk my daughter down the aisle, and I'm not a liability to my fellow firefighters on scene. You can't force fitness on people. Most of the exercise equipment the city next door got in 2003 is now doubling as their drying racks.

  11. #11
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Oh, and the Fed Register that was posted today isn't the NOFA (Notice of Funds Availability). That's done right before awards as a certification from OMB that all laws were followed in handling the application process to ensure compliance.

    But at the rate they're going the NOFA may dang well be out first....

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    492

    Default

    By the way Brian we have had nice weather since you were here. Thanks for bringing your wisdom and good weather with you.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LFD1MICHAEL View Post
    With applications coming some time soon....
    Has anyone who is peer reviewing had their dates changed. I thought I had read in an earlier post, peer was set for end of April.
    Also, are we assured a 5 week application period when it does break?
    Panic, ME, NEVER
    That's a great question!! The FPS line is that it will be a 5 week window, but anything could change. Peer review on the other hand...anybody have any insight??

    earl

  14. #14
    Forum Member dwl-mfri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24

    Default Peer review

    As a potential peer reviewer, I received an email today explaining that the application period had been delayed; therefore, the three weeks that were identified previously for peer review will also be delayed. They didn't offer new dates and only said that they would communicate again when the application period dates were set.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    Makes me wonder how many folks will not be able to make it for Peer Review since so many people are not able to move vacation schedules. It'll all work out. Of course, with no apps to review.....

    earl

  16. #16
    Forum Member dwl-mfri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24

    Default

    I think that there will be PLENTY of apps to review. I think with the rule changes, there will be more this year than last, even with the schedule delay. I already have some that I have helped write or provided technical review that are just waiting for the application window to open up. Stand by for the gush of air !!!

    Dave

  17. #17
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Actually with the same amount of money available shouldn't be any more in Peer Review than last year. More computer denials definitely, especially in vehicles. With only $135 mil or so to award, still only reviewing $270 mil worth of requests which will be somewhere around 1600 apps total. Equipment apps reviewed will probably be around 9-10k again. So with lots of folks doing all 3 apps probably will see somewhere around 30k computer denials. Like every year, the competition is going to be hotter than the year before. A-minus might not cut it, gotta bring the A game.

  18. #18
    Forum Member Engine305's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Sahuarita AZ, formerly of Hewitt NJ
    Posts
    293

    Default Afg

    Hello Brian, havent been checking the funding titles lately, but I guess its time to. I have been trying to scrounge up private donations for a Chief's gig, as well as some other stuff. WE have a Cedap app in, see what happens. Also a request in for HDER equipment

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Southwestern, Pa
    Posts
    177

    Default Cost Benefit Matrix

    I too am reading in that the new risk/cost/benefit matrix will favor larger departments more so now than before. I realize use was always a consideration in cost benefit...However now it sounds like the deck has been stacked in favor of larger/higher call volume departments. From the FEDERAL REGISTER

    "...In the implementation of previous years' programs, DHS had utilized sepatrate matrices for departments that protected urban,surban,and urban (I BELIEVE THAT SECOND URBAN IS A TYPE-O THAT SHOULD READ RURAL) communities when determining the consideration for incidents. DHS believes that when using separate matrices, urban departments receive too little consideration...In order to remove this inequity, DHS will utilize a single, combined matrix when determining consideration for an applicant's level of incidents for fire departments."

    Does this mean that a 7500 call per year urban department is now DIRECTLY being compared with a 100 call per year rural department. If so, the deck is stacked. I hope I have misunderstood the F-R!
    BB

  20. #20
    FH Mag/.com Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cypress, TX
    Posts
    7,288

    Default

    Remember it's a matrix so there are no direct comparisons at the bottom of it. Yes each statistic is being compared with the same statistics as every other department, so while they may score higher in the call volume weight, it doesn't mean that an urban with 6 year old bunker gear is going to jump a 100 call rural department with 15 year old gear. Every system has a combination that will result in high scores for the applicant regardless of their numbers. Finding that project has always been key.

    So if nothing else, it underscores what I've been saying for many moons: smaller more focused projects score higher and are awarded more often. That and: what worked last year probably won't work this year. The game's players always change, so every year the computer scores change. So if you keep doing the same thing, no guarantee of even similar results. That's how one year someone gets the excess fund denial and the next gets the computer denial on the same project. Nothing is ever the same year to year, never has been. Pick the one thing that you need and can justify and go after it. Doesn't matter how many things you can justify, each app has to be focused. Remember this trick, and the folks I met over the last 8 weeks will remember this: if you need bunker gear it is the number 1 priority in the program. So you know right now, that anything you put with it will bring your score DOWN because everything else is a lower priority and weighted as such. SCBA is #2, so it will bring down a bunker gear app. Anything else will bring down an SCBA score.

    Even though some things can be packaged, the question you have to ask yourself is: do you feel lucky today Punk? I mean do you want to sacrifice the big need for a smaller one? Both are needs, but which 1 is more?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2007 AFG Postponed
    By BG56c362 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-09-2007, 06:12 PM
  2. 2007 AFG - Intercom system
    By shirsch in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-05-2007, 06:11 PM
  3. 2007 AFG Workshops In Minnesota
    By WarrenJ in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-29-2007, 01:06 PM
  4. 2007 AFG Peer Review
    By SLY4420 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-12-2007, 09:00 AM
  5. Afg 2007 - Scba ?
    By jwfisher in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-13-2006, 03:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts