MEMO Program Overview: Urban Greening Project Grants Program

Community Scholars MEMO Program Overview: Urban Greening Project Grants Program DATE: March 7, 2014 TO: Participants of the Investment Justice/SB 535 Workshop, and stakeholders in the Clean Up Green Up Communities AUTHOR: Tulsi Patel CONTACT: tulsipatel707@gmail.com Objective This memo describes a State funding program that could be eligible for funding from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The objective is to provide an overview of the program, with a focus on how the investments can benefit disadvantaged communities as identified by the State. The Clean Up Green Up communities of Boyle Heights, Pacoima, and Wilmington are of particular focus. Disclaimer Neither the University nor the Luskin School of Public Affairs and its Community Scholars program nor the Luskin Center for Innovation, either supports or disavows the findings of this memo. University affiliations are for identification only; the University is not responsible for the project. The author(s) is/are students in the Urban and Regional Planning Community Scholars course. Urban Greening Project Grants 1

I. Program Overview A. Current Status The budget funding for this program was designated to be for only 3 grant cycles, with 2013 being the third and final round for grant applications. 1 The third round of applications is currently being evaluated and will be announced mid-2014. This grant program is a promising one and may be regain funding through future Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds, Strategic Growth Council (SGC) funds, or future bonds. B. Program Objectives The Urban Green Grants program is a result of Proposition 84, which was passed in 2006. Prop 84 is officially titled the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006. The funds prioritize water-related projects, but also allocated funding for Sustainable Communities and Climate Change Reduction, under which SGC s Urban Greening Program was categorized. 2 This grant program is intended to support capital improvement projects that further the goals of Prop. 84 through urban greening. 3 A larger goal of these projects is to support the creation of sustainable communities across California. 4 It should be noted that SGC s Urban Greening Program has two grant sub-programs within it: Project grants and Planning grants. This memo focuses on the Project Grants, as it is one of the programs specified by CARB as a potential avenue for Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds. As mentioned, project grants are to fund capital improvement projects that increase greening in urban areas. C. Funding Criteria A points-based criteria is used to evaluate the a projects ability to accomplish multiple goals and priorities of the State, SGC, and the grant program. Figure 1 is a basic outline 1 California Natural Resources Agency. (2013a). Solicitation Announcement: Proposition 84 - Urban Greening Grant Program - Third and Final Round. 2 California Natural Resources Agency. (2014, January 29). Proposition 84 Allocation Balance Report. 3 California Strategic Growth Council. (2012, January 24). Strategic Plan 2012-2014. 4 Reid, M. (2011, April). Grant Opportunities Summary. Kestrel Consulting, Inc. Urban Greening Project Grants 2

of priorities and the points assigned to each section as per the 2013 grant cycle. 5 The first section, Statutory Requirements, lists the criteria that all projects must meet in order to be eligible for this funding. In the following section, at least one of the Statutory Priorities must be met by the proposed project. In this section, economically disadvantaged community and severely disadvantaged communities are automatically given additional points. 6 Third, is the section of Additional Priorities and Public Access, which is technically optional, even though one-fourth of the total evaluation points are allocated to this section. The sizes of the project grants generally range from $600,000 - $1M. 7 Figure 1: Scoring Rubric for Urban Greening Project Grant Applications Source: Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. Within the budget for each round of project grants, there is a set-aside of up to $2M as Target Funds for small project grants within disadvantaged communities. A small project can apply for up to $75,000. Examples of small projects include community gardens, rain gardens, tree planting projects. 5 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. 6 The application guidelines have specific instructions for determining if a project is primarily or substantially within, adjacent to, or one mile from the geographic boundary of a Disadvantaged Community, (2012 Guidelines). The definition for disadvantaged is less than 80% of statewide annual median household income, and less than 60% of the statewide annual median household income for severely disadvantaged communities (2012 guidelines). 7 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). Urban Greening Project Grants 3

D. Types of Eligible Projects The Urban Greening Project Grants has a clear set of goals and objectives that can be accomplished a multitude of ways. Many of the environmental projects that community residents connect to a higher a quality of life, such as community gardens, increased tree canopy, park space, and active transportation infrastructure, can be funded through this grant program. Projects that have higher infrastructure construction demands such as ground water recharge and water capture systems can also be realized through funding from this program. The Statutory Priorities section has a set number of points (rather than a range of possibilities) assigned to it in the scoring criteria, which will certainly be to the advantage of the Clean Up Green Up communities looking to bring these projects to their neighborhoods. In general, eligible projects include those that will create, increase, or protect park and open space, urban forests, wetlands, and other community green spaces. 8 The guideline document also offers a table of example project types with co-benefits that would eligible for funding consideration (Figure 2). Combining multiple project types will increase the range of benefits of project, and in turn, make the project proposal more competitive in the application process. In the full application, there are 15 questions related to multiple benefits, which must be answered as applicable. The benefits are categorized by: 1. Decrease in air and water pollution 2. Reduction in the consumption of natural resources and energy 3. Increase in the reliability of local water supplies 4. Increased adaptability to climate change 9 8 Reid, M. (2011, April). Grant Opportunities Summary. Kestrel Consulting, Inc. 9 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. Urban Greening Project Grants 4

Figure 2: Table of Example Projects with Multiple Benefits Source: Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. Projects can address a combination of many issues. The most competitive applications are often those with that take a comprehensive approach and likely have multiple benefits. This would generally entail a project, which combines multiple project types such as tree canopy along urban bike-ped trails that incorporate bio-swales and storm water capturing features, with native plants incorporated throughout. 10 It would likely be most strategic and beneficial for proposed projects to have a robust set of co-benefits. This will be not only improve prioritization given to the project in the evaluation process but also deliver greater outcomes for the community. Something to note: Given that California has recently entered a drought period, the grant committee currently evaluating Round 3 applications take into consideration if a proposed project will have a high demand for water resources, 11 even though it may help address other environmental concerns. 10 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). 11 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). Urban Greening Project Grants 5

II. Program Process: A. Administering Agency and Contact The lead agency is the California Natural Resources Agency, which administers the grant program on behalf of the Strategic Growth Council. The Bond & Grants Line at the California Natural Resources Agency can be contacted at (916) 653-2812 for any questions regarding the application, including ways to improve the competiveness of the application. They are also open to having in-person conversations, at their Sacramento office, regarding an application. B. Who is Eligible for Funding? Cities, counties, special districts, and non-profits are eligible to apply. Joint powers authorities are also able to apply if at least one entity qualifies as one of the four mentioned types of eligible applicants. 12 Within the Clean Up Green Up communities, established nonprofits can especially play a role in the grant application process by serving as intermediaries. There may be smaller, or newer nonprofits that would like to apply for project funding, but may not have the financial capacity or organizational credibility to present a strong enough application to the Natural Resources Agency. One strategy to overcome this barrier is for the small/new nonprofit to partner with an established organization that can instead submit the grant application. If the grant is awarded to the established organizations, the small nonprofit could then take on the role similar to a subcontractor or consultant to actually carry out the project implementation. The funds would flow through the intermediary to the smaller nonprofit. The intermediary role is not limited to a nonprofit, it can also be taken on by the City or County, and does not necessarily have to be another nonprofit. 13 While only one entity can apply for the grant and receive the funding, collaboration, coalitions, and partnerships are essential to application competitiveness. In addition to building partnerships within community organizations, it would be beneficial for Clean 12 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. 13 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). Urban Greening Project Grants 6

Up Green Up communities to build partnerships with local officials and environmental scientists, biologists, or ecosystem experts (unless that expertise already exists within the applicant s organization) as there is technical review of the project. C. Application Process SGC has a two-step application process. Both pieces of the applications are submitted online. A comprehensive and clear application guide is made available online in English during the fall of the prior calendar year. The guidelines can be found on both SGC and Natural Resources Agency websites. Additionally, about six workshops are held across the State, three of which are usually in Southern California. Interested entities are highly encouraged to attend a workshop as indepth advice and recommendations are given to making an application most competitive. 14 Attendance, however, does not guarantee an applicant will be awarded a grant. The first step in the application process for project grants is the Concept Proposal. In previous years, the initial proposal is due in mid-spring. A formal solicitation announcement is made through the Strategic Growth Council and the state s Natural Resources Agency. During the 2011 round, there was a 45-day time frame for concept proposal submissions. The Concept Proposal is submitted using an online wizard tool. A webpage of helpful tips and reminders is made available to grant applicants. 15 The submitted Concept Proposals are then evaluated on eligibility and readiness to determine if an applicant will be invited to submit a full application. Invitation to submit a full application does not guarantee funding. Once the full applications are submitted in the fall, they are again reviewed for eligibility and completeness. The State is not required to further evaluate incomplete or ineligible applications. The Urban Greening Grant Committee using the Evaluation Selection 14 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). 15 California Natural Resources Agency. (2013b). Urban Greening Projects Concept Proposals Wizard. Urban Greening Project Grants 7

Criteria evaluates remaining applications. 16 This will include a technical review that looks at project details such as plant palette being proposed and the geological features of the project area that would affect the project s environmental outcomes. Following these review, the highest scoring, most competitive applications will then have a site visit. Grants are not generally awarded to sites that have not been visited. 17 The Urban Greening Grant Committee then makes recommendations to SGC, which will make the final decision for project awards. D. Considerations for Participation from Disadvantaged Communities, particularly the Clean Up Green Up communities. Clean Up Green Up communities can participate in this program at the county, municipal, and nonprofit levels. With a clear application process and availability of resources to assist in application completion, the program is relatively accessible to these communities. Additionally, there is also the set aside for small project grants within target communities. Another opportunity that the program design offers communities is that a single entity is able to submit multiple project proposals, and they each are essentially stand-alone applications during the evaluation process, meaning multiple grants may be offered to a single entity. Clean Up Green Up communities are therefore not limited to selecting one priority project, but rather can apply of multiple grants through one or multiple entities. Clean Up Green Up communities may also benefit from and be involved in projects that are funded in close proximity to them. One consideration in the evaluation process is if a project is near an economically disadvantaged community. Applicants are asked to provide details on the actual distance from such neighborhoods, the availability of public transportation to the project site, and how the economically disadvantaged 16 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. 17 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). Urban Greening Project Grants 8

community will be engaged and participatory in the development and implementation of the project. 18 One aspect of the program s design that could be a barrier for organizations within Clean Up Green Up communities is the grant s disbursement process. This program s grants are disbursed on a reimbursement basis. While this is a common practice for government grants 19, it could be a barrier for smaller organizations, as it would require applicants to have the financial capacity to take on project expenses until the grant can reimburse project costs. This may be addressed through the intermediary strategy described earlier. III. Case Study: Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit (2010) Background: The Elmer Avenue project is along a 2-block stretch in the Sun Valley that wouild easily and severely flood during storms. The project was a collaborative effort with several entities, led by the Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. 20 This project spans over the two small, neighborhood blocks yet can manage rain and stormwater from a 40-arce area. Elmer Avenue is intended to be a demonstration project for leading Low Impact Development (LID)strategies being implemented on private and public land. 21 Urban Greening Strategies Implemented: This project incorporated several strategies for stormwater capture and water filtration. Best Management Practices (BMPs) were implemented in all aspect of their project. Elements of the project include: Permeable Surfaces for walkways and driveways Rain Barrels Resident Right-of-Way Improvements lined with Bioswales Curb and Gutter Modification to better direct water to bioswales and rain barrels Climate appropriate and native landscaping and trees Infiltration galleries below streets for groundwater recharge Dry Swales Solar Street Lights 22,23 18 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. 19 Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. (Interview). 20 The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (2010, December). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Demonstration Monitoring Program. Los Angeles Basin Water Augmentation Study Technical Advisory Committee. 21 The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (n.d.). Water Augmentation Study: Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Project. 22 Landscape Architecture Foundation. (n.d.). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit. 23 Belden, E., Antos, M., Morris, K., & Steele, N. L. C. (2012, March). Case Study - Elmer Avenue: Post-Project. Urban Coast. Urban Greening Project Grants 9

Benefits: The range of strategies implemented in this project has and will continue to lead to a range of benefits. Water quality protection and water capture are the large-scale benefits that the implemented management practices will bring to the community. Other benefits include green space and sidewalks for residents to enjoy. The plant choice for landscaping also fosters biodiversity. The installation of solar street lights lead to energy savings and the community benefit of increased safety. 24 Project costs: This project took a comprehensive and aggressive approach through its use of BMPs to address water quality and water supply. Total project costs were $2.7M. Of this, $1.8M was for construction. 25 Performance Metrics and Indicators: Following the completion of the project in 2010, the Watershed Council identified the following five key management questions to evaluate the project: 1. What effect do the BMPs have on water quality? 2. What effect do the BMPs have on water supply? 3. What the Operating and Maintenance needs for the BMPs? 4. How has the project affected the residents relations to watershed health? 5. What are the additional benefits for the project? 26 To answer each of these questions, a series of samples, tests, and observations would be conducted both manually and through automated systems. Figure 3, from the Watershed Council s Monitor Program document, presents the key questions along with the overall approach to data collection and indicators for evaluation. The indicators selected for water quality and supply management are specific and telling of the project effectiveness. There is also attention given to the impacts on the residents in terms of operation and maintenance, and includes the collection of residential surveys and observations. 27 One example an unexpected impact is higher than expected levels of sediment and trash collection in the 24 ibid. 25 Landscape Architecture Foundation. (n.d.). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit. 26 The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (2010, December). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Demonstration Monitoring Program. Los Angeles Basin Water Augmentation Study Technical Advisory Committee. 27 ibid. Urban Greening Project Grants 10

bioswales, increasing need for resident maintenance. Such challenges can be overcome through identification of other models for maintenance and funding sources to share responsibilities with an outside entity. 28 Overall, the project benefits are being realized. For example, over a 20-month span, monitoring showed that 23 acre-feet of stormwater was filtered into the groundwater supply. 29 Figure 3: Table of Metrics and Monitoring Approaches for Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Source: The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (2010, December). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Demonstration Monitoring Program. Los Angeles Basin Water Augmentation Study Technical Advisory Committee. 28 Landscape Architecture Foundation. (n.d.). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit. 29 Belden, E., Antos, M., Morris, K., & Steele, N. L. C. (2012, March). Case Study - Elmer Avenue: Post-Project. Urban Coast. Urban Greening Project Grants 11

IV. Recommendations for Program Implementation to Help Maximize Benefits for Disadvantaged Communities This program is very applicable to addressing the needs of Clean Up Green Up communities and disadvantaged communities. The importance of directing funds to these communities is also recognized by the SGC. During Round 2 of the program, 75% of the 24 projects recommended to the SGC for final approval of grants greater than $75,000 were indicated as projects from economically disadvantaged. 30 A common request for funding policies is to have a clear set-aside for disadvantaged communities to ensure more equitable outcomes for resource allocation. Yet, in this program s case, community status as disadvantaged or severely disadvantaged is incorporated into the evaluation process for all funds. However, there is potential for improvement in the Small Projects grants to targeted communities. Currently, up to $2M of the Project Grant funding can be awarded to small projects for targeted populations. There is no requirement on the minimum amount of funding that must go into these target areas. When looking at Round 2, there were 13 complete applications submitted (in the final application phase) that requested a total of $900,000. Of these, only 8 were recommended by the grants committee to actually receive funding. These 8 projects have funds totaling approximately $598,000. 31 In other words, only about 30% of the available funds are actually being awarded for small projects in targeted communities. There may need to be increased outreach to or awareness in low-income communities about the small grants set-aside, so that more applications are submitted. Additionally, the remainder of $2M less the total small grants awarded should remain earmarked for disadvantaged communities. They could be allocated specifically for disadvantaged communities within the larger project grant pool. Another way to redirect the remainder of the $2M would be towards capacity building to assist some of the unfunded 30 Strategic Growth Council. (2012, May 10). Urban Greening Grant Program for Sustainable Communities: Round 2 Funding Recommendations. 31 ibid. Urban Greening Project Grants 12

small projects improve their proposals for either a future round of funding or for a smaller amount during the same round. Additionally, now that the CalEnviroScreen tool is available, the Urban Greening Project Grants program could be improved upon through inclusion of EJ Communities as a prioritized area for project impact and location. EJ Communities could easily be incorporated into the existing criteria and framework, with an automatic point value assigned to project that are located within the EJ Community. Similar to the small-grants set aside for targeted communities, there could be a set-aside for EJ Communities to ensure that a certain percent of large-project funds are be directed to the communities that endure the a disproportionate share of the environmental burdens. Urban Greening Project Grants 13

References & Resources Belden, E., Antos, M., Morris, K., & Steele, N. L. C. (2012, March). Case Study - Elmer Avenue: Post-Project. Urban Coast. Retrieved from http://watershedhealth.org/files/document/793_2012%20belden.pdf California Natural Resources Agency. (2013a). Solicitation Announcement: Proposition 84 - Urban Greening Grant Program - Third and Final Round. Retrieved from http://www.resources.ca.gov/bond/solicitationnoticeconceptround3.pdf California Natural Resources Agency. (2013b). Urban Greening Projects Concept Proposals Wizard. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from http://grants.resources.ca.gov/urbgreen2013/about.aspx California Natural Resources Agency. (2014, January 29). Proposition 84 Allocation Balance Report. Retrieved from http://bondaccountability.resources.ca.gov/attachments/b1a801cb-36af-44c7-854e- 3b9047a4525f/29/Prop84AllocationBalanceReport.pdf California Strategic Growth Council. (2012, January 24). Strategic Plan 2012-2014. Retrieved from http://sgc.ca.gov/docs/workplan/strategicplan-01-24-12.pdf Harding, P. (2014, March 6). California Natural Resources Agency: Bond and Grants Line. Landscape Architecture Foundation. (n.d.). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit. Retrieved March 8, 2014, from http://www.lafoundation.org/research/landscape-performance-series/case-studies/case-study/381/ Reid, M. (2011, April). Grant Opportunities Summary. Kestrel Consulting, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.kestrelinc.com/documents/april2011grantsummary_california.pdf State of California. (2006). Proposition 84 Language. Strategic Growth Plan - Bond Accountability. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from http://bondaccountability.resources.ca.gov/p84text.aspx State of California. (n.d.). Proposition 84 Overview. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from http://bondaccountability.resources.ca.gov/p84.aspx Strategic Growth Council. (2012, May 10). Urban Greening Grant Program for Sustainable Communities: Round 2 Funding Recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.cpdr.com/sites/default/files/urbangreeninggrantsround2.pdf Strategic Growth Council. (2012, October). Urban Greening Project Guidelines for Sustainable Communities Funded by The Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 - Proposition 84. Retrieved from http://resources.ca.gov/bond/urban_greening_project_guidelines_october_2012.pdf The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (2010, December). Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Demonstration Monitoring Program. Los Angeles Basin Water Augmentation Study Technical Advisory Committee. Retrieved from http://watershedhealth.org/files/document/685_elmer%20monitoring%20plan_1210.pdf The Los Angeles & San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council. (n.d.). Water Augmentation Study: Elmer Avenue Neighborhood Retrofit Project. Retrieved from http://watershedhealth.org/files/document/530_elmer%20neighborhood%20retrofit%20factsheetfinal.pdf Urban Greening Project Grants 14