The Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration programs,
will convene a ranking panel of Federal employees, to include representatives
from the Service's Headquarters of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration
programs, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the U.S. Coast Guard, to review, rank, and make funding
recommendations to the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Director
will make the selection of eligible grants by August 1, annually. Upon selection
of a proposal the appropriate Regional Office will advise the successful
applicant of additional documentation requirements.
Code of Federal Regulations / Title 50 - Wildlife and Fisheries / Vol. 9 /
2013-10-01638 [59 FR 11206, Mar. 10, 1994, as amended at 78 FR 35153, June 12, 2013]
5 Comments
Anonymous
Apr 17, 2014Janine-
This process should be more transparent. Very little to no information is shared with states on how their proposals are ranked by category. In order to improve the quality of the applications the State should receive a score card or evaluation sheet that lets them know how many points they received (averaged of all scores by ranking committee) for each criteria.
Having this information will let States know where the application was weak or strong and areas that they could improve for future applications.
Anonymous
Apr 22, 2014Pam Parker Maine DEP
I concur with the comment by Janine.
Anonymous
Apr 22, 2014Teresa Jarrett (NDOW)
I agree with Janine. We should have some way to get feedback on how our grant was scored against the nation, in order to improve our scores or shore-up deficient areas of the ranking.
Anonymous
Apr 29, 2014Al Ortiz, USFWS, R5
I suggest describing the formula used for selecting the proposals to be awarded. This would make the selection process more transparent although, it could be done through the yearly RFA too, in case a better formula is developed in a few years. The ranking however is done with the criteria identified and states are always encouraged to ask where they did poorly in order to make it better on the next round. Most years states receive what is requested so, is there really a need to develop a post award score card feedback? I suggest not to add another level to the process.
Anonymous
Apr 30, 2014Lynne V, NY - Omit "August 1" date or conform to this date each year. I agree that more information would be helpful on the scoring and selection process.