Adaptive Management of Untreated Urban Runoff | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Adaptive Management of Untreated Urban Runoff (USGS / GLRI)

1. What was the "Adaptive Management of Untreated Urban Runoff" funding opportunity?

It was a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) cooperative agreement funded under the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). The opportunity supported work to strengthen how GLRI makes decisions about where to invest restoration dollars for the biggest improvements in Great Lakes ecosystem health, specifically related to non-point source pollution and untreated urban runoff under GLRI Focus Area 3.

2. What program funded this award?

The award was funded through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) and administered by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

3. What was the main purpose of the project to be funded?

The purpose was to develop, justify, and demonstrate a defensible spatial decision-making rationale that GLRI decision makers could use to choose where to target actions addressing untreated urban runoff and other non-point source pollution in the Great Lakes basin.

4. Which GLRI focus area did this opportunity relate to?

It specifically addressed GLRI Focus Area 3, with emphasis on problems tied to non-point source pollution and untreated urban runoff.

5. What does GLRI mean by "adaptive management" in this context?

In the announcement, adaptive management is described as a six-step, science-based cycle: identify and prioritize ecosystem problems, select projects to address them, and evaluate how well those projects work so future decisions improve over time.

6. What gap in the adaptive management cycle was this grant meant to address?

The opportunity focused on a gap related to choosing "strategic geographies." While GLRI intended to target projects in priority places to maximize annual measures of progress, it had not clearly explained or demonstrated a defensible rationale for selecting those places. This grant aimed to create and demonstrate that rationale for urban runoff and related non-point pollution.

7. What kind of work was the grant designed to support?

The opportunity emphasized analytical framework development and decision support for restoration planning. It was categorized under "Science and Technology and other Research and Development," reflecting a focus on science-driven prioritization methods rather than direct implementation alone.

8. How much funding was available?

The estimated total funding amount was $120,000.

9. Was this a single award or multiple awards?

This was a single-award opportunity. One recipient would receive the full amount.

10. What were the award ceiling and floor?

Both the award ceiling and the award floor were $120,000, meaning the award amount was fixed at $120,000 for the single selected recipient.

11. Was cost sharing or matching required?

No. The announcement stated there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

12. What was the funding instrument type?

The funding instrument was a cooperative agreement.

13. What does it mean that the award was a cooperative agreement?

Based on the announcement description, a cooperative agreement typically indicates substantial involvement or collaboration with the federal agency during the project. That aligns with the decision-support and adaptive management nature of the work described.

14. Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was limited to public and state-controlled institutions of higher education.

15. What type of funding was this considered?

The opportunity was categorized as discretionary funding.

16. What was the CFDA number for this opportunity?

The CFDA number listed was 15.808, titled "U.S. Geological Survey Research and Data Collection."

17. When was the opportunity posted?

The announcement was posted on July 14, 2015.

18. What was the application deadline?

The opportunity closed on July 28, 2015.

19. When was the opportunity archived?

The archive date listed was August 27, 2015.

20. What broader plan or strategy did this opportunity align with?

The opportunity was set in the context of the GLRI Action Plan, which emphasizes strategic, science-driven ecosystem restoration and faster progress toward long-term lake management goals.

21. What was the intended outcome or deliverable of the funded work?

The intended outcome was a practical, science-based approach for prioritizing where to address untreated urban runoff and related non-point source pollution in the Great Lakes basin, so GLRI investments could be better targeted to places where they would yield the largest and most measurable gains.

22. Who was the listed contact for access issues or administrative questions?

The listed USGS contact was Contract Specialist Tangee Brookie. Phone: 303-236-9322. Email: tbrookie@usgs.gov.