Opportunity Information: Apply for NPS DOIP15AC00448
Apply for NPS DOIP15AC00448
- The National Park Service in the natural resources sector is offering a public funding opportunity titled "Extending Alaska Region National Hydrography Dataset Editing Protocols and Data Production to Accommodate Wetlands and other Value Added Attributes" and is now available to receive applicants.
- Interested and eligible applicants and submit their applications by referencing the CFDA number(s): 15.945 Cooperative Research and Training Programs Resources of the National Park System.
- This funding opportunity was created on Jun 5, 2015 and posted on Jun 5, 2015.
- Applicants must submit their applications by Jun 14, 2015. (Agency may still review applications by suitable applicants for the remaining/unused allocated funding in 2026.)
- The funding agency has allocated a total of $250,000.00 to eligible and selected applicants.
- Each selected applicant is eligible to receive up to $400,000.00 in funding.
- The number of recipients for this funding is limited to 1 candidate(s).
- Eligible applicants include: Others (see text field entitled Additional Information on Eligibility for clarification).
- This is a notice of intent to award solely to Saint Marys University of Minnesota.
[Watch] Creating a grant proposal using the step-by-step wizard inside the applicant portal:
Opportunity Summary:
The National Park Service (NPS) issued this notice to inform the public that it intended to fund a specific, non-competitive cooperative agreement rather than solicit applications. The project, titled "Extending Alaska Region National Hydrography Dataset Editing Protocols and Data Production to Accommodate Wetlands and other Value Added Attributes," was set up as a CESU task agreement under statutory authority 54 USC 101702(b) and CFDA 15.945 (Cooperative Research and Training Programs - Resources of the National Park System). The intended recipient was Saint Mary's University of Minnesota (SMUMN). The anticipated award amount was $250,000 with no cost share requirement, and the anticipated period of performance ran from 6/15/2015 through 6/30/2017 (about two years). The NPS point of contact listed was Erica Cordeiro.
At its core, the effort aimed to expand how hydrography data are edited and produced in Alaska so the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) can represent more than the traditional features it focuses on (streams, rivers, and lakes). NPS and SMUMN proposed extending existing Alaska NHD editing protocols so that wetlands could be captured consistently, and so "value added attributes" tied to water features (the example given is fish spawning locations) could be integrated during data development. A key requirement is that the resulting protocols and outputs remain compliant with US Geological Survey (USGS) NHD standards while also fitting Alaska's complementary stewardship framework, AKHydro. The bigger practical payoff described in the announcement is a more complete hydrographic database to support ongoing mapping programs (including USGS US Topo updates) and stronger modeling and analysis capabilities, including smoother future migration toward the NHDPlus data model.
The work was designed in two phases, with this task agreement funding Phase 1 and leaving open the possibility of adding Phase 2 later if progress was satisfactory and funds were available. Phase 1 focused on building and testing methods to incorporate wetlands into the NHD editing workflow to improve representation of Alaska surface hydrography. The approach combined traditional manual image interpretation with automated or software-assisted classification techniques to delineate and classify wetlands. These methods were to be proven in a real production environment through a large-area NHD update exercise in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (WRST), representing a boreal ecoregion context. Phase 1 also included selecting suitable test areas (including WRST and a polar ecoregion candidate area in Noatak National Preserve, NOAT) that had full coverage of key base datasets, specifically Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative (SDMI) processed SPOT5 satellite imagery and SDMI IfSAR-derived elevation data.
A major deliverable was not just new mapped features but a documented, repeatable workflow that fits within USGS NHD processes. The announcement calls for a clear description of an NHD-compliant development/edit process from start to finish: project identification, data checkout, editing, conflation, NPS and USGS quality control steps, and final check-in to the USGS master database. It also required documentation of minimum data requirements needed to do wetlands-inclusive NHD development (what imagery, elevation, and other base layers are necessary) and a project management framework describing milestones, roles, responsibilities, resource needs, and expected outputs. Another important technical requirement was that wetlands captured through this work would be incorporated into both AKHydro and the NHD data model as 2D area features, ensuring the outputs could be stewarded in Alaska and also accepted into the national dataset.
Phase 2, contingent on Phase 1 success, would extend these protocols into additional parts of Alaska where hydrology and wetland types differ, with an emphasis on polar/arctic conditions in NOAT. In addition to expanding production to another ecoregion, Phase 2 would also compile a prioritized list of additional value added attributes needed for describing, modeling, and analyzing Alaska surface hydrology. This list was to be developed through coordination with NPS and other federal agencies in Alaska that were doing related work, such as the US Forest Service. In other words, the second phase was positioned as both a geographic expansion and a content expansion: testing the protocol under different environmental conditions and broadening the kinds of information linked to mapped hydrography.
Beyond the wetlands-specific protocol development, the announcement lays out general production objectives that would apply across phases wherever NHD updates were being prepared and submitted. These include extracting existing NHD data from USGS and assessing gaps and errors; assembling base datasets (imagery, elevation, and existing edited hydrography); correcting stream geometry, flow paths, and connectivity; ensuring the resulting flow network meets USGS NHD standards; improving coastline features with the best available data; correcting and populating key feature attributes (like stream name, stream order, and reach code); using NHD conflation tools to merge changes into existing data while reconciling conflicts; and submitting final updated data back to USGS for inclusion in the national NHD.
Roles were split in a way that reflects a true cooperative agreement with substantial federal involvement. SMUMN, working with NPS, was responsible for developing the extended editing protocols, designing the hybrid automated/manual wetland delineation approach, applying the methods in the WRST production test, incorporating edits into AKHydro and the USGS National Map/NHD using validation and conflation tools, documenting minimum data requirements and their internal production process, and delivering supporting GIS data, metadata, documentation, and a brief final technical report with methodology and accuracy assessment. NPS was expected to be deeply involved by helping select test areas and determine appropriate wetland attribution detail, participating in feature mapping and organizing quality assurance with park staff who have on-the-ground hydrology knowledge, coordinating input from fisheries biologists and aquatic ecologists on data requirements for wetlands and related features, helping set wetland feature collection and validation criteria, and reviewing/commenting on project data and written products prior to release.
The notice also explains why the award was made without competition. The single-source justification cited Department of the Interior policy requirements and relied on two criteria: continuation and unique qualifications. NPS characterized the work as a continuation of an earlier task agreement (P10AC00466) in which SMUMN and NPS developed Alaska NHD stewardship strategy and editing protocols. Because SMUMN already had experience in the relevant Enterprise ArcSDE GIS environment where NHD and AKHydro reside, and already had working relationships with Alaska hydrography data stewards, the Alaska Hydrography Technical Working Group, and NPS GIS and park science staff, switching to a new partner was described as risking delays and undermining continuity. The unique qualifications argument emphasized SMUMN's multi-year Alaska hydrography experience, its prior NHD update work over large areas, its specific expertise with the NHD and AKHydro data models and Alaska value-added attribution needs, and especially its extensive background with the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory program in Alaska, including development of wetland mapping and classification techniques using both traditional interpretation and newer imagery and software-assisted methods.
Expected products from the overall effort were framed as practical tools and documentation that others can use: publicly usable procedures for wetland delineation and classification in the NHD (using both automated and manual approaches), a webinar to share methods and results, and a final report. Taken together, the opportunity was less about funding a new open competition and more about formalizing and extending an existing NPS-SMUMN collaboration to modernize Alaska hydrography editing so wetlands and other high-value ecological attributes can be captured consistently, quality-controlled, and integrated into national USGS datasets.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is this NPS notice about?
This notice from the National Park Service (NPS) states that NPS intended to fund a specific, non-competitive cooperative agreement rather than solicit applications through an open competition.
Is this an open grant opportunity where organizations can apply?
No. The notice describes an intended single-recipient, non-competitive cooperative agreement. It was not a solicitation for applications.
What is the project title?
The project is titled "Extending Alaska Region National Hydrography Dataset Editing Protocols and Data Production to Accommodate Wetlands and other Value Added Attributes."
Who was the intended recipient?
The intended recipient was Saint Mary's University of Minnesota (SMUMN).
What was the anticipated award amount?
The anticipated award amount was $250,000.
Was cost sharing or matching required?
No. The notice states there was no cost share requirement.
What was the anticipated period of performance?
The anticipated period of performance ran from 6/15/2015 through 6/30/2017 (about two years).
What program and authority was this award issued under?
The notice cites statutory authority 54 USC 101702(b) and CFDA 15.945, Cooperative Research and Training Programs - Resources of the National Park System. The project was set up as a CESU task agreement.
Who was the NPS point of contact?
The NPS point of contact listed was Erica Cordeiro.
What is the core purpose of the project?
The effort aimed to expand hydrography data editing and production in Alaska so the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) could represent more than traditional features like streams, rivers, and lakes, specifically by adding consistent wetlands capture and integrating other "value added attributes" tied to water features (for example, fish spawning locations).
What is meant by "value added attributes" in this notice?
The notice describes "value added attributes" as additional information tied to water features that can support mapping, modeling, and analysis. An example provided is fish spawning locations.
What standards did the work need to comply with?
The resulting protocols and outputs were required to remain compliant with US Geological Survey (USGS) NHD standards while also fitting Alaska's complementary stewardship framework, AKHydro.
Why was AKHydro mentioned alongside the USGS NHD?
The notice describes AKHydro as Alaska's complementary stewardship framework. A key requirement was that wetlands and other outputs could be stewarded in Alaska (AKHydro) while also being accepted into the national dataset (USGS NHD).
How were wetlands expected to be represented in the datasets?
Wetlands captured through this work were required to be incorporated into both AKHydro and the NHD data model as 2D area features.
What were the main expected benefits or payoffs?
The notice describes the practical payoff as a more complete hydrographic database that supports ongoing mapping programs (including USGS US Topo updates) and stronger modeling and analysis capabilities, including smoother future migration toward the NHDPlus data model.
How was the work structured (phases)?
The work was designed in two phases. This task agreement funded Phase 1, with the possibility of adding Phase 2 later if progress was satisfactory and funds were available.
What did Phase 1 focus on?
Phase 1 focused on building and testing methods to incorporate wetlands into the NHD editing workflow to improve representation of Alaska surface hydrography. It combined manual image interpretation with automated or software-assisted classification techniques to delineate and classify wetlands, and it was to be proven in a real production environment through a large-area NHD update exercise in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (WRST).
Where was Phase 1 production testing planned to occur?
Phase 1 included a large-area NHD update exercise in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (WRST), representing a boreal ecoregion context.
Were other test areas considered?
Yes. Phase 1 included selecting suitable test areas including WRST and a polar ecoregion candidate area in Noatak National Preserve (NOAT), provided the areas had full coverage of key base datasets.
What base datasets were specifically called out as requirements for test areas?
The notice specifies Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative (SDMI) processed SPOT5 satellite imagery and SDMI IfSAR-derived elevation data as key base datasets needed for the test areas.
What was a major deliverable besides new mapped features?
A major deliverable was a documented, repeatable workflow that fits within USGS NHD processes, including a clear description of the NHD-compliant development/edit process from start to finish.
What steps had to be documented in the end-to-end workflow?
The notice calls for documentation covering project identification, data checkout, editing, conflation, NPS and USGS quality control steps, and final check-in to the USGS master database.
What documentation about data inputs was required?
The work required documentation of minimum data requirements needed to do wetlands-inclusive NHD development, including what imagery, elevation, and other base layers are necessary.
Was a project management framework part of the deliverables?
Yes. The notice required a project management framework describing milestones, roles, responsibilities, resource needs, and expected outputs.
What would Phase 2 add if it were funded?
Phase 2, contingent on Phase 1 success, would extend protocols into additional parts of Alaska where hydrology and wetland types differ, emphasizing polar/arctic conditions in NOAT. It would also compile a prioritized list of additional value added attributes needed for describing, modeling, and analyzing Alaska surface hydrology through coordination with NPS and other federal agencies in Alaska (for example, the US Forest Service).
What general hydrography production objectives were described (beyond wetlands)?
The notice describes objectives including extracting existing NHD data from USGS and assessing gaps and errors; assembling base datasets (imagery, elevation, and existing edited hydrography); correcting stream geometry, flow paths, and connectivity; ensuring the flow network meets USGS NHD standards; improving coastline features with the best available data; correcting and populating key feature attributes (such as stream name, stream order, and reach code); using NHD conflation tools to merge changes and reconcile conflicts; and submitting final updated data back to USGS for inclusion in the national NHD.
What was SMUMN responsible for under the cooperative agreement?
SMUMN (working with NPS) was responsible for developing the extended editing protocols; designing the hybrid automated/manual wetland delineation approach; applying the methods in the WRST production test; incorporating edits into AKHydro and the USGS National Map/NHD using validation and conflation tools; documenting minimum data requirements and internal production processes; and delivering supporting GIS data, metadata, documentation, and a brief final technical report with methodology and accuracy assessment.
What was NPS responsible for (substantial federal involvement)?
NPS was expected to be deeply involved by helping select test areas and determine appropriate wetland attribution detail; participating in feature mapping and organizing quality assurance with park staff who have on-the-ground hydrology knowledge; coordinating input from fisheries biologists and aquatic ecologists on data requirements for wetlands and related features; helping set wetland feature collection and validation criteria; and reviewing/commenting on project data and written products prior to release.
Why was this award non-competitive (single-source)?
The notice states the single-source justification relied on Department of the Interior policy requirements and cited two criteria: continuation and unique qualifications.
What does "continuation" mean in the justification described?
NPS described the work as a continuation of an earlier task agreement (P10AC00466) where SMUMN and NPS developed Alaska NHD stewardship strategy and editing protocols. The notice indicates that switching to a new partner could risk delays and undermine continuity.
What "unique qualifications" were cited for SMUMN?
The notice cites SMUMN's multi-year Alaska hydrography experience, prior large-area NHD update work, expertise with the NHD and AKHydro data models and Alaska value-added attribution needs, experience in the Enterprise ArcSDE GIS environment used for NHD and AKHydro, established working relationships with Alaska hydrography data stewards and relevant working groups, and extensive background with the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory program in Alaska (including wetland mapping and classification techniques using traditional and newer methods).
What tools or processes were referenced for integrating edits into the national dataset?
The notice references the use of NHD validation and conflation tools and specifies that final updated data would be submitted back to USGS for inclusion in the national NHD, including a final check-in to the USGS master database.
What kinds of public-facing products were expected?
Expected products were framed as practical tools and documentation others can use, including publicly usable procedures for wetland delineation and classification in the NHD (using automated and manual approaches), a webinar to share methods and results, and a final report.
Which parks/preserves were specifically mentioned?
The notice specifically mentions Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (WRST) and Noatak National Preserve (NOAT).
What is the relationship between this work and USGS US Topo?
The notice states that a more complete hydrographic database would support ongoing mapping programs, including USGS US Topo updates.
What is the relationship between this work and the NHDPlus data model?
The notice describes improved modeling and analysis capabilities and notes smoother future migration toward the NHDPlus data model as one of the practical benefits.
Browse more opportunities from the same category: Natural Resources
Next opportunity: Marine Debris Education, Outreach and Cleanup in Kotzebue Sound Communities
Previous opportunity: Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII) Investing in Innovation (I3) Fund VALIDATION GRANTS CFDA Number 84.411B
USGrants.org Applicant Portal:
Are you interested in learning about about how to apply for this government funding opportunity? You can create a free applicant account and receive instant access to our applicant portal that many business owners like you have benefited from.
Apply for NPS DOIP15AC00448
[Watch] how do funding administrators access proposals?
Applicants also applied for:
Applicants who have applied for this opportunity (NPS DOIP15AC00448) also looked into and applied for these:
| Funding Opportunity |
|---|
| Westside Regional Drainage Plan San Joaquin River Salinity Management 2015 Financial Assistance Agreement Apply for R15AN20005 Funding Number: R15AN20005 Agency: Bureau of Reclamation Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $3,750,000 |
| Watershed Rehabilitation and Sediment Control Apply for R15AN20026 Funding Number: R15AN20026 Agency: Bureau of Reclamation Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $1,331,126 |
| Weed Management and Jobs Creation Project, Phase 2 Apply for R15AN20017 Funding Number: R15AN20017 Agency: Bureau of Reclamation Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $1,499,181 |
| WLCI Support of Watershed Management Habitat Enhancement for Triple Creek Forage Reserve Apply for RFA WY08 9012 Funding Number: RFA WY08 9012 Agency: Bureau of Land Management Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $75,000 |
| Georgia Resource Conservation Development Projects Apply for USDA NRCS GA 08 03 Funding Number: USDA NRCS GA 08 03 Agency: Georgia State Office Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $50,000 |
| CESU Quantify Thickness of Harding Icefield Apply for J9845100013 Funding Number: J9845100013 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: Case Dependent |
| Farm Bill Assistance in Trinity County, CA Apply for USDA NRCS CA 10 0004 Funding Number: USDA NRCS CA 10 0004 Agency: California State Office Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $25,000 |
| Farm Bill Assistance in Kern County, CA Apply for USDA NRCS CA 10 0005 Funding Number: USDA NRCS CA 10 0005 Agency: California State Office Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $50,000 |
| Herbarium Study of Plant Samples from the Arctic Network of Alaskas National Parks Apply for J9840100052 Funding Number: J9840100052 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $50,000 |
| Hemlock Woolly Adelgid Systemic Treatment Research Study Letters of Interest Apply for NPS LIGRSM100104 Funding Number: NPS LIGRSM100104 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $80,000 |
| Vascular and non vascular plant specimen identification, curation, and technical support for vegetation monitoring in the Southwest Alaska Network Apply for J2101100015 Funding Number: J2101100015 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $50,000 |
| A Technical Plan to Conduct a Landcover (Vegetation) Inventory for Alagnak Wild River Apply for J2141L0003 Funding Number: J2141L0003 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $103,968 |
| WETLAND RESTORATION ASSISTANCE Apply for USDA NRCS IA 10 02 Funding Number: USDA NRCS IA 10 02 Agency: USDA NRCS Iowa State Office Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: Case Dependent |
| Landbird Monitoring 2010 Option Apply for NPS NOINOCAJ9471101071 Funding Number: NPS NOINOCAJ9471101071 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $47,283 |
| Farm Bill Assistance in San Joaquin County, CA Apply for USDA NRCS CA 10 0006 Funding Number: USDA NRCS CA 10 0006 Agency: California State Office Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $100,000 |
| Halibut Research Publication Apply for J9815100510 Funding Number: J9815100510 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $15,000 |
| A Technical Plan to Conduct Landcover (Vegetation) Inventories for Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park and Sitka National Historical Park Apply for J2141100002 Funding Number: J2141100002 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $105,000 |
| Butterfly Monitoring North Cascades NP Apply for NPS NOINOCAJ9471101283 Funding Number: NPS NOINOCAJ9471101283 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $12,000 |
| Invasive Plant Control by SAGA Crews in Alaskas National Parks Apply for J9923110001 Funding Number: J9923110001 Agency: National Park Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $100,000 |
| Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Joint Venture Habitat Restoration and Protection Apply for FWS JVGLRI 2011 Funding Number: FWS JVGLRI 2011 Agency: Fish and Wildlife Service Category: Natural Resources Funding Amount: $500,000 |
Grant application guides and resources
It is always free to apply for government grants. However the process may be very complex depending on the funding opportunity you are applying for. Let us help you!
Apply for Grants
Premium leads for funding administrators, grant writers, and loan issuers
Thousands of people visit our website for their funding needs every day. When a user creates a grant proposal and files for submission, we pass the information on to funding administrators, grant writers, and government loan issuers.
If you manage government grant programs, provide grant writing services, or issue personal or government loans, we can help you reach your audience.
Subscribe to Leads
Request more information:
Would you like to learn more about this funding opportunity, similar opportunities to "NPS DOIP15AC00448", eligibility, application service, and/or application tips? Submit an inquiry below:
Don't forget to subscribe to our grant alerts mailing list to receive weekly alerts on new and updated grant funding opportunities like this one in your email.