RIO GRANDE NATURAL AREA RESTORATION PLANNING | Apply Online

RIO GRANDE NATURAL AREA RESTORATION PLANNING (L13AS00233) - FAQs

What is the RIO GRANDE NATURAL AREA RESTORATION PLANNING opportunity (L13AS00233)?

It was a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) discretionary grant offered as a cooperative agreement under the Natural Resources funding activity category. The project focus was to develop a targeted restoration plan and then begin early implementation of the plan's recommended actions to support on-the-ground river and habitat improvement work.

What was the main purpose of this grant?

The central purpose was to move beyond general restoration concepts by producing a practical, usable planning document that could guide restoration decisions in a specific river corridor, while also demonstrating progress through initiating priority improvements identified during the planning process.

Where was the project supposed to take place?

The geographic focus was a specific 33-mile segment of the Rio Grande in southern Colorado, running from the south end of the Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge to the Colorado-New Mexico state line.

Was the grant intended for planning, implementation, or both?

Both. The opportunity emphasized first developing a targeted restoration plan and then beginning early implementation of the plan's recommended actions within the same effort.

What kinds of activities were envisioned under "river and habitat improvement"?

The summary does not list specific techniques, but it describes "river improvements" and habitat work in a way that commonly includes actions such as enhancing channel and floodplain function, improving riparian habitat, addressing erosion or sediment issues, improving fish and wildlife habitat connectivity, managing invasive species, and restoring native vegetation, tailored to conditions within the Rio Grande Natural Area corridor.

How much funding was available?

The opportunity anticipated a single award with an estimated total funding amount of $50,000.

What were the minimum and maximum award amounts?

The award floor was $10,000 and the award ceiling was $50,000.

How many awards did BLM expect to make?

The opportunity anticipated making one award.

Was cost share or matching required?

Yes. A cost share or matching contribution was required, meaning applicants needed to bring non-federal resources to support the project.

What types of match contributions were mentioned?

Examples referenced include cash match, in-kind services, partner labor, donated materials, or other eligible contributions, depending on the detailed terms in the full announcement.

What type of funding instrument was used?

The instrument type was a cooperative agreement.

What does it mean that this was a cooperative agreement?

It indicates BLM expected substantial involvement during the project. The description notes this typically includes coordination, technical input, review of deliverables, and alignment of restoration actions with agency priorities and compliance requirements.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was limited to nonprofit organizations that hold 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, excluding institutions of higher education.

Are universities or institutions of higher education eligible?

No. Institutions of higher education were explicitly excluded from eligibility.

What kinds of organizations did this opportunity seem designed for?

Based on the eligibility and project intent, it targeted conservation groups, watershed organizations, river or land stewardship nonprofits, and similar 501(c)(3) entities capable of convening partners and translating restoration priorities into a plan and early action steps.

What was the CFDA number and program alignment?

The opportunity fell under CFDA 15.231, Fish, Wildlife and Plant Conservation Resource Management, aligning with habitat improvement, species conservation, and natural resource management efforts that support ecological function and resilience.

What would a competitive proposal likely have included?

The description suggests a strong proposal would have laid out a clear approach for assessing existing conditions in the corridor, identifying limiting factors and restoration opportunities, engaging relevant stakeholders and land managers, producing a practical prioritized plan, and including near-term restoration tasks that could be initiated during the award period. It would also typically include a timeline, budget, partner roles, and measurable outputs.

Did the opportunity require actual on-the-ground work, or only a plan?

It called for more than a plan. The announcement specifically described beginning implementation of plan recommendations, meaning some feasible early restoration actions were expected in addition to the planning deliverable.

What were the key dates for this opportunity?

It was posted and created on August 29, 2013. The original and current closing date was September 12, 2013. It was archived on October 15, 2013.

Is this a current funding opportunity?

No. Based on the dates provided, it was a time-limited 2013 opportunity and is archived.

Where were applicants supposed to get the full instructions and application materials?

Applicants were directed to download the full announcement via the application materials.

Who was the point of contact for grants management questions?

The listed grants management point of contact was Yvonne Pier, Grants Management Officer. The email provided was ypier@blm.gov, and the contact was identified for access issues or administrative questions.

What was the funding activity category?

The funding activity category was Natural Resources.

Which agency offered this grant?

The opportunity was offered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

What was the overall scope and scale of the project BLM intended to fund?

The funding level and framing indicate it was meant as a focused planning-and-initial-action effort, not a large multi-year construction program, with deliverables centered on a targeted restoration plan plus early implementation steps within the defined Rio Grande corridor segment.