2011 HSGP Grant Michigan State Police Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division

2011 HSGP Grant
Michigan State Police
Emergency Management and
Homeland Security Division
Mr. Sam Jonker-Burke
Mr. Mike Curtis
April 30, 2012
Goals Today
• FY 2011 Priorities
• 2011 changes
• Existing requirements
• Answer Questions
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
2
FY 2011 Priorities
• Priority One – Whole Community
• Priority Two – Building Prevention
and Protection Capabilities
• Priority Three – Maturation and
Enhancement of State and Major
Urban Area Fusion Centers
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
3
Changes
• Organization – Typing of Equipment and Training
– State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) and
Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) provide funding
for equipment, training, and exercises for the
prevention, protection against, response to, and
recovery from terrorism events
○ All equipment and training procured under this grant must be
in support of the development or maintenance of an identified
team or capability described and typed under the National
Incident Management System (NIMS) where such typing
guidance exists as published by Federal Emergency
Management Agency) FEMA
○ All grantees will report what equipment was purchased and
what typed capability it supports in the Biannual Strategy
Implementation Report (BSIR)
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
4
Changes (Cont.)
• Organization – Typing of Equipment
and Training Cont.
○ All grantees will report in the BSIR the number of
people trained in a given capability to support a
reported number of defined resource typed teams
(e.g., 63 responders were trained in structural
collapse to support 23 Type 2 Urban Search and
Rescue [USAR] Teams)
○ All grantees will report the total number of a
defined type of resource and capabilities built
utilizing the resources of this grant as part of the
BSIR
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
5
Law Enforcement Terrorism
Prevention Activities (LETPA)
• Per the 9/11 Act, States are required to ensure
that at least 25 percent (25%) of SHSP
appropriated funds and 25 percent (25%) of
UASI appropriated funds are dedicated
towards law enforcement terrorism
prevention-oriented planning, organization,
training, exercise, and equipment activities
(LETPA)
• Actual dollar amount is listed in the grant
agreements
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
6
LETPA (Cont.)
• Funds leveraged toward LETPA must
prioritize activities associated with
Priorities Two and Three, in particular
those activities that focus on:
○ Building Prevention and Protection
Capabilities
○ Maturation and Enhancement of State and
Major Urban Area Fusion Centers
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
7
Grant Guidance
• Use of SHSP and UASI funds must be
consistent with and supportive of
implementation of the State Homeland
Security Strategy. Linkages between
specific projects undertaken with SHSP
and UASI funds and strategic goals and
objectives will be highlighted through
regular required reporting mechanisms,
including the BSIR
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
8
Grant Guidance (Cont.)
• Activities implemented under SHSP must
support terrorism preparedness by building or
enhancing capabilities that relate to the
prevention of, protection from, response to,
and recovery from terrorism in order to be
considered eligible. However, many
capabilities which support terrorism
preparedness simultaneously support
preparedness for other hazards. Grantees
must demonstrate this dual-use quality for
any activities implemented under this
program that are not explicitly focused on
terrorism preparedness.
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
9
FY 2011 Regional
Investment Projects
• Eight (8) investments were developed
using Goals and Objectives from the
State and Regional Homeland Security
Strategies
• Each region has been provided an index
that identifies which Goals and
Objectives from their Regional
Homeland Security Strategy support
which investment(s)
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
10
FY 2011 Regional
Investment Projects (Cont.)
• The index can be used to easily
determine which investment the region
is working towards accomplishing by
completing a specified objective
• Investment Projects start on page 27 of
the FY 2011 Michigan Supplemental
Guidance
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
11
Investment Project Review
(page 28 of Regional Guidance)
Each Investment Project includes:
• Header with corresponding title / state
investment #
• National Priorities and Target Capabilities best
supported by the Investment Project are
identified (Note: best supported; i.e. list is not
necessarily exhaustive)
• Investment description summary
• Investment Project (IP) Description /
Implementation Activities
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
12
Investment Project Review (Cont.)
• Using a different Investment
○ A region may choose to tie a strategic goal or
objective to an investment other than the one
identified in the index if the region determines one
of the goals/objectives is better reflected in another
investment and/or that the identified investment
does not fully accomplish the intent of the specific
objective(s)
• Region must provide a rationale in the
form to explain how the identified goal /
objective supports accomplishment of
the overall mission of the selected
investment
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
13
Regional Investment Project
Projections (RIPP)
• Must include Investment Projects listed
on the Region specific indexes
• Include funding dedicated with timeline
• Include any additional Investment
Projects that the Region ties their RHSS
to and that are not listed on the index
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
14
Regional Investment Project
Projections (RIPP) (Cont.)
• Summary due by June 29, 2012
• Send completed sheet electronically to:
[email protected]
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
15
Environmental and Historic
Preservation (EHP) Review
• Any activities that have been initiated
without the necessary EHP review
and approval will result in a noncompliance finding and will not be
eligible for FEMA funding
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
16
EHP Review (Cont.)
• When required, including but not limited
to:
○ Interior / Exterior Installations
○ Installing new structures
○ Ground disturbance
• Timeline:
○ 2-3 Months for most interior installations
○ 2-3 Months for most installations on existing
structures
○ 2-12 Months (or longer) for new structures or
ground disturbance
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
17
Review process
• The Project Justification (PJ) and
Allowable Cost Justification (ACJ) forms
have been combined
• The new form is called the Alignment
and Allowability Justification form
• The investment is now the project
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
18
QUESTIONS?
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
19
Contact Information
Mr. Sam Jonker-Burke
[email protected]
(517) 333-4195
Mr. Mike Curtis
[email protected]
(517) 333-5039
Ms. Renee Tober
[email protected]
(517) 333-5030
http://www.michigan.gov/emhsd
20