2015-2017 DOE Floodplain by Design Budget Proposal Scoring CriteriaDEPARTMENT OF
ECOLOGY
/91N1 State of Washington
Floodplain by Design 2015-17 Budget Proposal
In 2013 the Department of Ecology was successful in securing legislative
funding through the Floodplain by Design effort. Ecology was given $33
million to advance integrated floodplain projects in Puget Sound and an
additional $11 million for a statewide floodplain management and control
competitive grant program.
The Department of Ecology is now soliciting preliminary proposals of
projects in order to develop a budget proposal for the 2015-17
biennium.
There are two goals of the program:
1. Promote the reduction of flood risks and floodplain ecosystem recovery
while maintaining or improving agricultural production, water quality,
and open space/recreation.
2. Improve the coordination of public funding for floodplain efforts.
Submittal deadlines:
• May 23, 2014: Preliminary Proposals
• August 1: Project applications submitted to Ecology
Background
The Department of Ecology wants to promote a broad approach to floodplain
management, combining efforts that have previously been approached
through single -issue programs focused on reducing flood hazards, restoring
floodplain habitat, or investing in other floodplain activities. Achieving these
multiple objectives will need increased funding at the local level.
The capital budget proposal is intended to provide local efforts the flexible
funding necessary to fill in gaps left by single -purpose grant sources and
enable higher impact, locally driven approaches to complex floodplain
management issues.
Ecology is looking for Preliminary Proposals for projects that combine
reducing flood risk with ecosystem improvements. These 3-4 page
Preliminary Proposals will be evaluated, and successful applicants will be
asked to prepare more detailed project proposals by August 1, 2014.
Successful projects will include a variety of objectives, such as habitat
restoration, improved recreational access, and improved water quality. Final
FY 15-17 Coordinated Investment for Floodplains Budget Proposal Page 1
proposals will make up a funding package Ecology will submit to the
Governor and Legislature. It is likely the request will not be less than $50
million statewide. Decisions on the level of funding and scope of the
program will be determined by the 2015-2017 legislative budget process.
Eligible projects
Projects must reduce flood risks and protect or restore floodplain ecosystem
functions. Addressing other floodplain management objectives within the
river reach of the project is encouraged.
This program encourages innovative actions. The program is also intended to
be flexible in terms of both the phases and types of activities that are eligible
as long as a strong case is made that the project will lead to or directly result
in substantial results. Eligible project types include:
• Pre -construction (e.g., feasibility, design)
• Acquisition
• Construction
Who can apply?
Counties, cities, federally recognized Indian tribes, special purpose districts
(i.e., port districts, flood control zone districts, flood control districts, and
diking and drainage districts), salmon recovery lead entities, regional
fisheries enhancement groups, conservation districts, and nonprofit
organizations. Proposals that affect flood protection of facilities must have
the support of the entity with statutory authority for those facilities.
Match requirements
Match required: project proponents must demonstrate they have a minimum
of 20% matching, non -state dollars.
Project funding caps
Our objective is to determine what is necessary in terms of additional funding.
Grant caps have not been determined at this time.
Funding solicited
The funding package submitted to the Governor and Legislature will be
determined, in part, by the projects submitted. It is likely the request will not
be less than $50 million statewide for the 2015-2017 biennium. The final list
of projects that receive funding will be determined by the outcome of the
2015-17 legislative budget process.
Project Ranking Criteria:
1. Project scope of work and budget: Projects are evaluated based on
significance of problem and effectiveness of proposal in advancing
multiple benefits, such as flood risk reduction, salmon recovery, water
FY 15-17 Coordinated Investment for Floodplains Budget Proposal Page 2
quality improvements, habitat restoration, agricultural viability and
channel migration zone protection. Projects must include the following
elements. (180 points)
a. Flood hazard/risk reduction element. (60 points) Reducing the
magnitude or frequency of flood damages to people, structures or
infrastructure. Projects will be evaluated on the significance of the
flood hazard, and the ability of the solution to address the hazard.
Evidence of flood hazard reduction can be demonstrated via flood
storage added (acre-feet), flood stage reduction (reduced BFE)
conveyance increased (cubic ft/sec), sediment storage added or
inputs reduced, number or value of structures and/or development
rights removed from hazard area (# or areal extent), critical facilities
removed from high hazard area, transportation and infrastructure
facilities removed from high hazard areas, and other project -specific
goals.
b. Floodplain ecosystem protection or restoration element. (60
points) Projects will be evaluated on both the significance of the
ecological benefit and the ability of the solution to address the overall
need in the project area or watershed. Examples include but are not
limited to reconnecting floodplains, salmon recovery actions, habitat
restoration, Channel Migration Zone protections, etc. Evidence of
ecosystem benefits include floodplain (including estuary) habitat type
(e.g., wetland, side channel, forest) and area restored (# acres),
floodplain area protected from bank armoring (# of acres), floodplain
area protected from development or other land use change (# acres),
hardened bank removal or levee/riprap removal (linear feet), levee
setbacks constructed (linear feet, # acres), new side channels or
reconnection of old side channels (linear feet or storage volume),
salmon species benefitted (# of listed, non -listed species).
Secondary evidence includes culvert replaced to restore fish passage
or increase conveyance, logjam and or wood structures installed,
riparian area planted, and other project -specific goals.
c. Other benefits. Projects that maintain or improve agricultural
viability, water quality, public open space/recreation access,
economic development, or other important local benefits or values,
and do not conflict with other objectives of this program. Projects
receive points based on the importance of the result produced, the
ability of the solution to address the overall stakeholder need and the
long-term improvement. (40 points)
Agricultural viability (Evidence of agricultural benefits include
reductions in flooding (acres), protection from development
(acres), improvement of drainage infrastructure (acres affected),
or other capital or non -capital benefits to agricultural
productivity).
Water quality improvement (e.g., through stormwater
infrastructure upgrades, treatment of a TMDL or 303(d) issue,
reduction in sediment, restoration of wetlands or riparian areas,
implementation of related best management practices, etc.).
FY 15-17 Coordinated Investment for Floodplains Budget Proposal Page 3
• Public access and recreation (e.g., through land acquisition, the
development of trails or other recreational infrastructure, etc.)
• Other floodplain values or services of local importance.
d. Cost-effectiveness (20 points)
• Budget is appropriate to the project scope, designed for project
success.
• Clear plan for how the project will be continued or maintained
after the grant has been completed.
2. Long-term cost avoidance: (30 points)
a. Projects that minimize or eliminate future costs for maintenance,
operation, or emergency response. (15 points)
b. Projects that account for expected future changes to hydrology,
sediment regimes, or water supply resulting from other floodplain
management efforts, land use changes, extreme weather events, or
other causes. (15 points)
3. Demonstration of need and support: (30 points)
a. Projects are consistent with the intent of existing floodplain
management or habitat recovery plans or are specifically identified
through existing plans or work programs. (Elements of the project
may have been developed through more than one planning process.
Please identify the planning process used for each major element if
they are not from a common plan.) (15 points)
b. Flood control authorities, Tribal Nations, local governments, lead
entities, key stakeholders or decision -makers representing floodplain
interests located within the river reach or affected by the project
have provided letters of support explicitly endorsing the project and
its outcomes for their interests. (15 points)
4. Readiness to proceed and complete the proposed phase of the
project: Projects are ready to proceed with the scope of work, and
sponsors have the capacity to complete the project successfully and
maintain it over time. (25 points)
a. Project schedule
b. Capacity of the sponsor organization(s)
5. Pilot project and leverage opportunities: Additional points may be
awarded for the following. (25 points)
a. Projects that could serve as pilot efforts or result in changes or
results with broader impacts to the state. (10 points)
b. Leverage existing investments. Projects that leverage other
programs and investments (e.g., SRFB, FCZDs, Dike Districts, TMDLs,
WWRP, ESRP, NEP, and other funding sources.) Evidence of this will
be based on the amount and diversity of the leveraged funding
sources. (10 points)
c. Projects that address an equity or social justice issue by benefitting
FY 15-17 Coordinated Investment for Floodplains Budget Proposal Page 4
underserved communities. (5 points)
6. Additional factors in ranking and award: This is a very new funding
source. To ensure that projects meet the objectives of the program, these
additional factors will be considered in creating the proposed funding list:
• Balance of project types: Balance funding ready -to -proceed
construction projects with funding pre -construction activities. This
balance in project types is vital to ensuring success over time.
• Geography: There is strong interest in ensuring that projects in all
areas of the state receive funding.
• Advancing multi -benefit floodplain management: It is
important that the project list advance the principles and practical
application of multi -benefit floodplain management.
FY 15-17 Coordinated Investment for Floodplains Budget Proposal Page 5