2012 Homeland Security Grant Program

1. 2012 Homeland Security Grant Program Michigan State Police Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division Mr. Sam Jonker-Burke Mr. Mike Curtis April 29, 2013

2. Overview • FY 2012 HSGP Priorities • FY 2012 HSGP Guidance • Emergency Management and Homeland Security (EMHSD) Grant Process • Questions

3. FY 2012 Priorities Priority One: • Implementation of PPD-8 and the Whole Community Approach to Security and Emergency Management

4. FY 2012 Priorities (cont.) Priority Two: • Building and Sustaining Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Capabilities

5. FY 2012 Priorities (cont.) Priority Three: • Maturation and Enhancement of State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers

6. 2012 Guidance • No longer discrete grant programs: • Citizen Corps Program (CCP) • Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) • Most activities and costs are allowable and encouraged under the FY 2012 HSGP • Describe how expenditures support maintenance and sustainment of current core capabilities

7. 2012 Guidance (cont.) 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 of, protection against, response to, and recovery from terrorism related events. • A well executed mission requires carefully managed resources (personnel, teams, facilities, equipment, and/or supplies) from the Whole Community to meet incident needs. • Utilization of standardized resource management concepts such as typing, inventorying, organizing, and tracking will facilitate the dispatch, deployment, and recovery of resources before, during, and after an incident.

8. 2012 Guidance (cont.) Organization - Typing of Equipment and Training • Measurement Method: • Percentage of total equipment purchased using a typed resource under the National Incident Management System (NIMS) in support of developing or maintaining core capability • Percentage of all personnel trained in a given capability to support a reported number of defined resource typed teams (e.g., Technical search and rescue equipment for urban search and rescue must be identified for use in the development of a NIMS defined Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) team or to outfit technical rescue specialists as typed single resources) • Percentage of defined types of resources and core capabilities built utilizing grant funds

9. 2012 Guidance (cont.) Organization - Typing of Equipment and Training • Reporting Requirements: • Report what equipment was purchased, and identify what typed capability it supports as part of the reporting requirements • Report the total 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 USAR Teams) • Report the total number of a defined type of resource and core capabilities built utilizing the resources of this grant as part of the reporting requirements.

10. 2012 Guidance (cont.) Sustaining Capabilities: • In this time of limited resources, HSGP grantees should ensure that grant funding is utilized to sustain core capabilities within the National Preparedness Goal (NPG) that were funded by past HSGP funding cycles to include training of personnel and lifecycle replacement of equipment. • Grantees must ensure that the capabilities are deployable outside of their community to support regional and national efforts. All capabilities being built or sustained must have a clear linkage to one or more core capabilities in the NPG.

11. 2012 Guidance (cont.) Sustaining Capabilities: • Measurement Method: • Percentage of proposed funding on a project by project basis which supports the sustainment of the NPG’s core capabilities • Reporting Requirements: • As part of programmatic monitoring, grantees will be required to describe how expenditures first support maintenance and sustainment of current NPG core capabilities within reporting

12. 2012 Guidance (cont.) 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

13. 2012 Guidance (cont.) • 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 throughout regular required reporting mechanisms, including the Biannual Strategy Implementation Reports (BSIR).

14. 2012 Guidance (cont.) • Activities implemented under SHSP and UASI 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.

15. 2012 Guidance (cont.) Performance Period end date: May 31, 2014 Reimbursement must be received: June 30, 2014

16. FY 2012 Regional Investment Projects • Six (6) investments were developed using Goals and Objectives from the State and Regional Homeland Security Strategies • Investment Projects start on page 26 of the FY 2012 Michigan Supplemental Guidance

17. Investment Project Review (page 27 of Michigan Supplemental Guidance) Each Investment Project includes: • Header with corresponding title / state investment # • Core Capabilities 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

18. Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP) Review • Any activities that have been initiated without the necessary EHP review and approval will result in a non-compliance finding and will not be eligible for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding

19. 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

20. EMHSD Process • The Project Justification (PJ) and Allowable Cost Justification (ACJ) forms have been combined • The new form is called the Alignment and Allowability Form • ***Note: AAF is required for all costs starting with Grant Year 2011***

21. EMHSD Process (cont.)

22. EMHSD Process (cont.) FOCUS NARRATIVE ON THE INVESTMENT LANGUAGE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE CONNECTION/ALIGNMENT JOB AID: rkb.us  other content  core capabilities

23. EMHSD Process (cont.) SPECIFIC NARRATIVE IS RECOMMENDED 23

24. EMHSD Process (cont.)

25. EMHSD Process (cont.) JOB AID: rkb.us  other content  NIMS Resource Types

26. EMHSD Process (cont.) MUSTmatch the reimbursement request documents Please recognize that the goal is to track all of the attributes included on the AAF by the actual amount spent

27. QUESTIONS?

28. Contact Information Mr. Sam Jonker-Burke Jonker-BurkeS@michigan.gov (517) 333-4195 Mr. Mike Curtis CurtisM9@michigan.gov (517) 333-5039 Ms. Renee Tober ToberR2@michigan.gov (517) 333-5030