Improve Award Process for Lead Program Grants
[Recommendation P3]
You will need the free Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page.
See EPA's PDF page to learn more.
This recommendation has not yet been addressed because EPA has been focusing on the 16 priority areas identified by the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) in summer 2007 and this recommendation is not in a priority area. The recommendation is listed here to ensure that a full set of states’ submissions is accessible.
States' Original Input
Related recommendations submitted by states during the October 2006 data call by EPA:
- Maryland - Lead grants - EPA continues to have a competitive grant process for states with an excellent track record, which have received such grants for over a decade. States do not think they should still compete for these grants. Read Maryland's original submission; see text highlighted in yellow (PDF) (3 pp, 29K).
- Utah - The Region should allocate lead grant funds to the state without making the state compete for each grant. These programs should be treated as core state programs. Grant allocations should be determined and then the work plan should be negotiated as part of the Performance Partnership Agreement (PPA). Results should be reported in the PPA End-of-Year Report. Budget reporting should be part of Performance Partnership Grant (PPG) reporting. Read Utah's original submission (PDF) (1 pg, 295K).
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif)