FY 2009 SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

Office of Emergency
Communications:
Fiscal Year 2009
SAFECOM Recommended Guidance
for Federal Grant Programs

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

A Message to Federal, State, and Local Stakeholders
On behalf of the Office of Emergency Communications (OEC), I am pleased to present
the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant
Programs. As a legacy of the policy and planning components of SAFECOM, OEC is
congressionally-mandated to develop and coordinate grant guidance for all Federal
programs that fund interoperable emergency communications. To that end, this
document will help Federal grant programs target their funds to support National goals
and objectives while simultaneously increasing the interoperable and emergency
communications capabilities at the State and local levels of government.
For our Federal partners, we encourage you to incorporate these recommendations into
your grant programs that fund emergency communications-related activities. This will
help ensure that the Federal government is driving consistent and measurable progress
towards National goals and objectives.
For our State and local partners, we are well aware that efforts to coordinate interoperable
and emergency communications at all levels of government will require transparency
among those most affected by these efforts. Moreover, we need your assistance,
expertise, and leadership to support and promote the ability of emergency responders and
government officials to continue to communicate in the event of natural disasters, acts of
terrorism, or other man-made disasters. We are committed to working with you to
ensure, accelerate, and attain interoperable and operable emergency communications
nationwide. This is especially crucial in our role of coordinating guidance for programs
that fund interoperable communications.
Your leadership, combined with the leadership of your colleagues in the Federal
government, will ensure that we optimize the limited Federal resources dedicated to
interoperable emergency communications.
In keeping with that sentiment, I encourage you–our Federal, State, and local partners–to
share your thoughts about this document with me. For questions, comments, or
assistance in applying these recommended grant policies, please contact my office at
[email protected].

Chris Essid
Director
Office of Emergency Communications
November 2008

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

I. Introduction

Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.), as amended,
calls on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Emergency
Communications (OEC) to establish coordinated guidance for Federal grant
programs that fund public safety interoperable communications. In accordance with this
statutory requirement, and in coordination with the Office for Interoperability and
Compatibility (OIC), OEC has developed the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 SAFECOM
Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs.1

1.1 Purpose of the Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant
Programs
This document outlines recommended allowable costs and applications requirements
for Federal grant programs providing funding for interoperable emergency
communications. The recommendations are
Purpose
designed to ensure that Federal grant funding
•
Ensure
that
Federal grant
for interoperable emergency communications is
funding for interoperable
aligned with National goals, objectives, and
communications is aligned with
initiatives established in the National
national goals and objectives
Emergency Communications Plan (NECP).2
• Ensure alignment of State,
local, and tribal investment of
The NECP is the overarching strategy for
Federal grant funding to
ensuring that emergency responders can
statewide and national goals
communicate as needed, on demand, and as
and objectives
authorized–at all levels of government–and
• Drive consistent and
across all disciplines. In addition, this
measurable progress in
strengthening emergency
document is intended to ensure that investments
communications capabilities
made by State, local, and tribal governments
through Federal grant funding align to strategic
and tactical plans already developed. By aligning to these National goals and building
upon the strategic and tactical planning in place at all levels, grant programs across the
Federal government can drive consistent and measurable progress in strengthening
emergency communications capabilities nationwide. The NECP goals, objectives, and
initiatives, as well as initiatives and gaps identified through strategic planning and tactical
exercises, serve as the basis for the recommended allowable cost activities within this
document.

1

 This document was previously titled SAFECOM Recommended Federal Interoperable Communications Grant Guidance.  Per 
Title XVIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended, OEC is responsible for managing the policy and planning 
elements of the SAFECOM Program, which included development of coordinated grant guidance.  The Office for 
Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) maintains responsibility for the research, development, testing and evaluation, 
and standards elements of SAFECOM. 
2
 The NECP is available at: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/national_emergency_communications_plan.pdf. 

1

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

1.2

How to Use This Document

To help Federal grant administrators align their grant programs with the NECP, this
document maps the plan’s interoperable and emergency communication priorities to
common allowable costs, specifically–
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

General Application Requirements
Planning
Personnel
Training
Exercise
Equipment

Federal grant administrators have limited time to develop guidance or acquire subject
matter expertise in interoperability and emergency communications. With these facts in
mind, OEC recommends that Federal grant administrators incorporate key factors from
this document into their respective agencies’ grant guidance addressing interoperability
and emergency communications needs. OEC drafted the following sections of this
document in a generic manner to allow grant administrators from across the Federal
government to easily apply language on allowable costs for interoperable and emergency
communications to their own grant programs.
Applying the language from this guidance document to a Federal grant program
application kit related to interoperable or emergency communications can help
demonstrate compliance with the goals and objectives of the NECP. OEC also
encourages grant administrators to offer recommendations on ways to make this guidance
document more useable. For questions, comments, or assistance in applying these
recommended grant policies, please contact [email protected].

II.

Application Requirements and Allowable Costs

OEC understands that Federal grant administrators and programs are subject to different
statutory requirements and authorities. Consequently, only portions of the following
recommendations may apply to any given grant program. However, OEC strongly
encourages grant applicants to incorporate as much of this guidance into their
applications as feasible. Doing so will help ensure that Federal funding is driving results
in emergency communications according to the goals and objectives of the NECP, and to
the initiatives and gaps identified in Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans
(SCIP)3 and Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans (TICP).4

3

 As of April 2008, all States and territories have a DHS‐approved Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan (SCIP).  
All investments should align with the goals, objectives, and initiatives identified in the SCIPs. 
4
 In 2006, Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) recipients were required to develop and exercise Tactical 
Interoperable Communications Plans (TICP) in designated Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) sites. 

2

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

2.1

General Application Requirements

Applicants should coordinate investments with the statewide interoperability coordinator,
the statewide interoperability governing body, and the appropriate stakeholders and/or
committees at the State, regional, local, and tribal levels of government. Further, grant
applicants are encouraged to submit multi-State, multi-urban area, or regional
investments to promote regional collaboration and cost-effective measures.
Finally, grant applications should demonstrate how the proposed investments align to at
least one of the following plans–
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

2.2

Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan
Tactical Interoperable Communications Plan
National Emergency Communications Plan

Planning

Planning activities help to prioritize needs, build capabilities, update preparedness
strategies, allocate resources, and deliver preparedness programs across multiple
disciplines and levels of government. Interoperable emergency communications planning
activities may include any of those listed below.
ƒ

Development and/or enhancement of interoperable emergency
communications plans. Grant funds may be used to develop and/or enhance
interoperable communications plans and align such plans to goals, objectives, and
initiatives set forth in the NECP, including–
o
o
o
o
o

ƒ

Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans
Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans
Communications system life-cycle plans
Disaster emergency communications plans
Other regional or local interoperable emergency communications plans

Establishment and/or enhancement of interoperability governing bodies.
Grant funds may be used to establish or enhance statewide, regional, or local
interoperability governing bodies5 as needed to conduct activities associated with
planning, implementing, and managing interoperable emergency communications
initiatives.

5

 The NECP established the National milestone that statewide interoperability governing bodies in all 56 States and 
Territories should be established as recommended in the Statewide Interoperability Planning Guidebook by July 2009. 

3

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

ƒ

Development and/or enhancement of interoperable emergency
communications assessments and inventories. Multi-agency and multijurisdictional partnerships should facilitate planning activities, such as
assessments of–
o Technology capabilities, specifically the identification and inventorying of
infrastructure and equipment
o Standard operating procedures
o Training and exercises
o Usage

ƒ

Development and enhancement of interoperable emergency communications
protocols. Funds may be used to enhance multi-jurisdictional and multidisciplinary common planning and operational protocols. Activities may include–
o Programming interoperability channels
o Developing standard operating procedures
o Eliminating coded substitutions (specifically, developing and
implementing plain language protocols)

ƒ

Use of priority service programs. Grant funds may be used to facilitate
participation in a number of Federal priority service programs. This includes
programs designed for both priority service and priority call completion. For
example–
o Telecommunications Service Program (TSP)
o Government Emergency Telecommunications Service (GETS)
o Wireless Priority Service (WPS)

2.3

Personnel

Salaried personnel, hiring, overtime, and backfill expenses are allowable expenses if such
expenditures support interoperable and emergency communications planning, training,
and exercise activities. Specifically, this includes personnel associated with the
interoperability coordinator function. However, applicants must identify sustainable
sources of funding and integrate new staff in their budgets in future years to maintain
these capabilities. Funds may not be used to hire any personnel to fulfill traditional
public safety duties or to supplant traditional public safety positions and responsibilities.

4

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

ƒ

Hiring of certain part-time staff and contractors or consultants. Part-time
staff may be hired to support planning, training, and exercise-related activities.
This includes staff to serve in the following roles, consistent with the SCIPs–
o Project manager(s) for the statewide interoperability coordinator6 function,
as appropriate
o Subject matter expert(s) for the statewide interoperability coordinator
function, as appropriate
o Regional, local, or tribal interoperability coordinator(s), as appropriate
Applicants must follow formal written procurement policy. They may use either
their own agencies’ policies or the policies set forth in the Federal Acquisition
Regulations.

ƒ

Overtime. These expenses are limited to the additional costs that result from
personnel working more than 40 hours per week as a direct result of their
performance of approved interoperable and emergency communications activities
specified in this guidance. Overtime associated with any other activity is not an
allowable expense eligible for grant funds.

ƒ

Backfill-related Overtime. Also called “Overtime as Backfill,” these expenses
are limited to overtime costs of personnel who work overtime (as identified
above) to perform the duties of other personnel who are temporarily assigned to
approved interoperable and emergency communications activities outside their
core responsibilities. These costs are calculated by subtracting the non-overtime
compensation, including fringe benefits of the temporarily assigned personnel,
from the total costs (non-overtime and overtime compensation, including fringe
benefits) for backfilling the position.

2.4

Training

Communications-specific training activities should be incorporated into statewide
training exercise plans. Training should address a performance gap identified through
SCIPs, TICP After Action Reports (AAR), and/or other assessments. Interoperable
emergency communications grant funds may be used for the training activities listed
below.
ƒ

Development, delivery, attendance, and evaluation of training. Grant funds
may also be used to plan, attend, and conduct communications-specific training
workshops or conferences, to include costs related to planning, meeting space,
and other meeting costs, facilitation costs, travel, and training development.
Communications-specific training should focus on–
o Use of established operational protocols (such as plain language)

6

 The NECP established a National milestone specifying that all States and Territories should establish full‐time statewide 
interoperability coordinators or equivalent positions by July 2009. 

5

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

o Use of National Incident Management System (NIMS) Incident Command
System (ICS)
o Use of interoperable emergency communications solutions
o Communications Unit Leader Training, Communications Unit Technician,
or other ICS Communications Unit position training

2.6

Exercises

Exercises should be used to both demonstrate and validate skills learned in training and to
identify training gaps. Specifically, applicants are encouraged to conduct exercises to
achieve Goal 1 of the NECP–
By 2010, 90 percent of all high-risk Urban Areas designated within the
Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) are able to demonstrate responselevel emergency communications within one hour for routine events
involving multiple jurisdictions and agencies.7
Interoperable emergency communications grant funds should be used to focus on the
activities listed below.
ƒ

Design, development, execution, and evaluation of exercises. Grant funds may
be used to design, conduct, and evaluate interoperable emergency
communications exercises, including tabletop and fully functional exercise
formats. Exercise activities should focus on–
o
o
o
o

2.6

Using established operational protocols
Using interoperable emergency communications solutions
Leveraging TICPs to exercise on standard operating procedures
Demonstrating response level communications

Equipment

Emergency response providers must upgrade and regularly maintain communications
systems and capabilities to ensure effective operation. Given the substantial costs and
complexities associated with system design, implementation, and maintenance, applicants
must provide system life-cycle plans for all communications systems purchased with grant
funding to demonstrate long-term sustainability. Regional operable and interoperable
solutions, including shared solutions, are strongly encouraged. Grant applicants are
encouraged to submit multi-State, multi-urban area, or regional investments to promote
regional collaboration and cost-effective measures. Interoperable emergency
communications grant funds should be used to focus on the activities listed below.
ƒ

Development of communications system life-cycle plans

7

 The OEC will provide further guidance regarding on how applicants can measure and demonstrate achievement of 
Goal 1 (for example, through incident or exercise After Action Reports). 

6

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

ƒ

Design, construction, implementation, enhancement, replacement, and
maintenance of emergency response communications systems and equipment

ƒ

Migration to approved open architecture and interoperable next generation
systems, where appropriate

ƒ

Leveraging of existing and emerging technologies (for example, a multiband/multi-mode capable radio) to expand and integrate disaster
communications capabilities among emergency response providers

ƒ

Project management costs associated with management and implementation
of equipment and systems

ƒ

Governance, development of policies and procedures for, and the conduct of
training and exercises on, communications systems and equipment

ƒ

Procurement of technical assistance services for management, implementation,
and maintenance of communication systems and equipment

Equipment Standards
When procuring equipment for communications systems, whether voice or data, a standardsbased approach should be used to begin migration to multi-jurisdictional and multidisciplinary interoperability. The applicable standards for land mobile radio (LMR) systems
and data-related information sharing systems are described below. Applicants must
demonstrate how their procurements will comply with these standards, as applicable, or
provide compelling reasons for using non-standards-based solutions.
Land Mobile Radio Systems
All new digital voice systems should be compliant with the Project 25 (P25) suite of
standards. This recommendation is intended for government-owned or -leased digital land
mobile public safety radio equipment. Its purpose is to ensure that such equipment or
systems can interoperate with other digital emergency response land mobile equipment or
systems. It is not intended to apply to commercial services that offer other types of
interoperability solutions. Further, it does not exclude any application if the application
demonstrates that the system or equipment being proposed will lead to enhanced
interoperability.
With input from the user community, these standards have been developed to support
backward compatibility with existing digital and analog systems and to provide for
interoperability in future systems. The FCC adopted the P25 suite of standards for voice and
low-speed data interoperability in the new nationwide 700 megahertz (MHz) frequency band
for the designated interoperability channels. Most Federal agencies with a public safety
mission that operate mission critical Push-To-Talk (PTT) radio systems have chosen the P25
suite of standards for their digital radio solutions. This includes the U.S. Department of
Defense, which uses this technology for its non-tactical communications.
This guidance does not preclude funding non-P25 equipment when there are compelling
reasons for using other solutions. However, the first priority of Federal funding (subject to
the statutory authority of the grantor agency or the objectives of the grant program when the

7

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

applicant is seeking Federal grant funding) for improving public safety communications is to
provide basic, operable communications within a department, with safety as the overriding
consideration. Funding requests by agencies to replace or add radio equipment to an existing
non-P25 system (such as procuring new portables for an existing analog system) will be
considered if there is an explanation for how the radio selection will improve interoperability
or support eventual migration to interoperable systems. Absent these compelling reasons,
SAFECOM intends that P25 equipment will be preferred for LMR systems to which the
standard applies.
In partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, DHS has developed
the P25 Compliance Assessment Program (P25 CAP). This program allows users to obtain
documented evidence from manufacturers that equipment has been tested and has passed
critical normative P25 performance, conformance, and interoperability tests published by the
Telecommunications Industry Association. This program is being rolled out in phases, with
the first phase covering the Common Air Interface (CAI) up through FY 2009. Additional
interfaces will be added to the P25 CAP in subsequent phases. The tests currently covered by
the P25 CAP can be found in the P25 CAP Compliance Assessment Bulletin (CAB),
Baseline Testing Requirements, available on the SAFECOM program Web site at–
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/currentprojects/project25cap/.
A 6-month grace period will begin once DHS has formally recognized the first laboratories
assessed for performing the tests specified in the Baseline Testing Requirements CAB. The
date upon which the grace period begins will be posted on the SAFECOM program Web site
at–
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/currentprojects/project25cap/.
During this grace period, equipment delivered to grantees will not be required to have the
supporting Supplier’s Declaration of Compliance (SDoC) documentation from the
manufacturer. Grantees taking delivery of equipment during the grace period will come to an
agreement with the manufacturer on the date by which SDoCs will be delivered after the
grace period ends. Grantees taking delivery of equipment after the 6-month grace period has
ended must obtain SDoCs from the manufacturers upon delivery.
Grantees should explicitly state in the grant application that P25 equipment purchased with
DHS grant funds shall meet the requirements of the P25 CAP not later than the time of
product acceptance (given the grace period) for base station, portable, and mobile radios
implementing the P25 CAI. Grantees must also publish an SDoC and post it at–
https://www.rkb.us.
P25 equipment that implements P25 interface standards other than the CAI (such as, Inter-RF
Subsystem Interface, Fixed Station Substation Interface, Console Subsystem Interface,
among others) are not covered by the P25 CAP at this time and therefore do not require an
SDoC.

8

SAFECOM Recommended Guidance for Federal Grant Programs

For assistance in determining allowable communications equipment purchases under this
section, and in determining when justification material is required, grantees can access webbased technical assistance tools at–
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/resources/p25/OICGrantguidancetool.pdf.
The OIC Wireless Communications Grant Guidance Tool will also give users access to
detailed information that will be helpful in selecting and procuring Project 25 equipment. In
addition, this tool offers links to documents available under the P25 CAP.
Data-Related Information Sharing Systems
Grant funded systems, developmental activities, or services related to emergency response
information sharing should comply with the OASIS EDXL data messaging standards.
Compliance should include the OASIS EDXL Common Alerting Protocol (CAP), version 1.1
or latest version, and the OASIS EDXL Distribution Element (DE), version 1.0 or latest
version. Systems should also comply with the Hospital AVailability Exchange (HAVE) and
Resource Messaging (RM) standards, which are expected to be finalized in late 2008. More
information on these standards can be found in Appendix A of this document and at–
www.oasis-open.org.
This guidance does not preclude funding of non–OASIS EDXL-compliant systems when
there are compelling reasons for using other solutions. Absent such compelling reasons, the
OASIS EDXL standards identified above are the preferred standards.
Grant funded systems, developmental activities, or services related to emergency response
information sharing should also leverage the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)
for data component or element standards. More information on NIEM can be found at–
www.niem.gov.
For any procurements of equipment with Graphical Information Systems (GIS) equipment,
equipment must conform to applicable standards, which may include a common operating
picture or minimum level of data layers.

_______________________________________________________________________
9