NAWCA Standard Grants - applications - U.S. (govt)

North American Wetlands Conservation Act
United States Standard Grant

2015 Proposal Instructions

Proposal Deadlines = FEBRUARY 27, 2015 and JULY 7, 2015

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT: This information collection is authorized by the North American
Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) of 1989, as amended (16 U.S.C. 4401 et seq.). Your response is required to
obtain or retain a benefit in the form of a grant. Completion times vary greatly depending upon the complexity of the
project. We estimate that it will take an average of 203 hours to complete an application for a U.S. Standard Grant and
an average of 80 hours for a Canada/Mexico Standard Grant. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and
Budget control number. OMB has reviewed and approved this information collection and assigned OMB Control
Number 1018-0100, which expires XX/XX/2018. You may submit comments on any aspect of this information
collection to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mailstop BPHC, 1849 C Street,
NW (Mail Stop BPHC), Washington D.C. 20240.

INTRODUCTION
Due to the implementation of the Department of Interior Financial and Business Management System (FBMS), all proposal SF
424 and SF 424D forms must be submitted through Grants.Gov. The remaining sections of the proposal should be submitted
to DBHC via mail and email (see below). Due to code requirements within the FBMS, the term “Budget” cannot be used.
“Financial Plan” must be used in its place to avoid data access errors. The following information will be needed in the
application process as attachments to the Grants.Gov application.
Federal agencies are exempt from the DUNS, CCR, EIN requirements, etc., and should submit their application directly to the
Division of Bird Habitat Conservation. Federal agencies do not need to submit a SF 424.
This document contains instructions for preparing a North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) Standard Grant proposal.
Consult other files on the web site for guidance regarding eligibility requirements, format, costs and the NAWCA schedules and
processes:
 Eligibility Criteria & Processes (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/EligibilityCriteria.pdf)
and U.S. Grant Administration Standards (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/files/GrantStandards.pdf)
 Proposals will be returned as ineligible if they do not adhere to eligibility and cost criteria in the preceding files and in these
instructions.
We recommend you read the information in all of these files BEFORE you write a proposal. These instructions are applicable
to Standard Grant proposals submitted through July 7, 2015. We further recommend that you prepare the Work Plan,
Financial Plan Table and Tract Tables first. These will provide a reference point to ensure that the proposal data is consistent
throughout the various sections.
To proceed directly to a specific section or example, click on the link below. With the exception of the example maps, the
information provided in examples is based on a single proposal and is intended to be consistent among the various sections. Use the
examples as general guidelines in preparing the sections for your proposal.
1. Introduction
2. Major Changes from the 2014 Standard Grant Instructions
3. Proposal Project Officer’s Page
4. Proposal Summary
Summary Page Example
5. Proposal Financial Plan and Work Plan (includes Financial Plan Table and Work Plan information).
Budget Table Example
Tract Work Plan Example
6. Proposal Technical Assessment Questions (TAQ) and Scoring Table
Question #1
Question #2 (TAQ #2 Example)
Question #3
Question #4 (TAQ #4 Example)
Question #5 (TAQ #5 Example)
Question #6
Question #7
7. Proposal Attachments:
Tract Table (Tract Table Example), Partner Contribution Statements, Optional Matching Contributions Plan (Optional
Matching Contributions Plan Example), Programmatic Project Proposal, Standard Form 424 and Assurances B and
D, and Maps.
8. Click here for ALL Examples
To aid you in completing a proposal, blank proposal outlines and tables may be downloaded:
1. Word Proposal Outline (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/ProposalOutline.doc)
2. Excel Financial Plan Table (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/USStandard/files/ExcelFinancial
PlanTable.xls)
Do not modify the outline font or font size. These files do not contain any instructions or examples; follow the instructions in this
file when completing one of the blank proposals. The entire text portion of the application must be submitted in Microsoft Word
format.
Provide copies of the proposal and accompanying information as follows:
1. Two unbound (a binder clip is allowed), one-sided, original proposal and attachments to be mailed. Include copies of

2.

easements, leases, deeds and the Indirect Cost Rate Agreement, if applicable.
One copy of the proposal, Financial Plan Table, Tract Table, maps, and partner letters to be sent electronically to
[email protected] (Do not send any file larger than 5MB).
Grants.Gov will request proposals to be uploaded to their website. Due to file size restrictions, the only documents that can
be uploaded to the Grants.Gov website are the SF 424 and SF 424D forms. Please upload only these two forms to
Grants.Gov.

Instructions for submitting the proposal:
1. Do not send the proposal by fax.
2.

Mail the proposal to:
Coordinator, North American Wetlands Conservation Council
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters
Division of Bird Habitat Conservation
Attn: Stacy Sanchez
Mail Stop: MB
5275 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22041-3803

3.

Email a copy to your Joint Venture Coordinator (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/JointVentures/index.shtm).

Proposal Deadlines: Due dates for submission of complete proposals are February 27 and July 7, 2015. Any group or individual
may submit proposals at any time before those dates. Proposals received after the February deadline will be processed, but will be
considered for funding as a July deadline proposal. Proposals received after the July deadline will be ineligible unless the proposal is
clearly labeled as an early 2016 submission (these will be subject to modifications depending on any changes in the submission
guidelines that occur for 2016). Complete electronic proposals must be sent no later than 4 p.m. Eastern Time February 27 and/or July
7, 2015. Complete written proposals (identical to the electronic version) must be postmarked no later than February 27 or July 7,
2015. We suggest that you mail your written proposal with adequate lead-time and do not rely on meeting the proposal deadline at the
last minute through mail delivery companies.

MAJOR CHANGES FROM THE 2014 STANDARD GRANT INSTRUCTIONS
The Map section at the end of the guidelines includes a change in the required projection and attribute table:
Additionally, please provide a single GIS shapefile which contains multiple polygons representing the location of each of the tracts
involved in the project. The GIS file submitted should use a NAD 84 projection and the attribute table should contain a name for
each polygon which corresponds to a tract listed in the proposal work plan. If the applicant is undertaking a project where an
exact activity location cannot be determined at the time of proposal (i.e. easement acquisition in the prairie potholes), then the
applicant should include a single polygon which encompasses the larger project area where the activities are targeted to occur.
Please read each section of the 2015 instructions carefully. Also, see process changes in Eligibility Criteria & Processes
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/EligibilityCriteria.pdf).
Effective 1/28/2011, the Department of Interior established a new policy to ensure and maintain the integrity of scientific and
scholarly activities used to inform management and public policy decisions: DOI Policy, 305 DM 3, "Integrity of Scientific and
Scholarly Activities" (http://elips.doi.gov/elips/release/3889.htm).
The new scientific-integrity policy applies to the department's employees as well as its contractors, grant recipients and volunteers
when they analyze or share scientific information with the public or use the department's information to make policy or regulatory
decisions. This policy now applies to all funding applications received by the North American Wetlands Conservation Act grant
program. Essentially, the use of false data to leverage grant funds is a direct violation of DOI's scientific integrity policy and requires
the refund of any associated federal assistance.
The following are not changes but are critical portions that must be completed accurately for a proposal to be eligible for evaluation:
1. We will only accept properly formatted Partner Contribution Statements as verification of partner match. Submitting partner
letters that do not follow the format in the guidelines will adversely affect the timely review of a proposal and may result in
the contribution being considered as non-match.
2. All applicants EXCEPT the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must submit an SF 424 core form and D Assurances form with
the proposal (all projects involving acquisition, restoration, or enhancement are considered construction projects).

Failure to submit a proposal following the required guidelines and formats will result in the proposal being
considered ineligible.

PROPOSAL PROJECT OFFICER’S PAGE
NOTE: Do NOT include a cover/transmittal letter with the proposal. The Project Officer’s page should be the first page of
the proposal. The information below in italics is intended to assist you as you fill out the blank proposal outline.
What is the proposal title? Due to database limitations, it is critical that the title be limited to 30 characters and that phased
proposals retain the original title with only the phase number changing. Enter a short, descriptive, and unique title, such as
“Falcon Bottoms,” “Turtle Bog Marsh,” or “Great Bay.” If the proposal is a phase of an earlier funded proposal, use the same
title as the earlier proposal and include the appropriate Roman numeral to denote that this is a subsequent proposal, such as
“Falcon Bottoms II.”
What is the date you are submitting the proposal?
What are the geographical landmarks for the proposal?
 State(s):
 County(ies): Name all counties in alphabetical order
 Congressional District(s):
 JV: Identify the migratory bird Joint Venture area
 BCR: Identify the Bird Conservation Region
Project Officer information:
 Name: The Project Officer MUST be the primary point of contact for the project and must be affiliated with/employed by
the grantee’s organization. List the person who will be managing the project activities, filing reports, and communicating
with DBHC.
 Title:
 Organization: If the organization entered here is not the grantee organization, please explain. (See 2013 Eligibility
Criteria and Processes)
 Address:
 Telephone number: List the numbers at which the Project Officer can be reached, including work and cell numbers.
 E-mail address: 
 Grantee organization or proposal website, if available:
Please answer the following questions:
2010 Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon Macondo Oil Spill
Projects occurring in Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, as well as those benefiting affected habitats and species
may be funded with fines paid by British Petroleum (BP) to settle Migratory Bird Treaty Act violations. Projects must clearly
demonstrate conservation benefits to affected habitats or populations of species listed in Attachments B (NAWCA Priority Bird
Crosswalk list) and C (Richness Density map) that winter, breed, or migrate through areas affected by the spill. Additional
guidance may be forthcoming.
Are you requesting that this proposal be considered for funding using BP Gulf Spill funds? Yes/No
If Yes, you must demonstrate a nexus between your project and the migratory bird species and other wildlife and habitat affected by
the Gulf spill. Furthermore, provide the best available science-based information (banding information, telemetry, etc.) indicating
that the population(s) of species targeted in this proposal also use habitats along the Gulf of Mexico affected by the Spill.
Limit your response to two pages and attach the response after the Project Officer page. The North American Wetlands
Conservation Council will use this information to make a final eligibility determination.
Is an Optional Matching Contributions Plan (MCP) submitted with the proposal? Yes/No
Does the proposal contain match associated with a previously submitted MCP? Yes/No

Or

Are you requesting that this proposal be considered as a continuation of a previous grant agreement (a Programmatic Project
Proposal)? Yes/No
If yes, provide the title and grant agreement number of the previous grant agreement.
Do you expect this project to be the first phase of a Programmatic Project? Yes/No
How many more proposals are planned for the same proposal area?

Will any of the NAWCA funds requested as part of this proposal be received or spent by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or
another Federal agency?
Yes/No
If yes, which agency(ies) will receive these funds and what is the fund amount:
Agency_______________________
Amount______________
(add additional lines as necessary)
Are carbon sequestration credits involved in your proposal?
Yes/No
If yes, please highlight and provide details in the appropriate financial plan narrative/work plan section. Include information
about whether the credits will generate program income (Described in Grant Administration Standards).
Will any portion of any tract or activities associated with any tract be used to satisfy wetland or habitat mitigation
requirements under Clean Water Act, Rivers and Harbors Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Water
Resources Development Act, or other related statutes now or in the future?
Yes/No
If yes, please highlight and provide details in the appropriate financial plan narrative/work plan section.
Have you confirmed that all partners, key personnel, and contractors are eligible to participate in Federal grants? Yes/No
Project Officer must confirm that parties are eligible to participate in Federal grants by checking the Federal Excluded Parties List
at: https://www.epls.gov/. If an ineligible party participates in a Federally funded project, all or a portion of the Federal funding
may be terminated.
To ensure that the proposal complies with available guidelines and that partners are aware of their responsibilities, the
Project Officer certifies to the following statement: I have read the 2014 Standard Grant proposal instructions, eligibility
information, and applicable U.S. grant administration policies and informed partners or partners have read the material themselves.
To the best of my knowledge, this proposal is eligible and complies with all NAWCA, North American Wetlands Conservation
Council, and Federal grant guidelines and the information submitted herein is true and correct. The work in this proposal consists of
allowable and eligible work and costs associated with long-term wetlands and migratory bird habitat conservation. If habitat or
migratory bird benefits described in the proposal are found to be grossly exaggerated and/or intentionally misleading, the proposal
may be declared
ineligible or any resulting awards may be fully or partially terminated.
OMB Circular A-133 audit reports. If the applicant organization expended more than $500,000 of federal funds during the last
calendar year, please include a copy of your most recent A-133 audit. If your organization did not expend more than $500,000
federal funds last year, please certify that the A-133 audit was not required.
Do you have any comments about, or suggestions for, the NAWCA program? You may provide comments with this proposal,
or send them at any time.
 By mail to:
Coordinator, North American Wetlands Conservation Council
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters
Division of Bird Habitat Conservation
Mail Stop: MB
5275 Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, Va 22041-3803
 Via phone to:
703-358-1784
 Via fax to:
703-358-2282
 Via e-mail to:
[email protected]

PROPOSAL SUMMARY
The Proposal Summary is the only narrative material provided to the North American Wetlands Conservation Council and Migratory
Bird Conservation Commission, so it must be descriptive and succinct. Consider developing the Summary after you have written the
rest of the proposal, as this will help to ensure that information in the Summary is the same as in the rest of the proposal. The
Proposal Summary must follow the format provided in the blank proposal outline exactly, including margins, spacing, font
size, etc. Click here for the Proposal Summary Example: Proposal Summary Example
General Requirements
1. The Proposal Summary will be used as a stand-alone document and will be subject to editing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Start the Proposal Summary on a new page (i.e., do not begin the Proposal Summary on the same page as the Project
Officer’s page), and enter a page break at the end of the Proposal Summary. Save the Summary Page in a separate file for
ease of editing.
2. Do not number Proposal Summary pages. Starting with the Financial Plan Table as page 1, number all remaining pages.
3. The Proposal Summary, which includes tabular and narrative information, MUST NOT EXCEED THREE PAGES.
4. Margins: The summary is the only part of the proposal that has specific margin requirements. All margins should be 1 inch.
5. Format must be in Microsoft Word.
6. Font size: 11 point.
7. Font typeface: Times New Roman.
8. The information in the summary table must exactly match the information provided elsewhere in the proposal.
Specific Requirements (see Proposal Summary Example).
1. Center “NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT PROPOSAL SUMMARY” in all capital letters at the
top of the page, and center the project title and state with initial capital letters beneath it. If the proposal is a phase of an
earlier funded proposal, use the title of the earlier proposal with an appropriate Roman numeral denoting the phase number.
2. All other information is left justified, without indentation, except for financial totals on the right side of the page, which are
right justified.
3. Type the header for each paragraph category in all capital letters (e.g. COUNTY(IES), STATE(S), CONGRESSIONAL
DISTRICT(S); GRANT AMOUNT; MATCHING PARTNERS; etc.).
4. Using the prescribed format shown in the example, provide the requested information for each category. However, do not
include categories shown in the example if no information for that category exists. For instance, if there is no restoration
work being done, do not include a “Restored” line in the “ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES” section.
5. Enter the total grant amount on the right side of the page, right justified, on the same line as the header “GRANT
AMOUNT.” Under “Grant Amount”, type “Allocation:”. Enter the name of the organization(s) that will be allocated grant
funds (normally, this will be the Grantee organization, which administers the funding as planned in the proposal; however, in
certain circumstances, other organizations may be receiving grant funds directly). Enter the allocation amount after the
organization(s) name. Enter the total for MATCHING PARTNERS, and the total for ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES
each on the same line as their respective headers, in alignment with the total grant amount.
6. MATCHING PARTNERS: Enter the grantee organization and contribution immediately underneath the category header. If
the grantee is not contributing funds, enter $0. List the matching partners and their contributions under the grantee. List all
matching partners, whether they contribute more or less than 10% of the grant request (see Technical Assessment Question
7B). List the individual match contributions in tabular format (see example). For the grantee or partner associated with a
Matching Contributions Plan (MCP), list the amount associated with the MCP phase as the contribution amount on a separate
line.
7. GRANT AND MATCH - ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES: Insert the total costs and acreage associated with the grant
and match funds to the right on the same line as the header (right justified). Under the header, list one or more appropriate
activities, costs, and acreages from the following activity categories: Fee Acquired; Easement(s) Acquired; Lease(s)
Acquired; Restored; Enhanced; Established Wetlands; Other. List the activities in that order, but do not list categories in
which no activity will take place. After each category listed, indicate the amount being expended in tabular format, then
type a slash (/) and the total acreage involved. If building envelope acres are involved with any activities, ensure that these
acres are not included in the acreage totals for the proposal.

Include only those activities, costs, and acres associated with grant or match funds. See the instructions for the Budget
Table below for contributions from non-match funds.

If acquired acreage also will be restored or enhanced in the current proposal, place parentheses around the restored or
enhanced acreage to show that they have already been accounted for under the acquired category.
In the following simplified example, 300 new acres are to be acquired in Fee Title using grant and/or match funds.
200 new acres are to be restored using grant and/or match funds; 150 of the 300 acres acquired in fee in this project are also
restored – (150); an additional 200 acres acquired in a previous NAWCA project will also be restored – (200).

100 new acres are to be enhanced using grant and/or match funds; 100 of the 300 acres acquired in fee are also enhanced –
(100); an additional 300 acres acquired in a previous phase will also be enhanced – (300).
GRANT AND MATCH - ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES
Fee Acquired
Restored
Enhanced
Other
8.

$2,050,000/600 (750) acres

$1,000,000/300 acres
$500,000/200 (350) acres
$500,000/100 (400) acres
$50,000

MATCHING CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN: If a partner’s match amount is associated with a MCP (either a new MCP
submitted with the proposal or a follow-on phase for a MCP previously approved by the Council), list only the match amount
that is being applied to the current proposal.
All of the acres associated with a new MCP are listed with the appropriate activity. Acreage associated with a previously
approved/used MCP does not appear in subsequent proposals; list the MCP amount attributed to the current proposal as
“Previously Approved MCP Funds”.
In the following simplified examples, costs and acres are listed along with the correct format for a new MCP (example
1) and the second phase of a previously approved MCP (example 2):
Example 1.
400 new acres are to be acquired in Fee Title using grant and/or match funds (total cost = $2,000,000).
100 additional match acquisition acres are the basis for a new MCP (total appraised value = $3,000,000).

GRANT AND MATCH - ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES
Fee Acquired

$3,000,000/500 acres

$3,000,000/500 acres [this includes all of the
MCP acres and
$1,000,000 of
the value of the MCP]

Example 2.
In this example, the MCP is the second phase of the previously approved MCP ($2,000,000
remains after the initial phase). No acres are listed because these have been accounted for in the
initial phase. Only the $2,000,000 cost associated with this phase of the MCP is listed.
300 new acres are to be acquired in Fee Title using grant and/or match funds ($1,000,000).
GRANT AND MATCH - ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES
Fee Acquired
Previously approved MCP funds

$3,000,000/300 acres

$1,000,000/300 acres
$2,000,000

This phase would close out the MCP.
9. PROPOSAL PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION: Describe the proposed project’s goals and objectives; why the work is
proposed; who will be doing what activity(ies); where they will be doing the activity(ies) (for example, on a refuge, on private
land, near a conservation area); how they will accomplish the work (building dikes, installing water-control structures, etc.); what,
if any, joint venture is involved or benefiting.
10. HABITAT TYPES AND WILDLIFE BENEFITTING: Describe the habitat types involved in the proposed proposal
activities; provide examples of the species (Blue-winged Teal, American Bittern, etc.) benefiting and their uses of the habitats
(breeding, feeding, resting, etc.).
11. PUBLIC BENEFITS/PUBLIC ACCESS: Describe the benefits of the proposal to the public (hiking, hunting, birding,
education, water quality, etc.); describe whether any of the grant/match tracts will allow public access, and if so, what type of
access.
12. NEW PARTNERS: Identify partners who have never previously participated in any NAWCA grant.

13. RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUSLY FUNDED NAWCA PROPOSALS: If applicable, summarize the relationship of the
current proposal with previously funded NAWCA proposals in the region and show how the current proposal adds to progress (if
any) towards regional conservation goals for habitats and/or birds. If this is a phased NAWCA proposal and/or if your
organization has received other NAWCA Standard grants in the same general area, specifically identify the cumulative habitat
achievements of previous phases and how the landscape and the bird populations of that landscape have changed.
14. THREATS AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: Describe any threats to habitats in the proposal area or other circumstances
that make funding at this time particularly important.

PROPOSAL FINANCIAL AND WORK PLAN
FINANCIAL PLAN TABLE
NOTE: Landowner and tract names must be consistent throughout the proposal
Insert the Financial Plan Table as page 1, after the Summary Pages.
1. Complete the Financial Plan Table provided in the Word proposal outline and insert it as page 1. Click here for the Financial
Plan Table Example: Financial Plan Budget Table Example. You may submit additional tables if those will help explain
the financial plan, but keep to a minimum. The Word Proposal Outline
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/ProposalOutline.doc) contains blank Financial Plan
Tables or you may use the table in the file “Excel Financial Plan Table”
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/ExcelFinancial PlanTable.xls)
2. Identify each tract (or logical groupings of tracts) using a consistent method on all maps and throughout the proposal. Show
all costs covered by the grant, each matching partner, and each non-matching partner for all grant/match tracts. Non-match
should not be listed in the table unless it has been pooled with grant/match dollars to accomplish grant/match acres. Entirely
non-match tracts and activities should not be included in the table.
3. For all grant expenditures, list the partner that will be spending grant funds.
4. You may show grant and one partner’s contribution on one line for the same tract, but do not combine different partner
contributions on the same line. For example, if there are 10 separate partners contributing to fee acquisition for a particular
tract, then there should be 10 separate partner entries for that tract. Add lines to the table as needed. In the example, a line
was added under Land Costs: Fee Acquired for Tract A because partners DNR and PF should not be shown on one line. In
the example, a line was added under Land Costs Easement Acquired because different tracts are affected.
5. Separate match funds into "Old" (spent prior to proposal submission) and "New" (to occur after proposal is submitted and
during the Grant Agreement period).
6. If you are submitting a Matching Contributions Plan, be sure the Financial Plan Table only includes funds for the current
proposal and not the entire contribution in the Match Plan. Costs from the first phase of an MCP should appear with the
activity and partner in the appropriate direct cost category. For subsequent phases of an MCP, enter the MCP match costs as
a line item above the Grand Total Direct costs, identified as “Previously Approved MCP” and listing the appropriate amount
as old match.
Previously Approved MCP example (showing final portion of Financial Plan Table only):

ACTIVITIES

GRANT $

PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MCP
GRAND TOTAL DIRECT
TOTAL INDIRECT
GRAND TOTAL

7.
8.

9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

PARTNER
NAME

OLD
MATCH

Partner A
$1,000,000
0
$1,000,000

NEW
MATCH

$3,000,000
$1,000,000

Partner B
$4,000,000

TOTAL $
$3,500,000
$5,000
$3,505,000

TRACT NONID
MATCH

$3,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000
$9,005000

NA
$500,000
4
$500,000

Show each private landowner by name, contribution amount, and tract if they are contributing to grant/match acres.
For acres being acquired, restored, or enhanced by pooling both grant/match funds and non-match funds, and in which
NAWCA will acquire an undivided interest in those acres, list the total acreage in either grant or match in the table, as
appropriate. Do not pro-rate acres between grant or match. (See item 2 for clarification on when to include non-match)
All cost categories are shown in the example. Do not include categories that do not apply to your proposal (e.g., there is no
enhancement in your proposal, so you can leave that section blank or delete it).
You may use a landscape, versus portrait, orientation for the printed page if needed.
You may abbreviate partner names in the table, but be sure to spell them out somewhere in the Financial Plan section of the
proposal.
NA in the example means “Not Applicable”.
Below the Financial Plan Table, list each sub-grantee who will receive, because of this proposal, any of the following:
- Federal grant funds or “new” matching funds,
- Property (e.g., land, structures, dikes, levees, earthen dams, equipment, supplies) that will be purchased with
Federal grant or matching funds or
- Property committed as “new” match.

Contractors or vendors who will be paid for goods, construction, planting or services purchased for the proposal and individuals
are NOT considered sub-grantees.
Explain any abbreviations in the Financial Plan Table.

Proposal requests exceeding $1,000,000 must include an explanation of the extraordinary circumstances justifying the request.
The Council will evaluate the request and approve/disapprove based on factors such as opportunity, resource values involved, threat
level, loss of match and/or the amount of available funding.
If any match was previously approved by the Council via an Optional Matching Contributions Plan, include a copy of the
letter approving the Matching Contributions Plan and give the following information: tracts affected, how much of each
partner’s match has been used in previous proposals, how much is being used in this proposal, and how much will remain
after the current proposal is funded (see example of an MCP table at end of these guidelines).

WORK PLAN (FINANCIAL PLAN JUSTIFICATION)
Construct the work plan as series of discrete, stand-alone activities (e.g., fee acquisition, easement donation, restoration,
enhancement, etc.) associated with specific tracts (Click here for the Work Plan Example: Work Plan Example). The work
plan should include only grant/match tracts. Eligible non-match pooled with grant/match dollars to accomplish grant/match
acres may be listed in the work plan, but acres and dollars that are entirely funded by or attributed to non-match should NOT
be included in the work plan. Group acquisition, restoration, enhancement, and establishment costs separately.
For the first phase of an MCP, list associated activities/costs with the appropriate tract(s). MCP costs in subsequent proposals
should be shown under “Other Grant/Match Activities”, with the name and phase of the MCP listed under “Item & Work”.
Use the following format for identifying tracts. Each tract should be numbered sequentially starting with “1” and given an
identifying name (e.g., Tract 1 – Howard Farms, Tract 2 - Brancheau Wetland, Tract 3 – McIntyre). Describe the work to be
done using the format in the example. The tract name should exactly match that used in other sections throughout the
proposal. Include the following information:
1.

2.
3.

4.

5.

6.

7.
8.

9.

Tract name, overall number of acres affected on the tract (for instance, if there are 300 acres acquired and 100 of those acres
will be restored, the overall acreage affected is 300; the restoration acres would be listed as (100)), tract location (central
latitude/longitude), and a list of state or Federal government agencies (if any) with a legal interest in the property (such as
those with Notices of Funding or Grant Restrictions on fee deeds or easements).
For each tract, list the acreages for each of the activities associated with the tract. Identify non-add acres (acres already
accounted for in a previous activity: 100 acres acquired and restored – the 100 restored acres are non-add) in parentheses.
Under each tract listed, type the applicable Work Plan activity category titles in all capital letters and list the total cost and
acreage for that activity category within that tract. Identify non-add acres for a tract in parentheses. For example,
“ACQUISITION FINANCIAL PLAN JUSTIFICATION - $3,000,000 AND 10,000 acres”. On the next line, separately enter
the amount of grant, match, and non-match funding for that activity category within that tract. All costs (“Total $” column in
each table below) must be described and equal the figures in the activity category headers. Identify an actual or estimated
timeframe for completion of that activity.
Describe all of the grant and match activities that will occur on each tract. If multiple activities take place on the same tract,
describe them separately but identify if acres overlap between activities. For example, if a proposal includes land acquisition
with restoration work done on the same site, this would be described as two separate activities.
For each activity, include a clear description of the work to be done and briefly justify why that activity is being included as
part of this proposal.
a. Acquisition activities: Describe how they enable better management or create a restoration opportunity or they
are needed because the site is currently valuable habitat vulnerable to development. Fee acquisition of lands
already protected by a conservation easement must be justified.
b. Habitat restoration, enhancement, and establishment activities: Identify specific habitat types and plant
communities affected by project activities. Those habitat types should be identified in Joint Venture
implementation plans or similar documents.
Explain any unusually high costs or large differences between per acre value of match and grant tracts. Refer to the
Eligibility Criteria & Processes (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/EligibilityCriteria.pdf)
for information on eligible and ineligible direct and indirect costs and negotiated indirect cost rate agreements. If a cost
estimate is different from the fair market/reasonable value, please explain.
Itemize costs shown in the Financial Plan Table for each activity and identify the source (grant or the partner providing the
match and non-match dollars). Use only the portions of the table that are applicable to each activity.
For each easement or fee acquisition activity included in the proposal, including old match, whether purchased or donated,
complete the NAWCA Land Acquisition Disclosure section as part of the Work Plan. If the acquisition activity for that tract
does not involve an easement or lease, do not include those portions of the Disclosure in the Work Plan. Attach to the
proposal copies of all easements being used as old match. If available, provide draft language of easements to be acquired
with grant or match funds during the project period. Grant funds will not be released for easement acquisition until the
easement language has been reviewed and approved by FWS.
Do not include any activity categories in the Financial Plan Justification that are not applicable to a tract. For example, if no

10.

11.
12.

13.
14.
15.
16.

17.

portion of a tract is being acquired as part of the project, then the Work Plan for that tract would not include an acquisition
section.
Group indirect costs by tract (with the exception of any associated with “Other Grant/Match Activities”). Do not lump direct
cost financial plan lines in the indirect cost tables. Each direct cost line should appear exactly as it did in the direct cost table
so that direct and indirect tables can be compared. Indirect costs are eligible as grant or match cost only if you have a
previously negotiated and approved rate agreement with the Federal government that establishes the activities on which your
organization may charge an indirect rate. Attach to the proposal your current approved negotiated indirect cost rate
agreement, application for rate, or other proof that the indirect costs you have claimed are compliant with applicable Federal
regulations. If more than one negotiated indirect cost rate applies, attach all applicable agreements. If you do not provide the
information in the Financial Plan Table and Work Plan and include copies of applicable agreements, indirect costs will be
considered ineligible. Each line entry shown should identify only one source (either grant amount or match amount). For
more on indirect costs, go to Eligibility Criteria & Processes
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/EligibilityCriteria.pdf), Eligible Grant Costs I, second
paragraph. Unless your agreement specifically allows it, indirect costs calculated on the following are ineligible:
a. Subgrants (subawards), major subcontracts, any in-kind match provided by a party other than the applicant;
b. Non-match, in-kind match from partners other than the partner with the negotiated indirect cost rate agreement,
contributions from Federal agencies, and other items that “distort” the cost base;
c. The acquisition costs of interests in real property; and
d. The purchase price of equipment with an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit and a useful life of more than
one year (consistent with recipient policy, lower limits may be established).
If some tracts are not yet identified, explain why and the method to be used to select tracts during proposal implementation.
You may group large numbers of tracts with similar activities and per unit costs for the purposes of financial plan
justification. Line item costs must be applicable to most tracts in order for those tracts to be grouped in the justification (For
instance, 50 grassland easements are held by a single partner and planned enhancement on 40 of those easements will cost
approximately the same per acre on all of those easements). Do not group acquisitions that will be held by different partners.
All dollar figures should add up to those in the Financial Plan Table.
Note that all questions are in the future tense, but they also apply to past (match) work and costs.
NA in the tables means “Not Applicable”.
Note that examples of how to answer the questions are given to enable and encourage you to provide the requested
information in the most efficient manner possible. Follow this format. Use tables, bulleted lists, or short statements instead
of full sentences and paragraphs to provide the information. When tables are given as examples, that indicates that answers
should be presented in columns, however it is not required that a table be developed.
Include any grant/match cost items that cannot be captured under a specific tract (for instance, grant administration) in a
section entitled “OTHER GRANT/MATCH ACTIVITIES” at the end of the Work Plan. Describe and itemize those costs
(including indirect costs) below that heading.

TRACT 1- NAME
OVERALL ACRES AFFECTED:
STATE/FEDERAL AGENCIES HOLDING INTERESTS: (List agencies and describe interest; if none type NA)
Acreage Summary of Grant/Match Activities on the Tract:
Acquisition
Restoration

Enhancement

Establishment

Describe all grant/match activities occurring on the tract here:
Tract 1-Name: Acquisition Financial Plan Justification - $_______ and _____ acres
Grant - $_________
Match - $_________
Non-Match - $_________
Completion:
LAND ACQUISITION DISCLOSURE
Type of acquisition: (fee title, easement, lease, etc.)
Holder of NAWCA conservation interest: (fee title, easement, lease, etc.)
Grantor/Seller of conservation interest: (if Grantor/Seller is conservation organization, explain below how sale/transfer
increases conservation value)
Tenure of conservation interest: (10 years, perpetuity)
All funding sources for acquisition: (include landowner if acquisition involved a donation or bargain sale)
Are mineral rights severed or included? If severed, explain.
Are water rights severed or included? If severed, explain.
EASEMENTS:
What organization will monitor the easement?
Should the easement holder cease to exist, to what organization will the easement revert?
Has the easement holder adopted the “Land Trust Standards and Practices” developed by the Land Trust Alliance? If so,
provide the date of that action. If not, describe the standards used to ensure adequate easement management and monitoring.
Is there a stewardship endowment dedicated to maintaining and managing the easement? If so, what is the amount?
Is subdivision of the easement property permitted? If so, with what limits?
List all other allowed activities, allowed structures, or reserved rights not described above.
LEASES:
What is the nature of the lease?
What activities are allowed/prohibited?
How does this contribute to long-term conservation of the property?
Item & Work

Units

$/unit

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner
name)

APPRAISALS and OTHER ACQUISITION COSTS

Subtotal Appraisals and Other Acquisition Costs
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL and TRAVEL

$

Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel and Travel
TOTAL ACQUISITION DIRECT COSTS

$
$

Tract 1-Name: Restoration Financial Plan Justification - $_________ and ______ acres
Grant - $________
Match - $________
Non-Match - $________
Completion:
Item & Work

Units

$/unit

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner
name)

CONTRACTS

Subtotal Contracts
MATERIALS and EQUIPMENT

$

Subtotal Materials and Equipment
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL and TRAVEL

$

Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel
TOTAL RESTORATION DIRECT COSTS

$
$

Tract 1-Name: Enhancement Financial Plan Justification - $_________ and _______ acres
Grant - $________
Match - $________
Non-Match - $________
Completion:
Item & Work

Units

$/unit

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner
name)

CONTRACTS

Subtotal Contracts
MATERIALS and EQUIPMENT

$

Subtotal Materials and Equipment
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL and TRAVEL

$

Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel
TOTAL ENHANCEMENT DIRECT COSTS

$
$

Tract 1-Name: Establishment Financial Plan Justification – $_______ and ______ acres
Grant - $________
Match - $________
Non-Match - $________
Completion:
Item & Work

Units

$/unit

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner
name)

CONTRACTS

Subtotal Contracts
MATERIALS and EQUIPMENT

$

Subtotal Materials and Equipment
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL and TRAVEL

$

Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel
TOTAL ESTABLISHMENT DIRECT COSTS

$
$

Tract 1-Name: Indirect Costs Financial Plan Justification - $_________
Click here for the Indirect Costs Financial Plan Justification Example: Indirect Cost Budget Justification Example
Grant $________
Match $________
Non-match $_________
Complete the table below and attach applicable agreements to the proposal. The indirect costs shown in this table should match the
indirect costs shown in the Financial Plan Table. Identify the specific financial plan line items to which you are applying a negotiated
indirect cost rate in column two. Do not lump different types of base costs. Each line entry should identify only one source (either
grant or match amount). For more on indirect costs, go to Eligibility Criteria & Processes
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/EligibilityCriteria.pdf), Eligible Grant Costs I, second paragraph.

Allowable
Category
from I.C
Rate
Agreement

Specific
Financial Plan
Line Items to
Which Indirect
Cost is Applied

Direct
Cost
Base
Amount

Approved
Rate (%)*/
Agreement
Date

Partner to
which I.C.
Rate
Applies

I.C.
Grant
Amount

I.C.
Match
Amount

Total
Indirect
Cost

$
$
$

$
$
$

$
$
$

OTHER GRANT/MATCH ACTIVITIES FINANCIAL PLAN JUSTIFICATION – $________
Grant - $________
Match - $________
Non-Match - $_________ Completion:
Describe other activities associated with implementing the grant, such as grant administration efforts, here.
Item & Work
Units
$/unit
Total $
Schedule
Funding Source
(month, year)
(Grant or Partner
name)

TOTAL OTHER ACTIVITIES DIRECT COSTS

$

OTHER ACTIVITIES INDIRECT COSTS FINANCIAL PLAN JUSTIFICATION $_________
Grant $________
Match $________
Non-match $_________
Complete the table below and attach applicable agreements to the proposal. The indirect costs shown in this table should match the
indirect costs shown in the Financial Plan Table. Identify the specific financial plan line items to which you are applying a negotiated
indirect cost rate in column two. Do not lump base costs of different types. Each line entry should identify only one source (either
grant or match amount).
Allowable
Category
from I.C
Rate
Agreement

Specific
Financial Plan
Line Items to
Which Indirect
Cost is Applied

Direct
Cost
Base
Amount

Approved
Rate (%)*/
Agreement
Date

Partner to
which I.C.
Rate
Applies

I.C.
Grant
Amount

I.C.
Match
Amount

Total
Indirect
Cost

$
$

$
$

$
$

PROPOSAL TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS
The North American Wetlands Conservation Act (http://law2.house.gov/usc.htm) specifies criteria to be used to evaluate proposals.
The criteria are captured in the following seven Technical Assessment Questions.
Question 1 - How does the proposal contribute to the conservation of waterfowl habitat?
Question 2 - How does the proposal contribute to the conservation of other wetland-associated migratory birds?
Question 3 - How does the proposal location relate to the geographic priority wetlands described by the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan, Partners in Flight, the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, and/or the North American Waterbird
Conservation Plan?
Question 4 - How does the proposal relate to the national status and trends of wetlands types?
Question 5 - How does the proposal contribute to long-term conservation of wetlands and associated habitats?
Question 6 - How does the proposal contribute to the conservation of habitat for wetland associated federally listed or proposed
endangered species; wetland associated state-listed species; and other wetland-associated fish and wildlife that are specifically
involved with the proposal?
Question 7 - How does the proposal satisfy the partnership purpose of the North American Wetlands Conservation Act?
Answer the questions as follows:
1. Answer each question separately. The questions, including species lists, are available in the Word Proposal Outline
(http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/files/ProposalOutline.doc).
2. Answers should cover benefits derived from completed grant- and match-funded work in the proposal that occurred within
the past two years and will occur during the two-year Assistance Award period.
3. Do NOT include information/benefits/acres associated with non-match work or tracts except in Questions 7C and 7D.
4. Be as qualitative and as quantitative as possible.
5. All seven questions must be answered in no more than 14 pages total, including all text and tables (average of two pages
per question).
6. Select the best methods to provide as much information as possible (such as giving species, abundance and seasonal use
information in a table followed by a narrative), while adhering to format and proposal length guidelines.
7. Specifically explain linkages between the proposal tracts and conservation objectives (national and regional) of the following
programs and plans: North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Partners in Flight, U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, and
North American Waterbird Conservation Plan.
8. Do NOT include benefits to a larger area, such as previous or future phases of the current proposal area.
9. Include all habitat types (not just wetlands).
10. Make sure acreage figures are consistent with those given elsewhere in the proposal.
11. Include only benefits from actions covered by the proposal. For example, if the proposal includes acquisition of sites that
need restoration, but restoration is not part of the proposal, do not include restored habitat values in answers to the questions.
Note that unless restoration is also included in the proposal, proposals for acquisition of degraded wetlands will be evaluated
on the basis of the degraded condition and subsequent resource benefits.
12. If a new Matching Contributions Plan (MCP) is submitted with the proposal, include that acreage and those benefits in your
answers. However, if the MCP component is a phase of a previously approved MCP, do NOT include the associated acreage
and benefits in your answers.
13. Reviewers assign points based on information in the proposal. In addition, reviewers evaluate the questions and the proposal
in relation to the group of proposals under review. Scores are available about eight weeks after the proposal due dates.
14. Review the file U.S. Grant Administration Standards
http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/files/GrantStandards.pdf to see how Technical Assessment Question
answers will be incorporated into the Assistance Award/Grant Agreement.

SCORING TABLE

CATEGORIES OF QUESTIONS

POINTS = 100

#1. WATERFOWL
A. High priority species
B. Other priority species
C. Other waterfowl
#2. WETLAND-ASSOCIATED MIGRATORY BIRDS
A. Priority bird species
B. Other wetland-associated bird species
#3. NORTH AMERICAN GEOGRAPHIC PRIORITY WETLANDS AS RECOGNIZED BY MAJOR
MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION PLANS
A. National geographic priority wetland areas
B. Regionally important wetland areas
#4. WETLANDS STATUS AND TRENDS
A. Decreasing wetlands types
B. Stable wetlands types
C. Increasing wetlands types
D. No trend data types
E. Uplands
#5. LONG-TERM CONSERVATION
A. Benefits in perpetuity
B. Benefits for 26-99 years
C. Benefits for 10-25 years
D. Benefits for <10 years
E. Significance to long-term conservation
#6. ENDANGERED SPECIES AND OTHER WETLAND-DEPENDENT FISH AND WILDLIFE
A. Federal endangered, threatened or proposed species = 1, 2, >2 species
B. State-listed species = >1 species
C. Other wetland-dependent fish and wildlife = >1 species
#7. PARTNERSHIPS
A. Ratio of non-Federal match to grant request = < 1:1; >1: < 1.5; 1.5 : < 2; > 2
B. Matching partners contributing 10% of the grant request = 0-1, 2, 3, > 3
C. Partner categories = 1, 2, 3, > 3
D. Important partnership aspects
E. Public Access

MAXIMUM = 15
0-7
0-5
0-3
MAXIMUM = 15

MAXIMUM = 15
0-9
0-6
MAXIMUM = 10
0-10
0-4
0-1
0-1
0-8
MAXIMUM = 15
0-12
0-8
0-6
0-4
0-3
MAXIMUM = 10
0-3, 0-4, 0-5
0-3
0-2
MAXIMUM = 20
0, 1, 3, 6
0, 1, 2, 3
0, 2, 3, 4
0-5
0-2

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #1
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONSERVATION OF WATERFOWL HABITAT?
Under A, B, and C below, list species that will be affected by the grant and match work (do NOT include non-match). In the
narratives that follow, succinctly explain how the proposal will impact the species. The responses should address the proposal area
and proposal activities only. If the proposal is a phase of an ongoing project, address only the current phase activity/acreage.
A. HIGH PRIORITY SPECIES Tule Greater White-fronted Goose, Dusky Canada Goose, Cackling Goose, Southern James Bay
Canada Goose, Northern Pintail, Mottled Duck, American Black Duck, Mallard, Lesser Scaup, Greater Scaup
B. OTHER PRIORITY SPECIES Pacific Greater White-fronted Goose, Wrangel Island Snow Goose, Atlantic Brant, Pacific Brant,
Wood Duck, Redhead, Canvasback, Ring-necked Duck, Common Eider, American Wigeon
C. OTHER WATERFOWL
D. NARRATIVE
1. Describe how the proposal will aid in meeting objectives of waterfowl conservation plans.
2. For the species listed above, describe how many individuals/pairs will use the proposal area before and after the proposal is
completed and for what life cycle stage(s) after the proposal is completed.

TAQ 1

Breeding
Species

Before

Migration

After

Before

After

Wintering
Before

After

High Priority

Priority

Other

Seasonal Relative Abundance Category Codes:

Abundance Category

Up to 1,000
individuals
daily
encountered
on:

1,000-10,000
individuals
daily
encountered
on:

10,000+
individuals
daily
encountered
on:

Abundant: A

-

25-75% of days

1 day +

Common: C

25+% of days

<25% of days

-

Rare: R

<25% of days

-

-

3. How will the proposal impact species affected and improve habitat quality (describe before- and after-proposal environment)?
4. What is the importance of each tract or logical groupings of tracts shown in the proposal to the species (if tracts are not yet
identified, explain what procedure will be used to ensure that high quality habitat is targeted)?

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #2
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONSERVATION OF OTHER WETLANDASSOCIATED MIGRATORY BIRDS?
A. PRIORITY BIRD SPECIES
Identify up to ten priority bird species from the BCR lists (Attachment A) at the end of these instructions that best demonstrate
the benefits of the proposal activities to non-waterfowl species. Use habitat and population objectives from the bird conservation
plans listed below (with contact information for the plan coordinators), and the species in the Bird Conservation Regions (reference
the BCR lists at the end of these instructions; for more information on BCRs, see http://www.nabci-us.org/map.html).
• Partners in Flight (songbirds) (http://www.blm.gov/wildlife/pifplans.htm)
([email protected])
• U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (http://shorebirdplan.fws.gov)
([email protected])
• North American Waterbird Conservation Plan (http://www.waterbirdconservation.org)
([email protected])
• Joint Venture plans (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/JointVentures/index.shtm)
([email protected] for national coordination, or contact individual Joint Venture
Coordinators through the above link)
Using a table format (see TAQ # 2 example), succinctly describe the impact of the grant and match work on each selected species. Do
NOT include benefits from non-match work, and address only non-waterfowl species.





Which species or population will benefit and in which plan(s) is it a priority?
How many individuals/pairs are expected to use the proposal area and, if the proposal area is being restored or enhanced,
what is the expected increase in population numbers?
How will the proposal activities positively affect the species and improve habitat quality?
What is the importance of each tract (or logical grouping of tracts) in the proposal to the species or population, and for what
life cycle stage (If tracts are not yet identified, explain what procedure will be used to ensure that the high quality habitat is
targeted)?

B. OTHER WETLAND-ASSOCIATED BIRD SPECIES
Identify up to ten bird species not included in the priority species lists provided in Part A. above that help demonstrate the
benefits of the project activities to non-waterfowl species.
Using a table format (see TAQ # 2 example), succinctly describe the impact of the grant and match work on each selected species. Do
NOT include benefits from non-match work, and address only non-waterfowl species.





Which species or population will benefit and in which plan(s) is it a priority?
How many individuals/pairs will use the proposal area and, if the proposal area is being restored or enhanced, what is the
expected increase in population numbers?
How will the proposal activities impact the species and improve habitat quality?
What is the importance of each tract (or logical grouping of tracts) in the proposal to the species or population, and for what
life cycle stage (If tracts are not yet identified, explain what procedure will be used to ensure that the high quality habitat is
targeted)?

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #3
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL LOCATION RELATE TO THE GEOGRAPHIC PRIORITY WETLANDS
DESCRIBED BY THE NORTH AMERICAN WATERFOWL MANAGEMENT PLAN, PARTNERS IN
FLIGHT, the U.S. SHOREBIRD CONSERVATION PLAN, and/or the NORTH AMERICAN WATERBIRD
CONSERVATION PLAN?
A. NATIONAL PRIORITY WETLAND AREAS. Using the table format below, indicate how the proposed grant and match
activities will address the national priority areas for wetland habitat conservation as outlined in the four major migratory bird
conservation plans (Partners in Flight (songbirds), U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan, North American Waterbird Conservation Plan
and the North American Waterfowl Management Plan). Geographic priority maps for these bird groups are located at:
http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/Grants/NAWCA/Standard/US/Maps.shtm.
Exact proposal location will be based on the GIS shapefile information you provide with the maps.
Do NOT include non-match activities.
National Bird Plan Priority Areas
NAWMP
PIF
Wading Birds
Shorebirds

In

Partially In

Out

B. REGIONAL IMPORTANT WETLAND AREAS. Briefly describe how the proposed grant and match activities will address the
current regional geographic priorities based on Joint Venture and other partner’s science and planning information. It is prudent to
work closely with Joint Venture staff to ensure that this proposal is based on the most current science and planning for all wetland
associated migratory birds. To access this information or contact plan coordinators, click below:
Migratory Bird Joint Venture Coordinators (http://www.fws.gov/birdhabitat/JointVentures/index.shtm).
Do NOT include non-match activities.

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #4
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL RELATE TO THE NATIONAL STATUS AND TRENDS OF WETLANDS
TYPES?
For more information about wetland functions, maps, the classification system/types/codes used below, and national and regional
status and trends, go to the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) web site (http://wetlands.fws.gov/). Contact regional Joint Venture
Coordinators for state or regional information. Not all wetland types are listed below, but they are given in the Cowardin report on the
NWI web site.
Complete the following table. In Section A, list the match and grant acreage by activity for each wetland type or group of types.
DO NOT INCLUDE DUPLICATED ACRES THAT ARE INDICATED WITH PARENTHESES IN YOUR PROPOSAL
SUMMARY.
In Section B, list the acreage by type or group of types for each tract. Additionally, as indicated in the example TAQ #4, indicate the
funding source for each tract (grant funds, new match funds, old match funds or a combination).
If your proposal is funded, you will be required to submit annual reports that compare actual accomplishments with the acreage
figures and habitat types you give here. Additionally, you will be asked for actual accomplishments of your proposal in this format as
part of your final report. This data will be used to determine the success of your proposal. Click here for the TAQ #4 example: TAQ
#4 Example
FOR BOTH SECTIONS, ONLY USE THOSE ACTIVITY ROWS REQUIRED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL. PLEASE
ENSURE THE ACREAGE TOTALS PROVIDED IN TAQ #4 MATCH THOSE TOTALS PROVIDED ON THE SUMMARY
PAGE.
ACTIVITY AND
TRACTS IN THE
PROPOSAL

TOTAL
STATUS, TYPES, AND ACRES OF WETLANDS
UPLANDS
Note: Types subsidiary to types listed below have the same status.
DECREASING
STABLE
INCREASING NO TREND
DATA
PEM PFO PSS E2 E2AB,
L
R
M2, PAB,
E1, PML,
Veg E2US
PUB/POW,
PRB
PUS

SECTION A
Fee
Easement
Lease
ACQUIRED TOTAL
RESTORED
ENHANCED
ESTABLISHED
TYPE TOTALS
STATUS TOTALS
GRAND TOTALS
SECTION B
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:
E1=estuarine subtidal, E2AB=estuarine intertidal aquatic bed, E2US=estuarine intertidal unconsolidated shore, E2Veg=estuarine
intertidal vegetated (E2EM, intertidal emergent marsh, and E2SS, estuarine intertidal scrub-shrub), L=lacustrine, M2=marine
intertidal, PAB=palustrine aquatic bed, PEM=palustrine emergent, PFO=palustrine forested, PML=palustrine moss-lichen,
PRB=palustrine rock bottom, PSS=palustrine scrub-shrub, PUB/POW=palustrine unconsolidated bottom/palustrine open water,
PUS=palustrine unconsolidated shore, R=riverine. Upland category may include restored cropland.

Provide a brief narrative to describe upland habitats (e.g., cropland, grassland, forest) and the relationship to wetlands and migratory
bird conservation (i.e., reason for including in proposal).

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #5
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL CONTRIBUTE TO LONG-TERM CONSERVATION OF WETLANDS AND
ASSOCIATED UPLANDS?
Complete the following table. In Section A, list the match and grant acreage by activity for each tenure category.
INCLUDE DUPLICATED ACRES THAT ARE INDICATED WITH PARENTHESES IN YOUR PROPOSAL SUMMARY.
In Section B, list the acreage by tenure for each tract. Additionally, as indicated in the example TAQ #5, indicate the funding source
for each tract (grant funds, new match funds, old match funds or a combination).
RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES SHOULD NOT BE LISTED UNDER THE PERPETUITY TENURE
CATEGORY WITHOUT EXCEPTIONAL AND APPROPRIATE JUSTIFICATION, RELATIVE TO TENURE OF
AGREEMENTS. THE EXPECTATION OF MAINTENANCE DOES NOT MAKE A RESTORATION PERPETUAL.
If your proposal is funded, you will be required to submit annual reports that compare actual accomplishments with the acreage
figures and habitat types you give here. Additionally, you will be asked for actual accomplishments of your proposal in this format as
part of your final report. This data will be used to determine the success of your project. Click here for the TAQ #5 example: TAQ
#5 Example
FOR BOTH SECTIONS, ONLY USE THOSE ACTIVITY ROWS REQUIRED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL. PLEASE
ENSURE THE ACREAGE TOTALS PROVIDED IN TAQ #5 MATCH THOSE TOTALS PROVIDED ON THE SUMMARY
PAGE.

ACTIVITY

ACRES BY LONGEVITY OF BENEFITS
* Includes water control structures made of material other than wood.
** Includes wood water control structures and pumps.
PERPETUITY
*26-99
**10-25
< 10

TOTAL
ACRES

SECTION A
Fee
Easement
Lease
TOTAL ACQUIRED
RESTORED
ENHANCED
ESTABLISHED
TOTAL
SECTION B
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:
Tract:

Provide a brief narrative describing the significance of the proposal to long-term conservation, including how the project might help
address climate change concerns or be affected by climate change.

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #6
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONSERVATION OF HABITAT FOR WETLAND
ASSOCIATED, FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED ENDANGERED SPECIES; WETLAND ASSOCIATED
STATE-LISTED SPECIES; AND OTHER WETLAND-ASSOCIATED FISH AND WILDLIFE THAT ARE
SPECIFICALLY INVOLVED WITH THE PROPOSAL?
For more information on Federally listed species and critical habitat, go to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Endangered Species
Program web site (http://endangered.fws.gov/). Click on Species Information for species-specific information. Go to the Service’s
Endangered Species Program contacts page (http://endangered.fws.gov/contacts) for information in a regional or state context. Under
A, B, and C below, list species that will be affected by the grant and match work (do NOT include non-match tracts) and succinctly
provide the additional requested information to explain how the proposal will affect the species.
A. FEDERALLY THREATENED, ENDANGERED OR PROPOSED SPECIES
Species:
How many individuals/pairs will use the proposal area and for what life cycle stage and whether this is an improvement in population
numbers over the current situation:
How proposal will improve habitat quality (describe the before- and after-proposal environment):
Whether proposed actions and proposal area are identified in a recovery plan or other species plan:
Whether the completed proposal will contribute towards relieving the need for any special protective status for the species:
Importance of each tract or logical groupings of tracts in the proposal to the species (if tracts are not yet identified, explain what
procedure will be used to ensure that high quality habitat is targeted):
Additional information:

B. STATE-LISTED ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES
Species: Do NOT list species listed in A.
How many individuals/pairs will use the proposal area and for what life cycle stage and whether this is an improvement in population
numbers over the current situation:
How proposal will improve habitat quality (describe the before- and after-proposal environment):
Whether proposed actions and proposal area are identified in a recovery plan or other species plan:
Whether the completed proposal will contribute toward relieving the need for any special protective status for the species:
Importance of each tract or logical groupings of tracts in the proposal to the species (if tracts are not yet identified, explain what
procedure will be used to ensure that high quality habitat is targeted):
Additional information:
C. OTHER WETLAND-DEPENDENT FISH AND WILDLIFE
Species and narrative:

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT QUESTION #7
HOW DOES THE PROPOSAL SATISFY THE PARTNERSHIP PURPOSE OF THE NORTH AMERICAN
WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT?
A. Ratio of the Non-Federal Match to the Grant Request: State the ratio of the non-Federal match to the grant request (e.g., the
ratio of a non-Federal match of $1,500,000 to a $1,000,000 grant request = 1.5:1). A 2:1 match or higher gains maximum points. To
receive credit, you must submit signed Partner Contribution Statements from matching partners with the proposal.
B. 10% Matching Partners: List the matching partners who contribute at least 10% of the grant request (e.g., for a $1,000,000 grant
request, list the matching partners who contribute at least $100,000). To receive credit, you must submit signed Partner Contribution
Statements from matching partners with the proposal.
C. Partner Categories: Show the partner diversity by listing each partner (irrespective of contribution amount) under one of the
following categories. To receive credit, signed Partner Contribution Statements from matching and non-matching partners must be
submitted with the proposal.









State agencies;
Non-governmental conservation organizations (e.g., local wildlife club, Ducks Unlimited, Inc., The Nature Conservancy);
Local governments, counties or municipalities (e.g., Conservation District);
Private landowners;
Profit-making corporations (e.g., Exxon);
Native American governments or associations;
Federal agencies; and
Other partner groups.

For NAWCA purposes, a partner is defined as a group, agency, organization, or individual which participates in a specific NAWCA
project as a match provider.
Non-match partners are eligible for inclusion in this section if the non-match funds are pooled with grant or match funds to
accomplish acreage goals.
A partner letter is required for each partner, including non-match partners.
D. Important Partnership Aspects: Briefly state any particularly significant or unique benefits that are provided by the proposal
partnerships (new grant recipient, significant new partners, unique partners, or large numbers of partners under any category in C.
above).
E. Public Access
Open to public access means that any member of the public can legally enter NAWCA proposal tract/tracts subject to only modest
restrictions (e.g., daylight hours only, small entry fee, etc.). Under this definition, proposal tracts may be closed during certain times
of the year or certain types of activities may be limited to facilitate habitat and wildlife management (manage for hunting access,
migratory bird sanctuary or other environmental impacts, etc.).
Scoring: This definition will be applied to all types of proposal activity including fee acquisitions, easements, restorations and
enhancements, regardless of whether the activity is funded with grant or match funds (including old match).
2, 1, or 0 points will be awarded as follows:
2 points – open to public hunting
1 point – open to other public access
0 points – closed to public access

ATTACHMENTS
TRACT TABLE. Ensure that each tract involved in the proposal is consistently identified in each section of the proposal (Summary,
narratives, tables, Technical Assessment Questions, etc.). For any tract(s) involved in the proposal that is/are not yet identified,
complete the Tract Table as much as possible, explain why the tract(s) is/are not yet identified and describe the methods to be used to
select the tract(s).
Please provide the following information for each tract.
 Tract identification (same as on the Financial Plan Table, Technical Questions 4 & 5 and on the maps submitted with the
proposal).
 Wetland, upland acres and riparian miles within each tract.
 Funding category (grant, old match, new match or combination).
 Funding source (for non-matching partner tracts, enter the partner’s name and “nonmatch”).
 The county the tract is located in.
 A central tract location latitude/longitude point in decimal degrees
 Title holder after the proposal is completed (for easements, give both the fee and easement holders).
 Matching Contributions Plan information: Make sure tracts and acres that are part of a Matching Contributions Plan are
shown here as in the Proposal Summary; i.e., funding is apportioned according to the Matching Contributions Plan, but all
acres are counted in the first proposal. Subsequent proposals show acres in parentheses and account for partner funding as
defined in the Matching Contributions Plan.
The tract location latitude/longitude information is mandatory.
Landowner and tract names must be consistent throughout the proposal
Below the table, complete the Final Titleholder Summary. Acreage total should match the Summary Page data.
[NOTE: Should your proposal be awarded a grant, you will be asked for actual accomplishments of your proposal in this format as
part of your final report. This data will be used in Government Performance and Results Act reporting.]

Tract Table:
Tract ID/
Activity

Wetland
Acres

Upland
Acres

Riparian
Miles

Funding
Category

Funding Source

County and State

Central Tract Location in
Decimal Degrees

Final Title
Holder

Tract
Tract
Tract
Tract
Tract

FINAL TITLEHOLDER SUMMARY:
Definitions: from USFWS Strategic Plan 2000 - 2005
Riparian: A landscape position – lands contiguous to perennial or intermittent streams, channels and rivers. Riparian areas may
include upland, wetland, and riparian plant communities. Riparian plant communities are affected by surface or subsurface hydrology
of the adjacent water source. Riparian plant communities have one or both of the following characteristics: 1) distinctively different
vegetative species than adjacent areas, and 2) species similar to adjacent areas but exhibiting more vigorous or robust growth forms.
Upland: Land or an area of land lying above the level where water flows or where flooding occurs. May include restored cropland.
Wetland: From Cowardin et al. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. -- “Wetlands are
lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered
by shallow water. For purposes of this classification wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least
periodically the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soils; and (3) the
substrate is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.” By
definitions wetlands include areas meeting specific criteria included in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, as
well as in the USDA-NRCS’s National Food Security Act Manual.

PARTNER CONTRIBUTION STATEMENTS.
 Each matching partner (including the grantee and private landowners, if providing funds and/or donating title to
property) and non-matching partner (including Federal partners) listed in the proposal must complete a
Statement.
 Each statement must be submitted with the proposal before the deadline date.
 The statements must be signed and dated for the contribution to be considered documented.
 It is preferred that each partner listed in the proposal complete a statement. If this cannot be done, another party
may vouch for the matching partner, but no credit will be gained in the Partnership Technical Assessment
Question 7 under the categories of "10% partners" and "partner categories". These situations will be handled on
a case-by-case basis.
 If you want to show support from non-funding sources, do not send statements, but instead include a statement
in the proposal such as "To illustrate the overwhelming support for this proposal, we have 37 letters on file from
landowners and State and Federal representatives.”
 The grantee’s statement should not be a cover or transmittal sheet for the proposal.
 If the North American Wetlands Conservation Council has approved a prior Matching Contributions Plan that
involves match for the current proposal, include a copy of the original approval letter in this section.
 Remember that the contribution amount on the statement must be the same as the amount shown in the proposal
for the partner. If the amount differs in any section of the proposal or on the statement, the lesser of the two
will be considered the partner's contribution. If there are many such inconsistencies in the proposal, it will be
returned as ineligible.

NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT PROPOSAL
PARTNER CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT
NOTE: The grantee organization that submits the original proposal and accompanying MCP is responsible for maintaining
the MCP records throughout the life of the plan. That grantee organization must provide a partner letter with each proposal
using the MCP match acknowledging the amount of MCP funds used and the remaining MCP balance.
What is the title of the proposal that you are contributing to?
What is your name or the name of your organization?
When will you make the contribution?
What is the value of your contribution and how did you determine the value? Does the contribution have a non-Federal
origin? If this is based on a fund-raising event or other future action, if that future action fails, will you still provide the
contribution amount?
What long-term migratory bird and wetlands conservation work will the contribution cover?
Does the proposal correctly describe your contribution, especially the amount?
If applicable to the proposal, is your organization competent to hold title to, and manage, land acquired with grant funds and
are you willing to apply a Notice of Grant Agreement or other recordable document to the property?
Please confirm that your contribution has not been used to meet any other federal programs match or cost share requirements.
Do you have any additional comments?
Signature:
Your Name (printed), Organization, and Title:
Date Signed:

OPTIONAL MATCHING CONTRIBUTIONS PLAN (OR “MATCH PLAN”). You may submit a Matching Contributions Plan
with a proposal when you have matching funds in addition to what you will use for this proposal and need to maintain the eligibility
of this match beyond two years for future proposals. The Council will consider waiving the two-year eligibility rule based on the
circumstances by which the additional match was obtained, your need, and how you will use the match. Other sections of these
instructions contain information on how to apply the Match Plan dollars, acres, and natural resource benefits in future proposals.
 What is the Match Plan Amount and Purpose? State the amount of match that must remain eligible for future
proposals (use this same amount in the lower right-hand cell of the example below) and briefly describe the
conservation goals to be achieved by future proposals supported by this match.
 What is the Match Plan Intent? Describe how/why you obtained the additional match, including the sources
(partners) and the relationship of these partners to the proposal.
 What is the Match Plan Need? Describe why you need this match to complete future phases of the proposal and
why obtaining new match for these proposals Is not feasible.
 Is there a Match Plan Chart? Provide a chart showing Match Plan partner contributions used in the current
proposal and future proposals. (See the example.)
Click here for the Optional Matching Contributions Plan example: Optional Matching Contributions Plan Example

OPTIONAL PROGRAMMATIC PROJECT PROPOSAL REQUEST. If a new grant award would fund ongoing work being
done with a previously awarded grant(s), the applicant may request that the subsequent grant award be a continuation and expansion
of the same grant agreement if the original (first) grant agreement is not more than 24 months old at the time of the proposal
application deadline. An applicant requesting that a proposal be treated as a programmatic project, and incorporated into an existing
grant agreement, must justify the request in the proposal. Relevant factors in the request include:
 The length of the existing grant agreement (must be no more than 24 months old)
 The number of proposals previously added to the existing grant agreement (a maximum of 3 awards can be combined into a
programmatic project)
 The relationship between the existing and proposed project boundaries
 How the new proposal is part of a long-term strategic planning and programmatic effort
 How the additional project is related to warrant consideration as a continuation of the existing grant agreement
 The evidenced progress that has been made on the original grant agreement
 How the grantee organization and Project Officer have performed on prior and current NAWCA grants
For more information concerning Programmatic Proposals, see the 2015 Eligibility Criteria, “Programmatic Project Proposals” under
NAWCA Standard Grant Proposal Eligibility Criteria.

STANDARD FORM 424. The SF 424 Assurances for Construction Projects, is required for all NAWCA projects (any project that
involves acquisition, restoration or enhancement is considered a construction project).
All non-Federal applicants must send a SF 424 core form and D Assurances form with the proposal. You can access and submit the
forms through the Grants.gov web site:
The core and D forms can be accessed on the Grants.gov website at: (10th and l1th one down on page)
http://apply07.grants.gov/apply/FormLinks?family=15
Instructions can be accessed at:
http://www07.grants.gov/assets/SF424Instructions.pdf
The following instructions for completing the SF 424 to accompany a NAWCA proposal supersede those on the back of the SF 424.
NOTE: Use the most current version of the SF 424. We will only accept the updated form. You are required to obtain a
DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet in order to apply for any Federal grant. Instructions for obtaining a DUNS number
are on the Grants.gov website above.
NOTE: The address on an applicant’s SF-424 must match the address associated with DUNS number

THE ADDRESS ON THE 424 (# 8 d) MUST BE THE SAME AS THE ADDRESS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DUNS
NUMBER (# 8 c).
CELL NUMBER and TITLE
INSTRUCTIONS
See instructions on back of SF 424.
1. Type of Submission
See instructions on back of SF 424.
2. Type of Application
Leave blank
3. Date Received
Leave blank.
4. Applicant Identifier
See instructions on back of SF 424.
5. a. Employer Identification
See instructions on back of SF 424.
5 .b. Federal Award Identifier
Leave blank
6. Date Received by State
Leave blank
7. State Application Identifier
See instructions on back of SF 424, “c”. *DUNS # required
8. (a-e) – Applicant Information
See instructions on back of SF 424.
9. Type of Applicant
Enter "U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service"
10 – Name of Federal Agency
11 – Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number and Enter "15.623" and “NAWCA U.S. STANDARD GRANTS”
Title
Enter “15.623” and “NAWCA U.S. STANDARD GRANTS”
12. Funding Opportunity Number/Title:
Leave blank
13. Competition Identification Number/Title:
Enter only information for "Counties and States"
14 – Areas Affected by Project
Enter title used in Part 1 of proposal.
15. Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project
Enter only information for "b. Project"
16 – Congressional Districts of Applicant/Project
Leave blank
17. Proposed Project Start and End Dates
Do not include non-match $. In “a”, include only NAWCA grant
18 – Estimated Funding
$. In “b-e”, include only matching partner $. Leave "f" blank.
19 – Is Application Subject to Review by State EO 12372 Only applicable to states.
Process?
See instructions on back of SF 424.
20 – Is Applicant Delinquent on any Federal Debt?
See instructions on back of SF 424.
21 – Authorized Representative

MAPS. As the last attachment, provide two maps: one that conveys an understanding of all conservation activities in the proposal
area including federal, state, non-match and NGO conservation lands, and one that includes location of all grant and match tracts in
the proposal as well as an overall proposal boundary.
Additionally, please provide a single GIS shapefile which contains multiple polygons representing the location of each of the tracts
involved in the project. The GIS file submitted should use a NAD 84 projection and the attribute table should contain a name for each
polygon which corresponds to a tract listed in the proposal work plan. If the applicant is undertaking a project where an exact activity
location cannot be determined at the time of proposal (i.e. easement acquisition in the prairie potholes), then the applicant should
include a single polygon which encompasses the larger project area where the activities are targeted to occur.
Three examples of maps are provided. These maps represent large-, intermediate- and small-scale proposal areas. Maps are critical
sections of the proposal. Well constructed and informative maps can have a significant impact on understanding the scope and
significance your proposal has to wetland conservation. This understanding will be reflected in the scoring process. Your maps
should include:
 Proposal title
 Location of the ENTIRE proposal area (all grant, match, and non-match tracts) within State(s) and counties
 Identification and location of all fee-title, easement and lease tracts (or acquisition priority areas, if tracts have not
been identified)
 Identification and location of all restoration and enhancement tracts, major water control structures and other major
restoration/enhancement features
 A legend, if needed
 Map scale
 A north directional arrow
 Location of natural features (rivers, lakes) to show how the proposal fits into the natural landscape
 Location of previous grant and future proposal sites
 If applicable and possible, where the proposal is in relation to a larger wetlands conservation project (show larger
project boundary and boundary of current proposal). 

PROPOSAL EASEMENT, LEASES, AND INDIRECT COST RATE AGREEMENT
Have you included the following?
Copies of easements and leases in place when the proposal was submitted and models/templates for easements and leases to
be acquired through the proposal.
If you are requesting grant funds for indirect costs or using indirect costs as match, attach a copy of your current approved
negotiated indirect cost rate agreement (and any other former approved negotiated indirect cost rate agreement used to
determine match costs in this proposal) signed by your agency.

EXAMPLES BELOW ARE PROVIDED FOR:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Summary page
Financial Plan Table
Financial Plan Justification
TAQ #1
TAQ#2
TAQ#4
TAQ#5
Tract Table
Optional Matching Contribution Plan

Also attached:
TAQ#2 Priority NAWCA Species List

PROPOSAL SUMMARY EXAMPLE
NOTE: This example is adapted from a previous submission.

NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT PROPOSAL SUMMARY
Des Moines River Valley Wetlands, Iowa
COUNTY(IES), STATE(S), CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT(S): Iowa counties include: Polk, Jasper, Warren, Marion,
Lucas, Monroe, Mahaska, Keokuk, Wapello, Jefferson, Davis, Van Buren, Washington, Henry, Des Moines, and Lee.
The area also includes portions of Iowa Congressional Districts 2, 3 and 4.
GRANT AMOUNT
Allocation: Iowa Department of Natural Resources

$1,000,000

$1,000,000

MATCHING PARTNERS
Grantee: Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation
Lee County Conservation Board
Hardwood Timberland Unlimited
Pheasants Forever, Warren County Chapter
Pheasants Forever, Iowa Capital Chapter
Pheasants Forever, Lee County Chapter
Three Rivers Conservation Foundation

$2,015,000
$ 620,650
$ 789,650
$ 73,800
$ 20,000
$ 10,000
$ 10,000
$ 10,000

$3,549,100

GRANT AND MATCH - ACTIVITIES, COSTS AND ACRES
Fee Acquired
$3,924,100/2,438 acres
Enhanced
$ 622,000/ 889 acres
Indirect Costs
$
3,000

$4,549,100/3,327 acres

PROPOSAL PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION: This is phase 2 of 4 anticipated NAWCA proposals directed at wetland
conservation projects along the main-stem tributaries of the Mississippi River which traverse central and southern Iowa.
The Phase I project (Iowa River Corridor) was focused on the central and lower Iowa River. This proposal offers an
equally impressive number and quality of wetland conservation projects along the Skunk and Des Moines Rivers.
Through an extended planning process that began in late 2007, we have been able to target conservation activities to
protection and enhancement of two of the largest wetland habitat complexes in the state of Iowa: Pool 19 on the
Mississippi River and Red Rock Reservoir on the Des Moines River. Both areas are known for the large number of
waterfowl and diverse assemblages of shorebirds, herons, rails, and other waterbirds they host during both spring and fall
migration. In addition, we are conserving bottomland deciduous forests associated with two of Iowa’s State Forests,
which represent some of the largest forested tracts in the state, and represent important habitats as both migration
stopovers and breeding areas for many species of neotropical migrants.
HABITAT TYPES AND WILDLIFE BENEFITTING: The proposal area is an important part of a major migration
corridor for waterfowl, including lesser Scaup, and other wetland birds moving north from the Central Mississippi River
to the Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) and other breeding grounds to the North and West. The proposal area includes
important mid-latitude migration habitats on the Central Mississippi River, and provides similar floodplain habitats along
the central and lower Des Moines and Skunk Rivers to expand on a series of large habitat complexes which serve as
important migration stopover sites. The added semi-permanent wetlands and seasonally flooded mud flats and moist soil
management areas will increase the number of migratory birds these areas serve during spring and fall migrations. The
proposal area also supports breeding populations of a wide variety of migratory bird species, and this proposal conserves a
diverse set of palustrine herbaceous and forested wetlands along with some of the best remaining mature bottomland
forest as well as adding to some large blocks of tallgrass prairie. These habitats are additions to the large wetland
complexes, and act to improve the water quality, aquatic vegetation, and invertebrate communities in these important
migration habitats.
PUBLIC BENEFITS/PUBLIC ACCESS: The proposal tracts provide excellent access to wetland habitats and serve as
much needed stages for both structured and unstructured opportunities to experience, appreciate, and learn about Iowa’s

native floodplain wetland habitats and the benefits of reconnecting the river to its floodplain. Activities in this proposal
will provide significant improvements in flood control and water quality through wetland and grassland habitat restoration
which include conversion of row crop agriculture within and adjacent to the floodplain of the Des Moines and Skunk
Rivers. Every tract included in this project will be open to public access, however, some consumptive and passive use
restrictions may apply. Public fishing, swimming, hiking, bird watching, natural resource interpretation, scientific
education and research and scenic enjoyment are permitted.
NEW PARTNERS: This project marks a new partnership with the Lee and Warren County Conservation Boards. The
significant work of these two county conservation organizations and the local citizens, businesses and conservation groups
with which they work was the impetus for initiating this grant request. During the preparation of this proposal, several
additional conservation opportunities have been identified that would not have been recognized were it not for this new
partnership. The Des Moines River Valley project combines the work of these new partners with the efforts of some of
the strongest conservation organizations operating in Iowa, including the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, Pheasants
Forever, and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Bureau. This is the first NAWCA project that includes
partnership with Iowa’s State Forest Program. This new NAWCA partnership is a result of several recent cooperative
ventures between the Forestry and Wildlife Bureaus aimed at improving forest management and bird habitat on Iowa’s
deciduous upland and bottomland forests, and represents one of the greatest opportunities for expansion of bird
conservation in Iowa.
RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUSLY FUNDED NAWCA PROPOSALS: This project complements four other
completed and ongoing NAWCA proposals that have focused on creating large functional wetland complexes within
central Iowa. This project also complements long-standing cooperative agreements between the DNR and USFWS for the
expansion of Iowa’s Waterfowl Production Areas.
THREATS AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES: Major threats to Iowa’s wetlands today include: non-point source
pollution, silt accumulation, increased surface flows and drainage inputs, exploding rough fish populations and a general
lack of infrastructure needed to adequately maintain and manage these sites. As the health and biological integrity of
these wetlands continues to deteriorate, future restoration and enhancement efforts will only become increasingly more
difficult and expensive. A significant match contribution (Iowa DNR - $2,015,000) will be lost if this proposal is not
funded this year.

FINANCIAL PLAN TABLE EXAMPLE

Land Costs: Fee Acquired

TOTAL ACQUIRED
Contracts

TOTAL ENHANCED
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MCP
GRAND TOTAL DIRECT
TOTAL INDIRECT
GRAND TOTAL

PARTNER
NAME
IDNR
INHF
IDNR
$180,000
LCCB
$45,000
LCCB
HTU
IDNR
PF-W
PF-IC
PF-L
TRCF
$475,000
IDNR
$700,000
$200,000
IDNR
$100,000
IDNR
USFWS
$300,000
$1,000,000
0
$1,000,000

Iowa DNR – Forestry Bureau
Iowa Natural Heritage
Lee County
Hardwood Timberlands,
Warren County
Iowa Capital Chapter
Lee County
Three Rivers Conservation
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
GRAND TOTAL

$1,000,000

OLD
MATCH $
$1,027,000

$63,000
$20,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$125,000
$1,648,300
$300,000
$22,000

TOTAL $
$1,027,000
$620,650
$475,000
$785,000
$229,650
$73,800
$63,000
$20,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000
$600,000
$3,924,100
$500,000
$122,000

$0

$322,000

$622,000

$1,575,800

$1,970,300
$3,000
$1,973,300

$4,546,100
$3,000
$4,549,100

$513,000
$620,650
$789,650
$20,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000

$2,015,000
$620,650
$789,650
$73,800
$20,000
$10,000
$10,000
$10,000

$1,973,300

$4,599,100

$620,650
$475,000
$605,000
$184,650
$73,800

$1,575,800

IDNR
$1,575,800
IDNR
INHF
LCCB
HTU
PF-W
PF-IC
PF-L
TRCF
USFWS
NA

NEW
MATCH $

$1,502,000

$73,800

TRACT
ID

NONMATCH

8
2
4
1
2
3
6
7
7
5
5
11
$0
9,10
9,10
9,10

$50,000
$50,000
$50,000

9
$50,000

$50,000
$1,575,800

NOTE:
In this example, non-match (USFWS) funds are listed on the Financial Plan Table but not on the Summary Page.
In this example, there is no MCP involved and the “Previously Approved MCP” row is left blank.

WORK PLAN EXAMPLE
NOTE: this Work Plan example lists only two of the acquisition tracts involved (and shown in the TAQ 4 and 5 and Tract Table
examples.

WORK PLAN (FINANCIAL PLAN JUSTIFICATION)
TRACT 1 - Jones
OVERALL ACRES AFFECTED: 459
STATE/FED AGENCIES HOLDING INTERESTS: Lee County (IA) Conservation Board
Acreage Summary of Grant/Match Activities on the Tract:
Acquisition:
459
Restoration:

Enhancement:

Establishment:

Describe all grant/match activities occurring on the tract here: Grant and match funds will be used to acquire 459 acres of palustrine emergent,
palustrine forested, and lacustrine wetlands as part of the Lee County Conservation District. The property is currently privately owned and
unavailable to the public. By acquiring the tract, the Conservation District will be able to better manage a large, contiguous block of habitat for
wildlife and provide conservation-compatible recreational opportunities for the public.
Tract 1 - Jones: Acquisition Financial Plan Justification - $785,000 and 459 acres
Grant - $180,000 Match - $605,000
Non-Match - $________ Completion: May 2011
LAND ACQUISITION DISCLOSURE
Type of acquisition: fee title
Holder of NAWCA conservation interest: Lee County Conservation Board
Grantor/Seller of conservation interest: Jones family
Tenure of conservation interest: perpetuity
All funding sources for acquisition: LCCB and grant funds
Are mineral rights severed or included? included
Are water rights severed or included? n/a
EASEMENTS: n/a
LEASES: n/a

Item & Work

Units

$/unit

APPRAISALS and OTHER ACQUISITION COSTS
Appraisal
1
15,000
Legal fees, titlework, closing costs
Fee title
Subtotal Appraisals and Other Acquisition Costs
TOTAL ACQUISITION DIRECT COSTS

Total $

15,000
10,000
760,000

Schedule
(month, year)
April 2011
May 2011
May 2011

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner name)
LCCB
LCCB
Grant and LCCB
$785,000
$785,000

TRACT 2 - Nordberg
OVERALL ACRES AFFECTED: 438
STATE/FED AGENCIES HOLDING INTERESTS: Lee County (IA) Conservation Board
Acreage Summary of Grant/Match Activities on the Tract:
Acquisition:
438
Restoration:

Enhancement:

Establishment:

Describe all grant/match activities occurring on the tract here: Grant and match funds will be used to acquire 438 acres of palustrine emergent
and lacustrine wetlands as part of the Lee County Conservation District. The property is currently privately owned and unavailable to the public. By
acquiring the tract, the Conservation District will be add to a network of wildlife habitats and reduce conflicts with the public over land management
activities such as burning. The tract will also provide another location for safe, conservation-compatible public recreation such as bird-watching,
fishing, and hunting.

Tract 2 – Nordberg: Acquisition Financial Plan Justification - $850,300 and 438 acres
Grant - $45,000
Match - $805,300
Non-Match - $_________ Completion: June 2011
LAND ACQUISITION DISCLOSURE
Type of acquisition: fee title
Holder of NAWCA conservation interest: Lee County Conservation Board
Grantor/Seller of conservation interest: Nordberg family
Tenure of conservation interest: perpetuity
All funding sources for acquisition: LCCB, Iowa Natural Heritage Fund, and grant funds
Are mineral rights severed or included? included

Are water rights severed or included? n/a
EASEMENTS: n/a
LEASES: n/a

Item & Work

Units

$/unit

APPRAISALS and OTHER ACQUISITION COSTS
Appraisal
1
15,000
Legal fees, titlework, closing costs
Fee title
Subtotal Appraisals and Other Acquisition Costs
TOTAL ACQUISITION DIRECT COSTS

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

15,000
15,300
820,000

April 2011
June 2011
June 2011

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner name)
LCCB
LCCB
INHF, Grant, LCCB
$850,300
$850,300

**The remaining tracts in the Acquisition Financial Plan Justification were deleted to save space**

TRACT 9 - Red Rock Mgmt. Unit
OVERALL ACRES AFFECTED: 429
STATE/FED AGENCIES HOLDING INTERESTS: Iowa DNR
Acreage Summary of Grant/Match Activities on the Tract:
Acquisition:
Restoration:

Enhancement:

429

Establishment:

Describe all grant/match activities occurring on the tract here: Grant, match, and non-match funds will be used to enhance a 429-acre moist soil
unit. Enhancement will involve soil grading and planting to improve water flow and diversity of habitats on the unit. Palustrine emergent, palustrine
forested, and palustrine scrub-shrub habitats will be enhanced. All physical enhancements will require no maintenance and be largely self-sustaining.
Success of plantings will be monitored for 5 years following planting, with partial re-planting if failure exceeds 30%.
Tract 9 - Red Rock Mgmt. Unit: Enhancement Financial Plan Justification - $322,000 and 429 acres
Grant - $125,000
Match - $172,000
Non-Match - $25,000
Completion: Sept 2012
Item & Work

Units

CONTRACTS
Earthwork (Grading, scraping)
Planting
Subtotal Contracts
MATERIALS and EQUIPMENT
Tree plugs (ash, maple, swamp oak)
Shrub plugs (willow, dogwood, etc.)
Soil
Subtotal Materials and Equipment
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL
Project management

$/unit

Total $

Schedule
(month, year)

150,000
72,000

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner name)
IDNR
IDNR, Grant
$222,000

1,500
5,000
20,000 cy

$10
$5
$2

15,000
25,000
40,000

Grant
USFWS
Grant
$80,000

20,000

Project period

Grant

Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel
TOTAL RESTORATION DIRECT COSTS

$20,000
$322,000

Tract 9-Red Rock Management Unit Indirect Costs Financial Plan Justification - $3000
Grant $_______
Match $3,000
Non-match $_________
Allowable
Category from
I.C Rate
Agreement
Salaries & wages

Specific
Financial Plan
Line Items to
Which Indirect
Cost is Applied
N-C Personnel

Direct
Cost
Base
Amount

Approved
Rate (%)*/
Agreement
Date

$20,000

15%/8.09

Partner to which
I.C. Rate Applies

I.C. Grant
Amount

I.C. Match
Amount

Total
Indirect Cost

IDNR

$

$3000

$3000

TRACT 10 – Des Moines Mgmt. Unit
OVERALL ACRES AFFECTED: 460
STATE/FED AGENCIES HOLDING INTERESTS: Iowa DNR
Acreage Summary of Grant/Match Activities on the Tract:
Acquisition:
Restoration:

Enhancement:

460

Establishment:

Describe all grant/match activities occurring on the tract here: Grant, match, and non-match funds will be used to enhance a 460-acre moist soil
unit. Enhancement will involve soil grading and supplemental planting to improve water flow and habitat function on the unit. Palustrine emergent
and palustrine forested habitats will be enhanced. All physical enhancements will require no maintenance and be largely self-sustaining. Success of
plantings will be monitored for 5 years following planting, with partial re-planting if failure exceeds 30%.
Tract 10 – Des Moines Mgmt. Unit: Enhancement Financial Plan Justification - $350,000 and 460 acres
Grant - $175,000
Match - $150,000
Non-Match - $25,000
Completion: Sept 2012
Item & Work

Units

CONTRACTS
Earthwork
Spraying/mowing
Planting
Subtotal Contracts
MATERIALS and EQUIPMENT
Tree plugs
1,000
Sedge and rush plugs
25,000
Subtotal Materials and Equipment
NON-CONTRACT PERSONNEL
Project oversight
Subtotal Non-Contract Personnel
TOTAL ENHANCEMENT DIRECT COSTS

$/unit

Total $

175,000
35,000
65,000

Schedule
(month, year)

Funding Source
(Grant or Partner name)
Grant, IDNR
IDNR
IDNR
$275,000

$10
$2

10,000
50,000

IDNR
Grant, USFWS
$60,000

15,000

Grant
$15,000
$350,000

TAQ#1 EXAMPLE
Breeding

Migration

Wintering

Species

Before

After

Before

After

Before

After

Mallards

C

A

C

A

R

R

Pintail

C

A

C

C

R

R

Scaup

C

C

C

C

C

C

Wood Duck

C

C

C

C

R

R

Black Duck

C

C

C

C

C

C

Gadwall

C

A

C

C

R

R

Green-winged Teal

C

A

C

C

R

R

High Priority

Priority

Other

TAQ#2 EXAMPLE
A. NAWCA Priority Bird Species for BCR 22
Species/Plan
King Rail
NAWCA (BCR 22)1
NAWCP2
(High Concern)
UMVGL-WCP3
(Highly Imperiled)
UMRGLJV-WHCS9
(Focal Species)

Numbers
Benefits of Project
Tract Importance
Affected
Breeder, Migrant Benefit from restoration and
1 & 2: Provide 145 acres of palustrine emergent
management of seasonal and
wetland intermixed with 476 acres of grassland in the
10 breeding pairs semi-permanent wetlands with a floodplain of the South River.
well-developed zone of emergent
100 birds during vegetation.
3, 8, 9 & 10: Provide 889 acres of diverse shallow
migration
wetland habitats associated with two sub-impoundments
Benefit from restoration and
(i.e., moist soil management units) along the Des
Iowa Status (B): management of sedge meadow Moines River above Red Rock Reservoir.
Endangered
zones of wetland edges. Also
Unknown
benefits from restoration and
11: Expected to provide another 35 acres of palustrine
protection of grasslands along emergent wetland intermixed with 100 acres of
river and wetland margins.
grassland in floodplain habitats in the Des Moines and
Skunk River Watersheds.
herbaceous floodplain wetlands.
.

Breeder, Migrant Benefit from restoration and
1 & 2: Provide 145 acres of palustrine emergent
enhancement of large prairie
wetland intermixed with 476 acres of grassland in the
NAWCA (BCR 22)1 30 breeding pairs marshes and adjacent upland
floodplain of the South River.
grasslands.
NAWCP2
300 birds during
4: Provides 56 acres of upland grass and 65 acres of
(High Concern)
migration
More abundant in larger
palustrine emergent wetland adjacent to Rock Creek
wetlands with tall emergent
Marsh, a diverse 120 acre palustrine emergent wetland
UMVGL-WCP3 (High Iowa Status (B): vegetation. Nests in dense
above Rock Creek Lake.
Concern)
Rare
emergent vegetation over water
Stable
and occasionally in tall grassland 11: Expected to provide another 35 acres of palustrine
UMRGLJV-WHCS9
vegetation.
emergent wetland intermixed with 100 acres of
grassland in floodplain habitats in the Des Moines and
USFWS Region 3 Benefit from restoration of
Skunk River Watersheds.
Priority Species12
tallgrass prairie around wetlands.
3, 8, 9 &10: Provide 889 acres of diverse shallow
IWAP-SGCN(B)11
wetland habitats associated with two sub-impoundments
along the Des Moines River above Red Rock Reservoir.
American Bittern

B. Other Wetland-Associated Bird Species
Species/Plan
American GoldenPlover
USSCP4
(High Concern-GL)
UMVGL-RSCP5
(Moderate Concern)

Numbers
Affected
Migrant

Benefits of Project

Benefit from wetland restorations
that include seasonal and semi5,000 birds during permanent zones to create mud
migration
flats and shallow water zones.
Iowa Status (M):
Common

UMRGLJV-SHCS8
(Focal Species-M)

Tract Importance
3, 8, 9 & 10: Provide 889 acres of diverse shallow
wetland habitats associated with two subimpoundments along the Des Moines River above
Red Rock Reservoir. Water control mechanisms and
management regimes will favor a mix of shallow open
water, mudflats, and moderate emergent vegetation in
late summer and early fall. Water levels will slowly
rise throughout the fall providing shallow water over a
wide area dominated by moist soil plants.
1 & 2: Provide 145 acres of palustrine emergent
wetland intermixed with 476 acres of grassland in the
floodplain of the South River. Tract C includes two
large wetlands (46 and 32 acres). These floodplain
wetlands are expected to provide ideal migration
habitat for this species in late summer and early fall.

IWAP-SGCN(M)11

11: Expected to provide another 35 acres of palustrine
emergent wetland intermixed with 100 acres of
grassland in floodplain habitats in the Des Moines
River Watershed.
Solitary Sandpiper

Migrant

USSCP4
(High Concern-GL)

500 birds during
migration

UMVGL-RSCP5
(Moderate Concern)

Iowa Status (M):
Common

UMRGLJV-SHCS8
IWAP-SGCN(M)11

Benefit from wetland restorations
that include seasonal and semipermanent zones to create mud
flats and shallow water zones.

3, 8, 9 &10: Provide 889 acres of diverse shallow
wetland habitats associated with two subimpoundments along the Des Moines River above
Red Rock Reservoir. Water control mechanisms and
management regimes will favor a mix of shallow open
water, mudflats, and moderate emergent vegetation in
late summer and early fall. Water levels will slowly
rise throughout the fall providing shallow water over a
wide area dominated by moist soil plants.

TAQ#4 EXAMPLE
ACTIVITY AND
TRACTS IN THE
PROPOSAL

TOTAL
STATUS, TYPES, AND ACRES OF WETLANDS
Note: Types subsidiary to types listed below have the same status.
DECREASING
STABLE
INCREASING NO TREND
DATA
PEM PFO E2Veg E2AB,
L
R
M2, PAB,
E1, PML,
E2US
PUB/POW,
PRB
PSS, PUS

SECTION A
Fee
908.3 207.8
ACQUIRED TOTAL 908.3 207.8
ENHANCED 757.2 63.2
TYPE TOTALS 1,665.5 271.0
STATUS TOTALS
1,936.5
GRAND TOTALS
SECTION B
Tract: 1 (grant + new
290.7 84.5
match)
Tract: 2 (grant + new
412.0
match)
Tract: 3 (old match)
94.0 8.3
Tract: 4 (old match)
50.5 14.3
Tract: 5 (new match)
6.0
Tract: 6 (new match)
12.7 40.1
Tract: 7 (new match)
2.3 14.8
Tract: 8 (old match)
51.3 22.8
Tract: 9 (new match)
312.2 48.2
Tract: 10 (grant)
445.0 15.0
Tract: 11Unidentified
35.0 23.0
(grant + new match)

109.8 26.7
109.8 26.7

4.4
4.4
68.6

136.5

73.0
2,146.0

UPLANDS

1,181.0
1,181.0

2,438.0
2,438.0
889.0

1,181.0

3,327.0

83.8

459.0

26.0

438.0
12.7
5.2
1.8
2.1

0.4

427.0
56.0
133.0
205.0
160.8

542.0
126.0
139.0
260.0
180.0
76.0
429.0
460.0

153.0

218.0

1.9
68.6
3.0

4.0

TAQ#5 EXAMPLE
ACRES BY TENURE (years) OF BENEFITS CATEGORY
* Includes water control structures made of material other
than wood.
** Includes wood water control structures and pumps.

ACTIVITY

PERPETUITY

*26-99

**10-25

TOTAL ACRES

< 10

SECTION A
Fee
TOTAL ACQUIRED

2,438

2,438

2,438

2,438

ENHANCED
TOTAL

2,438

889

889

889

3,327

SECTION B
Tract: 1 (grant + new match)

459

459

Tract: 2 (grant + new match)

438

438

Tract: 3 (old match)

542

542

Tract: 4 (old match)

126

126

Tract: 5 (new match)

139

139

Tract: 6 (new match)

260

260

Tract: 7 (new match)

180

180

Tract: 8 (old match)

76

76

Tract: 9 (new match)

429

429

Tract: 10 (grant)

460

460

Tract: 11 Unidentified
(grant + new match)

218

218

TRACT TABLE EXAMPLE

Tract Table
Tract ID/
Activity

Wetland
Acres

Upland
Acres

Riparian
Miles

Tract 1

459.0

0

0

grant +
new match

LCCB,
NAWCA

Lee County,
Iowa

40.587980

-91.393166

LCCB

Tract 2

438.0

0

0

grant +
new match

LCCB, INHF,
NAWCA

Lee County,
Iowa

40.546688

-91.421373

LCCB

Tract 3

115.0

427.0

1.5

old match

HTU

Warren County,
Iowa

41.342359

-93.479101

WCCB

Tract 4

70.0

56.0

0.7

old match

IDNR

Warren County,
Iowa

41.451107

-93.360919

IDNR

Tract 5

6.0

133.0

0.6

new match

IDNR, PF-L,
TRCF

Jasper County,
Iowa

41.773713

-92.831597

IDNR

Tract 6

55.0

205.0

1.5

new match

IDNR

Lee County,
Iowa

40.572682

-91.648816

IDNR

Tract 7

19.2

160.8

0.6

new match

IDNR, PF-W,
PF-IC

Monroe County,
Iowa

41.099689

-93.070235

IDNR

Tract 8

29.8

46.2

0.4

old match

IDNR

Monroe County,
Iowa

41.130411

-93.089533

IDNR

Tract 9

429.0

0

0

new match

NAWCA,
IDNR, USFWS

Polk County, Iowa

41.499867

-93.348154

USFWS

Tract 10

460.0

0

0

grant

NAWCA,
IDNR, USFWS

Warren & Marion
Counties, Iowa

41.477768

-93.321698

USFWS

153.0

1.0

grant +
new match

NAWCA,
IDNR

16 county
proposal area, Iowa

41.124510

-92.373827

IDNR,
WCCB,
LCCB

Tract 11
Unidentified
Tracts

65.0

Funding
Category

Funding Source

Central Tract Location in
Decimal Degrees

County and State

Final Title
Holder

FINAL TITLEHOLDER SUMMARY: LCCB - 897 acres; USFWS - 889 acres; IDNR - 781 acres;
WCCB - 542 acres; IDNR/WCCB/LCCB - 218 acres tbd.

OPTIONAL MATCHING CONTRIBUTION PLAN EXAMPLE
Match Plan Partner
Partner name
Current Proposal Total
MCP Future Total

Attachments:

Current Proposal
$2,500,000
$2,500,000

Proposal II
$1,5000,000

Proposal III
$1,000,000

Total $
$5,000,000

$1,500,000

$1,000,000

$2,500,000

A. BIRD CONSERVATION REGIONS AND QUESTION 2 PRIORITY NAWCA SPECIES
BCR 1 ALEUTIAN/BERING SEA
ISLANDS
Red-faced Cormorant
Pelagic Cormorant
Black Oystercatcher
Rock Sandpiper (ptilocnemis ssp.)
Red-legged Kittiwake
Aleutian Tern
Arctic Tern
Marbled Murrelet
Kittlitz's Murrelet
Whiskered Auklet

BCR 4 NORTHWESTERN INTERIOR
FOREST
Horned Grebe
Solitary Sandpiper
Lesser Yellowlegs
Whimbrel
Bristle-thighed Curlew
Hudsonian Godwit
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.)
Rock Sandpiper (ptilocnemis ssp.) (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Rusty Blackbird

BCR 2 WESTERN ALASKA
Red-throated Loon
Yellow-billed Loon
Red-faced Cormorant
Pelagic Cormorant
Black Oystercatcher
Solitary Sandpiper
Lesser Yellowlegs
Whimbrel
Bristle-thighed Curlew
Hudsonian Godwit
Bar-tailed Godwit
Marbled Godwit
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.)
Rock Sandpiper (ptilocnemis ssp.) (nb)
Dunlin (arcticola ssp.) (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher
Aleutian Tern
Arctic Tern
Marbled Murrelet
Kittlitz's Murrelet
BCR 5 NORTHERN PACIFIC
RAINFOREST
Yellow-billed Loon (nb)
Western Grebe (nb)
Red-faced Cormorant
Pelagic Cormorant (pelagicus ssp.)
Bald Eagle
Black Oystercatcher
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
Aleutian Tern
Caspian Tern
Arctic Tern
Marbled Murrelet
Kittlitz's Murrelet
Black Swift
Rufous Hummingbird
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Willow Flycatcher

BCR 3 ARCTIC PLAINS AND
MOUNTAINS
Red-throated Loon
Yellow-billed Loon
Whimbrel
Bar-tailed Godwit
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.)
Dunlin (arcticola ssp.)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper
Arctic Tern

BCR 9 GREAT BASIN
Eared Grebe (nb)
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail
Snowy Plover
Long-billed Curlew
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Black Swift
Calliope Hummingbird
Lewis's Woodpecker
Willow Flycatcher
Tricolored Blackbird

BCR 10 NORTHERN ROCKIES

BCR 11 PRAIRIE POTHOLES

BCR 12 BOREAL HARDWOOD
TRANSITION

Bald Eagle
Swainson's Hawk
Long-billed Curlew
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Black Swift
Calliope Hummingbird
Lewis's Woodpecker
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Willow Flycatcher

Horned Grebe
American Bittern
Least Bittern
Bald Eagle
Swainson's Hawk
Yellow Rail
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Long-billed Curlew

Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
American Bittern
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)

Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Black Tern
Short-eared Owl
Red-headed Woodpecker
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow

Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Black Tern
Common Tern
Red-headed Woodpecker
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Wood Thrush
Golden-winged Warbler
Canada Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird

BCR 13 LOWER GREAT LAKES/ST.
LAWRENCE PLAIN

BCR 14 ATLANTIC NORTHERN
FORESTS

BCR 15 SIERRA NEVADA

Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
American Bittern
Least Bittern
Black-crowned Night-Heron
Bald Eagle
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
American Woodcock
Black Tern
Common Tern
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Golden-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Canada Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow

Red-throated Loon (nb)
Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
Great Cormorant (nb)
American Bittern
Least Bittern
Snowy Egret
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
Purple Sandpiper (nb)
American Woodcock
Arctic Tern
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Canada Warbler
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird

Bald Eagle
Black Swift
Calliope Hummingbird
Lewis's Woodpecker
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Willow Flycatcher

BCR 16 SOUTHERN
ROCKIES/COLORADO PLATEAU

BCR 17 BADLANDS AND PRAIRIES

BCR 18 SHORTGRASS PRAIRIE

Gunnison Sage Grouse
American Bittern
Bald Eagle
Snowy Plover
Long-billed Curlew
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Lewis's Woodpecker
Willow Flycatcher

Horned Grebe
American Bittern
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail
Long-billed Curlew
Marbled Godwit
Short-eared Owl
Lewis's Woodpecker
Red-headed Woodpecker

Bald Eagle
Snowy Plover
Long-billed Curlew
Lewis's Woodpecker
Willow Flycatcher
Bell's Vireo

BCR 19 CENTRAL MIXED GRASS
PRAIRIE

BCR 20 EDWARDS PLATEAU

BCR 21 OAKS AND PRAIRIES

Little Blue Heron
Mississippi Kite
Bald Eagle
Swainson's Hawk
Black Rail
King Rail
Snowy Plover
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Long-billed Curlew
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)

Bald Eagle
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Harris's Sparrow (nb)
Orchard Oriole

Little Blue Heron
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Black Rail (nb)
King Rail
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
American Woodcock
Red-headed Woodpecker
Bell's Vireo
Swainson's Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow (nb)

Red-headed Woodpecker
Bell's Vireo
Henslow's Sparrow
Harris's Sparrow (nb)

Harris's Sparrow (nb)
Orchard Oriole

BCR 22 EASTERN TALLGRASS
PRAIRIE

BCR 23 PRAIRIE HARDWOOD
TRANSITION

BCR 24 CENTRAL HARDWOODS

Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
American Bittern
Least Bittern
Black-crowned Night-Heron
Bald Eagle
Black Rail
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (a) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Black Tern
Common Tern
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Acadian Flycatcher
Bell's Vireo
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Prothonotary Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
American Bittern
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (a) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Black Tern
Common Tern
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Willow Flycatcher
Marsh Wren
Blue-winged Warbler
Golden-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
Bobolink
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

Bald Eagle
Black Rail
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
American Woodcock
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Bell's Vireo
Sedge Wren
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
LeConte's Sparrow (nb)
Painted Bunting
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

BCR 25 WEST GULF COASTAL PLAIN/ BCR 26 MISSISSIPPI ALLUVIAL
OUACHITAS
VALLEY

BCR 27 SOUTHEASTERN COASTAL
PLAIN

Least Bittern
Little Blue Heron
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
American Woodcock
Red-headed Woodpecker
Wood Thrush
Cerulean Warbler
Prothonotary Warbler
Worm-eating Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Louisiana Waterthrush
Kentucky Warbler
Bachman's Sparrow
Henslow's Sparrow (nb)
Painted Bunting
Orchard Oriole

Red-throated Loon
American Bittern (nb)
Least Bittern
Roseate Spoonbill (nb)
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
Black Rail
King Rail
Limpkin
Snowy Plover
Wilson’s Plover
American Oystercatcher
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Upland Sandpiper (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Least Tern
Gull-billed Tern
Sandwich Tern
Black Skimmer
Red-headed Woodpecker
Sedge Wren (nb)
Wood Thrush

American Bittern (nb)
Least Bittern
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
Black Rail
King Rail
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Sedge Wren (nb)
Wood Thrush
Cerulean Warbler
Prothonotary Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow (nb)
LeConte's Sparrow (nb)
Painted Bunting
Rusty Blackbird (nb)
Orchard Oriole

Blue-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Prothonotary Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
LeConte's Sparrow (nb)
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow (nb)
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow (nb)
Seaside Sparrow (c)
Painted Bunting
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

BCR 28 APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS

BCR 29 PIEDMONT

BCR 30 NEW ENGLAND/MIDATLANTIC COAST

Bald Eagle
American Woodcock
Red-headed Woodpecker
Olive-sided Flycatcher
Sedge Wren (nb)
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Golden-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Louisiana Waterthrush
Kentucky Warbler
Canada Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

Bald Eagle
Black Rail
King Rail
American Woodcock
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Sedge Wren
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Cerulean Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

Red-throated Loon (nb)
Pied-billed Grebe
Horned Grebe (nb)
American Bittern
Least Bittern
Snowy Egret
Bald Eagle
Black Rail
King Rail
Wilson’s Plover
American Oystercatcher
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
Purple Sandpiper (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock
Least Tern
Gull-billed Tern
Black Skimmer
Short-eared Owl (nb)
Red-headed Woodpecker
Sedge Wren
Wood Thrush
Blue-winged Warbler
Golden-winged Warbler
Worm-eating Warbler
Kentucky Warbler
Henslow’s Sparrow
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Seaside Sparrow
Rusty Blackbird (nb)

BCR 31 PENINSULAR FLORIDA

BCR 32 COASTAL CALIFORNIA

BCR 33 SONORAN AND MOJAVE
DESERTS

Magnificent Frigatebird
American Bittern (nb)
Least Bittern
Reddish Egret
Roseate Spoonbill
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
Black Rail
King Rail
Limpkin
Snowy Plover
Wilson’s Plover
American Oystercatcher

Ashy Storm-Petrel
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
Black Rail
Snowy Plover
Black Oystercatcher
Whimbrel (nb)
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
Gull-billed Tern
Black Skimmer
Xantus's Murrelet

Least Bittern
Bald Eagle
Black Rail
Snowy Plover
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Gull-billed Tern
Black Skimmer
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Elf Owl
Bell's Vireo
Lucy's Warbler
Yellow Warbler (sonorana ssp.)

Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock (nb)
Least Tern
Black Skimmer
White-crowned Pigeon
Mangrove Cuckoo
Red-headed Woodpecker
Black-whiskered Vireo
Yellow Warbler (gundlachi ssp.)
Prothonotary Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow (nb)
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow (nb)
Saltmarsh Sharp-tailed Sparrow (nb)
Seaside Sparrow (c)
Painted Bunting (nb)

Cassin's Auklet
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Black Swift
Allen's Hummingbird
Lewis's Woodpecker
Yellow Warbler (brewsteri ssp.)
Common Yellowthroat (sinuosa ssp.)
Song Sparrow (graminea ssp.)
Song Sparrow (maxillaris ssp.)
Song Sparrow (pusillula ssp.)
Song Sparrow (samuelis ssp.)
Tricolored Blackbird
Lawrence's Goldfinch

Lawrence's Goldfinch

BCR 34 SIERRA MADRE OCCIDENTAL BCR 35 CHIHUAHUAN DESERT

BCR 36 TAMAULIPAN
BRUSHLANDS

Bald Eagle
Common Black-Hawk
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Elf Owl
Elegant Trogon
Lewis's Woodpecker
Northern Beardless-Tyrannulet
Bell's Vireo
Phainopepla
Lucy's Warbler
Yellow Warbler (sonorana ssp.)
Red-faced Warbler
Varied Bunting

Bald Eagle
Common Black-Hawk
Snowy Plover
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Elf Owl
Bell's Vireo
Yellow Warbler (sonorana ssp.)
Red-faced Warbler
Varied Bunting
Painted Bunting

Swainson's Hawk
Snowy Plover
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Long-billed Curlew (nb)
Gull-billed Tern
Red-billed Pigeon
Elf Owl
Northern Beardless-Tyrannulet
Bell's Vireo
Varied Bunting
Painted Bunting
Audubon's Oriole

BCR 37 GULF COAST PRAIRIE

BCR 67 HAWAII

PUERTO RICO AND VIRGIN
ISLANDS

American Bittern
Least Bittern
Reddish Egret
Swallow-tailed Kite
Bald Eagle
Yellow Rail (nb)
Black Rail
King Rail
Snowy Plover
Wilson’s Plover
American Oystercatcher
Solitary Sandpiper (nb)
Lesser Yellowlegs (nb)
Upland Sandpiper (nb)
Whimbrel (nb)
Long-billed Curlew
Hudsonian Godwit (nb)
Marbled Godwit (nb)
Red Knot (roselaari ssp.) (nb)
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (a) (nb)
Buff-breasted Sandpiper (nb)
Short-billed Dowitcher (nb)
American Woodcock (nb)
Least Tern
Gull-billed Tern
Sandwich Tern
Black Skimmer
Short-eared Owl (nb)

Laysan Albatross
Black-footed Albatross
Christmas Shearwater
Band-rumped Storm-Petrel
Tristram's Storm-Petrel
Bristle-thighed Curlew (nb)
Short-eared Owl

West Indian Whistling-Duck
White-cheeked Pintail
Masked Duck
Ruddy Duck (jamaicensis ssp.)
Audubon's Shearwater
Masked Booby
Brown Booby
Red-footed Booby
Magnificent Frigatebird
Least Bittern
American Flamingo
Black Rail
Yellow-breasted Crake
Caribbean Coot
Limpkin
Snowy Plover
Wilson’s Plover
American Oystercatcher
Red Knot (rufa ssp.) (nb)
Semipalmated Sandpiper (Eastern) (nb)
White-crowned Pigeon

Sedge Wren (nb)
Prothonotary Warbler
Swainson's Warbler
Henslow's Sparrow (nb)
LeConte's Sparrow (nb)
Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow (nb)
Seaside Sparrow (c)
Painted Bunting

NAWCA Priority Bird List for MBTA Gulf Spill Settlement Projects 
American Bittern (mid‐Continent*) 
American Black Duck 
American Oystercatcher (FL & Gulf Coast) 
American Wigeon 
Audubon's Shearwater 
Bachman's Sparrow (mid‐Continent) 
Bald Eagle (mid‐Continent) 
Black Rail (mid‐Continent) 
Black Skimmer (Gulf Coast only) 
Black Tern  (mid‐Continent) 
Black‐crowned Night‐Heron (Gulf Coast only) 
Buff‐breasted Sandpiper (mid‐Continent) 
Canvasback 
Common Tern (Great Lakes population) 
Greater Scaup 
Gull‐billed Tern (Gulf Coast only) 
Henslow's Sparrow (mid‐Continent) 
Horned Grebe (mid‐Continent) 
Hudsonian Godwit (mid‐Continent) 
Kentucky Warbler (mid‐Continent) 
King Rail  (mid‐Continent) 
Least Bittern (mid‐Continent) 
Least Tern (mid‐Continent) 
Le Conte's Sparrow (mid‐Continent) 
Lesser Scaup 
Lesser Yellowlegs (pops. East of Rockies) 
Limpkin (Gulf Coast only) 
Little Blue Heron (mid‐Continent) 
Long‐billed Curlew (pops. East of Rockies) 
Mallard (mid‐Continent) 
Mangrove Cuckoo (Gulf Coast only) 
Marbled Godwit (pops. East of Rockies) 
Marsh Wren (mid‐Continent) 
Mottled Duck 
Nelson's Sparrow (mid‐Continent) 
Northern Pintail (pops. East of Rockies) 
Painted Bunting (mid‐Continent) 
Pied‐billed Grebe (mid‐Continent) 
Piping Plover (Great Lakes and Great Plains pops.) 
Prothonotary Warbler (mid‐Continent) 
Red Knot (C.c. rufa and C.c. roselaari) 
Reddish Egret (Gulf Coast only) 
Redhead 
Red‐throated Loon (mid‐Continent) 
Ring‐necked Duck (mid‐Continent) 
Roseate Spoonbill (Gulf Coast only) 
Rusty Blackbird (mid‐Continent) 
Saltmarsh Sparrow (Gulf Coast only) 
Sandwich Tern (Gulf Coast only) 
Seaside Sparrow (Gulf Coast only) 
Sedge Wren (mid‐Continent) 
Semipalmated Sandpiper (mid‐Continent) 

Short‐billed Dowitcher (mid‐Continent) 
Snowy Egret (mid‐Continent) 
Snowy Plover (Interior U.S. and Gulf Coast populations) 
Solitary Sandpiper (mid‐Continent) 
Swainson's Warbler (mid‐Continent) 
Swallow‐tailed Kite (Gulf Coast only) 
Whimbrel (mid‐Continent) 
Wilson's Plover (Gulf Coast and south) 
Worm‐eating Warbler (mid‐Continent) 
Yellow Rail (pops. East of Rockies) 
Yellow‐billed Cuckoo (mid‐Continent) 
*mid‐Continent = Central and Mississippi Flyways
Oiled 

C. Richness Density map

12/17/2014