Administrative Funds to CDs implementing State Cost Share Programs

[John Switzer]

For those states that have state funded cost share programs, how do you compensate conservation districts that help promote the program, enroll participants, develop conservation plans, verify practice installation, or otherwise assist with implementation? Do you provide a certain percentage of administration funds based on the dollar amount of the contracts funded, provide a set base amount, compensate for time/hours worked on state cost share, or other means of compensation? Any details including specific percentage or funding amounts and total annual cost share implemented are appreciated. Thank you!

[Bill Smith]

In South Dakota, conservation districts may claim up to 15% of the total grant for administrative costs with supporting documentation (timesheets, receipts, etc). This is spelled out in Administrative Rule 12:03:05:09.

[Delwyne Trefz]

Hello John,

Our agency administers one small cost-share program. To compensate them for their work on funded BMP implementation projects, Districts are eligible to receive an amount equal to 10% of the cost-share dollars as an administrative fee. We don’t require districts to account for how the administrative fee is spent, i.e., they aren’t required to keep track of hours, miles, or other project-associated costs. While most districts invoice us for the full 10% they’re eligible for, some choose to take a lessor percentage so they’re able to contribute more to BMP implementation.

Have a merry Christmas and a wonderful holiday season!

Delwyne Trefz

[Kip Studer]

John,

In Ohio we have done about every way imagined. In the past we had provided 10-15% of the total grant would be for administration or technical service and was spelled out in the grant contract. These were typically smaller grants. More recently we paid a percentage of the completed work, and was paid annually based on completion. $1 per acre for verifying practices, depending on the complexity and time requirements the amount varied from $1-$5 per acre completed. With the size and scale of H2Ohio we provided $60K per district for 3 years to fund a position to work on H2Ohio. As with many programs, it is never enough and doesn’t account for all the time and effort spent implementing the program. The per acre is nice because if a district works hard to implement the program, the dollars coming into the district is more, but this also means more work for the district.

Have a Merry Christmas!

Kip

[Melissa King]

Minnesota here: short answer yes. As you know it take a lot of time and effort to develop relationships and projects. We value that work and recognize that it is critical to implementing conservation practices. The Board of Water and Soil Resources has many grant programs (https://bwsr.state.mn.us/grants) that help cover the costs to do outreach to and engage landowners, provide that project development and technical assistance, conduct assessments to determine the best places to put the most effective projects, determine project feasibility, provide construction oversight, inspect completed project maintenance, etc. The type of work that may be eligible, varies on the specific grant program and that work can be completed by SWCD or local staff, or they can hire a consultant to help.

Most of our programs don’t have explicit caps limiting the amount that can be spent on administration, technical assistance, etc. However, we have standards across our programs for how staff need to track their time (https://bwsr.state.mn.us/time-and-effort-documentation), how billing rates are calculated (https://bwsr.state.mn.us/determining-billing-rate), and if folks use contractors/consultants, requirements for detailed invoices/receipts of that work.
Happy to chat more if helpful!
Melissa King

[Jake Wilson]

Our grants to districts are separate and independent (mostly) from the cost-share program. The state provides funding for a minimum of 1 full-time employee per district with the average district having two state funded employees. This includes a full salary and benefits package. We encourage districts to be productive by giving them more cost-share funding when they spend a 90% of their current allocation on a monthly basis. The state fully funds 274 district employee positions and this funding is not tied to the amount of work that they do, but cost-share output is considered when deciding whether to provide funding to refill vacancies.

[Savannah Howell]

The Arkansas Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Division doesn’t have a state funded cost share program but, we do use federal funds for cost share implementation. There isn’t a percentage amount but base it off of tasks completed and pay a certain amount per unit. This may include administrative functions such as reporting, newsletters, etc. or technical tasks such as writing farm plans, return visits, informative field days. The conservation district must send in copies of the reports, farm plans, sign-up sheet for field days, or anything else to try and show work was completed. Hope this gives some alternative ideas outside of percentage caps.

[Blair Gordon]

Hi John,

Here in Va we offer quiet a lot of support to our 47 SWCDs through an Administrative and Operation Grant and a Cost-Share and Technical Assistance Grant. Our Admin/Ops grant is to help cover the costs of business, like paying rent, bills, admin staff salary, etc. It is a flat amount of funding every year. The Cost-Share/TA grant covers the cost-share for practices implemented on the ground, and the TA is meant to help with expenses related to implementing the cost-share program, for example TA is used to cover salary for technical employees, training, equipment, etc. The Technical Assistance funding does fluctuate with the amount of cost-share each district is allocated. I’d be happy to send you copies of our policies and grant agreements that outline in detail how our funding is allocated to the SWCDs. Feel free to email me with that request or with any follow up questions you might have (blair.gordon@dcr.virginia.gov).

[Jean Fike]

In Washington we think about funding to help support Districts in implementing cost share and other on-the-ground work in three categories, technical assistance, overhead on staff time and core/foundational funding. We award up to 25% of the project cost for cost share and similar on-the-ground BMP implementation projects for what we call “technical assistance”. Technical assistance funding is designed to cover the kinds of items items you list, enroll participants, develop conservation plans, verify practice installation, or otherwise assist with implementation. Within that amount, most of which is direct-billed time, we allow districts to charge up to 25% for overhead. This overhead portion is unrestricted and generally used to cover costs associated with that employee’s work that aren’t captured in the composite rate (e.g. supervision, IT support, equipment and supplies, physical workspace etc.). Finally, to provide core/foundational funding districts also receive a grant we call “Implementation” which can be used for any need. That grant is currently at $117,823 per district per year. Districts use the implementation grant in a wide variety of ways including applying for grants, conducting elections, supporting their Board/staffing board meetings, website maintenance, financial reporting and audit requirements, recruiting and onboarding, legal advice not charged to grants, trainings and meetings not billable to grants, conducting general outreach in the community, building partnerships and maintaining compliance with a host of legal requirements. Some districts use a portion of their implementation grant for projects. Hope that helps, let us know if you’d like more information.

[Marcia Fox]

In Delaware, conservation districts receive 10% of the total award for administrative costs. This amount is charged to both state and federal dollars.

[Author]

Posts