NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration Partnership Grants

Full Announcement

NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY

---

Table of Contents
NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY ....................................................................................................................1
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................1
Full Text of Announcement ............................................................................................................................................2
I. Funding Opportunity Description ...........................................................................................................................2
II. Award Information ................................................................................................................................................6
III. Eligibility Information ..........................................................................................................................................7
IV. Application and Submission Information ............................................................................................................9
V. Application Review Information .........................................................................................................................20
VI. Award Administration Information ....................................................................................................................27
VII. Agency Contacts ...............................................................................................................................................32
VIII. Other Information ............................................................................................................................................32
Executive Summary
Federal Agency Name
Fisheries Habitat Conservation Program Office (HCPO)
Funding Opportunity Title
NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration Partnership Grants
Announcement Type
Competitive
Funding Opportunity Number
NOAA-NMFS-HCPO-2024-28122
Assistance Listing Number(s)
11.463
Dates
Applications will be accepted and considered on an annual basis, with due dates of October 28, 2024; September 5,
2025; and September 4, 2026. Applications for projects starting approximately October 1, 2025 must be received
through www.Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 28, 2024. To be considered for funding in
subsequent fiscal years, applications must be received by 11:59 p.m.on September 5, 2025 for projects starting on
approximately October 1, 2026, and September 4, 2026 for projects starting approximately October 1, 2027. The
earliest date for receipt of awards for this funding opportunity is anticipated to be October 1, 2025. Further
application details are provided in the announcement.
NOTE: We strongly encourage all prospective applicants to begin required registrations as early as possible.
Completing the required registrations can take six weeks or longer. Submission due dates will not be extended
because of registration delays. Submissions received after the due date will be considered late and will not be
accepted.
Applicant organizations and individuals must register for three different Federal systems prior to submitting an
application through Grants.gov (SAM.gov, eRA Commons, and Grants.gov). Applicant organizations and
individuals must first register with SAM.gov and obtain a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). After you obtain your
UEI, you can complete your Grants.gov and eRA Commons registrations concurrently.
NOAA NOFO Page 1 of 32

---

See Section IV(G) for detailed instructions on registration requirements. If you do not have access to the internet,
please contact the Agency Contacts listed in this NOFO for submission instructions.
Funding Opportunity Description
The principal objective of the NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration Partnership Grants competition is to
provide federal financial and technical assistance to habitat restoration projects that meet NOAA's mission to restore
coastal habitats and support the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)
(https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/documents/glri-action-plan-3-201910-30pp.pdf) goal to protect and
restore habitats to sustain healthy populations of native fish species in the eight U.S. Great Lakes states. Proposals
submitted under this solicitation will be evaluated based on alignment with our program priorities, including: 1)
contribution to GLRI Focus Area 1 (Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern) goals to implement management
actions within Areas of Concern (AOC), and 2) contribution to GLRI Focus Area 4 (Habitats and Species) goals to
restore habitat for native Great Lakes fish species whose populations have been impacted by habitat degradation.
Through this solicitation, we intend to address GLRI Focus Area 4 goals by prioritizing a subset of habitat
restoration projects identified by the Lake Committees as Environmental Priorities to meet fish community
objectives for Great Lakes fish species. Lake Committees are composed of senior officials from state, provincial,
and U.S. intertribal fishery agencies, convened by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Together, they are
responsible for managing the Lakes’ fisheries and developing plans and guidance to sustain healthy populations of
Great Lakes commercial and recreational fish species.
Applicants are encouraged to propose one or more projects that are identified on 1) an AOC management list and/or
2) a Lake Committee Environmental Priorities list. (Please see section I.B of this funding opportunity to see the
AOCs and Environmental Priorities that are prioritized in this competition). Proposed activities may include future
project development and feasibility studies; engineering and design; permitting; on-the-ground restoration; pre- and
post-removal implementation monitoring; stakeholder engagement, including in tribal, indigenous and underserved
communities; building the capacity of new and existing restoration partners to manage multi-faceted project design
and construction; and education and outreach. Applicants may therefore apply for funding to support all of these
activities; however, priority will be given to applications that include on-the-ground construction likely to occur
during the award period.
Proposals selected for funding through this solicitation will be funded through cooperative agreements. Multi-year
awards are expected to be funded in annual increments for up to three years. Applicants with multi-year projects
should propose estimated funding for the second and/or third years, which NOAA will consider when determining
the final amounts that may be provided in future years, pending future federal appropriations and progress towards
project milestones. NOAA anticipates typical federal funding for awards will range from $500,000 to $6 million
over one to three years. NOAA will not accept proposals with a federal funding request of less than $250,000 or
more than $30 million total over three years. NOAA anticipates up to $12 million will be available under this
announcement in Fiscal Year 2025 and that 5-10 awards will be made. Estimated funding in subsequent fiscal years
has not been determined; this announcement may be amended if estimates for future fiscal years become available.
Funds will be administered by the Community-based Restoration Program within the NOAA Office of Habitat
Conservation. Awards are dependent upon the amount of funds made available to NOAA for this purpose by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative in FY25 - FY27 budgets.
NOAA reserves the right to fund some and not all the proposed projects based on program priorities and funding
availability.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
A. Program Objective
NOAA NOFO Page 2 of 32

---

The principal objective of the NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration Partnerships Grants solicitation is to
provide federal financial and technical assistance to habitat restoration projects that meet NOAA's mission to restore
coastal habitats and support the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)
(https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/documents/glri-action-plan-3-201910-30pp.pdf) goal to protect and
restore habitats to sustain healthy populations of native fish species in the eight U.S. Great Lakes states. This
funding opportunity prioritizes habitat restoration projects identified in Section I.B. that aim to restore functional
coastal wetland, nearshore, and/or riverine habitats that support native fish migration, reproduction, growth, and/or
seasonal refuge for Great Lakes fish. Proposals submitted under this solicitation will be evaluated by how well they
demonstrate that the proposed habitat restoration actions will lead to significant and sustainable benefits for Great
Lakes native fish species.
B. Program Priorities
As stated above, the principal objective of the NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration Partnership Grants
solicitation is to support habitat restoration projects that contribute to NOAA and the GLRI priorities by restoring
habitat for native Great Lakes fish species whose populations have been impacted by habitat degradation.
Note: please see sections III.C. for information about ineligible restoration activities and IV.B for examples of
relevant habitat restoration projects that have been funded under this program.
Highest priority will be given to applications that address at least one of the following program priorities and
substantially contribute to GLRI goals, which are the basis for the Importance and Applicability evaluation criteria:
1. GLRI Focus Area 1 - Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern
Habitat restoration that contributes to implementing management actions in Areas of Concern.
2. GLRI Focus Area 4 - Habitat and Species
Through this competition we intend to address GLRI Focus Area 4 goals by prioritizing a subset of habitat
restoration projects identified by the Lake Committees as Environmental Priorities to meet fish community
objectives for Great Lakes fish species. Lake Committees are composed of senior officials from state, provincial,
and U.S. intertribal fishery agencies, convened by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Together, they are
responsible for managing the Lakes’ fisheries and developing plans and guidance to sustain healthy populations of
Great Lakes commercial and recreational fish species.
The subset prioritized for this competition is listed below:
Subset of Lake Superior Committee Environmental Priorities
-Hydrologic modification of unregulated tributary flows within the basin to provide minimum flows to meet
reproductive and early life-history requirements for brook trout. Specific focal areas to address hydrological
modifications that impact fish production include tributaries along the south shore of Lake Superior in Wisconsin
and on the Bayfield Peninsula.
-Habitat restoration in the St. Louis River and Bay area including restoration of connected coastal wetlands and
floodplains and enhancement of spawning habitat for additional lake sturgeon and walleye production.
-Protection of Buffalo Reef and nearshore areas in Traverse Bay from further encroachment of stamp sands, and
long-term mitigation.
NOAA NOFO Page 3 of 32

---

Subset of Lake Michigan Committee Environmental Priorities
-Reef restoration of degraded reef habitats, which provide critical spawning and nursery areas for multiple species of
common concern across Lake Michigan including lake trout, lake whitefish, and cisco. Specific focal areas to
implement reef restoration actions in Lake Michigan are in the Charlevoix/Harbor Springs, Michigan area. Reef
restoration projects that focus on restoring historic conditions using natural substrates are prioritized.
-Coastal wetland reconnection/restoration, softening of shorelines, and increasing submerged aquatic vegetation,
which provide critical spawning and/or nursery habitats for multiple species of common concern across Lake
Michigan, including lake sturgeon, lake whitefish, yellow perch, esocids, and centrarchids. Priority locations include
the western and eastern shorelines of Green Bay and the southern basin nearshore of Lake Michigan.
-Tributary connectivity/fish passage restoration is critical for providing access of adult species of common concern,
including lake sturgeon and lake whitefish, to reproductive and nursery habitat across the Lake Michigan Basin.
Consideration of sea lamprey control remains paramount for all tributary connectivity/fish passage restoration
projects. Specific locations where connectivity is limiting production of priority species includes: the Peshtigo River
and the Oconto River.
-In-stream habitat restoration is critical for providing suitable reproductive habitat for multiple species of common
concern, particularly lake sturgeon. Specific focal areas for in-stream habitat restoration include locations in the
Grand River, Michigan, particularly below the Sixth Street Dam.
Subset of Lake Huron Committee Environmental Priorities
-Reef restoration of degraded reef habitats, including mitigating impacts of sedimentation on reefs, which provide
critical spawning and nursery areas for multiple species of common concern across Lake Huron, are necessary for
the achievement and maintenance of self-sustaining populations of lake whitefish, cisco, lake trout, and walleye.
Reef restoration projects that focus on restoring historic conditions using natural substrates are prioritized. Specific
focal areas to implement reef restoration actions in Lake Huron include:
• The Thunder Bay Reefs, MI
• The Saginaw Bay Reefs, MI
• The Northern Main Basin region, MI
• Implementation of actions to address spawning habitat augmentation, sedimentation, and connected nursery
habitat restoration is critical to restore functional habitat and enhance fish production.
-Coastal wetland habitat restoration/reconnection, which will provide critical spawning and nursery habitats for
multiple species of common concern across Lake Huron, including esocids and walleye. Specific focal areas for
coastal wetland reconnection and restoration include locations in Saginaw Bay.
NOAA NOFO Page 4 of 32

---

-In-stream habitat restoration and enhancement that is critical for providing suitable reproductive habitat for multiple
species of common concern, particularly lake sturgeon and walleye.
Subset of Lake Erie Committee Environmental Priorities
-Regional nutrient reduction strategies to reduce phosphorus loading and achieve mesotrophic conditions in the
western, central, and nearshore waters of the eastern basins and embayments. The Maumee River watershed is a
focal area for nutrient reduction strategies. Projects that improve water quality through the creation or enhancement
of fish habitat, such as coastal wetland restoration and floodplain reconnection, are eligible. See section III.C. for
examples of ineligible activities.
-Increase connectivity of select tributaries where connectivity is limiting production of fish community objective
species including: Black River, MI – Wingford Dam and Huron River, MI – Flat Rock Dam/Huroc Dam.
-Increase shoreline/nearshore complexity through softening of shorelines, rehabilitation of connected coastal
wetlands, and increases in submerged aquatic vegetation. Specific locations where shoreline alterations (hardening,
diking, etc.) are limiting production of fish community objective species include:
• Sandusky Bay
• Huron-Erie Corridor
• Grand River, OH
• St. Clair River Delta
Subset of Lake Ontario Committee Fish Habitat Priorities
-Enhance or restore effective upstream passage for adult Atlantic Salmon to allow access to spawning and juvenile
rearing habitat.
-Restore nearshore open coast, cold-water spawning and nursery habitat for Lake Trout, Whitefish and Cisco.
-Restore degraded stream habitat to improve reproductive capacity in streams that are managed for wild fish
production. Priority activities include:
• Install riverbank stabilization/fish habitat improvement structures and instream flow enhancement features
for Atlantic Salmon on the Salmon River (system-wide) including Trout and Orwell brooks.
• Add spawning substrate (gravel) for Walleye and Lake Sturgeon downstream of Dexter Dam on the Black
River.
-Restore the ecological function of coastal wetlands to enhance Northern Pike, Muskellunge and other members of
the wetland-dependent fish community. Priority actions include:
• Complete level ditching and potholing to increase fish spawning and nursery habitat in coastal wetlands,
including Lakeview Wildlife Management Area, Port Bay, and Sodus Bay.
• Promote restoration and rehabilitation of lost coastal wetlands.
NOAA is committed to the goals of advancing equity and support for tribal, indigenous, and underserved
communities. Applicants should identify if the project is to be carried out in full or in part by a tribal government; if
the project is located within tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities; and/or whether a portion of the
resilience benefits from the proposed work will flow to tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities. This is a
Justice40 covered program, and applicants should review Section IV.B. “Project Narrative” for information
pertaining to the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) to assist in identifying disadvantaged
communities.
NOAA NOFO Page 5 of 32

---

NOAA is also committed to enhancing community resilience to extreme weather and climate hazards and providing
other co-benefits. Applicants should describe how the proposed work will benefit human populations within or near
the project site(s), and how these actions will reduce vulnerability to the climate hazards that are most threatening to
the local communities. Applicants may also describe how the proposed work will enhance the ability to plan and
prepare for adverse effects of extreme weather events or climate hazards or provide additional co-benefits to the
community (e.g., economic vitality, increased access to natural resources).
The following definitions of key terms apply to this funding opportunity.
• Ecosystem resilience. This term refers to the capacity of an ecosystem to absorb, withstand, respond to,
and/or recover rapidly from disturbances linked to extreme weather events and climate hazards. Resilient
ecosystems can resist damage from extreme weather events or climate hazards, while retaining or having
the ability to recover their inherent structure and ecological function.
• Community resilience. This term refers to the capacity of a human community to withstand, respond to,
and/or recover rapidly from disturbances linked to extreme weather events and climate hazards.
Community resilience can also include the ability to plan and prepare for adverse effects of extreme
weather events or climate hazards, and the capacity to adapt to changing environmental conditions.
• Underserved communities. This term refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as
geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of
economic, social, and civic life. Underserved communities are defined in Executive Order 13985:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racialequity-and-support-
for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government.
• Co-benefits of restoration. This term refers to the multiple benefits of restoration that extend beyond
biologically relevant benefits to target species. This may include: contributions to ecosystem and
community resilience; increases in business opportunities; revitalization of public communities;
improvements in access to recreational, subsistence, and/or culturally important fishing opportunities;
reductions to safety hazards; and/or reductions in operation and maintenance costs. Co-benefits are often
measured through socioeconomic methods.
C. Program Authority
The Secretary of Commerce is authorized under the following statutes to provide grants and cooperative agreements
for habitat restoration and conservation: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 16 U.S.C. 661, as amended by the
Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970.
Under 33 U.S.C. § 893a(a), the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is
authorized to conduct and support formal and informal educational activities at all levels to enhance public
awareness and understanding of ocean and coastal science and stewardship by the general public and other coastal
stakeholders, including underrepresented groups in ocean science careers. In conducting those activities, the
Administrator shall build upon the educational programs and activities of the agency with consideration given to the
goal of promoting the participation of minorities in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields.
II. Award Information
A. Funding Availability
NOAA anticipates typical federal funding for awards will range from $500,000 to $5 million over one to three years.
NOAA will not accept proposals with a federal funding request of less than $250,000 or more than $30 million total
over three years. NOAA anticipates up to $12 million will be available under this Announcement in Fiscal Year
2025 and that 5-10 awards will be made. Awards are dependent upon the amount of funds made available to NOAA
for this purpose by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative in
FY25 - FY27 budgets. Estimated funding in subsequent fiscal years has not been determined; this announcement
may be amended if estimates for future fiscal years become available.
NOAA NOFO Page 6 of 32

---

Funds will be administered by the Community-based Restoration Program within the NOAA Office of Habitat
Conservation. The exact amount of funds that may be awarded will be determined in pre-award negotiations
between the applicant and NOAA. Any funds provided to successful applicants for subsequent-year funding requests
will be determined by progress towards stated milestones and availability of funding at the discretion of the NOAA
Office of Habitat Conservation and the NOAA Grants Management Division (GMD).
NOAA or the Department of Commerce are not responsible for direct costs of application preparation if programs
fail to receive funding or are canceled because of other agency priorities, or for any other reason. Publication of this
announcement does not oblige NOAA to award any specific project or to obligate any available funds. There is no
guarantee that sufficient funds will be available to make awards for all top-ranked applications. The number of
awards to be made as a result of this solicitation will depend on the number of eligible applications received, the
amount of funds requested for habitat restoration, the merit and ranking of the applications, and the amount of
federal appropriations made available in FY25 and subsequent fiscal years. NOAA reserves the right to fund some
and not all the proposed projects based on program priorities and funding availability.
B. Project/Award Period
NOAA anticipates that the period of performance for most awards will be for up to 3 years. Award periods may be
extended, at the discretion of NOAA and based on project needs, up to the extent legally allowable. This is typically
a maximum award length of five years. The earliest anticipated start date for awards will be October 1, 2025. Both
federal and non-federal match pre-award costs will be considered during pre-award negotiations between the
applicant and NOAA. Incurring pre-award costs before NOAA GMD offers a grant is at the applicant's own risk.
C. Type of Funding Instrument
Selected applications will be funded through cooperative agreements, as defined in 2 C.F.R. Sec 200.1, meaning that
NOAA expects to be substantially involved in many aspects of the awards. Substantial involvement may include,
but is not limited to, collaboration on the scope of work, providing assistance with technical aspects of the habitat
restoration project, review and comment on design plans, and review of procurement materials to the extent
authorized by 2 C.F.R. Sec. 200.323.
III. Eligibility Information
A. Eligible Applicants
Eligible applicants are institutions of higher education, non-profits, commercial (for profit) organizations, U.S.
territories, and state, local and Native American tribal governments. Applications from federal agencies or
employees of federal agencies will not be considered. Federal agencies are strongly encouraged to work with states,
non- governmental organizations, municipal and county governments, and others that are eligible to apply. Eligible
applicants may be located anywhere but must propose work within the Great Lakes basin and within one of the eight
U.S. Great Lakes states (New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota).
NOTE: We strongly encourage all prospective applicants to begin required registrations as early as possible.
Completing the required registrations can take six weeks or longer. Submission due dates will not be extended
because of registration delays. Submissions received after the due date will be considered late and will not be
accepted.
Applicant organizations and individuals must register for three different Federal systems prior to submitting an
application through Grants.gov (SAM.gov, eRA Commons, and Grants.gov).
Registration Requirements: Applicant organizations and individuals must first register with SAM.gov and obtain a
Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). After you obtain your UEI, you can complete your Grants.gov and eRA Commons
registrations concurrently.
NOAA NOFO Page 7 of 32

---

See Section IV(G) for detailed instructions on required registrations. If you do not have access to the internet, please
contact the Agency Contacts listed in this NOFO for submission instructions.
B. Cost Share or Matching Requirement
There is no statutory matching requirement for this funding. Though not required, applicants are strongly
encouraged to combine NOAA federal funding with formal matching contributions or informal leverage from a
broad range of sources in the public and private sectors. Non-federal match funds may be optionally included within
the application to demonstrate stakeholder support for the proposed work. NOAA also desires cost sharing or
leverage to encourage partnerships among government, community, industry, and academia. To this end, applicants
should note that cost sharing or leverage is an element considered in the Evaluation Criteria under "Project Costs"
(Section V.A.4).
Match is entered on federal forms, recorded on award documents, and becomes a legally binding component of the
award. Leverage refers to all other funding support that contributes to completion of the project(s). Leverage can
include funds expended toward the project(s) either before or during the award period. Federal sources cannot be
considered for formal matching funds, but can be described in the budget narrative to demonstrate additional
leverage and collaboration. Formal match to NOAA funds can come from a variety of public and private sources and
can include third party in-kind goods and services and volunteer labor. Applicants should refer to 2 C.F.R. § 200.306
for explanations of match funds, which must be used during the award period, generally.
Applicants whose proposals are selected for funding will be bound by the percentage of match reflected in the award
document signed by NOAA's Grants Management Division, unless amended based on extenuating circumstances.
NOAA is under no obligation to amend the matching contributions once agreed to by the recipient. Successful
applicants should be prepared to carefully document matching contributions, including the overall number of
volunteers and third party in-kind participation hours devoted to habitat restoration projects. Applicants are
permitted to combine contributions from non-federal partners, as long as such contributions are not used to match
any other federal funds and are available within the project period stated in the application. Letters of commitment
for any secured resources that will be used as non-federal match for an award under this solicitation should be
submitted as an attachment to the application (see Section IV.B).
C. Other Criteria that Affect Eligibility
Application submission time should be documented by the applicant by electronic submission to Grants.gov, a U.S.
Postal Service postmark, or a delivery service receipt. Applicants should consider the possibility of unforeseen
impacts from natural hazards that could affect internet access and use of Grants.gov on or before application due
dates. Applicants should be aware that localized hazardous weather, monthly scheduled Grants.gov weekend
maintenance, or other situations that impact the ability to submit application packages may not result in changes to
the recommended application deadline. Information regarding electronic submission through Grants.gov and
regarding submitting paper applications is contained in Section IV.G. All applications MUST contain ALL required
forms and proposals will be reviewed for eligibility, completeness, and responsiveness to this funding
announcement. Failure to submit forms may result in disqualification from this competition. See Section IV.G for
more details.
The following information describes ineligible project proposal types and activities:
Activities that are required by a separate local, state, or federal consent decree, court order, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) exemption or license condition, statute, or regulation are not eligible. Applicants
planning to combine grant or matching funds with mitigation should review the Compensatory Mitigation for Losses
of Aquatic Resources Final Rule at 73 Fed. Reg. 19594 (April 10, 2008). NOAA plans to follow the approach
adopted by some other federal agencies on Page 19636 that describes scenarios where mitigation credits may or may
not be obtained in association with federal financial incentives.
NOAA NOFO Page 8 of 32

---

Effectiveness monitoring and research are not eligible project types. See Section IV.B and V.A.2 for more
information on eligible monitoring.
Ineligible activities related to water quality improvements include, but are not limited to, proposals addressing hard
infrastructure only for water quality improvement, wastewater treatment plant upgrades, elimination of combined
sewer outfalls, replacement of failing septic systems and implementation of agricultural animal waste management
plans. However, projects that improve water quality through the creation or enhancement of fish habitat, such as
coastal wetlands, are eligible.
Proposals that focus only on marine debris prevention and removal are not eligible.
Proposals that focus on acquisition of real property are not eligible.
Proposals that focus on beach renourishment solely for recreational purposes are not eligible.
Projects seeking funds only for invasive species removal and management will also not be considered under this
solicitation. However, NOAA may fund invasive species removal as a component of an overall habitat restoration
project proposal.
Reef restoration projects that propose the use of molluscicides only are not eligible.
IV. Application and Submission Information
A. Address to Request Application Package
Complete application packages, including required federal forms and instructions, can be found on
www.Grants.gov. If a prospective applicant is having difficulty downloading the application forms from
www.Grants.gov, contact www.Grants.gov Customer Support at 1-800-518-4726 or support@Grants.gov. If an
applicant does not have internet access, application materials may be requested from Rina Studds by e-mail at
rina.studds@noaa.gov or phone (301) 427-8651 and Julie Simmons by email at julie.simmons@noaa.gov or by
phone (734) 680-5671.
B. Content and Form of Application
A complete, standard NOAA financial assistance application package should be submitted, as described below. See
section IV.A. for submission information.
Each proposal must include the following Federal application forms:

Standard Form (SF)-424: Application for Federal Assistance. The SF-424 form family may be downloaded from

https://www.grants.gov/forms/forms-repository/sf-424-family.

SF-424A: Budget Information for Non-construction Programs. (An SF-424A for each year of requested funding

will be required prior to an award offer, but is not required as part of the initial application.)

Project Abstract Summary form

SF-424B: Assurances for Non-construction Programs

CD-511: Certification Regarding Lobbying

SF-LLL (if applicable): Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

NOAA NOFO Page 9 of 32

---

In addition to the federal application forms, NOAA recommends the following components as part of a complete
application package. Page limits assume an 11- or 12-point font and 1-inch margins. Components should be
organized into a maximum of three flattened PDF files outlined below, with a maximum length of 75 combined
pages. It is recommended that file sizes not exceed 100MB in order to preserve the applicant’s formatting.
Additional information on formatting attachments can be found here: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-
application-guide/format-and-write/format-attachments.htm

Project Summary, Project Narrative, and Data Management Plan (20 page limit)

Budget Justification (10 page limit)

Supplemental Materials and project design (45 page limit)

Reviewers will only evaluate the first 75 pages of the submitted materials. The application should follow the
organization of the evaluation criteria (see Section V.A) to receive a consistent review against competing
applications. The information provided below may help to address the evaluation criteria.
Proposals that include multiple restoration sites should fully describe the proposed restoration activities at each site.
If all project(s) details cannot be described within the recommended page limits, applicants should consider
submitting more than one application.
Project summary (2 page limit):
We recommend you provide a summary with the following components:
-Applicant Organization
-Project Title
-Site Location: Include the geographic coordinates and the nearest town or watershed. If multiple sites are proposed,
please include the geographic coordinates for all sites.
Brief Project Description: Describe the extent to which the proposed work aligns with the stated program objective
(Section I.A) and program priorities (Section I.B). The description should outline the expected benefits for the target
species or fisheries, and how ecosystem resilience will be strengthened. Explain how your proposed work will
enhance community resilience to climate hazards. Describe the proposed work within the context of the landscape,
watershed, or other geographically defined boundary. The description should identify how the restoration aligns
with comprehensive planning documents or other relevant resources, and if the proposed actions demonstrate high
priority and transformative potential within the geographic area. Identify if the project is located within tribal,
indigenous, and/or underserved communities and/or whether a portion of the resilience benefits from the proposed
work will flow to tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities.
Timeline: Provide a timeline of all project activities to be supported with federal and/or non-federal matching funds,
including an indication of when activities will begin.
Landowner(s): Include name and address (if privately owned) or public agency contact for each proposed project.
Funding Request: Outline the total request for NOAA funds for each year of the project period. If non-federal
matching contributions are proposed, include the status of the funds (e.g., not applied for; pending; secured). If other
financial support beyond NOAA federal funds and non-federal match funds will be used to complete the proposed
work, outline the sources and amount of these leveraged funds. If you have submitted (or plan to submit) your
proposal to other relevant funding opportunities, please identify the funding source and/or title(s) of the
competition(s), amount of funds requested, and approximate decision date(s) for anticipated award selection. If
space is limited, provide a summary here and include a full description in the Supplemental Materials.
NOAA NOFO Page 10 of 32

---

Project Narrative (18 page limit): Provide sufficient background and contextual information for reviewers to
independently assess the significance of the proposed project(s). The application should generally follow the
organization of the Evaluation Criteria (see Section V.A) to receive a consistent review against competing
applications. The information provided below is intended to help applicants address the evaluation criteria.
Relevance to Program Priorities: Describe how the proposed projects will deliver meaningful results that are
relevant to GLRI Action Plan III Focus Area 1 and/or 4 goals to restore habitat for native Great Lakes fish species
whose populations have been impacted by habitat degradation. As described in Section I.B, through this solicitation
we intend to address GLRI Focus Area 1 and 4 goals by prioritizing habitat restoration projects in a subset of
priority Areas of Concern and/or projects identified by the Lake Committees to meet fish community objectives for
native Great Lakes species. The narrative should explicitly describe how the proposed project(s) addresses the
Priorities. For full points, a letter of endorsement from the relevant Lake Committee representative or AOC Public
Advisory Council (PAC), as appropriate, should be submitted for all proposed projects.
The narrative should succinctly describe the historic and current condition of the restoration site(s) and the habitat-
based issue(s) that is the primary focus of the proposal. Describe any processes that have resulted in degradation of
the habitat and how these processes have been abated to allow for successful restoration. Identify one or more
species targeted by the proposed habitat restoration, their historic and current status or population estimates, and the
project(s)’ expected benefits on the target species and ecosystems. The narrative should describe the project’s
context within the ecosystem, including how it complements other nearby restoration efforts, as appropriate.
Applicants may also explain why the proposed work is meaningful within the selected geographic region.
Applicants should refer to watershed plans or other fishery-related strategic planning, conservation, or management
documents, as appropriate to the proposed work. Proposals should identify how the restoration aligns with
comprehensive planning documents or other relevant resources, and if the proposed actions demonstrate high
priority and transformative potential within the defined geographic area. Proposals that include multiple sites should
demonstrate how projects collectively contribute to the priorities within the same geographic area or watershed.
Applicants should also include the number of acres to be restored and/or stream miles to be made accessible to fish
through the proposed activities and any other anticipated long-term ecological benefits, so that reviewers can
understand the scale and meaning of your proposed project in the context of the watershed. Please indicate how the
anticipated benefits and quantitative performance measures have been determined (e.g., ground-truthing, desktop
assessment).
Enhancing Community Resilience to Climate Hazards and Providing Other Co-benefits: Applicants should describe
how the proposed habitat restoration will benefit human populations within or near the project site(s), and how
habitat restoration actions will promote resilience to the climate hazards that are most threatening to the local
communities. Applicants may also describe how the proposed work will enhance the ability to plan and prepare for
adverse effects of extreme weather events or climate hazards. Examples of co-benefits include, but are not limited
to: protection from flooding and extreme weather events; reduction in erosion impacts; increases in job
opportunities; improvements in access to recreational, subsistence, and cultural fishing opportunities; and creation of
public spaces.
Proposals should include descriptions of anticipated resilience benefits and other co-benefits that will result from
habitat restoration within the spatial and temporal context of the proposed activities. Co-benefits are defined in
Section I.B.
NOAA NOFO Page 11 of 32

---

Proposals may include specific metrics within the Project Narrative to capture the impact or scale of the proposed
work on community resilience and other expected co-benefits such as public safety or community enhancement.
Public safety benefits may include infrastructure improvements, removal of physical hazards, or flood risk
reduction, with potential metrics such as: number of structures improved; number of structures protected from
flooding or storm surge; or changes in flood heights. Community enhancement benefits may include recreational or
economic improvements, with potential metrics such as number of new recreational access points or avoided or
reduced maintenance costs. For more information on developing socioeconomic performance metrics for restoration
projects, applicants should visit: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/funding-financial-services/program-
priorities-habitat-restoration-grants.
Providing Benefit to Tribal, Indigenous, and/or Underserved Communities, Including Through Partnerships:
Applicants should identify if the proposed work is to be carried out in full or in part by a tribal government or if the
project is located within a tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved community. Applicants should indicate whether a
portion of the resilience benefits from the proposed work will flow to tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved
communities and how those benefits will be measured.
As needed, to assist with identifying and assessing the marginalized, underserved, and underrepresented
communities that are connected to their proposed restoration actions, NOAA encourages the use of the Climate &
Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) (at https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#3/33.47/-97.5) as the
primary mapping tool. Applicants are encouraged to use the information available through CEJST, other relevant
tools, and direct engagement of tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities to assist in assessing how the
benefits of a project will reverse or mitigate the burdens of disadvantage.
Technical/Scientific Merit: As noted above, this funding opportunity prioritizes habitat restoration projects identified
in Section I.B. Proposals should describe in detail the actions to be undertaken.
Project Feasibility and Methodology: Applicants should provide evidence to support the feasibility of the
techniques, and address whether the methods are technically sound and safe for the public. Proposals that include
multiple sites should describe the restoration methods for each location. For each restoration site, applicants should
clearly identify the project phase(s) (e.g., feasibility study, engineering and design, on-the-ground implementation)
and the proposed restoration techniques.
Project Detail: The project narrative should include a timeline with key milestones and deliverables identified and
detail how the actions will be completed within the specified time period (a gantt chart or other chart is helpful to
include). If multiple restoration sites are included within one proposal, the proposed actions should be fully
described for each site. Applicants should identify interim milestones that correspond to funding year increments.
This includes identifying all consultation and permitting requirements and the current document status (e.g. not
applied for, pending, secured), and incorporating the likely award start date and species-specific work windows. For
projects with permits or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents completed or under development,
please indicate the status and level of NEPA review (Categorical Exclusion, Environmental Assessment, or
Environmental Impact Statement), lead federal agency, contact information for the lead agency person, and where
public copies of the document are available. See also Section VI.B. of this announcement.
Note: Federally funded projects are subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
Applicants are advised to include a sufficient budget request to provide NOAA with required information to meet
NHPA requirements and consultations with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Refer to your state's
SHPO office for more details on SHPO review requirements.
Suggested details to include in your proposal, by restoration activity:
NOAA NOFO Page 12 of 32

---

-Hydrologic restoration (modification) reverses the negative impacts to habitat function created by restricting or
changing surface water flow. Examples include restoring water elevations and flow through fill removal, culvert
removal/replacement to allow natural flooding of wetlands, complete removal of levees and dikes or other
impediments to historic/natural flow or hydrology, floodplain reconnection, or creation/restoration of off-channel
habitats. Priority will be given to projects that restore habitat that previously existed. Applicants proposing to install
structures such as fish passage devices or water control structures should include discussion of an operation and
management plan that specifies the entity responsible for the operation and maintenance of the structure(s) and how
they will be operated and maintained throughout the life of the structure(s) to ensure lasting habitat benefits.
Applicants should also describe measures that will be put in place to prevent filling of the flood storage area
upstream of new or modified water control structures.
-Fish passage projects remove barriers that prevent native Great Lakes fish from accessing spawning habitats and
create or improve habitat to support the growth of juvenile fish. Priority will be given to fish passage/barrier
removal projects that directly benefit native Great Lakes migratory fisheries by providing free and open passage
from spawning grounds to the open lake environment. These projects include, but are not limited to, dam removals
and/or culvert removals and replacement with bottomless arch culverts or bridges, fish ladders, by-pass channels,
and/or nature-like fishways. Fish passage project applications should describe the significance of the project to
historical fish populations in the river, identify the river length that will be restored, the distance to the next
upstream blockage, any downstream blockages or seasonal impediments to fish passage, and whether the target
barrier is a partial or complete barrier. Applications should state how the project will meet fish passage guidelines
for the area, and identify and provide documentation of support for the project from the landowner/dam owner.
Applications should highlight any synergies with other fish passage efforts in the watershed, including fish passage
improvements at hydropower dams. Fish passage projects proposing to install fish passage devices or movable
control structures should submit a summary management plan that specifies the entity responsible for the operation
and maintenance of the structure(s) and how they will be operated and maintained throughout the life of the
structure(s) to ensure lasting habitat benefits. All types of fish passage projects should address issues and potential
control strategies regarding aquatic invasive species (e.g., sea lamprey). If a project is proposing fish passage,
include appropriate documentation demonstrating consultation with and support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Sea Lamprey Control Program.
-Shoreline/nearshore restoration may include removing fill and debris, removing hardened structures, stabilizing the
shoreline with natural materials and vegetation, installing nearshore rock reefs, and/or restoring spawning beds.
Applications should describe the significance of the fish habitat in the area including desired function (e.g., shallow
water nursery habitat), historic conditions and materials to be used. Proposals should highlight synergies with other
fish habitat efforts in the watershed. NOAA prioritizes reef restoration projects that restore historic conditions and/or
complement previous or planned habitat restoration efforts and that use natural substrates (e.g., gravel, cobble,
woody debris, plant material). Reef restoration projects that propose the use of molluscicides only are not eligible.
As noted above, proposals that include multiple restoration sites should fully describe the proposed restoration
activities at each site within the project narrative section. If all aspects of a multi-year and/or multi-project award
cannot be described within the recommended page limits, applicants should consider submitting more than one
application.
For feasibility or design projects, applicants should: describe the overall habitat restoration need and goals of the
feasibility and design activities; provide justification for potential design alternatives, if known (e.g., technique is
appropriate and proven as demonstrated by similar successful projects, approach is comprehensive); discuss
expected outcomes; list members of the planning team including NOAA staff and provide the decision framework;
and discuss how support for the proposed activity would catalyze subsequent on-the-ground restoration.
NOAA NOFO Page 13 of 32

---

Sustainability: The narrative should describe future management, beyond the award period, including mechanisms to
protect, maintain, or sustain the restoration site(s) so the effects of the funded project(s) can benefit the target
species and habitat into the future. If applicable, a description of a landowner agreement may contribute to this
element. For new or replacement structures, the estimated design life of a project should be noted, including any
factors (such as changing weather patterns) that may shorten the expected functional life of the project. Applicants
should also describe how the proposed restoration design, methodology, and techniques provide for ecosystem
resilience to extreme weather events, self-sustaining habitats, or adaptation to potential climate change impacts at
the project site. An operations and maintenance plan should be considered when applicants are proposing to install
structures that require ongoing operation and maintenance in order to be effective, such as fish passage devices,
fishways, or tide gates. The proposal should include discussion of an operations and management plan that specifies
the entity responsible for the structure(s) and how they will be operated and maintained throughout the life of the
structure(s) to ensure lasting habitat benefits.
Project Assessment: Applicants should describe the habitat-based metrics or other quantitative performance
measures that will be used to evaluate the success of the proposed restoration actions. Specifically, on-the-ground
restoration projects should include ecological targets that can be evaluated within approximately one-year post
implementation. Proposals that focus solely on pre-implementation activities, such as planning, feasibility, and/or
engineering and design, should include baseline monitoring. Proposals requesting funding for on-the-ground
implementation activities should include a Monitoring Plan (2 page limit) as part of the Supplemental Materials.
Applicants should be willing to work with NOAA to adjust planned monitoring activities, if necessary, to ensure that
the proposed parameters are appropriate and meet the requirements below. Proposals that include one of the NOAA
Restoration Center’s primary restoration methods (e.g., hydrologic restoration, fish passage) should incorporate the
applicable implementation monitoring parameters found in the NOAA Restoration Center Implementation
Monitoring (Tier 1) Guidance. The guidance document provides an overview of the preferred structure for
Monitoring Plans. The monitoring guidance and regional contact persons can be found at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/monitoring-and-evaluation-restoration-projects.
Proposals that do NOT include one of the NOAA Restoration Center’s primary restoration methods named above
should propose sufficient, cost-effective monitoring metrics that will assess whether the restoration actions were
carried out as designed. Proposals should: 1) include parameters that evaluate short-term structural changes at the
project site(s) (e.g., as-built surveys), and may also include a basic measure of success (e.g., presence/absence of
target species); 2) propose pre-implementation data collection, when applicable; 3) include parameters with
quantitative or clearly defined targets; and 4) include parameters with targets that can be evaluated within
approximately one year after project implementation. While the NOAA Office of Habitat Conservation values
effectiveness monitoring and research, funds are not included within this solicitation to support these efforts.
Effectiveness monitoring examines how well the project performs, is longer-term than implementation monitoring,
and often requires detailed field investigations of multiple physical, biological, and geochemical processes.
Proposals for effectiveness monitoring that do not qualify for other NOAA competitive funding may be eligible for
NOAA’s Broad Agency Announcement, posted on Grants.gov.
Data Management Plan: Proposals submitted in response to this announcement should include a Data Management
Plan. NOAA provides the following Data Management Guidance for this program. The Data Management Plan
should follow the Guidance for Data Management Plans at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-
conservation/resources-noaa-restoration-center-applicants#restoration-monitoring-and-data-management. A typical
plan should include descriptions of the types of environmental data and information expected to be created during
the course of the project; the tentative date by which data will be shared; the standards to be used for data/metadata
format and content; methods for providing data access; approximate total volume of data to be collected; and prior
experience in making such data accessible. The costs of data preparation, accessibility, or archiving may be included
in the proposal budget. Accepted submission of data to the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information
(NCEI) is one way to satisfy data sharing requirements; however, NCEI is not obligated to accept all submissions
and may charge a fee, particularly for large or unusual datasets. Final Data Management Plans may be developed in
coordination with NOAA as part of NOAA’s substantial involvement, as described in Section II.C. See also Section
VI.B.of this Announcement. The contact officials for data management guidance are listed in Section VII. of this
Announcement. NOAA’s Data and Publication Sharing Directive for NOAA Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and
Contracts is available at https://nosc.noaa.gov/EDMC/PD.DSP.php.
NOAA NOFO Page 14 of 32

---

Overall Qualification of Applicant
Restoration and Conservation Qualifications: Within the project narrative, applicants should describe the restoration
and conservation qualifications of the project team (staff and/or partners), including experience with planning,
design, engineering, implementation, and/or monitoring for habitat restoration projects. Resumes or curriculum vitae
(CVs) for up to five (5) key personnel should be included within Supplemental Materials, and the documents should
highlight relevant education, experiences, and training.
Management Capacity: Within the project narrative, applicants should describe the project team’s ability to
successfully manage a federal award. Applicants should demonstrate a strong capacity to maintain financial and
administrative records and fulfill reporting requirements. Within the attached resumes or CVs, applicants should
highlight relevant experience with management of federal funds or other significant grant awards. Applicants should
address whether the project team has the capacity to complete the proposed work on time, even in the face of
adverse conditions.
Project Costs: Applicants should follow the guidance provided under Budget Narrative below.
Outreach and Education:
Stakeholder Support: NOAA encourages robust public support for restoration projects, as evidenced by letters from
a diverse range of participants and partners. A diverse range of groups may include community associations, local
environmental justice organizations, business / agricultural groups, adjacent landowners, and state, local, and tribal
governments. If landowner support is essential to implementing the restoration actions, a letter of support or
permission should be included. Applicants should indicate which letters, if any, are from identified underserved
communities or tribes. Support letters should also note their relationship to the proposed project. Letters of
stakeholder support (and landowner support, if applicable) should be included in Supplemental Materials.
Community Outreach and Education: Applicants should describe the strategy to share information and educate the
public about the restoration actions. Strategies may include, but are not limited to: various formats of outreach
content (e.g., signage, newsletters, online content); materials in multiple languages, if applicable; events and
volunteer opportunities for community members; informal education and mentoring for interns or early career
professionals, including those from underrepresented groups in environmental science and policy careers;
opportunities for press visits; or other outreach that encourages support for restoration and environmental
stewardship. Applicants should consider collaborating with local community members to incorporate volunteer,
education, and/or hands-on opportunities for their communities.
Budget Justification (10 page limit)
Reviewers will evaluate project costs by reviewing your budget justification. If requesting funds for a multi-year
proposal, award costs should be broken into annual/interim funding requests up to three years in duration, based on
logical milestones in the implementation plan. For instance, a proposal request might include a request for a project's
design costs in year one, estimated construction costs needed in year two, and estimated post-project monitoring
costs in year three. Another example would be a project that requests construction costs for discrete sites in each
year of a multi-year award. One, two, or three-year proposals will be accepted. Please note, the total proposed over
three years sets an award maximum, and final award funding can not exceed the amount identified for all years in
the original proposal.
NOAA NOFO Page 15 of 32

---

The budget justification should break project costs out into the following categories: Personnel, Fringe Benefits,
Travel, Equipment, Supplies, Contractual, Other, and Indirect Charges, and these totals should also be recorded on
the SF-424A (see also https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/s3/2023-08/Supplemental-Application-Instructions-and-
Budget-Guidance.pdf#page=11). For projects with contractual components, applicants must follow procurement
standards set forth in 2 C.F.R. § 200.317-200.327. If the proposal is considered for funding, NOAA Grants
Management Division reviewers will be looking for information on the procurement methods used for each contract,
as defined in 2 C.F.R. § 200.320. Applicants are encouraged to provide separate budgets for each contract and they
must provide budgets for each contract in excess of $250,000, to determine whether proposed costs are reasonable,
necessary, allowable, and allocable. For contracts that are not yet in place at the time of submitting the proposal, the
budget narrative must include an explanation of how contractual costs were estimated and what procurement
methods they will use to select contractors. Another note is that you should consider costs associated with the Build
America, Buy America Act (See Section VI.B). We suggest that you reach out to a Manufacturing Extension
Partnership early, to help source USA made materials if needed.
If NOAA funding will be used to complete part of a larger project, a budget overview for the entire project should
be provided to demonstrate how the NOAA request relates to the overall project budget and is needed for successful
project implementation. If the project has been submitted for funding consideration elsewhere, the amount(s)
requested or secured from other funding sources, and whether the funds requested/secured are federal or non-federal,
should be included. The applicant should provide an estimate of all monitoring-related costs within the proposed
budget.
Applicants should clearly indicate if funds are proposed as official, non-federal match, or if the funds are informal
leverage. Applicants should refer to 2 C.F.R. § 200.306 for explanations of match funds, which must generally be
used during the award period. Match is entered on federal forms, recorded on award documents, and becomes a
legally binding component of the award. Leverage refers to all other funding support that contributes to completion
of the project(s). Leverage can include funds expended toward the project(s) either before or during the award
period. Applicants should include descriptions and documentation regarding match and/or leverage, as appropriate.
The NOAA Restoration Center has provided guidance regarding the level of detail required to determine if costs are
allowable, allocable, reasonable, necessary, and realistic in the “Supplemental Instructions” at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/resources-noaa-restoration-center-applicants
Supplemental Materials (45 page limit)
All supplemental attachments should be combined into one file that includes a list of the documents and associated
page numbers. The following documents may be included:
-If available, project designs should be included in the application in order for reviewers to comprehensively assess
the technical merit of the proposed restoration action(s). Relevant sections of construction specifications, scopes of
work for services, and cost estimates may also be provided. Please do not attach feasibility studies or watershed
plans. The critical components of those documents should be summarized in the Project Narrative. Please remember
that reviewers will only evaluate a maximum of 75 pages for each application package.

Include a map or aerial photo with nearby towns and/or roads labeled and with the site location(s) highlighted;

Include brief resumes or curriculum vitae (CV) for up to three (3) key personnel (maximum of 1 page per person)

and any examples of projects similar in scope and nature that have been successfully completed by the project team;

Federally Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreements (NICRA);

Adaptive management plan, and/or long term maintenance plan(s);

Monitoring plan;

Site photos;

NOAA NOFO Page 16 of 32

---

• Include any other relevant supporting materials, such as letters of support:
• Letter from relevant Lake Committee representatives from the jurisdiction from where the project is proposed indicating that the proposed project meets the objectives of the Lake Committee Environmental Priorities, as appropriate. • Letter from relevant Public Advisory Council or state agency responsible for implementing the AOC program indicating that the proposed project is on a management action list for the target Area of Concern, as appropriate. • If a project is proposing fish passage, include appropriate documentation demonstrating consultation with and support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sea Lamprey Control Program. • If applicable, include a letter documenting private owner or public land manager support of the project proposed for the owned site(s); • Letters from adjoining landowners, and • Letters documenting financial and in-kind support. Proposals submitted in response to this Announcement must include a Data Management Plan (up to 2 pages). See Section VI.B., Administrative and National Policy Requirements, below for additional information on what the plan should contain. This program does not use this questionnaire, except as described in Section VI.B. C. Unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM) To enable the use of a universal identifier and to enhance the quality of information available to the public as required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, 31 U.S.C. 6101 note, to the extent applicable, any proposal awarded in response to this announcement will be required to use the System for Award Management (SAM), which may be accessed online at SAM.gov. Each applicant, unless the applicant has an exception approved by the federal awarding agency under 2 C.F.R. § 25.110(d), is required to: (1) Be registered in SAM before submitting its application; (2) Provide a valid Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) in its application; and (3) Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a federal awarding agency. NOAA may not make a federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time NOAA is ready to make a federal award, NOAA may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a federal award to another applicant. Applicants should allow a minimum of two weeks to complete the SAM registration; registration is required only once, but must be periodically renewed. On April 4, 2022, the federal government began using a new UEI number provided by SAM. The organization’s Employer Identification Number (EIN) will be needed to receive a UEI, which is provided by SAM. If an entity is already registered in SAM.gov, the new UEI has already been assigned and is viewable in SAM.gov. This includes inactive registrations. D. Submission Dates and Times Applications will be accepted and considered on an annual basis, with due dates of October 28, 2024; September 5, 2025; and September 4, 2026. Applications may be submitted at any time prior to the due dates. Applications for projects starting approximately October 1, 2025 must be received through www.Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 28, 2024. To be considered for funding in subsequent fiscal years, applications must be received by 11:59 p.m. on September 5, 2025 for projects starting on approximately October 1, 2026, and September 4, 2026 for projects starting approximately October 1, 2027. The earliest date for receipt of awards for this funding opportunity is anticipated to be October 1, 2025. NOAA NOFO Page 17 of 32

---

E. Intergovernmental Review
Applications submitted by state and local governments are subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372,
"Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs." Any applicant submitting an application for funding is required to
complete item 19 on SF-424 regarding clearance by the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC) established as a result
of EO 12372. To find out about and comply with a State's process under EO 12372, contact the official listed in
Section VII of this announcement for referral information. The information can also be reviewed at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/SPOC-list-as-of-2023.pdf
F. Funding Restrictions
Both federal and match pre-award costs incurred up to 90 days prior to the award start date may be requested and
will be considered during pre-award negotiations between the applicant and NOAA. Incurring pre-award costs
before the NOAA GMD provides an award document (previously via NOAA Grants Online and currently through
eRA Commons on Form CD-450) is at the applicant's own risk. The earliest date for receipt of awards for this
funding opportunity is anticipated to be October 1, 2025.
The budget may include indirect (facilities & administrative [F&A]) costs if the applicant has an established indirect
cost rate with the federal government. As defined at 2 C.F.R. § 200.1, indirect (F&A) costs are incurred for a
common or joint purpose benefiting more than one cost objective, and not readily assignable to the cost objectives
specifically benefited, without effort disproportionate to the results achieved (e.g., lights, rent, water, and insurance).
A copy of the current, approved negotiated indirect (F&A) cost agreement with the federal government should be
included with the application. In addition, an eligible applicant under 2 C.F.R. § 200.414(f), may elect to charge a de
minimis rate of modified total direct costs (MTDC). An applicant may also describe all costs as direct costs in the
budget narrative, or establish a new rate through the Department of Commerce by contacting Jennifer Jackson in the
NOAA Grants Management Division by email at: jennifer.jackson@noaa.gov. Applicants may elect to propose the
reduction of part, or all, of allowable indirect costs as a component of cost sharing.
G. Other Submission Requirements
Applications must be submitted by the due dates and times provided in Section IV.D. Late applications may be
considered in subsequent fiscal years, until the final deadline of September 4, 2026, if funding is available.
We strongly encourage all prospective applicants to begin required registrations as early as possible. Completing the
required registrations can take six weeks or longer. Submission due dates will not be extended because of
registration delays. Submissions received after the due date will be considered late and will not be accepted.
Applicant organizations and individuals must register for three different Federal systems prior to submitting an
application through Grants.gov (SAM.gov, eRA Commons, and Grants.gov). See below for more detailed
information on each required registration process.
1. System for Award Management (SAM.gov)
SAM.gov registration is required to do business with the U.S. government. After registering with SAM.gov, you
will receive a 12-character Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) that you will use throughout the application process.
We recommend allowing at least three weeks for initial SAM.gov registrations and at least two weeks for SAM.gov
registration renewals. Additional information on SAM.gov registration is available here:
https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration
NOAA NOFO Page 18 of 32

---

You must update your SAM.gov registration any time your entity’s information changes. You must also renew and
revalidate your entity’s SAM.gov registration at least every 12 months from the date you last certified to and
submitted the registration. The renewal process may take up to two weeks. Your SAM.gov account’s primary point
of contact will receive an email message alerting them to the renewal requirement at 60 days, 30 days, and 15 days
prior to expiration. If you do not renew your registration by the deadline, it will expire.
2. eRA Commons
After completing your SAM.gov registration and receiving your Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), you must register
with eRA Commons and create several required user accounts. NOAA uses eRA Commons to process grant
applications and manage grant awards.
NOTE: eRA Commons requires applicants to create one ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE and two USER
ACCOUNTS before submitting an application. These requirements are described in detail below.
We recommend allowing at least three weeks for eRA Commons registration. This process can be completed
concurrently with your Grants.gov registration. Additional information on the eRA Commons registration process is
available here: https://www.commerce.gov/ocio/programs/gems/applicant-and-grantee-training
After creating an overall account for your “institution”, which may be for your organization or yourself as an
individual, eRA Commons requires you to set up at least two user accounts: one Signing Official (SO) account and
one Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account.
• The Signing Official (SO) user account must be assigned to an individual with signature authority to legally
bind the organization in grants administration matters. The SO will receive 4-5 emails throughout the
registration process.
• The Program Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) account must be assigned to an individual with
primary responsibility for the project(s) described in the grant application. The eRA Commons User ID
(Username) for the PD/PI must also be listed on the SF-424 form for item 4 (Applicant Identifier).
Your SO and PD/PI user accounts must be active before you submit an application. Both accounts can be assigned
to the same individual if appropriate.
3. Grants.Gov
After completing your SAM.gov registration and receiving your Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), you must complete
a one-time registration process with Grants.gov. Grants.gov is a government-wide portal used to solicit and accept
grant applications.
We recommend allowing at least two weeks for Grants.gov registration. This process can be completed concurrently
with your eRA Commons registration. Additional information on the Grants.gov registration process is available
here: https://www.grants.gov/applicants/applicant-registration
Submission Validation
The Grants.gov and eRA Commons validation processes for a submitted application can take up to two business
days after submission. Only validated applications are sent to NOAA to review. To ensure successful submission of
an application, we strongly recommend that you submit a final and complete application at least two business days
prior to the submission deadline.
Grants.gov and eRA Commons will not accept submissions if the applicant has not been authorized or if credentials
are incorrect. Submissions may also be rejected if:
NOAA NOFO Page 19 of 32

---

• The Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI)’s account username within eRA Commons is not
provided on the SF-424 form for item 4 (Applicant Identifier).
• The Universal Entity Identifier (UEI) from SAM.gov is not provided on the SF-424 form for item 8.c
(UEI).
• The Congressional District is not entered in the correct format on the SF-424 form for item 16
(Congressional Districts). The correct format is: [State Abbreviation]-[three digit district number]. For
example, Virginia’s 1st Congressional District would be listed as VA-001.
• PDF files are not flattened. To flatten a fillable PDF, you can use the “Print to PDF” function from any web
browser or PDF reader application.
• File sizes exceed 100 MB.
• Page sizes are greater than 8.5x11.
• File names exceed 50 characters (including spaces).
• File names include special characters.
After you submit your application, you will receive an automatic acknowledgment of receipt that contains a
Grants.gov tracking number. This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by NOAA.
Applications submitted through Grants.gov will be accompanied by FOUR automated responses (1-Grants.gov
Submission Receipt; 2-Grants.gov Submission Validation Receipt for Application; 3-Grants.gov Grantor Agency
Retrieval Receipt for Application; 4-Grants.gov Agency Tracking Number Assignment for Application).
In addition to the Grants.gov automated notification messages, you may receive automated email notifications of
any errors or warnings identified by eRA Commons. You must resolve all eRA Commons errors prior to the
application due date in order for the application to be processed.
Once an electronic application is accepted in eRA Commons, you will receive an additional automated notification
that the completed application was received and that an application number will be assigned.
You should save and print the proof of submission messages from both Grants.gov and eRA Commons. If you do
not receive an acceptance message from both Grants.gov and eRA Commons, you should follow up with the agency
contact listed in VII to confirm NOAA’s receipt of the complete submission.
H. Address for Submitting Proposals
Electronic applications are strongly encouraged through grants.gov; however, paper applications will also be
considered. Paper applications should be sent to: NOAA Restoration Center, NOAA Fisheries (F/HC3), 1315 East
West Highway, Rm. 14875, Silver Spring, MD 20910. ATTN: NOAA Great Lakes Fish Habitat Restoration
Partnership Grants. All applications MUST contain ALL required forms. Failure to submit forms may result in
disqualification from this competition. Applicants are responsible for tracking their own applications. Proposal
application materials, including all letters of collaboration or support, shall be submitted together in one package.
Please notify the contact official in Section VII of this announcement by email regarding any paper submissions by
mail, and/or for any technical difficulties using Grants.gov.
Submission time will be documented by electronic submission to Grants.gov, a U.S. Postal Service postmark, or a
delivery service receipt for paper applications. Applications submitted via the U.S. Postal Service must have an
official postmark; private metered postmarks are not acceptable. Applications received later than seven business
days following the closing date will be considered for funding in future fiscal years, subject to the availability of
funds.
V. Application Review Information
1. Importance/relevance and applicability of proposed projects to the program goals Maximum Points: 40
NOAA NOFO Page 20 of 32

---

This criterion ascertains whether there is intrinsic value in the proposed work and/or relevance to NOAA, federal,
regional, state, or local activities.
For this competition, applications will be evaluated based on the following:
(a) Relevance to Program Priorities: How well do the proposed project(s) link to the program priorities and address
GLRI Focus area 1 and 4 goals (see Section I.B). (20 points)
0 – project(s) does not align with any of the program priorities; 10- project(s) aligns moderately well with
program priorities; meaningful benefits to native, Great Lakes fish species are likely to result, with moderate
progress toward meeting GLRI Focus area 1 and/or 4 goals. 20 - proposed project(s) are well aligned with program
priorities as demonstrated by letters of support by relevant entities; extraordinary benefits to native Great Lakes fish
species are likely to result, with substantial progress toward meeting GLRI Focus area 1 and/or 4 goals.
(b) Enhancing Community Resilience to Climate Hazards and Providing Other Co-benefits. To what extent will the
proposed actions enhance community resilience to climate hazards? To what extent will the proposed actions result
in additional co-benefits to the community, which could include socioeconomic metrics that are targeted to the
proposed work? For pre implementation activities (such as future project development planning and feasibility
studies, engineering and design, permitting, and stakeholder engagement) and/or organizational capacity building,
what is the likelihood that the proposed work will result in enhanced community resilience or other co-benefits,
once restoration actions are implemented? (10 points)
0 – proposed actions will not enhance community resilience to climate hazards or provide other co-benefits; 5 –
proposed actions will result in moderate enhancement of community resilience to climate hazards, with potential to
provide other co-benefits; 10 – proposed actions include on-the-ground implementation and will result in
substantial enhancement of community resilience to climate hazards, with a high likelihood of providing other co-
benefits.
(c) Providing Benefit to Tribal, Indigenous, and/or Underserved Communities, Including Through Partnerships.
Has the applicant demonstrated that the proposed work is located within a tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved
community, as defined within Section I.B? Has the applicant demonstrated alignment with stated priorities and
needs of tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities? Will the benefits of restoration flow to tribal,
indigenous, and/or underserved communities? (10 points)
0 – proposed actions will not benefit tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities; 5 – proposed actions have
strong potential of providing benefit to tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities; 10 – proposed actions
are located within tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities and/or have a high likelihood of providing
benefit to tribal, indigenous, and/or underserved communities
2. Technical/scientific merit Maximum Points: 30
This criterion assesses whether the approach is technically sound and/or innovative, if the methods are appropriate,
and whether there are clear project goals and objectives.
For this competition, applications will be evaluated based on the following:
(a) Project Feasibility and Methodology: To what extent is the proposed project(s) feasible from a biological and
engineering perspective, including whether the proposed approach is technically sound, safe for the public? For
feasibility and design proposals, what is the technical merit and feasibility of the proposed approach (e.g, has the
applicant described similar successful projects, is the technique appropriate and proven, is the approach
comprehensive?) (10 points)
0 – proposed approach is not feasible, safe, or technically sound; 5 – proposed approach is potentially feasible, safe,
and technically sound, but lacks documentation to support the proposed methodology; 10 – proposed approach is
feasible, safe, and technically sound, and substantial evidence is provided to support the proposed methodology for
all proposed projects.
NOAA NOFO Page 21 of 32

---

(b) Project Detail: To what extent does the proposal completely describe the proposed restoration actions, the
current status of the project(s) (e.g., 60% design plans complete), permitting and environmental compliance status,
and the applicant proposed a realistic time-frame and interim milestones. Complete project description(s) should
include all relevant phases of the restoration from initial feasibility study through design, permitting, construction,
project implementation monitoring, operation and/or maintenance. If the proposal is a feasibility and design
proposal only, to what extent does the proposal explain the planned approach, or provide examples of other projects
where the approach was successful? (Please see section IV.B for suggested details to include in your proposal by
restoration activity, as well as recommended details to include for feasibility and design projects only). For projects
with multiple sites, does the proposal include sufficient detail about the proposed work at each site to assess the
merit of the planned activities? (8 points)
0 – proposal provides negligible detail (as described in section IV.B) regarding restoration actions, project(s) status,
and key milestones; 4 – proposal provides moderate detail (as described in section IV.B) regarding restoration
actions, project(s) status, and key milestones; 8 – proposal provides extraordinary detail (as described in section
IV.B) regarding restoration actions, project(s) status, and key milestones.
(c) Sustainability of Restoration Approach: How great is the potential of the restoration effort to be sustainable and
provide lasting benefits of regional or national significance for the species targeted by the project and its habitat? Is
there evidence that the applicant has chosen the most self-sustaining restoration technique that accomplishes the
project's goals and/or evidence that habitat impacts will not re-occur? To what extent does the proposal describe the
susceptibility of the project site to climate change impacts and how the proposed restoration methodology and
design provides for resilience to extreme weather events and adaptation to potential climate change impacts
anticipated at the project site? (8 points)
0 – project is not sustainable and will not provide lasting benefits for target species; 4 – project is sustainable and
will potentially provide lasting benefits for target species; 8 – project is sustainable and will provide lasting benefits
for target species, and the design provides for resilience to extreme weather events and adaptation to potential
climate change impacts.
(d) Project Assessment: To what extent will the project measure near-term implementation success following
requirements in Section IV.B including ecological targets that can be evaluated within approximately one-year post
implementation and/or the use of parameters described in NOAA RC Implementation Monitoring (Tier I) Guidance
for projects that include one of the primary RC restoration methods? For restoration feasibility and design
proposals, is the proposed pre-restoration monitoring aligned with the requirements? See the NOAA RC
Implementation Monitoring (Tier 1) Guidance for more information:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/resources-noaa-restoration-center-
applicants#restoration-monitoring-and-data-management. (2 points)
0 – proposal does not include plans for monitoring near-term implementation success; 1 – proposal includes a
satisfactory monitoring plan, as outlined in Section IV.B.; 2 – proposal includes a well-described monitoring plan
following requirements in Section IV.B. Projects that include one of the RC primary restoration methods strictly
follow the NOAA RC Implementation Monitoring (Tier I) Guidance.
(e) Landowner Support: Is there substantiated landowner/land manager support and commitment to the project
documented within the application (e.g., a support letter)? (1 point.
0 – proposal does not provide documentation of landowner/land manager support; 1 – proposal provides
documentation of landowner/land manager permission to implement the project.
NOAA NOFO Page 22 of 32

---

(f) Data Management Plan: Does the proposal include a Data Management Plan, including descriptions of the types
of environmental data and information created during the course of the project; the tentative date by which data will
be shared; the standards to be used for data/metadata format and content; methods for providing data access;
approximate total volume of data to be collected; and prior experience in making such data accessible? If no data
will be collected through the project, the applicant must clearly explain the rationale for the lack of data collection
in order to receive full points. See pages 3 - 5 in the NOAA RC Implementation Monitoring (Tier 1) Guidance for a
template and more information: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/monitoring-and-
evaluation-restoration-projects. (1 point)
0 – proposal does not provide a Data Management Plan; 1 – proposal provides a complete and well-detailed Data
Management Plan.
3. Overall qualifications of applicants Maximum Points: 10
This criterion ascertains whether the applicant possesses the necessary education, experience, training, facilities,
and administrative resources to accomplish the project.
For this competition, applications will be evaluated based on the following:
(a) Restoration and Conservation Background: Does the applicant have the capacity and knowledge to conduct the
scope and scale of the proposed work, as indicated by the qualifications and past experience of the project leaders
and/or partners in designing, implementing, and effectively managing and overseeing projects? Otherwise, does the
applicant demonstrate an ability to collaborate with stakeholders and other partners? (5 points)
0 – proposal provides no documentation of experience in conducting the scope and scale of proposed work; 2.5 –
proposal provides documentation of adequate capacity and knowledge to conduct the proposed work; 5 – proposal
provides documentation of substantial capacity and expert knowledge to conduct the proposed work.
(b) Management Capacity: Does the applicant possess and describe the necessary experience, facilities, equipment,
and administrative resources available to successfully fulfill the responsibilities associated with managing a federal
grant award? Does the proposal describe the applicant’s ability and the plan for managing a significant number of
projects simultaneously (as relevant), including financial and administrative management of sub-awards and timely
submission of project-specific progress reports and deliverables? Does the applicant include a plan for coordination
with NOAA to implement the project(s)? (5 points)
0 – proposal provides no description of experience or available resources to manage the award; 2.5 – proposal
describes adequate experience and available resources to manage the award; 5– proposal describes extensive
experience with federal grants, demonstrates capacity for managing a significant number of simultaneous projects
(as relevant), and includes a plan for coordination with NOAA to implement the project(s).
4. Project costs Maximum Points: 10
This criterion evaluates the budget to determine if it is realistic and commensurate with the project needs and time
frame.
For this competition, applications will be evaluated based on the following:
(a) Cost-benefit Comparison: Has the applicant demonstrated that a significant benefit will be generated at a
reasonable cost, based on the applicant's stated objectives and time frame? If funds are requested for partial support
of a larger project or for a project with multiple sites or phases, the proposal should include the full project budget
and/or a budget for each site or project phase to place the funding request in spatial and temporal context. (5
points)
0 – proposal does not provide a reasonable cost-benefit comparison; 2.5 – project is likely to be reasonably cost-
effective for anticipated benefit; 5 – project is likely to be extraordinarily cost-effective for anticipated benefit.
NOAA NOFO Page 23 of 32

---

(b) Budget Detail: Has the applicant demonstrated a realistic understanding of costs by providing a budget (broken
down by SF-424A object classes) that provides sufficient detail and credible cost estimates and justifications? Does
the budget clearly outline the NOAA funding request and other funding sources, noting whether the other funding
sources are non-federal or federal, match or leverage? Multi-year or multi-phase award requests should include
annual/interim milestones that correspond to logical funding request increments. (3 points)
0 – proposal does not provide a realistic budget; 1.5 – proposal provides an adequately detailed budget with
realistic cost estimates; 3 – proposal provides an extraordinarily detailed budget with realistic cost estimates.
(c) Cost-sharing and Leveraging Funds. To what extent will the applicant complement NOAA’s investment with
other funding sources, including formal, non-federal matching contributions and/or informal leverage? Confirmed
matching and/or leveraged funding sources should be documented in the Supplemental Materials. Note whether the
other funding sources are non-federal or federal, and whether the funds are secured or pending. (2 points)
0 – budget does not include any formal, non-federal matching contributions or informal, leveraged funds; 1 –
budget includes formal, non-federal matching contributions and/or informal, leveraged funds, with a combined total
that is less than a 1:1 ratio of matching or leveraged funds to NOAA funds; 2- budget includes formal, non-federal
matching contributions and/or informal, leveraged funds, with a combined total that meets or exceeds a 1:1 ratio of
matching or leveraged funds to NOAA funds.
5. Outreach and Education Maximum Points: 10
This criterion assesses whether the project provides a focused and effective education and outreach strategy
regarding NOAA's mission to protect the Nation's natural resources.
For this competition, applications will be evaluated based on the following:
(a) Stakeholder Engagement and Support: Does the proposed project(s) include a wide base of stakeholder and
community support that demonstrates the restoration effort has been put forward by common agreement, preferably
through inclusion in a public planning process? Has or will the applicant engage with a diverse range of groups,
including underserved communities, either directly or in collaboration with a local partner (including through
contracts and subawards), to engage a variety of organizations such as community associations, local environmental
justice organizations, business/agricultural groups, adjacent landowners, state and local governments, and/or
members of Congress? (5 points)
0 – proposal does not demonstrate community support or common agreement; 2.5 – proposal demonstrates
adequate community support through a diverse set of partners; 5 – proposal demonstrates extraordinary community
support through a diverse set of partners, with evidence of common agreement through a public planning process.
(b) Community Outreach: Does the proposal include an outreach strategy to disseminate information about
restoration goals and results to a broad audience? The strategy may include, but is not limited to: informal
education and mentoring for conservation corps, interns, or early career professionals from underrepresented
groups in relevant science and policy careers; opportunities for press visits; or other outreach that encourages
support for restoration and environmental stewardship. (5 points)
0 – proposal does not include an outreach strategy as it pertains to dissemination of information about project goals
and results; 2.5 – proposal includes an adequate outreach strategy as it pertains to dissemination of information
about project goals and results; 5 – proposal includes an extraordinary outreach strategy as it pertains to
dissemination of information about project goals and results and has strong potential to encourage future habitat
restoration and protection actions.
Evaluation Criteria
Review and Selection Process
NOAA NOFO Page 24 of 32

---

All applications received by each annual deadline will undergo an initial administrative screening to determine if
they are responsive, eligible, and complete. NOAA, in its sole discretion, may continue the review process for
applications with non-substantive issues that may be easily rectified or cured. If an application was submitted to
Grants.gov by the deadline but the application was not validated by NOAA’s eRA grants management system, the
applicant should contact the competition managers, Rina Studds and Julie Simmons, immediately, or at least within
one business day, for troubleshooting with the system. Applications are screened to ensure that they are responsive
to this announcement; the applicant is eligible to apply; and includes a project summary, project description, budget,
and supporting documentation as outlined in Section IV.B Content and Form of Application. If an application is
submitted early and time and resources permit, NOAA may notify an applicant of administrative defects (e.g.,
missing material) in its application, so that the applicant may re-submit it; however, this is not assured, and is at the
sole discretion of NOAA.
Eligible applications will undergo a technical review and selection process to determine how well they meet the
program priorities and evaluation criteria of this solicitation and the mission and goals of NOAA. Eligible
applications will be evaluated by three or more merit reviewers as part of a technical review based on the Evaluation
Criteria listed in Section V.A. After the technical review, a panel may meet to make final recommendations to the
Selecting Official regarding which proposals best meet the program objectives and priorities (Sections I.A and I.B).
The panel will be comprised of federal employees and may convene in person or by teleconference, video
conference, or other electronic means to discuss applications.
If convened, the panel will be presented with the top applications, per the results of the technical review. Panelists
will also receive the technical review scores and comments for each application. The panel will rate all top-ranked
proposals on the following scale:
1 – Fair: application marginally addresses program priorities outlined in Section I.A and I.B;
2 – Good: application adequately addresses program priorities outlined in Section I.A and I.B;
3 – Excellent: application exceptionally addresses program priorities outlined in Sections I.A and I.B.
If a panel is held, the panel’s list will be considered by the Selecting Official for recommending applications for
funding. If a panel is not held, the technical review ranking will be considered by the Selecting Official for
recommending applications for funding.
If an application is recommended for funding, staff from the NOAA will contact the applicant to negotiate a final
application package. NOAA may select all, some, or none of the applications, or part of any application, ask
applicants to work together or combine projects, defer applications to the future, or reallocate funds to different
funding categories, to the extent authorized. In the event further funding becomes available after the initial selection,
NOAA may select additional proposals without repeating the competitive process.
Awards may not necessarily be made to the highest-scored applications. Applicants may be asked to modify
objectives, work plans, or budgets, and provide supplemental information required by the agency prior to the award.
NOAA may choose to award partial funding as part of a multi-year award. Once funds are awarded, recipients of
multi-year awards will not need to compete for funding in subsequent years for the same award. NOAA expects, but
is not obligated, to provide additional funding to multi-year awards in subsequent years. In this case, a budget
narrative and SF-424A that identifies each separate year of requested funding will be required prior to an award
offer.
NOAA NOFO Page 25 of 32

---

Adding funds to multi-year awards is contingent on the availability of funds and satisfactory performance, and is at
the sole discretion of NOAA. The exact amount of funds to be awarded, the final scope of activities, the project
duration, and specific NOAA cooperative involvement with the activities of each project will be determined in pre-
award negotiations among the applicant, the NOAA Grants Management Division, and NOAA program staff. The
NOAA Grants Officer makes the final approval decision and issues an award, as described in Section VI.A. and B.
Unsuccessful applicants will be notified that their application was not among those recommended for funding.
Unsuccessful applications submitted will be kept on file in accordance with NOAA records requirements and then
destroyed.
In addition, the NOAA Grants Officer will review financial and grants administration aspects of a proposed award,
including conducting an assessment of the risk posed by the applicant in accordance with 2 C.F.R. 200.206. NOAA
is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and
performance system accessible through the System for Award Management. An applicant, at its option, may review
information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any
information about itself that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated
integrity and performance system accessible through SAM. NOAA will consider any comments by the applicant, in
addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about
the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the
review of risk posed by applicants as described in §200.206 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by
applicants.
In addition to reviewing repositories of government-wide eligibility, qualifications or financial integrity information,
the risk assessment conducted by NOAA may consider items such as the financial stability of an applicant, quality
of the applicant’s management systems, an applicant’s history of performance, previous audit reports and audit
findings concerning the applicant and the applicant’s ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other
requirements imposed on non-federal entities. Applicants should be in compliance with the terms of any existing
NOAA grants or cooperative agreements and otherwise eligible to receive federal awards, or make arrangements
satisfactory to the Grants Officer, to be considered for funding under this competition. All reports due should be
received and any concerns raised by the agency should be addressed in a timely fashion in order to receive a new
award. Upon review of these factors, if appropriate, specific award conditions that respond to the degree of risk may
be applied by the NOAA Grants Officer pursuant to 2 C.F.R. 200.208. In addition, NOAA reserves the right to reject
an application in its entirety where information is uncovered that raises a significant risk with respect to the
responsibility or suitability of an applicant. The final approval of selected applications and issuance of awards will
be by the NOAA Grants Officer. The award decision of the Grants Officer is final.
Selection Factors
The Selecting Official, a NOAA program executive or designee, will recommend applications for funding in rank
order unless an application is justified to be selected out of rank order based upon one or more of the following
selection factors:
1. Availability of funding;
2. Balance/distribution of funds: a) by geographic area, b) by type of institutions, c) by type of partners, d) by
research areas; or e) by project types;
3. Whether this project duplicates other projects funded or considered for funding by NOAA or other federal
agencies;
4. Program priorities and policy factors set out in Sections I.A and I.B;
5. An applicant's prior award performance;
6. Partnerships and/or participation of targeted groups; and
7. Adequacy of information necessary for NOAA staff to make a NEPA determination and draft necessary
documentation before recommendations for funding are made to the NOAA GMD.
Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates
NOAA NOFO Page 26 of 32

---

Applicants that submitted applications by the annual due date will receive notification that their application has been
recommended for funding to the NOAA GMD by the start of the subsequent fiscal year, October 1. The earliest
anticipated start date for awards will be October 1, 2025.
VI. Award Administration Information
A. Award Notices
PRE-AWARD COSTS. NOAA authorizes award recipients to expend pre-award costs up to 90 days before the
period of performance start date at the applicant’s own risk without approval from NOAA, and in accordance with
the applicant’s internal policies and procedures. Such costs are allowable only to the extent that they would have
been allowable if incurred after the date of the federal award. This does not include direct proposal costs (as defined
at 2 C.F.R. § 200.460). NOAA or the Department of Commerce are not responsible for direct proposal preparation
costs. Pre-award costs will be a portion of, not in addition to, the approved total budget of the award. Pre-award
costs expended more than 90 days prior to the period of performance start date require approval from the Grants
Officer. This does not change the period of performance start date.
GRANTS OFFICER SIGNATURE. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation are not considered awards
until the Grants Officer has signed the grant or cooperative agreement. Only Grants Officers can bind the
Government to the expenditure of funds. The Grants Officer’s digital signature constitutes an obligation of funds by
the federal government and formal approval of the award.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. Funding for programs listed in this notice is contingent upon the availability of
funds. Applicants are hereby given notice that funds may not have been appropriated yet for the programs listed in
this notice. Publication of this announcement does not oblige NOAA to award any specific project or to obligate any
available funds.
UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, AND AUDIT
REQUIREMENTS. 2024 Revisions to 2 CFR 200 will be in effect for awards issued through this competition.
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, AND AUDIT
REQUIREMENTS. Through 2 C.F.R. § 1327.101, the Department of Commerce adopted Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, which applies to
awards in this program. Refer to http://go.usa.gov/SBYh and http://go.usa.gov/SBg4.
RESEARCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS. For awards designated on the CD-450 as Research, the Commerce
Terms, and the Federal-wide Research Terms and Conditions (Research Terms) as implemented by the Department
of Commerce, currently, at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp, both apply to the award. The Commerce
Terms and the Research Terms are generally intended to harmonize with each other; however, where the Commerce
Terms and the Research Terms differ in a Research award, the Research Terms prevail, unless otherwise indicated in
a specific award condition.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PRE-AWARD NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR GRANTS
AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS. The Department of Commerce Pre-Award Notification Requirements
for Grants and Cooperative Agreements contained in the Federal Register notice of December 30, 2014 (79 FR
78390) are applicable to this solicitation and may be accessed online at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-
30/pdf/2014-30297.pdf.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (DOC) TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Successful applicants who accept a
NOAA award under this solicitation will be bound by the DOC Financial Assistance Standard Terms and
Conditions. This document will be provided in the award package in eRA at http://www.ago.noaa.gov and at
https://www.commerce.gov/oam/policy/financial-assistance-policy.
NOAA NOFO Page 27 of 32

---

BUREAU TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Successful applicants who accept an award under this solicitation will be
bound by bureau-specific standard terms and conditions. These terms and conditions will be provided in the award
package in NOAA’s Grants Online system. For NOAA awards only, the Administrative Standard Award Conditions
for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Financial Assistance Awards U.S. Department of
Commerce are applicable to this solicitation and may be accessed online at
https://www.noaa.gov/organization/acquisition-grants/financial-assistance
HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH. For research projects involving Human Subjects an Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approval or an exemption determination will be required in accordance with DOC Financial Assistance
Standard Terms and Conditions Section G.05.i “Research Involving Human Subjects” found at
https://www.commerce.gov/oam/policy/financial-assistance-policy.
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA). NOAA must analyze the potential environmental
impacts, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for applicant projects or proposals which
are seeking NOAA federal funding opportunities. Detailed information on NOAA compliance with NEPA can be
found at the following NOAA NEPA website: http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/, including our NOAA Administrative
Order 216-6 for NEPA, http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/NAO216_6.pdf, and the Council on Environmental Quality
implementation regulations, http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/NEPA-40CFR1500_1508.pdf. Consequently, as part
of an applicant's package, and under their description of their program activities, applicants are required to provide
detailed information on the activities to be conducted, locations, sites, species and habitat to be affected, possible
construction activities, and any environmental concerns that may exist (e.g., the use and disposal of hazardous or
toxic chemicals, introduction of non- indigenous species, impacts to endangered and threatened species, aquaculture
projects, and impacts to coral reef systems). In addition to providing specific information that will serve as the basis
for any required impact analyses, applicants may also be requested to assist NOAA in drafting an environmental
assessment, if NOAA determines an assessment is required. Applicants will also be required to cooperate with
NOAA in identifying feasible measures to reduce or avoid any identified adverse environmental impacts of their
proposal. Failure to do so shall be grounds for not selecting an application. In some cases if additional information is
required after an application is selected, funds can be withheld by the Grants Officer under a special award condition
requiring the recipient to submit additional environmental compliance information sufficient to enable NOAA to
make an assessment on any impacts that a project may have on the environment.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. Department of Commerce regulations implementing the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552, are found at 15 C.F.R. Part 4, Public Information. These regulations set
forth rules for the Department regarding making requested materials, information, and records publicly available
under the FOIA. Applications submitted in response to this Notice of Funding Opportunity may be subject to
requests for release under the Act. In the event that an application contains information or data that the applicant
deems to be confidential commercial information that should be exempt from disclosure under FOIA, that
information should be identified, bracketed, and marked as Privileged, Confidential, Commercial or Financial
Information. In accordance with 15 CFR § 4.9, the Department of Commerce will protect from disclosure
confidential business information contained in financial assistance applications and other documentation provided
by applicants to the extent permitted by law.
MINORITY SERVING INSTITUTIONS. The Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (DOC/NOAA) is strongly committed to increasing the participation of Minority Serving Institutions
(MSIs), i.e., Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Tribal colleges and
universities, Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian institutions, and institutions that work in underserved
communities.
NOAA NOFO Page 28 of 32

---

DATA SHARING PLAN.1. Environmental data and information collected or created under NOAA grants or
cooperative agreements must be made discoverable by and accessible to the general public, in a timely fashion
(typically within two years), free of charge or at no more than the cost of reproduction, unless an exemption is
granted by the NOAA Program. Data should be available in at least one machine-readable format, preferably a
widely-used or open-standard format, and should also be accompanied by machine-readable documentation
(metadata), preferably based on widely used or international standards. 2. Proposals submitted in response to this
Announcement must include a Data Management Plan of up to two pages describing how these requirements will be
satisfied. The Data Management Plan should be aligned with the Data Management Guidance provided by NOAA in
the Announcement. The contents of the Data Management Plan (or absence thereof), and past performance
regarding such plans, will be considered as part of proposal review. A typical plan should include descriptions of the
types of environmental data and information expected to be created during the course of the project; the tentative
date by which data will be shared; the standards to be used for data/metadata format and content; methods for
providing data access; approximate total volume of data to be collected; and prior experience in making such data
accessible. The costs of data preparation, accessibility, or archiving may be included in the proposal budget unless
otherwise stated in the Guidance. Accepted submission of data to the NOAA National Centers for Environmental
Information (NCEI) is one way to satisfy data sharing requirements; however, NCEI is not obligated to accept all
submissions and may charge a fee, particularly for large or unusual datasets. 3. NOAA may, at its own discretion,
make publicly visible the Data Management Plan from funded proposals, or use information from the Data
Management Plan to produce a formal metadata record and include that metadata in a Catalog to indicate the
pending availability of new data. 4. Proposal submitters are hereby advised that the final pre-publication manuscripts
of scholarly articles produced entirely or primarily with NOAA funding will be required to be submitted to NOAA
Institutional Repository after acceptance, and no later than upon publication. Such manuscripts shall be made
publicly available by NOAA one year after publication by the journal.
More information can be found on NOAA’s Data Management Procedures at:
https://nosc.noaa.gov/EDMC/documents/Data_Sharing_Directive_v3.0_remediated.pdf and at NAO 212-15
Management of Environmental Data and Information:
https://www.noaa.gov/organization/administration/nao-212-15-management-of-environmental-data-and-information
NOAA SEXUAL ASSAULT AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE POLICY.
NOAA requires organizations receiving federal assistance to report findings of sexual harassment, or any other kind
of harassment, regarding a Principal Investigator (PI), co-PI, or any other key personnel in the award.
NOAA expects all financial assistance recipients to establish and maintain clear and unambiguous standards of
behavior to ensure harassment free workplaces wherever NOAA grant or cooperative agreement work is conducted,
including notification pathways for all personnel, including students, on the awards. This expectation includes
activities at all on- and offsite facilities and during conferences and workshops. All such settings should have
accessible and evident means for reporting violations and recipients should exercise due diligence with timely
investigations of allegations and corrective actions.
For more information, please visit: https://www.noaa.gov/organization/acquisition-grants/noaa-workplace-
harassment-training-for-contractors-and-financial.
NOAA NOFO Page 29 of 32

---

SCIENCE INTEGRITY. 1. Maintaining Integrity. The non-Federal entity shall maintain the scientific integrity of
research performed pursuant to this grant or financial assistance award including the prevention, detection, and
remediation of any allegations regarding the violation of scientific integrity or scientific and research misconduct,
and the conduct of inquiries, investigations, and adjudications of allegations of violations of scientific integrity or
scientific and research misconduct. All the requirements of this provision flow down to subrecipients. 2. Peer
Review. The peer review of the results of scientific activities under a NOAA grant, financial assistance award or
cooperative agreement shall be accomplished to ensure consistency with NOAA standards on quality, relevance,
scientific integrity, reproducibility, transparency, and performance. NOAA will ensure that peer review of
"influential scientific information" or "highly influential scientific assessments" is conducted in accordance with the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review and NOAA policies
on peer review, such as the Information Quality Guidelines. 3. In performing or presenting the results of scientific
activities under the NOAA grant, financial assistance award, or cooperative agreement and in responding to
allegations regarding the violation of scientific integrity or scientific and research misconduct, the non-Federal
entity and all subrecipients shall comply with the provisions herein and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 202-
735D, Scientific Integrity, and its Procedural Handbook, including any amendments thereto. That Order can be
found athttp://nrc.noaa.gov/ScientificIntegrityCommons.aspx. 4. Primary Responsibility. The non-Federal entity
shall have the primary responsibility to prevent, detect, and investigate allegations of a violation of scientific
integrity or scientific and research misconduct. Unless otherwise instructed by the grants officer, the non-Federal
entity shall promptly conduct an initial inquiry into any allegation of such misconduct and may rely on its internal
policies and procedures, as appropriate, to do so. 5. By executing this grant, financial assistance award, or
cooperative agreement the non-Federal entity provides its assurance that it has established an administrative process
for performing an inquiry, investigating, and reporting allegations of a violation of scientific integrity or scientific
and research misconduct; and that it will comply with its own administrative process for performing an inquiry,
investigation, and reporting of such misconduct. 6. The non-Federal entity shall insert this provision in all subawards
at all tiers under this grant, financial assistance award, or cooperative agreement.
REVIEW OF RISK. After applications are proposed for funding by the Selecting Official, the Grants Office will
perform administrative reviews, including an assessment of risk posed by the applicant under 2 C.F.R. 200.206.
These may include assessments of the financial stability of an applicant and the quality of the applicant’s
management systems, history of performance, and the applicant’s ability to effectively implement statutory,
regulatory, or other requirements imposed on non-Federal entities. Special conditions that address any risks
determined to exist may be applied. Applicants may submit comments about any information concerning
organizational performance listed in the Responsibility/Qualification section of SAM.gov for consideration by the
awarding agency.
REVIEWS AND EVALUATION. The applicant acknowledges and understands that information and data
contained in applications for financial assistance, as well as information and data contained in financial,
performance and other reports submitted by applicants, may be used by the Department of Commerce in conducting
reviews and evaluations of its financial assistance programs. For this purpose, applicant information and data may
be accessed, reviewed and evaluated by Department of Commerce employees, other Federal employees, and also by
Federal agents and contractors, and/or by non-Federal personnel, all of whom enter into appropriate conflict of
interest and confidentiality agreements covering the use of such information. As may be provided in the terms and
conditions of a specific financial assistance award, applicants are expected to support program reviews and
evaluations by submitting required financial and performance information and data in an accurate and timely
manner, and by cooperating with the Department of Commerce and external program evaluators. In accordance with
§200.303(e), applicants are reminded that they must take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally
identifiable information and other confidential or sensitive personal or business information created or obtained in
connection with a Department of Commerce financial assistance award.
NOAA NOFO Page 30 of 32

---

REQUIRED USE OF AMERICAN IRON, STEEL, MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS, AND
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS. If applicable, and pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(“IIJA”), Pub.L. No. 117-58, which includes the Build American, Buy American (BABA) Act, Pub. L. No. 117-58,
§§ 70901-52 and OMB M-22-11, recipients of an award of Federal financial assistance from the Department of
Commerce (DOC) are hereby notified that none of the funds provided under this award may be used for a project for
infrastructure unless: 1) all iron and steel used in the project are produced in the United States–this means all
manufacturing processes, from the initial melting stage through the application of coatings, occurred in the United
States; 2) all manufactured products used in the project are produced in the United States—this means the
manufactured product was manufactured in the United States; and the cost of the components of the manufactured
product that are mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States is greater than 55 percent of the total cost of
all components of the manufactured product, unless another standard for determining the minimum amount of
domestic content of the manufactured product has been established under applicable law or regulation; and 3) all
construction materials1 are manufactured in the United States—this means that all manufacturing processes for the
construction material occurred in the United States. The Buy America preference only applies to articles, materials,
and supplies that are consumed in, incorporated into, or affixed to an infrastructure project. As such, it does not
apply to tools, equipment, and supplies, such as temporary scaffolding, brought to the construction site and removed
at or before the completion of the infrastructure project. Nor does a Buy America preference apply to equipment and
furnishings, such as movable chairs, desks, and portable computer equipment, that are used at or within the finished
infrastructure project but are not an integral part of the structure or permanently affixed to the infrastructure project.
WAIVERS. When necessary, recipients may apply for, and DOC may grant, a waiver from these requirements.
DOC will notify the recipient for information on the process for requesting a waiver from these requirements. 1)
When DOC has made a determination that one of the following exceptions applies, the awarding official may waive
the application of the domestic content procurement preference in any case in which DOC determines that: a.
applying the domestic content procurement preference would be inconsistent with the public interest; b. the types of
iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials are not produced in the United States in sufficient and
reasonably available quantities or of a satisfactory quality; or c. the inclusion of iron, steel, manufactured products,
or construction materials produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25
percent. A request to waive the application of the domestic content procurement preference must be in writing. DOC
will provide instructions on the format, contents, and supporting materials required for any waiver request. Waiver
requests are subject to public comment periods of no less than 15 days and must be reviewed by the Made in
America Office. There may be instances where an award qualifies, in whole or in part, for an existing waiver
described at whitehouse.gov/omb/management/made-in-america.
DEFINITIONS. “Construction materials” includes an article, material, or supply—other than an item of primarily
iron or steel; a manufactured product; cement and cementitious materials; aggregates such as stone, sand, or gravel;
or aggregate binding agents or additives2 —that is or consists primarily of: non-ferrous metals; plastic and polymer-
based products (including polyvinylchloride, composite building materials, and polymers used in fiber optic cables);
glass (including optic glass); lumber; or drywall. “Domestic content procurement preference’’ means all iron and
steel used in the project are produced in the United States; the manufactured products used in the project are
produced in the United States; or the construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States.
“Infrastructure” includes, at a minimum, the structures, facilities, and equipment for, in the United States, roads,
highways, and bridges; public transportation; dams, ports, harbors, and other maritime facilities; intercity passenger
and freight railroads; freight and intermodal facilities; airports; water systems, including drinking water and
wastewater systems; electrical transmission facilities and systems; utilities; broadband infrastructure; and buildings
and real property. Infrastructure includes facilities that generate, transport, and distribute energy. ‘‘Project’’ means
the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of infrastructure in the United States. -- 1 Excludes cement and
cementitious materials, aggregates such as stone, sand, or gravel, or aggregate binding agents or additives. 2 IIJA, §
70917(c)(1).
C. Reporting
In accordance with 2 CFR 200.328-9 and the terms and conditions of the award, financial reports are to be submitted
semi-annually and performance (technical) reports are to be submitted semi-annually. Reports are submitted
electronically through eRA.
NOAA NOFO Page 31 of 32

---

The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, 31 U.S.C. 6101 note, includes a requirement for
awardees of applicable Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation
under Federal assistance awards. All awardees of applicable grants and cooperative agreements are required to
report to the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) available at https://www.fsrs.gov/ on all subawards over
$30,000. Refer to 2 CFR Part 170.
Recipients will be obligated to assist NOAA in complying with all relevant requirements and implementing
guidance issued to federal agencies by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). NOAA anticipates additional
guidance may be forthcoming related to responsibilities of recipients of grants and cooperative agreements,
including guidance on agency-wide or government-wide requirements.
VII. Agency Contacts
Supplemental Guidance regarding application writing and FAQs about this Announcement can be found at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/habitat-conservation/resources-noaa-restoration-center-applicants. For
further information contact Rina Studds by e-mail at rina.studds@noaa.gov or phone (301) 427-8651 and Julie
Simmons by email at julie.simmons@noaa.gov or by phone (734) 680-5671. Prospective applicants are strongly
encouraged to contact NOAA Restoration Center staff before submitting an application to discuss their NOAA
project ideas with respect to technical merit and NOAA's objectives. NOAA will make every effort to respond to
prospective applicants on a first come, first served basis. These discussions will not include review of draft
proposals or site visits during the application period.
VIII. Other Information
Funds awarded cannot necessarily pay for all the costs that the recipient might incur in the course of carrying out an
award. Generally, costs that are allowable include salaries, equipment and supplies, as long as these are "necessary
and reasonable" specifically for the purpose of the award. Allowable costs are determined by reference to the OMB
Uniform Guidance at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, codified by the Department of Commerce at 1327.101. All cost
reimbursement sub-awards (e.g. subgrants, subcontracts) are subject to those federal cost principles applicable to the
particular type of organization concerned.
NOAA NOFO Page 32 of 32