Because it is understood in so many different ways by so many different constituencies, no discussion of public safety can proceed meaningfully without a provisional definition of the term. For the purposes of this article, we will define public safety as a range of services provided to a defined community to prevent, deter, and respond to man-made and non-manmade threats facing its citizens and their property.  Public safety agencies include a wide range of institutions from municipal agencies to independent non-profit organizations and even for-profit companies that provide policing, fire suppression, and emergency management services.

The US Fire Administration administers three major funding programs each year. The Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) Program is the most well known, followed by the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) and the Fire Prevention and Safety Programs. All three were reauthorized in the recent National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (P.L. 112-239), and we’re expecting to see a fairly significant amount of funding coming out for each of them for 2013 and beyond. Learn more about these programs at www.firegrants.info.

Agencies around the country initiate technology projects in different ways and for different reasons. For some, technology is a way of keeping current and of ensuring that stakeholders have access to the latest and greatest in services. For others, a governing body may mandate a greater focus on technology, in the broad, undefined way governing bodies sometimes have. Still others are won over by a compelling case for return on investment or quality improvement. Or a technology salesperson may have let you know that the current technology has reached the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced.

Across the U.S., private foundations are experiencing an ever-increasing demand for grant funding.  Unfortunately, for many of these agencies, the supply of funding has diminished in recent years. Among hundreds or even thousands of unsolicited grant proposals, few new applicants are able to close the deal by receiving an award. Despite this bleak reality, there are several steps your organization can take to strengthen your approach to foundation funding and increase your likelihood of being among the elite organizations awarded with grant support.

May 2012

The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program has been a staple in the public safety landscape since it was created in 2005. With its range of program areas including law enforcement, planning, evaluation, technology improvement and crime victim and witness initiatives it is a program that is appealing and accessible to grantseekers. JAG is the leading source of federal justice funding to state and local jurisdictions.

The Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation (CTAS) was developed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2010 to consolidate the DOJ's existing Tribal-specific grant programs into one combined application package. Thus, the overall program is comprised of several individual programs or "Purpose Areas." CTAS is intended to foster a comprehensive approach to public safety and victimization issues by encouraging tribal governments to collaborate efforts and plan a community-wide strategy for addressing a variety of law enforcement and justice issues.
The 2012 Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation was announced on January 18, with a deadline of April 18, 2012. Over $100 million is available through this program, providing funds to support tribal public safety and justice initiatives such as community policing and tribal youth programs.

In the aftermath of the 2001 attacks, the nation’s collective quest for safety spawned a quick rise to prominence for U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Established in the Homeland Security Act of 2002, DHS supports the various security efforts and programs that contribute toward the broad yet vital mission to “secure the nation from the many threats we face.” But with the Fiscal Year 2012 Budget now solidified, many of those tasked with ensuring the nation’s security may be doing so with much less federal grant money in their pockets.

By Stephen R. Galati, Contributing Writer
December 2011

When one thinks of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grant programs and the risk of terrorist attacks, the first thought may be that government and public agencies are the primary targets. Although these agencies may hold higher visibility and threat risks, they are certainly not the only viable targets for acts of terrorism. Since the horrific attacks against the United States on September 11th, many nonprofit organizations, such as ones operating religious facilities and places of symbolic value, have become involved with infrastructure-hardening and emergency preparedness activities. The events of the last decade have served as a paradigm change in our collective understanding of national security.

To various degrees, the American people and regulatory bodies have always had an appreciation for humanity’s effect on nature’s well-being. Beginning in the late 1960s, and continuing today, we have successfully created numerous laws and expectations that formalize the notion that a federally-funded project to promote human progress must not come at the expense of environmental, historic, and cultural resources.

According to a 2009 report from the Pew Center on the States, a division of The Pew Charitable Trusts, more than 7 million people are in jail or prison, or on probation or parole. With one in every 31 adults under some form of correctional control, the economic costs and burdens associated with this statistic are no doubt overwhelming. Compounding this issue is the fact that too often successful prisoner reentry—the process of leaving prison and returning to society—isn’t solely correlated to a specific release date.

With terms like interoperability, collaboration, and standardization saturating the pages of guidance documents across the funding landscape, there is often an associated focus on supporting initiatives that, for lack of a better term, make sense. For many communities across the county, rural and urban alike, utilizing video conferencing to support various public safety-related needs will fit that broad requirement.

In recognition of the tenth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has recently released its progress report highlighting the achievements that the Department and its many partners have made in carrying out the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations. Created in late 2002, this Commission was chartered to prepare a complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 attacks and to provide recommendations intended to strengthen our nation’s well-being and defense from future attacks. Additional information on this August 2004 report is available at www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm.

There are all kinds of disasters that require emergency response. Some of them occur naturally like pandemic influenza and hurricanes. Others are man-made disasters such as exploding bombs and other terrorist attacks. No matter the cause, health care providers play an essential role in the aftermath of these events, caring for the sick and wounded. In addition, health care entities play a major role in preventing certain catastrophes like the spread of infectious diseases. States and other regulatory agencies require hospitals and other health care organizations to be prepared for and able to respond to such emergencies.

Goodbye, Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS). Hello, National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS). The HSAS, first implemented in response to the September 11th attacks, was designed to “inform all levels of government and local authority, as well as the public, to the current risk of terrorist acts.” As many of us know, the previous system was built on a five-level, color-coded threat condition indicator that attempted to assign a color according to the current threat level. Latent with unrealized benefits, this colorful experiment has officially ended as of April 2011. In its place we find DHS writing a new chapter of homeland security preparedness.

By Vince Siragusa
May 2011

As an indication that federal lawmakers are increasingly committed to deficit reduction and reining in spending, the recent congressional compromise trims $38.5 billion over the remainder of federal fiscal year 2011. Inevitably, those asked to do more with less will continue to be called upon to follow up on this daunting assignment. While thrifty public and private organizations have long ago trimmed the proverbial fat from their operational costs, many homeland security grant programs, no longer exempt from the broader discretionary spending freezes, will now be required to meet the same task. Let us take some look at what we can expect in Department of Homeland Security spending in 2011.

Protecting valuable infrastructure has always been a mission for communities and those responsible for their safety. From medieval moats harboring castles down to the high-tech surveillance, training, and weapons in today’s world, efforts are infinite in their attempt to avert the loss of lives and property that can come as a result of natural disasters, man-made hazards, and terrorist attacks.

In only its second year of the current structure, the Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation (CTAS) was recently released by the Department of Justice. Unique in its layout, the CTAS program combines a multitude of tribal-specific grant opportunities into one solicitation with one due date. Tribal applicants now are responsible for one submission for up to 8 program areas, where previously separate applications were due for each program at varying times during the year. Tribes are also eligible to receive multiple awards for projects that span several purpose areas.

As the new calendar and fiscal year 2011 begins, many grant programs are being reminded that they are only as valuable as the actual projects they support. Those consistently lacking results often find their government appropriations dwindle, if not dry up entirely. With everyone positioning their stake for a finite, albeit ever-growing level of federal funding, many grantmaking agencies demonstrate their value by leveraging investments in various projects that represent not only immediate community benefits but also the greatest potential for a long-term return on investment. Grantseekers therefore have an opportunity in the new year to strike while the iron is hot. Savvy applicants will likely consider one of the following project components in their FY2011 applications.

Over the course of proposal development, applicants are often challenged by indentifying eligible equipment and solutions as part of their submission process. Programs like the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants (JAG) are very flexible in their procurement allowances. Other programs, much more nebulous with offering information on allowable solutions, rely heavily on the grantee’s ability to identify solutions most appropriate for project goals.

One of the nation’s more popular grant programs, the Justice Assistance Program (JAG), has opened for 2010. This Department of Justice (DOJ) program allows states, tribes, and local governments to support a broad range of activities based on local needs and conditions. The JAG program, first funded through the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, was the product of a merger between the former Byrne Memorial Formula Program and the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program. The rationale for combining the two programs was to create a single funding mechanism intended to simplify the application and administration process. In many ways, the merger also provided the grant recipient greater spending flexibility. This flexibility has resulted in thousands of municipalities and departments having the ability to steer JAG money toward any number of public safety areas where there is a need for support.