SMARTe.org October 2010

Sources of Money

OverviewAlthough every revitalization project is unique, the one thing they all have in common is the need for financing. There are many different types of financing available, from many different sources. This section presents information on a wide variety of financing options. Different financing strategies may be appropriate at different stages in the revitalization process, and a combination of strategies may be necessary to meet the financing demands of projects.

The following subsections discuss a variety of financing strategies currently used in site revitalization, including: Public Financing, Private Financing, Foundation Funding. The Resources and Tools section includes links to sites offering grant-writing assistance and a tool for identifying financial resources appropriate for various brownfield revitalization projects.

Public FinancingThe public sector plays multiple essential roles in real estate revitalization projects. Local governments, and to some extent state governments, typically create and enforce zoning and building codes, control the permitting process, and can offer financial incentives or infrastructure development to favorable projects. Fast-track permitting and the delivery of financial incentives are most common when a particular revitalization project meets community goals for environmental cleanup, urban revitalization, and job growth. Federal and state governments also provide grants, loans, or other contributions to projects that meet public goals. Financial incentives remain the mechanism of choice for the public sector to facilitate revitalization of sites. Frequently, the costs of land assembly, assessment, and cleanup make revitalization too expensive and risky for the private sector to assume a project without any public assistance. Hence, the public sector plays a valuable role in assisting developers to overcome some of the hurdles that can be encountered in the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. The tools available to the public sector to catalyze revitalization expand each year, and are becoming more creative and sophisticated.

A key lesson from the success stories reviewed in preparing SMARTe is that in many cases public-sector financial assistance is needed to make revitalization of sites economically viable. Many of these projects do not proceed without some kind of financial incentive by the public sector. Site remediation and preparation costs make many sites economically uncompetitive, at least initially. Many project teams have trouble putting a complete financing package together – especially the capital needed for three specific activities that might occur on a potentially contaminated site: (1) carrying out an early stage site assessment; (2) defining a site remediation plan (necessary if the owner wants to take the site through a voluntary cleanup program (VCP) in order to get some finality on liability concerns, or to be able to use institutional controls); and (3) performing the actual cleanup itself.

The potential for excess site revitalization costs indicates that many revitalization sites have a financing gap because revitalization costs to the developer exceed market value as determined by the lender and

Page 1 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

other market forces (Davis, 1997). The project team’s challenge is dealing with financing gaps and situations that make revitalization sites economically uncompetitive – at least initially – and pulling together the technical and financial resources that can help them leverage the financial aspects of the project, so they can realize the full competitive advantage of their location and situation.

For decades, federal development and finance mechanisms have been used to stimulate economic activity in certain geographic areas or industries, or under certain types of situations, when private capital markets chose not to participate. Revitalization projects at potentially contaminated sites represent a logical extension of the mission of many of the programs that federal agencies currently operate. Federal financial assistance programs applicable to revitalization of potentially contaminated sites are listed in the Federal Financial Assistance Programs Applicable to Revitalization of Potentially Contaminated Sites Exhibit (below).

A complete list of public funding resources is available in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) and can be searched by area, agency, and type of assistance.

Exhibit: Federal Financial Assistance Programs Applicable to Revitalization of Potentially Contaminated Sites

Program Type ProgramLoans EDA’s Title IX (capital for local revolving loan funds)Loans HUD funds for locally determined CDBG loans and “floats”Loans EPA capitalized brownfields cleanup revolving loan fundsLoans SBA’s microloansLoans SBA’s Section 504 development company debenturesLoans Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF)Loans Drinking Water State Revolving Loan FundLoan guarantees HUD’s Section 108 loan guaranteesLoan guarantees Federal Finance Housing AgencyLoan guarantees SBA’s Section 7(a) and Low-Doc programsGrants HUD’s Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI)Grants HUD’s Community Development Block Grants (for projects locally determined),

to entitlement communities, to states for small cities (less than 50,000 population)

Non-Entitlement Community Development Block Grants for HawaiiGrants HUD's Indian Community Development Block Grant Program

HUD's Office of Native American ProgramsGrants EPA Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment Grants and Funding

Transition guidanceGrants EDA Title I (public works) and Title IX (economic adjustment)

Post Award Reporting RequirementsGrants DOE State Energy Program (SEP) GrantsGrants DOT (various system construction and rehabilitation programs)Grants DOT’s Transportation and Community System Preservation (TCSP) Grant Fact

SheetGrants NOAA/EPA Coastal Brownfields

Page 2 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

Program Type ProgramGrants EPA Job Training GrantsGrants EPA student design competition to respond to the scientific and technical

challenges in moving towards the goal of sustainabilityGrants Natural Resources Conservation Service – Conservation Partnership InitiativeGrants USDA Rural Development Grants and Funds AvailableGrants USDA Urban and Community Forestry Program Grants NIEHS/EPA Brownfields Minority Worker Training Program Grants Health Resources and Services Administration GrantsGrants Nonpoint Source Management Program - Clean Water Section 319Grants SARE Research and Education, Professional Development, and Producer GrantsGrants Wildlife Habitat Council Appropriated funds U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Policy Pocket Reference Guide

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program

The Role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Brownfield RedevelopmentEquity capital SBA’s Small Business Investment CompaniesTax incentives and tax-exempt financing

Brownfields Tax Incentive

Technical Assistance NOAA/EPA Coastal Resource Coordinator Program Technical Assistance DOE National Industrial Competitiveness through Energy, Environment and

Economics Program Technical Assistance DOE Renewable Energy Activities Technical Assistance DOI Federal Lands to Parks Program Technical Assistance DOI Land and Water Conservation Fund Program Technical Assistance DOI Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program Technical Assistance Department of Treasury Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Technical Assistance Executive Office of the President Council on Environmental Quality Technical Assistance Hazardous Substance Research Centers

Technical Assistance for Brownfields (TAB) centers Technical Assistance USDA/FSA Conservation Reserve Program Technical Assistance USDA/FSA Conservation Reserve Enhancement ProgramTechnical Assistance USDA/NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives ProgramTechnical Assistance Wetland Reserve ProgramTechnical Assistance Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program Technical Assistance Conservation Security ProgramTechnical Assistance Forestland Enhancement ProgramTechnical Assistance Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program

The USDA Building Better Rural Places website offers an index of programs that discuss environmental issues and provide information resources, technical assistance, and funding sources related to sustainable communities, agricultural practices, food systems, nutrition and health, forestry, fisheries, wildlife & the environment, and small businesses and entrepreneurs.

Page 3 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

Community Development Block GrantsSeveral of the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) programs offer communities considerable potential resources and the most flexibility. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) are provided to entitlement, jurisdictions -- typically, cities with populations of at least 50,000, and qualified urban counties with populations of at least 200,000 (excluding the population of entitled cities) Entitlement communities receive annual grants; HUD determines the amount of each entitlement grant by a statutory dual formula that uses several objective measures of community needs, including the extent of poverty, population, housing overcrowding, age of housing, and population growth lag in relationship to other metropolitan areas. How the grant funds are spent is a local decision, within broad HUD guidelines that stipulate that CDBG projects and funding must either benefit low- and moderate-icome persons, address slum and blight conditions, or meet an urgent community need (such as response to a disaster). States get a formula-based allocation of CDBG resources to distribute to their non-entitlement, small cities; each state determines its own distribution priorities, within the broad HUD guidelines.

Block grant funds can be lent to private companies for economic development projects under some circumstances, for activities that stimulate economic development and create jobs for lower income people. Coping with contamination has been defined as an eligible activity, and specifically put into law in 1997 as part of appropriations language. Since then, more than 100 cities have used CDBG resources directly for revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. Cities ranging in size from Chicago, Illinois, to Somerville, Massachusetts, have used CDBG to clean up targeted city sites.

• Other cities have used CBDG to capitalize local revolving loan funds (RLFs) for revitalization of potentially contaminated sites.

• Youngstown, Ohio, is using CDBG to pay for first-year loan costs incurred by a new manufacturing plant attracted to a revitalization site.

• Dallas, Texas, used $155,000 in CDBG to directly pay for cleanup at its McCommas Bluff site.

• Wisconsin has been reserving $2.5 million of state CDBG allocation for its small cities to provide them with resources to pay for site assessments – meeting a key need.

• Detroit, Michigan, has used it to pay for infrastructure improvements.Additional information on eligibility, eligible activities, requirements, and citizen participation can be found here.

Section 108 Loan Guarantee ProgramHUD’s Section 108 loan guarantee program is linked to the block grant program. Section 108 was authorized to help cities finance site clearance, property acquisition, infrastructure, rehabilitation, or related activities too large for single-year block grant funding. This can include removal of toxic contaminants as part of site preparation activities.

Entitlement cities and counties may leverage up to 5 times their annual grant for large, capital intensive

Page 4 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

projects — typically, economic development projects needing considerable up-front cash for site preparation. Cities have up to 20 years to repay these HUD-backed loans. Most cities use the income generated from the sale or revitalization of the site to pay off the debt. Both programs have great potential to support site revitalization.

More and more cities are targeting Section 108 for use in the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. Chicago, Illinois, has used it to cover the costs of cleaning and assembling small parcels into 0.1 km2 (25 acres) and 0.2 km2 (50 acres) tracts for new industrial development. Denver, Colorado, is using Section 108 for short-term construction loans on downtown projects, with the developers repaying the notes upon sale of the properties. Mid-sized cities such as Yonkers, New York, have used Section 108 proceeds to create a brownfields revolving loan fund. However, stakeholders should consider that cities take similar risks with Section 108 loans that developers take with revitalization.

Small cities with less than 50,000 people are not eligible on their own to apply. They should apply through their state or an urban county. To date, Glen Cove, New York, is the only small city to gain access to this program. At this time, the states of Washington, California, and Connecticut are exploring greater use of Section 108 for small town revitalization projects, perhaps by setting up financing pools, or a conglomerate of financial providers. More information on Section 108 can be found at www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/108/index.cfm.

Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio Example Prior to the 2000 census, the city of Cuyahoga Falls was a sub-recipient of federal funds under Summit County because its population was under 50,000, explained Truby. This entitled the city to only $1,000 to $2,000 a year, Truby said.

Five years ago, when the city's population exceeded 50,000, it became an entitlement city, Truby said, enabling it to go directly to the federal government for money without a "middle man in the way." All CDBG dollars spent have to benefit residents with a low to moderate income, she noted. On average, she said, the city has been alloted $730,000 a year.

Among city programs that utilize CDBG funding is the housing rehabilitation low-interest loan program that helps residents pay for improvement projects such as a new roof or new wiring. There is also an emergency grant available in situations such as a furnace breakdown.

In the last five years, Truby said, the city has loaned $284,000 to rehabilitate 19 homes and provided 26 emergency grants. In addition the city provided $461,000 in grants to 117 homeowners through its paint rebate program, she said. The city also provided $114,591 in grants which leveraged $133,662 in private investment, to expand and improve 12 Heslop homes in 2007 and 2008, said Truby.

The city also uses CDBG funds for small loans to businesses that provide jobs to low to moderate income residents. Funding is also used in infrastructure projects to improve areas of the city primarily inhabited by low to moderate income people.

There are four areas of the city targeted for CDBG-funded projects, said Fred Guerra, the city's planning director. They are the Cuyahoga River Area, State-Portage Trail Area, Bailey-Munroe Falls Area and Northampton Area. Guerra said a lot of the funds will be spent in the Cuyahoga River Area, which includes the Cuyahoga River Brownfield Corridor along South Front Street.

Page 5 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

Guerra said the goals in the new plan include rehabilitating owner-occupied housing for households at or below 80 percent of the median family income. He said there are 1,740 households in the city that fall into that category and have problems. Other goals are to provide emergency grants and rental assistance and develop new rental housing units for the elderly and small families.

Of the money allocated, 25 percent is to be used on housing rehab, 25 percent on infrastructure improvement, 18 percent on administration and planning, 12 percent on sustainable growth projects, and 20 percent on citywide job creation, said Truby.

The new plan lists street improvement projects on South Front, Stone, and Germaine streets, and Francis and Arcadia avenues, Guerra said.

Additional information can be found on the city's web site at http://cfo.cityofcf.com/web2/view.do?dir=commdevelop/cdbg.

Community Development Block Grant - FloatGenerally, CDBG recipients are unable to use their entire block grant allocations in the year received; long-term, larger projects (such as infrastructure construction) approved for funding take more than a year to plan and carry out. According to HUD rules, funds not needed to meet current project costs remain in the federal treasury until the city actually needs them. It is not unusual for CDBG funds awarded one year to be drawn down a couple of years later as big capital projects move towards completion.

When a city can show that previously awarded CDBG funds will not be needed in the near term, it may tap its block grant account on an interim basis – using what HUD calls a CDBG “float” – to finance short-term, low interest construction financing for projects that create jobs. Any developer, not-for-profit agency, or private company that can obtain an irrevocable letter of credit from a lender is eligible to apply for such financing. (The letter of credit satisfies HUD’s concern that the funding will be available for its originally planned purpose.)

Proceeds may be used to pay all costs for the purchase of land and buildings, site and structural rehabilitation – including environmental remediation – or new construction. Float funds can also finance purchase of machinery and equipment. Maximum loan size is determined by the amount of funds in a jurisdiction’s CDBG account available to cover the float. Float loans cannot be extended for more than two years; the interest rate is limited to 40 percent of the prevailing prime rate. A few municipalities, notably Chicago, Illinois, have financed cleanup activities via the CDBG float mechanism.

Brownfield Economic Development InitiativeAnother financing tool that is available is HUD’s Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI), although the administration has proposed terminating it and it has been erratically funded over the past several years; this year, $17 million will be available:

BEDI grants are intended to improve the viability of projects financed with HUD’s Section 108 loan guarantee program. BEDI funds can be used for any activity also eligible under CDBG. For example,

Page 6 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

cities may use BEDI funds to pay interest on the 108 loans, thereby rendering the loan interest free. But BEDI grants must be used in conjunction with new Section 108 loan guarantees, with at least a dollar-per-dollar ratio — they will not be granted independently. This is proving to be a stumbling block for cities that have reached their limit on Section 108 — either in real dollar terms, or because of local political and community pressures. And again, small cities, in practice, are largely shut out of the BEDI process.

Nevertheless, BEDI may offer a good option for some cities in the right circumstances. Recen examples of successful projects include Buffalo, New York, which used $240,000 in BEDI funds and a $3 million in Section 108 funds for site preparation and remediation at the Union Ship Canal commercial and office project; and Phillipsburg, New Jersey, which used $500,000 in BEDI funds and $2.5 million in Section 108 to acquire and revitalize part of the former Ingersoll Rand site into a modern industrial park, doing soil remediation as part of site preparation work that will include road, rail, and utility upgrading.

Low-Income Housing Tax CreditsLow-income housing tax credits are a federal tool with the potential to support revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. Every state gets an annual allocation of tax credit authority from the Treasury Department, to re-distribute to communities and other entities to promote affordable housing construction. A change added to the 2008 home owner assistance act required states to use their allocations to promote green construction. With the guaranteed return-on-investment generated by the low-income housing tax credit, developers may be more willing to consider brownfields and other previously used sites, because they can fold in remediation and site preparation expenses as part of the overall deal. There is growing interest in reusing potentially contaminated sites for residential purposes, and many recent affordable housing projects have taken advantage of these credits.

Low-income housing tax credits can play an important role in attracting the necessary capital for completing housing projects on potentially contaminated sites. One of the first success stories can be found in Trenton, New Jersey, where the Circle F project was developed on a contaminated manufacturing site. Trenton officials selected a long-time local non-profit developer to undertake the project that included senior housing and low-impact manufacturing. The developer fronted the $500,000 for site cleanup and preparation, and applied for and received an allocation of $8 million in federal low-income housing tax credits through the state of New Jersey. These credits attracted a private lender, who helped finance the project and assumed the role of a limited partner in the project in order to get the benefit of the tax credits. In the case of Circle F, the credits were linked to site contamination considerations without undermining the bank’s profitability.

Economic Development Administration GrantsThe U.S. Economic Development Administration (USEDA) provides grants to communities to support public works activities, and to capitalize economic adjustment revolving loan funds aimed at reversing economic decline. Since approximately 2001, USEDA has recognized revitalization of potentially contaminated sites as an important program objective, spending nearly 20 percent of its project resources on these activities. USEDA’s public works program supports industrial development

Page 7 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

activities. US EDA’s goal in brownfields redevelopment is to create value by returning non-productive, blighted and/or formerly contaminated real estate to local tax rolls while fostering capital investment and creating higher-skill, higher-wage jobs. USEDA’s economic adjustment and defense economic adjustment programs can provide capital for locally run revolving loan funds to enhance business development activities in distressed areas. USEDA resources can work well as part of packages to revitalize potentially contaminated sites.

Department of Transportation FundsSome communities have made creative use of Department of Transportation funds to contribute to the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. As a growing number of case studies show, transportation projects can be connected with these revitalization projects in three ways:

• Situations in which the revitalization site itself may be a transportation facility in need of upgrading – this most commonly includes roads and rail yards

• Sites where infrastructure improvements are needed to make them more marketable – typically by expanding access for vehicles, freight, or passengers

• When part of the transportation solution is also part of the environmental solution, such as using roads, parking lots, and other transportation structures as caps to limit exposure to site contaminants

As recently as March, 2009, DOT re-affirmed its policy that if the most feasible location for a transportation system improvement – an inter-change, arterial road, transit line, bus barn, etc. – happens to be a contaminated site, then DOT resources may be used to clean up that site as part of project development and construction activities.

Small Business Administration Loans and Loan Guarantees Most federal loan assistance, in the form of loan guarantees (nearly $20 billion worth this year) is delivered by the Small Business Administration (SBA). The vast majority of this assistance is provided through SBA’s Section 7(a) loan guarantee program, which is delivered by private banks; and through the Section 504 Development Company program, administered by local economic development agencies or community-based corporations. While SBA retains much of the broad oversight authority, specific projects are locally determined and driven. SBA can prove especially helpful to new or small firms that usually lack access to affordable capital from conventional sources. However, to date, SBA programs have only tangentially addressed revitalization of potentially contaminated sites; in fact, some bank officials and local economic developers have complained that SBA tends to be more conservative with respect to contamination and liability concerns than private lenders themselves. SBA generally only looks at clean deals.

EPA’s Brownfields Program The 2002 Brownfields Law expanded potential federal financial assistance for site revitalization, including grants for assessment, cleanup, and job training. It also limited the liability of certain

Page 8 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

contiguous property owners and prospective purchasers of revitalization properties, and clarifies innocent landowner defenses to encourage revitalization and reuse of sites.

The EPA Grant Funds Eligibility Exhibit indicates, by grant program, what types of entities are eligible to receive EPA funds for revitalization assessment, revolving loan fund (RLF), and cleanup grants. Contact your EPA Regional representative for assistance. Additional information on each of these programs, along with case studies highlighting Brownfield sites that have successfully used grants and RLFs can be found at www.epa.gov/brownfields/success.htm

Exhibit: EPA Grant Funds Eligibility

Type of Applicant Assessment RLF 1 Cleanup 1

General Purpose Unit of Local Government 2 X X XLand Clearance Authority or other quasi-governmental entity that operates under the supervision and control of, or as an agent of, a general purpose unit of local government

X X X

Government Entity Created by State Legislature X X XRegional council or group of general purpose units of local government

X X X

Revitalization Agency that is chartered or otherwise sanctioned by a state

X X X

State X X XIndian Tribe other than in Alaska 3 X X XAlaska Native Regional Corporation, Alaska Native Village Corporation, and Metlakatla Indian Community 4

X X X

Nonprofit organizations 5 X1 To be eligible for a cleanup grant or an RLF subgrant, the applicant must own the site for which they seek funding by the time the award is made.2 For purposes of the brownfields grant program, EPA defines general purpose unit of local government as a “local government” as that term is defined under 40 CFR Part 31.3 Intertribal Consortia are eligible for funding in accordance with EPA’s policy for funding intertribal consortia in the brownfields program to be published in the Federal Register. This policy also may be obtained from your Regional Brownfields Contact.4 Alaska Native Regional Corporations and Alaska Native Village Corporations are defined in the Alaskan Native Claim Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 and following).5 For the purposes of the brownfields grant program, EPA will use the definition of nonprofit organizations contained in Section 4(6) of the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999, Public Law 106-107. The term "nonprofit organization" means any corporation, trust, association, cooperative, or other organization that is operated primarily for scientific, educational, service, charitable, or similar purpose in the public interest; is not organized primarily for profit; and uses net proceeds to maintain, improve, or expand the operation of the organization.

Page 9 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

EPA Assessment Grant ProgramAssessment grants provide funding for a grant recipient to inventory, characterize, assess, and conduct planning and community involvement related to revitalization sites. EPA publishes revised grant guidelines annually; for more information, contact the EPA Regional representative or look for updates at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/applicat.htm.

• An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 to address sites contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum) and up to $200,000 to address sites contaminated by petroleum. Grant funds may not exceed $400,000 per applicant unless a waiver is requested, which must be based on the anticipated level of contamination, size, or ownership status of the site. Applicants may request a waiver of the $200,000 limits up to $350,000 for sites contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum) and up to $350,000 to address sites contaminated by petroleum. Due to budget limitations, no entity may apply for funding assessment activities in excess of the $700,000 as described above.

• The performance period for these grants generally will be two years.

EPA Revolving Loan Fund Grant ProgramRevolving Loan Fund (RLF) grants provide funding for a grant recipient to capitalize a revolving loan fund and to provide subgrants to carry out cleanup activities at revitalization sites.

• An eligible entity may apply for up to $1,000,000 for an initial RLF grant. Coalitions of eligible entities may apply together under one recipient for up to $1,000,000 per eligible entity. These funds may be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum and hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum).

• Proposals may be submitted by “coalitions,” or groups of eligible entities, to pool their revolving loan capitalization grant funds. A coalition is a grouping of two or more eligible entities joined together under one grant recipient. The grant recipient must administer the grant, be accountable to EPA for proper expenditure of the funds, and be the point of contact for the other coalition members. Members of the coalition other than the grant recipient must submit letters agreeing to be part of the coalition.

• An RLF grant recipient must use at least 60 percent of the awarded funds to capitalize a revolving loan fund. Revolving loan funds generally are used to provide no-interest or low-interest loans for revitalization site cleanups. An RLF grant recipient also may use its funds to award subgrants to other eligible entities, including nonprofit organizations, for revitalization site cleanups on sites owned by the subgrantee; however, an RLF grant recipient may use no more than 40 percent of the awarded funds for cleanup subgrants and may not subgrant to itself. Unlike loans, cleanup subgrants do not require repayment.

• An RLF award requires a 20 percent cost share, which may be in the form of a contribution of money, labor, material, or services, and must be for eligible and allowable costs (the match must

Page 10 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

equal 20 percent of the amount of funding provided by EPA and cannot include administrative costs). An RLF grant applicant may request a waiver of the 20 percent cost share requirement based on hardship. Applicants should contact their Regional representative to discuss applying for a waiver prior to submitting initial proposals.

EPA Cleanup Grant ProgramCleanup grants provide funding for a grant recipient to carry out cleanup activities at revitalization sites. For more information, contact the EPA Regional representative or look for updates at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/applicat.htm.

• An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 per site. Due to budget limitations, no entity should apply for funding cleanup activities at more than five sites. These funds may be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum and hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum).

• Cleanup grants require a 20 percent cost share, which may be in the form of a contribution of money, labor, material, or services, and must be for eligible and allowable costs (the match must equal 20 percent of the amount of funding provided by EPA and cannot include administrative costs). A cleanup grant applicant may request a waiver of the 20 percent cost share requirement based on hardship. Applicants should contact their Regional representative to discuss applying for a waiver prior to submitting Initial Proposals.

• An eligible entity must own the site by the time the grant is awarded for which it is requesting funding in order to qualify.

• A local government may use up to 10 percent of its grant funds for monitoring the health of populations exposed to one or more hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants from a revitalization site and monitoring and enforcement of any institutional control used to prevent human exposure to any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from a revitalization site.

• The performance period for these grants generally will be two years.

EPA Brownfields Job Training GrantsEPA, other federal agencies, local job training organizations, community colleges, labor groups, and others have established partnerships to develop long-term plans for fostering workforce development through environmental training, ensure the recruitment of trainees from socio-economically disadvantaged communities, provide quality worker-training, and allow local residents an opportunity to qualify for jobs developed as a result of brownfields efforts.

The Brownfields Job Training Grants will each be funded up to $200,000 over two years. There Grants will bring together community groups, job training organizations, educators, labor groups, investors, lenders, developers, and other affected parties to address the issue of providing environmental employment and training for residents in communities impacted by brownfields. EPA’s Brownfields Program is an organized commitment to help communities revitalize brownfields properties both

Page 11 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

environmentally and economically, mitigate potential health risks, and restore economic vitality to areas where brownfields exist. For more information go to: www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/job.htm.

Brownfield Cleanup Expensing Tax Incentive Initially enacted in 1997 and extended through December 31, 2009, the Brownfields Tax Expensing incentive encourages the cleanup and reuse of brownfields by allowing environmental cleanup costs at eligible properties to be fully deductible in the year incurred, rather than capitalized and spread over a period of years. A 2006 statutory amendment expanded the types of properties eligible for the incentive to include those with petroleum contamination. (Congress is currently considering a revival of this tax incentive, through at least the end of 2011, but it has not yet passed.)

The Brownfields tax incentive is applicable to properties that meet specific land use and contamination requirements. To satisfy the land use requirement, the property must either be held by the taxpayer incurring the eligible expenses for use in a trade or business or for the production of income; or, the property must be properly included in the taxpayer's inventory.

To satisfy the contamination requirement, hazardous substances or petroleum must be present or potentially present on the property. Sites listed or proposed for listing on EPA's National Priorities List are not eligible for the tax incentive. Taxpayers must obtain a statement from a designated state agency verifying a property’s eligibility for the tax incentive. State contacts can be found on EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/stxcntct.htm .

Amended tax returns may be filed to deduct expenditures from prior tax years. IRS guidance indicates that such returns must be filed within three years after the date a corporation filed its original return, or within two years after the date a corporation paid the tax (if filing for a refund), whichever is later. The IRS or a qualified tax professional should be consulted if there is any uncertainty as to whether prior tax year deductions are allowable.

EPA P3 Award CompetitionEPA and its 40 partners from industry, non-government organizations, and other government agencies, offer this student design competition to respond to the scientific and technical challenges in moving towards the goal of sustainability.

P3 is a partnership between the public and private sectors to achieve the mutual goals of economic prosperity while protecting the natural systems of the planet and providing a higher quality of life for its people. The P3 competition will provide grants to teams of college students to research, develop, and design sustainable solutions to environmental challenges. More information is located at www.epa.gov/P3.

EPA Return to UseAs part of the EPA Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, the Return to Use program is intended to help communities reclaim former Superfund sites and restore them to beneficial use. The Initiative is

Page 12 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

designed to remove barriers to reuse that are not necessary for the protection of human health, the environment, or the remedy at those sites where remedies are already in place.

The Initiative focuses on National Priorities List sites that were cleaned up prior to EPA’s current emphasis on considering reuse during response activities. Many of these sites have remained vacant. With appropriate oversight, communities can reclaim these vacant sites. Returning these sites to beneficial use will provide local communities with valuable green space, recreational amenities, or commercial property. Removing the stigma associated with fenced and vacant Superfund sites may also increase local property values and the tax base.

EPA can fund activities that facilitate reuse, as long as those activities are designed to project the future land use. Anticipating the probable future use of a Superfund site after it has been cleaned up is of key importance in selecting and designing a remedy that will be consistent with that use. Activities that are appropriate for funding under Superfund include the following:

• Community needs assessments that identify major issues, needs and desires of the local officials and the community related to the anticipated future use

• Analyses that identify area market conditions and trends to provide a realistic understanding of the uses and activities that could occur on-site

• Physical site evaluation to determine assets and constraints of the site and available infrastructure (transportation, utilities)

• Stakeholder and community outreach on reuse options

• Preparation of reports documenting the results of the analyses and describing anticipated future uses, and coordination of the reuse planning activities with the Superfund response process

Other EPA ResourcesAdditional EPA grant resource and technical assistance information, as well as more detail about EPA Regional Programs, can be found on the following web sites.

Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) Cooperative Agreements – This EPA program empowers communities to form collaborative partnerships, develop a comprehensive understanding of all sources of risk from toxics, set priorities, and identify and implement projects to reduce risks through collaborative action at the local level.

Environmental Education Grants Program – The goal of this program is to support environmental education (EE) projects that enhance the public’s awareness, knowledge, and skills to make informed and responsible decisions that affect environmental quality.

Environmental Justice Grants – Information on various EPA environmental justice (EJ) grant programs including the Small Grants Program, the EJ Community/ University Partnership Grants Program, and the Environmental Justice Through Pollution Prevention Grants Program.

Page 13 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

Directory of Technical Assistance for Land Revitalization (large file) - Provides information about technical assistance available from federal agencies to assist regional, state, and local government personnel in assessment and cleanup decisions at brownfields, reuse, and revitalization sites.

Natural Resources Conservation Service – Conservation Partnership Initiative - The Conservation Partnership Initiative (CPI) is a voluntary program established to foster conservation partnerships that focus technical and financial resources on conservation priorities in watersheds of special significance. Under CPI, funds are awarded to state and local governments and agencies, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organizations that have a history of working with agricultural producers.

EPA/NOAA Coastal Brownfields – EPA and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) agreed to work together to help coastal communities grow in ways that benefit the economy, public health, and the environment. Grants are available through the NOAA Portfields Program for revitalization of brownfields in port and harbor areas.

Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) Clean Water Financing – Includes guidance and information about the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program, Water Pollution Control Program Grants for states, Water Quality Cooperative Agreements, and Clean Water Indian Program Grants.

One Stop Reporting Program – The One Stop Program is designed as a long-term effort to develop a coherent overall environmental reporting and data management “system” that effectively serves all stakeholders, including the public, regulators, and industry. EPA hopes to extend One Stop grant offers to all 50 states by the end of Fiscal Year 2003.

Pollution Prevention Incentives for States – The Pollution Prevention Incentive for States (PPIS) grant program provides about $5 million annually to state and tribal programs to help develop and sustain state pollution prevention (P2) program activities and pioneer new P2 approaches in the states.

Water Grants – Information on national grant programs, including the State Revolving Funds for drinking water and wastewater, grants for water pollution prevention and wetlands protection, and tribal grants.

Regional InformationRegion 1 (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT) Grants and Funding in New England – Community funding sources and environmental education grants program.

Region 2 (NJ, NY, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands) Grants – Grants available to the Region 2 community including current issues, application kits, community grants and FAQs.

Region 3 (DE, DC, MD, VA, PA, WV) Grants and Funding in the Mid-Atlantic States – General grant information and water financing information.

Region 4 (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN) Grant Assistance – Grant information and information on managing your EPA assistance agreement.

Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI) Funding Sources – Information on grant funding available in Region 5.

Region 6 (AR, LA, OK, NM, TX) Grants and Funding – Information about grants, funding and

Page 14 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

procurement and also minority and women business enterprise information.

Region 7 (IA, KS, MO, NE) Regional Grants Information – Regional and national grant information as well as forms and guidelines.

Region 8 (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY) Grants and Financial Assistance –Information covering grants available in Region 8.

Region 9 (AZ, CA, HI, NV, American Samoa, Guam) Funding Sources – Information on Region 9’s continuing program and project grants.

Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, WA) Grants – Information on grants available in Region 10.

Other Grant ProgramsBelow is a listing of the grant programs administered by EPA as listed in the Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog. Each program in this list is prefaced with a hyperlink to a website describing the grant program.

66.001 Air Pollution Control Program Support

66.032 State Indoor Radon Grants

66.033 Ozone Transport

66.033 Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works

66.419 Water Pollution Control: State and Interstate Program Support

66.432 State Public Water System Supervision

66.433 State Underground Water Source Protection

66.454 Water Quality Management Planning

66.456 National Estuary Program

66.458 Capitalization Grants for State Revolving Funds

66.460 Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants

66.461 Wetlands Grants

66.463 Water Quality Cooperative Agreements

66.466 Chesapeake Bay Program

66.467 Wastewater Operator Training Grant Program (Technical Assistance)

66.468 Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

66.469 Great Lakes Program

66.508 Senior Environmental Employment Program

66.600 Environmental Protection Consolidated Grants: Program Support

66.604 Environmental Justice Grants to Small Community Groups

Page 15 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

66.605 Performance Partnership Grants

66.609 Children’s Health Protection

66.700 Consolidated Pesticide Enforcement Cooperative Agreements

66.701 Toxic Substances Compliance Monitoring Cooperative Agreements

66.707 TSCA Title IV State Lead Grants: Certification of Lead-Based Paint Professionals

66.708 Pollution Prevention Grants Program

66.714 Pesticide Environmental Stewardship: Regional Grants

66.801 Hazardous Waste Management State Program Support

66.802 Superfund State Site-Specific Cooperative Agreements

66.804 State and Tribal Underground Storage Tanks Program

66.805 Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Program

66.806 Superfund Technical Assistance Grants for Citizen Groups at Priority Sites

66.808 Solid Waste Management Assistance

66.809 Superfund State Core Program Cooperative Agreements

66.810 CEPP Technical Assistance Grants Program

66.926 Indian Environmental General Assistance Program

66.950 Environmental Education and Training Program

66.951 Environmental Education Grants

Exhibit: Assessment and Cleanup Grant Ranking Criteria

Assessment and Cleanup Grant Ranking Criteria

Associated SMARTe Section

Grant proposal budget Estimating Economic ViabilityCommunity need Community AssessmentSite selection process Site DescriptionSustainable reuse of revitalization sites/development potential

Sustainable Practices

Creation and/or preservation for greenspace/open space or other nonprofit purpose

Landscaping and Ecosystem Restoration

Reuse of existing infrastructure Infrastructure ConsiderationsCommunity involvement Community Involvement and CommunicationReduction of threats to human health and the environment

Risk Assessment

Leveraging of additional resources Sources of Money

Page 16 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

Empowerment Zone/Enterprise CommunitiesThe Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC) program is designed to empower communities across the nation by inspiring people to work together to create jobs and opportunities. An EZ or EC is a distressed community that the federal government has targeted to receive substantial investment of federal technical resources and special bond issuing authority to encourage private sector development, job growth, and entrepreneurship. Revitalization of abandoned, distressed properties clearly falls within the mission of the EZ/EC initiatives.

Although this program has not made any new designations in nearly a decade, several dozen urban and rural communities still have designations and are entitled to these benefits. Further information is available from USDA and HUD.

State and Local financial Assistance Program TypesMost cities and states offer their own grant, loan, tax incentive, and/or technical assistance programs that provide support for projects that involve assessment, cleanup, and revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. A range of types are described below.

In seeking support, project sponsors should know that grant assistance can be attained from a number of agencies including non-environmental agencies. For example, communities may be able to finance revitalization projects through a state economic development agency. As an alternative, localities can seek grants not traditionally used for site cleanup, such as groundwater protection grants, which could be awarded for protecting groundwater from contamination from a site being revitalized.

Subsidized Low-Interest LoansSubsidized low-interest loans can be used to reduce the cost of capital for project sponsors. They also provide full or partial financing for projects that otherwise might be unavailable on the private capital markets or that would be available only at an interest rate higher than the prevailing rates to compensate for the potential additional risk involved in the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. Many projects have made use of existing state and local loan programs for revitalization. Others have made use of loan programs specifically targeted to assessment, cleanup, and revitalization of potentially contaminated sites.

Revolving Loan FundsA revolving fund is a source of money that provides loans for specific purposes including financing revitalization projects. The parties reimburse the fund for the loan amount plus interest. Through payback of principal and interest, the fund is able to maintain the same or increased levels of funding. Private revolving funds are typically developed through the revenue disbursement from a trust fund. More information on revolving loan funds can be found under SMARTe Public Financing under EPA Revolving Loan Fund Grant Program.

BondsBond types take numerous forms – general obligation (GO) bonds, tax-exempt public or private activity bonds, and taxable bonds. But in most cases, the attractiveness of bond financing is that it can extend

Page 17 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

payment for new projects over a period of 15 to 30 years allowing time to generate sufficient income to repay the capital invested. Typically, states and local governments repay bonds with revenues from taxes, fees, or other sources. For revitalization projects, bonds backed by tax increment financing can be particularly popular because they rely on tax revenues anticipated from the economic impacts of the revitalization property after the project has been completed.

Tax exempt bonds provide income to bond purchasers that is exempt from federal and state taxes. Tax exempt bond funds can be used for government purposes including airports, docks and wharves, mass commuting facilities, facilities for furnishing water, sewage disposal, and facilities for solid waste disposal, including large investment for infrastructure, small issuer manufacturing facility bonds, and multifamily housing bonds for affordable housing. Security and sources of repayment for bonds need to be identified (property taxes, revenues, limited tax, tax increment financing [TIFs], local improvement district [LID], certification of participation [COP], lease purchase of obligation [using lease revenues to pay back debt]). Types of project bonds include open space projects, parks, housing, golf courses, assisted living facilities, hospitals, convention centers, libraries and mixed use projects.

GO bonds can bring vital flexibility to community-based brownfield financing strqategies. Virtually all communities can GO bonds for (in the terms of one city attorney) “any proper public purpose which pertains to its local government and affairs.” Economic development practitioners can make a strong case that a bond pool to support cleanup and reuse projects could create jobs and enhance the local tax base, which are appropriate public purposes. Cities traditionally issue GO bonds for acquiring land, preparing sites, and making infrastructure improvements – key elements in a revitalization strategy. Moreover, the city’s ability to repay this bond debt would be enhanced by the growth in property tax revenues as more potentially contaminated sites are brought back to productive uses

Lease ArrangementsSome communities find that revitalization projects can be stimulated by using a public agency to buy the sites (or take title to abandoned property), assess and cleanup the contamination, and then lease the property to private developers. The lease shields the developer from environmental liability as an owner (but not as a transporter or generator of hazardous waste), and gives the community a source of revenue. Depending on the length and terms of the lease, a community could use the payments to service bonds issued to support the project, or to pay off loans that the community had secured. In some cases, the local government finds a lessor before starting the project. In others, it pursues the project before identifying tenants.

Public OwnershipA second option that should be evaluated is to assess, cleanup, and revitalize a site as a publicly-owned parcel. After the local government has assembled the property and begun the first stages of cleanup, it can either sell the property to the private sector or retain ownership on its own behalf, and potentially set up lease arrangements as discussed in the previous paragraph. Public ownership can qualify sites for additional funding not available to privately-owned sites.

Land BanksSome states have authorized their communities to establish and use land banks, which take title to revitalization sites through the use of property tax foreclosure, eminent domain, or purchase. Depending on their objectives, they may assess and clean up the site, then sell the property to a developer. Some communities use the proceeds from the lease or sale of the property to finance future

Page 18 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

projects. A growing number of communities are launching land banks to help them address the growing problem of vacant properties.

Tax Increment FinancingThe tax increment financing (TIF) mechanism, available in 49 states, has traditionally been used for numerous types of economic revitalization efforts, usually in economically distressed or abandoned areas. The TIF process uses the anticipated growth in property taxes generated by a revitalization project to finance public sector investment in it. TIFs are built on the concept that new value will be created – an essential premise of most revitalization initiatives – and that the future value can be used to finance part of the activities needed now to create that new value. The key to TIF is the local commitment of incremental tax resources for the payment of revitalization costs. This funding mechanism may not be suitable for parks or other public projects that do not generate property tax, and it may compete with other programs that use tax revenues as incentives.

To fully take advantage of the increment over the long term, TIF bonds are typically issued for the specific purpose of revitalization – acquiring and preparing the site; upgrading utilities, streets, or parking facilities; and carrying out other necessary site improvements. This makes them an ideal financing tool for site revitalization projects, in fact, many cities with success stories helped bring them about with TIF financing. TIF programs are easily used with other types of funding, such as grants or loans.

However, many jurisdictions have been hesitant to use TIF mechanisms for revitalization of potentially contaminated sites; if projected revitalization fails to materialize or unanticipated complications arise, it can be difficult to retire the bonds. Some local economic development practitioners also cite the complexity of many TIF initiatives as a practical disadvantage. They can require a lot of time to put into place and high levels of technical expertise and negotiating savvy to move a project from concept to implementation, especially one made more difficult by environmental concerns.

Real Estate Transfer TaxReal estate transfer taxes are charged to the buyer or seller of a contaminated property at the time of transfer. These taxes are a percentage of the assessed value of property transferred, a flat deed registration fee, or a combination of the two. Both state and local governments use this planning tool to fund land-related initiatives, including acquisition of natural lands.

Tax AbatementsTax abatements include deferments or reductions in tax obligations and are commonly used to stimulate investments in building improvements or new construction in areas where property taxes or other conditions discourage private investment. States must usually grant local governments the authority to offer tax abatement programs, and most allow only certain areas to participate, such as economically distressed communities or deteriorating neighborhoods.

Tax abatement programs should be carefully designed to target intended beneficiaries without offering

Page 19 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

unnecessary subsidies. The key advantage of tax abatements is that they give local governments a workable, flexible incentive that helps influence private investment decisions. This can be important in efforts to promote reuse of revitalization sites.

Equity ParticipationEquity participation is a loan that includes conditions under which the lender shares in the increase in equity of the business or development. Many communities consider equity participation an excellent tool for stimulating projects. That effort can take the form of lease arrangements, establishment of reclamation banks, or municipal ownership and revitalization of property on its own behalf. The important aspect of equity participation is that the public sponsor assumes part of the risk of the project. For many communities, the risk is worthwhile because the assessed, cleaned up, and revitalized property will provide a source of new tax revenue. In addition, although state and local governments enjoy only a statutory liability exemption when acquiring property involuntarily, federal regulators have historically been more reluctant to pursue legal action against public agencies than against private landowners, a fact that reduces the risk. Even where it may not be appropriate to provide local funds for a private revitalization, local governments can contribute by upgrading utilities, providing streetscapes, and providing other improvements to adjacent public areas.

Refocusing Existing Local Development ProgramsEvery local government already uses a variety of financial assistance programs and incentives to promote economic and business development. Like federal and state programs, local offerings can be more explicitly packaged and promoted for potential developers and lenders to use to clean and rehabilitate potentially contaminated sites. A growing number of cities are examining ways to do this. Alternatives being considered in some places include:

• Earmarking water, sewer, and waste water charges for cleanup activities

• Earmarking some portion of grant, loan, or loan guarantee program funds to applicants proposing site characterization or cleanup projects

• Discounting publicly-owned properties with cleanup requirements

• Channeling some portion of loan repayments from existing city programs to the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites

• Devoting monies raised from fines or fees to a financing pool to be used for the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites

• Using small amounts of public funds to “seed” a private, shared-risk financing pool devoted to the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites

In addition, cities can explore other low- or no-cost techniques to stimulate the flow of capital to promising revitalization undertakings. For example, Chicago, Trenton, and Cleveland are a few of the cities that are considering ways to more easily convey tax-delinquent properties to new owners with

Page 20 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

viable reuse plans. Other cities are contemplating modifications in their zoning requirements, in specific cases, to provide developers with the opportunity to earn a greater return on their investment and offset site preparation costs.

Private FinancingAs the legislative, technical, and financial environment for cleanup and revitalization continues to improve, private developers are completing projects without public assistance in increasing numbers. Private companies and individuals may find the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites profitable, and will logically choose sites with the greatest potential for profitable involvement (the low-hanging fruit). While some public sector programs fund municipal efforts to clean up contaminated land, most cleanup resources come from private-sector investors who are looking for sound investments that promise returns above the market value. Private companies and joint ventures between developers, environmental consultants, insurers, and financiers that specialize in revitalization fill this unique market area.

Some revitalization projects may require a combination of lenders to obtain the full financing needed.

Trust FundsTrust funds are special accounts developed to receive and disburse revenues from taxes or fees for dedicated purposes including revitalization projects. These funds differ from revolving funds in that they do not maintain funding capacity through payback of loans, but through new injections of revenue through taxes or fees.

Real Estate Investment TrustReal estate investment trusts (REITs) are sources of revenues from private investors. REITs are holding companies that act as primary investors when purchasing property. For revitalization of potentially contaminated sites, the REIT acts as the owner, thereby shielding investors from liability in excess of the investor’s initial investment.

A REIT is essentially a mutual fund that specializes in pooled investments in real estate. REITs are fully integrated companies with professional management and staff that put real estate planning, acquisition, revitalization, management, and sales under one roof. With their investment focus, REITs can assemble diverse portfolios of real estate properties to spread and reduce financial risks. REIT dividend earnings can be tax-exempt for tax-exempt investors such as pension funds. Most REITs have a particular real estate investment focus, such as residential housing, industrial properties, general commercial properties, or shopping centers.

Hundreds of REITs throughout the country provide investment vehicles for billions of dollars in real estate properties located in thousands of communities. REITs are a major force in the development of apartment housing and shopping centers. As an industry, REITs have been in existence for more than 30 years and are vehicles for billions of dollars in real estate investments each year ($6.5 billion in 1992).

Page 21 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

REITs that focus on industrial and commercial real estate are beginning to include select potentially contaminated sites in their portfolios. New REITs are being established that focus on buying, assessing, cleaning up, revitalizing, or selling contaminated properties. Such REITs can be structured to focus investments on real estate properties located in Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC). An EZ or EC is a distressed community that the Federal government has targeted to receive substantial investment of federal technical resources to encourage private sector development, job growth, and entrepreneurship.

Foundation FundingFoundations provide funds and technical assistance to non-profit organizations for a range of activities including education, public health, science, the arts, the environment, and social services. Foundations are classified by type:

• Private independent foundation • Corporate foundation • Community foundation

One of the best sources of information for those beginning the grant-seeking process is the Foundation Center's Virtual Classroom, in which you'll find some free information on various foundations and other grantmakers, as well as technical assistance. The following links also contain listings of various foundations of potential interest for site revitalization projects.

Foundations.org – An on-line directory of foundations and grantmakers.

Foundation Center – Provides name of foundations across the U.S., with search capabilities.

The following are a few of the many private foundation funding resources.

The Kresge Foundation - Green building grant for nonprofit organizations.

Surdna Foundation - The foundation makes grants in the areas of environment, community revitalization, effective citizenry, the arts and the nonprofit sector.

Geraldine R. Dodge – Provides environment grants focused on sustainability, solutions to environmental protection and development needs.

The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation – Supports growth management in metropolitan areas and family and community development.

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation – Provides competitive funding to projects that sustain, restore, and enhance the Nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats.

Grant Writing ResourcesPrivate and Nonprofit GrantsPrivate nonprofit organizations and corporations can also be a source of grant funds for revitalization

Page 22 of 23

SMARTe.org October 2010

projects, especially for revitalization and job creation activities. Publications (some for a fee) can direct states and localities to organizations and corporations that are likely to provide grants, as well as information about criteria, amounts available, and application procedures. Partnering with non-profits can provide access to funds available only to non-profits. The non-profit can in turn act as an important asset in community participation.

Finding and identifying organizations that give grants for specific purposes or in specific subject areas requires considerable time, effort, and research. Successful grant-writing involves providing a well-written proposal which clearly states your objectives and sets forth a plan and budget for your activities.

The following are online resources for proposal/grant writing:

CFDA, Developing And Writing Grant ProposalsTAB EZ: EPA Brownfields Proposal Application AssistantThe Foundation Center, Proposal Writing Short CourseGrant Proposal.comGrants.govGrantseeking in Minnesota, Writing a Successful Grant ProposalNon-Profit GuidesDeborah Kluge, Grantwriting ResourcesCorporation for Public Broadcasting, Basic Elements of Grantwriting

Resources and ToolsA financing tool is available that helps the user through the maze of possible financing resources that are available to support land revitalization projects.

Page 23 of 23