Efforts to help rural communities obtain grants for climate change didn't help much; awards skewed urban and coastal

Despite the Biden administration's focus on grant access for rural communities, many areas still struggled to apply for or win government funding, according to a new analysis, reports Claire Carlson of The Daily Yonder. "Most of the funding in a recent round of climate-change grantmaking went to high-capacity communities located in coastal states, according to a report by the nonprofit Headwaters Economics. Less than a fifth of the grants went to 'low-capacity' communities, which tend to be rural, according to Kristin Smith, author of the study."

Smaller community governments often have staff members doing multiple roles, and funding additional people to apply for grants isn't financially doable, so their capacity to find, research and apply for federal money can be severely hampered. Looking at the most recent round of grants made through FEMA's Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, "Smith said low-capacity communities that did not fare well in the competition lack the staff and expertise necessary to create competitive proposals for federal grant programs," Carlson writes. "Match requirements, which is money awardees must contribute themselves to a grant-funded project, can also be a barrier for rural communities with small budgets or less access to philanthropic funding, according to Smith."

A  rural-urban disparity "played out in this year's BRIC funding, which is paid through an apportionment of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund: Only 3% of the counties that received grants are low-capacity, as defined by Headwaters Economics' Rural Capacity Index," Carlson reports. "High-capacity counties – which have the staff, resources, and expertise to apply for and win federal grants – were chosen 83% of the time. . . . FEMA is aware of these findings. A FEMA spokesperson said that the agency is 'currently in the process of reviewing the findings in the Headwaters Economics article and is open to engaging.'"

BRIC funding differs from many other federal programs, which could be particularly important for rural areas. Carlson adds, "There is no expiration date for the BRIC program. It's funded through an earmarked 6% of estimated disaster expenses every year through FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund, so even for the communities rejected funds, there is time to reapply. . . . Whether rural communities are prioritized in future funding awards remains to be seen." Smith told Carlson: "I do think FEMA is taking the issue seriously, and I also think there's a lot of work to do."