Introducing the AHC Match Development Program

A proven and innovative program to help participants develop the 25% match for the FEMA BRIC Grant Program


All Hazards Consortium
Board of Directors

Chris Geldart
Deputy Mayor Public Safety and Justice at DC Government
Mike Ambrosio
Wakefern Food Corp
Vice President
Kelly McKinney
NYU Langone Medical
Chris Eisenbrey
Edison Electric Institute
Carlos Torres
Retired, VP of Emergency Preparedness and Business Continuity
ConEdison in NYC, NY
Ira Tannenbaum
New York City
Emergency Management
Christy Morris
Former Deputy Secretary
West Virginia DMAPS
Jim Sheehan
New Jersey UASI
Joe Bruno
Former Commissioner,
New York City Emergency Management
Roland “Bud” Mertz
Director, Westmoreland County Public Safety
Executive Director
Tom Moran
Set Appointment

Summary: 25% Match Program

Learn how state and local governments on the East Coast solved the same 25% Match challenge with another DHS/FEMA’s grant program 2009-2014.

Re-Introducing the AHC BRIC Grant Match Program from the All Hazards Consortium…an innovative solution that creates 25% Match from your procurement and ongoing project activities with the private sector vendors and business owners/operators.

This innovative program was designed by states, approved by FEMA, and implemented by the AHC with states making all the decisions. It produced over 25% match, reduced the risk and workload on government to produce match, created competitive process, and kept government in the decision making roles.

See details below...

 Board of Directors 

Chris Geldart
DC Public Works

Mike Ambrosio
Wakefern Food Corp
Vice President

Kelly McKinney
NYU Langone Medical

Chris Eisenbrey
Edison Electric Institute

Joe Picciano
Private Sector

Ira Tannenbaum
New York City
Emergency Management

Christy Morris
West Virginia DMAPS

Jim Sheehan
New Jersey UASI

Joe Bruno
Hellen Keller Services

Roland “Bud” Mertz
Westmoreland County
Public Safety

Executive Director
Tom Moran

The Challenge for FEMA BRIC Grant Applicants

Meeting the BRIC grant’s 25% match requirements is a real challenge for many state/local/tribal governments.

Many entities don’t submit an application because this requirement seems insurmountable to them so they don’t even try.

For example, if an applicant submits a proposal for a $5 million project to enhance the resilience in their jurisdiction, they are responsible for generating $1,250,000 (25% of $5mill) in match. This is a major challenge, especially for smaller jurisdictions.

The typical approach involves a combination of efforts to gather funds, align other projects, and track the hourly participation of people from multiple agencies along the way. Most people who have done this before don’t want to do it again since they have other full-time jobs to focus on.

So how can there be a simple way to solve this challenge?

Introducing the All Hazards Consortium’s Match Development program.

A simple, proven program that was developed by states in 2008 for the FEMA Regional Catastrophic Planning Grant Program (RCPGP) or “reggie” grant.

The program engages the private sector vendors and business owners/operators in the match development process in a professional and respectful way that produces the match…. And usually more than 25%.

AHC Match Development Program

The Problem:

States, Tribes, and Territories Need Help Generating the 25% BRIC Grant Match for the FEMA BRIC Grant Program. 


   ●  BRIC Participating states and local jurisdictions, NGOs and non-profits in United States


   ●  Address the 25% Match requirement for BRIC related projects
   ●  Eliminates typical workload on government to generate match from private sector
   ●  Generates Match from private sector up front before projects begin
   ●  Flexible options to choose from
   ●  FEMA/DHS Approved process

How It Works

   ●  The AHC evaluates and qualifies project(s)
   ●  Match generation process implemented via RFP’s and procurements   
   ●  Match generation process implemented via project meetings and planning activities

Options are available to increase private sector Match contributions via meetings and other activities
   ●  Grant Match tracked and entered FEMA grants management system (optional)
   ●  Flexible Services
   ●  Procurement Only w/Match generation
   ●  Procurement and Ongoing Match generation, tracking and entering Match data into

FEMA grants management system
   ● Turnkey service including procurement, ongoing Match generation and contractor management, match tracking and grants management

Who is the AHC?

   ●  16-year-old, 501c3 public-private partnership organization
   ●  Over 50,000+ industry and government stakeholders nationwide 
   ●  AHC has provided grant support, match generations, project management, private sector integration, and staffing support services to multiple states, New York City, and District of Columbia since 2009.

Results from AHC Match Development Process

Over the course of several years (2008 to 2014), the AHC's match process developed over $5.0+ million in match which met or exceeded the FEMA 25% match requirements for each project that the AHC was involved in (30+ projects).

Stakeholder Feedback

  • ​"As the agency responsible for the match development for the FEMA RCPGP grant in the NCR (National Capital Region), the Consortium  provided a much needed resource at a time when we didn't have the resources and skill-sets needed to effectively engage the private sector across multiple states in the innovative way that the AHC could and did. It was a critical piece of the project and became a big success for all of the states and FEMA."  Darrell Darnell,  former Director, District of Columbia, Homeland Security and Emergency Management.
  • ​ The Consortium‘s unique relationship with the private sector and states made this innovative approach in match development a true success story.” Nicholas Peake, former FEMA RCPGP Program Manager.
  • The ability to generate grant match helped us to meet and exceed the FEMA requirements for our projects but also allowed us to have someone else manage and track the match being produced from the projects and the associated project meetings. Truly an innovative process generated in partnership between private sector solution providers and states.” Jim Spears, Former Secretary, Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety, West Virginia.
  • ​At the AHC, we have always looked for ways we can support states and local governments in their efforts to serve their communities and businesses. Innovation and pushing the limits of everyone's thinking is what we do best. This grant match solution it is a great example of that. It not only helps the states and local governments FEMA as well.” Chris Geldart, Deputy Mayor Public Safety and Justice at DC Government, AHC Board of Director Member.

About the FEMA BRIC Grant

Set Appointment


●   What is the BRIC Program? A FEMA grant program for Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) for pre-disaster mitigation activities
●   Takeaway: Recipients of the Program Must Generate 25% Cost Matching.
●   The goal is that the AHC aims to help entities generate these match funds.


  • ​BRIC: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program
  • ​Project Scoping: activities designed to develop strategies for hazard mitigation projects as well as obtain data in order to prioritize, select, and develop timely project applications for those mitigation efforts. Project scoping results in either an improvement in the capability to identify appropriate mitigation projects or in the development of an application-ready mitigation project for BRIC or another funding opportunity.
  • ​FEMA GO: FEMA Grants Outcomes. A management system to submit project scoping applications, etc. 
  • ​DUNS: Basically an ID number an organization receives when they’re fully registered with You have to have one in order to receive federal grants like BRIC. Stands for Data Universal Numbering System
  • ​SAM: System for Award Management. An organization must register their DUNS with SAM to be eligible for grants via - it takes about a month to get this process completed. 
  • ​BCR: benefit-cost ratio

Background: The BRIC Program

(What you need to know in order to sell the actual program)

What is it?

The Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program makes federal funds available to states, U.S territories, Indian tribal governments, and local communities for pre-disaster mitigation activities. 
FEMA lists the guiding principles of BRIC as:
  • ​Support state and local governments, tribes, and territories through capability- and capacity-building so that they may first identify mitigation actions and then implement projects that reduce disaster risk
  • Encourage and enable innovation in an effective, creative, and flexible way
  • ​Promote partnerships and enable high-impact investments to reduce risk from natural hazards with a focus on critical services and facilities, public infrastructure, public safety, public health, and communities
  • ​Reduce future losses and minimize impacts on the Disaster Relief Fund 
  • ​Support the adoption and enforcement of building codes, standards, and policies that will protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the public in order to have long-lasting impacts on community risk reduction - including critical services and facilities.
In order to achieve the above FEMA is providing grants for applicants who are performing one of the following activities:
  • Capability and Capacity Building: any activities which enhance the knowledge, skills, expertise, etc., of the current workforce to expand or improve the administration of mitigation assistance. This includes activities in the following sub-categories: building codes activities, partnerships, project scoping, mitigation planning and planning-related activities, and other activities;
  • ​Mitigation Projects: cost-effective projects designed to increase resilience and public safety; reduce injuries and loss of life; and reduce damage and destruction to property, critical services, facilities, and infrastructure; and 
  • Management Costs: financial assistance to reimburse the Recipient and sub-recipient for eligible and reasonable indirect costs, direct administrative costs, and other administrative expenses associated with a specific mitigation measure or project in an amount up to 15 percent of the total amount of the grant award, of which not more than 10 percent of the total award amount may be used by the Recipient and 5 percent by the sub-recipient for such costs.
It is important to note that under this program FEMA will also provide non-financial Direct Technical Assistance to communities to build a community’s capacity and capability to improve its resilience to natural hazards and to ensure stakeholders are capable of building and sustaining successful mitigation programs, submitting high-quality applications, and implementing new and innovative projects that reduce risk from a wide range of natural hazards.

Who is eligible?

 ●  States
 ●  District of Columbia
 ●  U.S. territories
 ●  Indian tribal governments (federally recognized)
Local governments, including cities, townships, counties, special district governments, and Indian tribal governments (including federally recognized tribes who choose to apply as sub applicants) are considered sub applicants and must submit sub applications for financial assistance or letters of interest for non-financial Direct Technical Assistance to their state/territory/tribal Applicant agency.

What projects are eligible? 

The priorities for the program are to incentivize:
   ●  public infrastructure projects
   ●  projects that mitigate risk to one or more lifelines
   ●  projects that incorporate nature-based solutions
   ●  and increase funding to Applicants that facilitate the adoption and enforcement of the latest published editions of building codes.
Only projects with a BCR of 1.0 or higher are eligible. Applicants can document their project BCR through a Benefit-Cost Analysis Tool created by FEMA, available here.

Funding Amounts

Total Available Funding for the NOFO: $500,000,000
   ●  State/Territory Allocation Subtotal: $ 33,600,000
   ●  Tribal Set-Aside Subtotal: $ 20,000,000
   ●  National Competition Subtotal: $446,400,000
Noteworthy: In addition to funding received as described in Section B.1, Available Funding for the NOFO, Applicants may apply for Applicant management costs of up to 10 percent of the total BRIC grant Application for management of the award and all selected subawards. Applicant requests for management costs must be submitted in a separate management costs subapplication in FEMA’s grant application system (see Section D, Application and Submission Information, Content and Form of Application Submission).
Sub applicants may include sub applicant management costs of up to 5 percent of the total cost of their C&CB activity or mitigation project sub application to manage the proposed subaward activities. Subapplicant management cost activities must be added to the Scope of Work section and identified as a line item in the Cost Estimate section of sub applications in FEMA’s grant application system.

How do they apply?

For this funding opportunity, FEMA requires Applicants to submit their Applications through FEMA GO. Applicants must have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number and an active System for Award Management (SAM) registration.


- Phase 1:

  • ​Leverages the data from the SISE ESRI platform
  • ​The primary front-end education
  • ​User management system 
  • ​The buyer & supplier enrollment process 
  • ​The buyer & supplier request/reply process
  • And a basic administration area design

- Phase 2:

  • ​Add user ranking and feedback system for self-governance and monitoring
  • ​Create a mobile app capability
  • ​Integrate with Commercial Routing Assistance (CRA) application to support PPE delivery routing for truckers by including route resistance data as part of supplier selection decision process (a big delay issue during Mar-Jun)

- Phase 3

  • ​Create a similar Exchange sourcing model integrated with the CRA for:
  • ​Commercial generator providers
  • ​Fuel truck distributors


The AHC’s leadership is fully committed to continue its goal of operationalizing ESF 14 and producing tangible, operational use cases and solutions for both industry and government.
ESF 14 Purpose:
“Emergency Support Function (ESF) #14 supports the coordination of cross-sector operations, including stabilization of key supply chains and community lifelines, among infrastructure owners and operators, businesses, and their government partners.”
-Excerpt from DHS CISA ESF#14 Overview Document.
ESF 14 Intended Outcomes:
The ESF 14 doctrine outlined what the private sector has been looking for a long while: reducing their overall risks by ongoing planning, information sharing, and coordinating research, data analytics, and response operations with states and federal agencies whenever possible, to produce operational results.
“Intended Outcomes: ESF #14 provides unique services to enhance response operations. ESF #14 is a platform that engages the private sector, leverages existing resources and capabilities within the affected community, and provides analytical capabilities focused on interdependencies. These activities support other existing Federal and state procedures.” 
-Excerpt from DHS CISA ESF#14 Overview Document.
At the end of the 2017 hurricane season, the AHC, along with 30+ partners submitted a letter of recommendation that included suggested improvements on how FEMA and DHS CISA could
improve cross-sector communications and coordination with industry and states during emergency and non-emergency scenarios.
With input from the AHC and many other sources, FEMA/ DHS CISA shortly developed the ESF 14 concept and rolled it out in 2018.
Since that time, the AHC and its SISE working group, have been focused on operationalizing the ESF 14 doctrine at the regional and state levels with states and industry on specific problems or use cases.
The ongoing cross-sector working groups and use case committees have been developing new use cases and solving problems with state and federal agency participation, especially over the past several months with the COVID-19 pandemic. 
ESF 14 & the AHC
ESF 14 doctrine was adopted by the AHC Board of Directors and its working groups in early 2019. 
The FEMA “life-lines” and DHS CISA “national critical functions” have been used to align SISE Use Cases to federal priorities and as an education tool to help industry understand how DHS CISA works to help them reduce risks by supporting their planning, response and recovery functions incidents that affect their organizations, their supply chains, and their communities.
How the AHC Uses ESF 14
The private sector understands that most of their operational actions during disasters require close coordination with multiple state agencies (who don’t always coordinate well in some states), but in coordination with the appropriate federal partners (who don’t always coordinate well). 
This doesn’t always happen on periodic disaster calls. Ongoing planning and problem solving needs to happen year-round.
Starting with joint planning and closed discussions these working groups will focus on operational problems facing industry or states, Use Cases are developed that form the overall framework to work the problem towards one or several solutions, leverage existing R&D, identify existing solutions, create partnerships, and build trust between the invested participant.
The entire process is based upon sustained private sector supported planning, problem solving, results and trust.
Enabling Trusted Problem Solving
The SISE’s “integrated planning capability” has been fundamental to the “trust” between government and industry.
According to the private sector, it is the trust that is missing, not the data, the technology, the policies, the processes, or the products. These all help but do not often sustain when people rotate in and out of their jobs or roles within their respective organizations. Once trust between people is achieved, problem-solving is accelerated dramatically.
Problems are solved (or show progress being made), the participants want to repeat the process again, and again, and again.
Results - Inter-Dependency Awareness
ESF#14 doctrine with the SISE has helped create an “interdependency awareness” across electric, telecommunications, fuel, food, transportation, finance, health, water, lodging, retail, and logistics by utilizing professionals that have been involved in the Use Case development process within the SISE. 
Results - State Adoption
In early 2018, the SISE created a new Use Case Committee comprised of state private sector liaisons who work in state emergency management agencies to work with the Fleet Response Working Group to address issues around fleet movement across state lines. This group started with liaisons in FL, NC, VA, MD, & PA who met weekly for 18 months. Using ESF 14 as part of the strategy, this committee became instrumental to the private sector’s operational problem-solving weekly calls during “blue-sky” days and response partners during disasters. Today this committee has expanded to include LA, MS, AL, OE, IL and AR. 
Results – Operational Solutions Produced 
Solving operational problems is what both industry and government operations professionals desire, along with their leadership. The SISE has created a private sector managed “safe space” for candid discussions over complex problems between government and industry stakeholders. The ESF #14 doctrine has created the policy framework government needed at the federal level to organize resources in support of the coordination of cross-sector operations, communications, planning, research and resource/information sharing. This has provided the credibility and legal support that can attract private sector investment of time, energy, etc.… In this environment, the SISE has produced multiple use cases , 100+ solutions, dozens of partnerships and provided government a unique way to gets things done faster while leveraging a willing private sector community that I willing to share the results.
Results – Lowered Risks
Lowering risk is s shared objective of government and industry. Yet, when people are honest about it, lowering risk is not always easy to prove or validate. The private sector views risk differently than government many times. Universally, industry and government stakeholders in the SISE like to measure risk reduction using simple metrics: reductions of labor hours, hard costs, process delays, brand damage, personnel safety, customers and increases in process efficiencies, customer satisfaction, safety, brand enhancement, etc…. Each of the SISE solutions were created to reduce operational risks and/or increase operational benefits. Many solutions don’t make the cut or have to be enhanced in order to get fully implemented and sustained.
For example: The SISE has created three PPE solutions to date:
  • PPE solution #1 – created a PPE supplier directory of vetted suppliers
  • PPE solution #2 – created a data service to download the solution 1 data into your systems
  • PPE solution #3 - created a “uber-like” PPE exchange that produces valid PPE quotes within minutes.  
  • Solution #1 was interesting, but few used it. User provided feedback. Planning continued.
  • Solution #2 was also interesting, but few subscribed to the service. Users provided feedback. Planning continued. 
  • Solution #3 was unique and provides a clear and measurable risk reductions (vetted Suppliers, legal agreements/disclaimers) along with measurable process enhancements and cost efficiencies (reduced PPE related staff time by 50% to 80%, reduced labor costs, competitive bids in minutes vs days)
All Rights Reserved 2021 © Copyright All Hazards Consortium