UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Agriculture & Natural Resources Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education Program

July 3, 2001

The University of California Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SAREP)
and the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA) - Region 9
announce a

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Biologically Integrated Farming Systems (BIFS) Projects for:

Field Crops * Row Crops * Orchards * Vineyards * Livestock

 

WORKSHOP ON PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT: AUGUST 15, 2001

PROPOSALS DUE: OCTOBER 2, 2001

---

Introduction

An increasing number of California farmers and livestock producers representing many agricultural commodities have been able to maintain yields and quality while reducing their reliance on agricultural chemicals through Biologically Integrated Farming Systems (BIFS). BIFS projects typically include the following three elements:

1. on-farm demonstrations of an innovative biologically-based farming system,
   
2. a collaborative extension model involving public-private partnerships for sharing technical information about the farming system, and
   
3. an organized program of monitoring key biological and economic variables so as to inform on-farm decision making as well as evaluate project success.

Continued support from US-EPA enables the University of California to fund several new three-year demonstration projects. These projects can help farmers and livestock producers address challenges to their production systems. BIFS projects can be designed to anticipate and comply with federal and state regulatory changes. To fulfill the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996, the US-EPA will continue to review food residue tolerances for all organophosphates, carbamates and the EPA category B1 and B2 carcinogens. Some uses of these pesticides may be lost as the EPA changes their risk assessment protocol and tolerances to be child-based and thus more conservative and/or companies decide that potential revenues do not justify the expense of re-registration. BIFS projects can support the demonstration of alternatives to the ozone-depleting fumigant, methyl bromide, planned to be phased-out in the near future. BIFS projects can help livestock producers address water quality goals through reducing off-site movement of soil and animal waste products. In addition, BIFS projects can help foster critical links between producers, regulatory personnel, and consumers who are increasingly involved in supporting farmers and livestock producers that are practicing environmental stewardship on their land.

Farming System
Proposals should describe a farming or livestock production system that integrates such key technical elements as biological and cultural controls of pests; habitat management on-farm and at the landscape scale to reduce pest problems and conserve natural resources; an emphasis on soil-building practices such as biological nitrogen fixation to supply all or part of the nitrogen needed for crop or livestock production; and reduced reliance on agricultural chemicals. Proposals should describe template farm(s) that will serve as model(s) for the alternative farming system. Proposed projects may employ field monitoring for pest and beneficial organisms, collection of weather data, reliance on research-based action thresholds for decision making, use of selective bio-rational pesticides, and soil, water, animal, and plant tissue testing. Proposals should describe the inherent links between the components of a farming system (tillage practices, crop rotation, nutrient cycling, water, and pest management) and the larger landscape or watershed. Proposals can also integrate natural resource and wildlife conservation practices into the farming system. Proposals must involve farmers setting aside demonstration acreage on their own land to evaluate and then demonstrate the innovative farming system. For orchard, vineyard, and field crops, 10-30 acres has been standard; for high-value row crops lesser acreage may be appropriate. For livestock systems, attempts to reduce off-site movement of soil and nutrients may necessitate projects at a watershed scale, however, smaller scale demonstrations will be considered if justified. The proposed farming system should be built upon a pre-existing knowledge-base and its success should not depend on the results of future research. In other words, if research is required, it should be adaptive.

BIFS Extension Model and Management Team
Proposed projects should build partnerships and be voluntary and collaborative in nature. The projects should use an extension approach that includes "farmer-to-farmer" information sharing. The extension model should bring scientists, farmers and consultants together in a collaborative, "co-learning" environment that enables farmers to learn and adapt integrated farming practices to local conditions. Industry partners can participate by providing matching funds, infrastructure for project support activities, and/or cost sharing rebates for farming system inputs such as cover crop seeds, beneficial organisms (arthropods and micro-organisms), insectary shrubs and trees, insect traps, laboratory services and farm implements. Other financial support can be obtained through government cost-share programs such as the USDA's Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

Proposals should describe a "management team" of persons experienced in the farming system that will provide technical support via customized farm plans, written materials, monthly meetings, intensive monitoring, and hands-on field days to a group of 10-30 participating farmers. The management team should include a project coordinator (usually at least a half-time position), at least one BIFS farmer (often the developer of the template farm), at least one pest control advisor, a university researcher and/or a farm advisor or specialist, and an industry representative. The role of the management team is to implement the proposed outreach program and to serve for its duration as resources for participating farmers.

Proposal Development Process
In the process of planning a BIFS project, a project logical framework should be developed by core project participants such as the Project Leader, cooperators, management team members, and some participating growers or consultants. A logical framework (logframe) is a useful tool for organizing both project goals and activities into a 1 - 2 page matrix format. A logframe incorporates information already in the body of the proposal into a concise layout of the main elements of project implementation. Please see the attachment/Web link for more information and an example logframe. SAREP staff is available to provide explanation and guidance on the development of a logframe. Bringing participants together to develop a clear outline of the project's major goals and how they will be accomplished and measured will help to establish a collaborative planning mode.

---

Criteria

Each of the following criteria is equally important and will be used to evaluate proposals:

1. Are current pest management strategies in the targeted conventional farming system threatened due to possible loss of pesticide registration because of FQPA, or due to ineffective control, pesticide resistance, high costs, or documented risk to human health or the environment?
   
   
2. Does the targeted conventional farming system employ relatively high total or per acre amounts of restricted use-pesticides, biologically disruptive, non-selective pesticides, or highly soluble nitrogen fertilizer? Or does the conventional farming system contribute to significant off-site movement of such pesticides, nitrates, human pathogens, or soil?
   
   
3. Does the proposed project enable farmers to reduce reliance on synthetic fertilizer and biologically disruptive, non-selective pesticides or reduce other adverse environmental impacts (e.g. dust, animal impact on water quality)?
   
   
4. Have the technical elements of the proposed project been shown, through scientific studies, to be effective in producing the results sought by the project?
   
   
5. Does the proposed project integrate soil fertility, plant nutrition, and pest management decisions in the context of a whole system or at least multiple elements?
   
   
6. Does the project integrate the farming system into the larger landscape or watershed? Does it employ on-farm or regional tactics such as vegetation and habitat management for wildlife conservation and water quality protection?
   
   
7. Has at least one template farm been identified that will serve as an important part of the proposed outreach project? Have all the elements of the biologically integrated farming system on this template farm been clearly described?
   
   
8. Does the project have a clear 2-3 year innovative strategy for outreach to interested farmers and agricultural consultants beyond project participants? Is it based on a farmer-to-farmer model for information exchange? If the project does not employ this kind of extension model, does it adequately explain why another model is more appropriate?
   
   
9. Has interest and support been documented for the proposed project from farmers, appropriate commodity groups, and extension personnel?
   
   
10. Does the project have a clear plan for documentation and evaluation in the following three areas: changes in agricultural chemical usage (pesticides and fertilizers), adoption of the farming system by enrolled farmers, and farmer participation?
    
    
11. Does the proposal provide evidence that the funds requested are reasonable and would be used in a cost-effective manner?
    
    
12. Does the scope of the project (i.e. appropriate institutional support, statewide applicability of demonstrated practices, well-developed outreach strategy) provide the potential for a significant increase in the use of biologically integrated farming systems on California farms and livestock operations? Does this project have the ability to expand to other regions, or statewide?
    
    
13. Does the proposal spell out a post-funding strategy that ensures the sustained impact of the project?

---

Eligibility

Only individuals and institutions based in California may receive funding. The following people or groups are eligible to apply as project leader for a BIFS grant: farmers and other individuals; both for-profit and non-profit corporations, including commodity boards and Resource Conservation Districts; United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service employees; University of California Cooperative Extension Farm Advisors and Specialists; and faculty of any accredited institution of higher learning in California.

UC SAREP staff and members of the BIFS Program Advisory Review Board are not eligible to participate as Principal Investigator, Cooperator, management team member, or participating grower on any proposal for funding under this program. The following persons are members or alternate members of the BIFS Program Advisory Review Board: Sherman Boone, Casey Walsh Cady, John Carlon, Bob Elliott, Tish Espinosa, Nan Gorder, Paul Gosselin, Steven Griffin, Lonnie Hendricks, Belinda Messenger, Gregory Nelson, Kevin Olsen, Judy Stewart-Leslie, Kathy Taylor, Lori-Ann Thrupp, and Steve Weinbaum.

---

Funding & Renewal Process

Funding is available for up to 3 years for any one project. Awards usually range from $70,000 to $100,000 per year. Projects are funded on a year-to-year basis with continued funding being based on project evaluation and available funds. Project evaluation will be based on written reports from the principal investigators, presentations by project personnel to the BIFS Program Advisory Review Board, and site visits. The project logical framework, developed as part of the proposal, will serve as a reference for assessing progress.

To qualify for continued funding, a project must demonstrate and document continued and expanding grower participation and progress in agricultural chemical use reduction and adoption of BIFS practices, while maintaining yields and quality using the goals defined in the logical framework as points of reference. Development of group process and the overall extension model for the project should also be documented, and, where possible, quantified. Ancillary or "piggyback" research projects conducted in coordination with BIFS projects are encouraged for subsequent years funding. During the final year(s) of the project, investigators should report on plans to expand the implementation effort to the larger grower or producer community. This may involve adoption by a commodity organization, local governmental agency, or formation of a commission.

---

Use of Funds

Principal expenditures should be for personnel, including the project coordinator, members of the management team, and persons who assist in field data collection, analysis and project evaluation. Reasonable expenses for supplies and travel also qualify for funding. Funds may not be used for equipment purchases, unless these are clearly shown to be more economical than rentals.

 

---

Proposal Process and Format

Proposal Development Workshop - August 15, 2001 1:00 - 4:30 p.m.
A half-day workshop will be held in Davis, CA to assist in the proposal development process and will explain the BIFS program goals and how to create a "project logical framework." Attendance at the meeting is strongly recommended, the framework will be required for all proposals. (Please contact SAREP to reserve your space at this workshop (530) 752-7556.)

Submittal and Review Schedule
A signed original plus 20 copies (double-sided preferred) of the proposal must be received by 5:00 P.M. October 2, 2001. Proposals received after the deadline will not be reviewed. Faxed or emailed proposals will not be accepted. Proposals should be typed, single-spaced with 10 pt. font or larger. Proposals, along with a copy on disk, should be sent to:

UC Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Program (SAREP)
University of CA
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616-8716

The physical location for delivery services is: SAREP, DANR Building, Hopkins Road (off Hutchison Road west of Highway 113).

Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by the 13-member BIFS Program Advisory Review Board. Successful applicants will be notified by December 1, 2001 and grants awarded shortly thereafter.

Format Requirements
The full proposal should include the following:

1. Introduction
   
   
   1. Cover Page - Use the cover page provided, or an exact duplicate of it, for the requested information.
   2. Summary - (500-words or less) The summary should stand alone as a definitive description of your project in lay language. If your project is funded, this summary will be the basis of your project's entry in SAREP's Projects Database on the Web.
      
      
2. Body of the proposal, not to exceed 10 pages, single-spaced, and including:
   
   
   1. Introduction and justification for the project

1. Give an overview of the crop or animal production system and discuss any sensitive environmental issues associated with this farming system as well as the economic viability of the current farming system. Discuss potential impacts of the implementation of the US-EPA's Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) on the current farming system. For a list of pesticides under review due to FQPA implementation in California contact SAREP or US-EPA or see: http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/August/Day-04/p20560.htm
   
   
2. Give an overview of the alternative farming system to be demonstrated. Discuss the possible environmental and economic benefits of the alternative farming system. If information is lacking, benefits or impacts may be estimated if supported by the literature and/or grower experience. Discuss how these alternative practices will help farmers anticipate the regulatory changes possible with the implementation of FQPA.
   
   
3. Discuss briefly how information exchange and outreach will occur in the project. Describe the kind of extension model to be used and why this approach will be the most effective.
   
   
4. Discuss briefly how the project will be evaluated, what kinds of monitoring, surveys and/or data evaluation might be employed and why these are the most effective methods to assess success in conducting the planned activities, adoption of the farming system, and impact or success in extending benefits beyond project boundaries.

2. Workplan and methods
   
   
   1. Farming system
      
      
      1. Describe the conventional farming system currently in use. Describe crop acreage and current average yields, the pest complex and pest management strategies employed (include pesticides, total amounts and frequency of use), soil management practices including fertilizer amounts and timing, and water management. Include typical rotational cropping patterns for the region, if applicable.
         
         
      2. Describe the alternative farming system to be demonstrated and the people involved (e.g. researchers and farmers) in developing this farming system. Describe the template farm(s) and the farmer(s) involved in developing the alternative farming system. Include crop acreage of the demonstration parcels and the number of farmers and farms, potential strategies for the pest management system, pesticides to be employed including amounts and frequency of use, soil management practices to be demonstrated including fertilizer amounts and timing, and water management. Include proposed rotational crops, if applicable.
         
         
   2. Extension model
      
      
      1. Describe how the project will use collaborative methods for outreach and information exchange. Describe how the project will bring scientists, farmers, and consultants together in a "co-learning" environment.
         
         
      2. Describe the roles of the project leader, project coordinator, the members of the management team, and other cooperators in the extension activities of the project.
         
         
      3. Describe any institutional support available for use in information sharing and outreach activities.
         
         
      4. Describe how the goals and desired impact of the project will be sustained beyond this initial funded phase.
         
         
      5. List proposed field days and topics for the first year.
         
         
   3. Monitoring, documentation, and evaluation
      
      
      1. Describe what data will be collected to make comparisons between BIFS plots and county averages and/or side-by-side conventional comparison plots (e.g. project crop and animal yields and quality, fertilizer and pesticide use, and use of elements of BIFS). Data should be collected at the onset of a project to establish a baseline, and annually at the end of each growing season. Provide any baseline data that is currently available.
         
         
      2. Describe in-season data collection to be used to inform on-farm decision making, such as monitoring of key biological indicators (e. g. pests, biological control agents, and decomposers, percent vegetation cover) and, if relevant, weather data that might influence pest populations.
         
         
      3. Describe how you will encourage the use of the alternative farming system by other interested farmers. What data will be collected and how will they be analyzed so as to evaluate the effectiveness, economic viability and applicability of the farming system.
         
         
      4. Discuss how the project will be evaluated. Describe how the most appropriate and effective means of verification were identified to assess progress towards project goals and the goal of the BIFS program. Include a description of how you will document and evaluate participation in the project and adoption or "buy-in" of the farming system by growers, PCAs, CCAs, Farm Advisors or others within the project. Give an estimate of the percentage of the targeted population that is predicted to adopt the farming system or a part of it in a given time period.

3. Proposed timeline (for the length of proposed project, up to 3 years)
   For the first year, specify project start date, tentative management team meeting dates, baseline data collection schedule, in-season data collection schedule and proposed field day dates and topics. Projects should plan to begin on January 1, 2002. (If an alternate starting date is necessary due to the cropping system, please justify.)

   For all years of the project, timeline should include target benchmarks for annual agricultural chemical use reduction, grower participation, as well as other major indicators included in the project logical framework.

4. Detailed budget for each of the first three years, including all sources of support, using this format:
   

 

	Requested Funds	Matching Funds (5)	Source of Matching Funds
Personnel:      Name and/or payroll title and % time
Employee Benefits
Supplies and Expenses (1)
Permanent Equipment (2)
Travel (3)
Subcontracts (4)
TOTALS

(1) List by major category, with costs, and justification for categories over $500. Reimbursement of growers for potential crop loss is not allowed.
(2) List specific items, their cost, and justification for each item. Equipment requests are scrutinized carefully, and are generally not approved unless the equipment is crucial to the project and access is not available by means other than purchase.
(3) Indicate destination(s), estimate number of trips and cost of each.
(4) List contractor name and services to be provided.
(5) Include in-kind contributions.

5. Required attachments
   
   
   1. Project logical framework (Please see example: BIFS Project Logframe)
      
   2. Literature Cited
      
   3. Resumes
      Include resumes (limit two pages) of the project leader(s), management team members, and cooperator(s) in order to document relevant experiences of those involved and their accomplishments and qualifications to carry out the project.
      
   4. Signatures
      1. Include signatures of all management team members, signifying that they have read the project proposal and intend to serve as a member of the management team as described in the proposal.
         
      2. Include signatures of all grower/rancher participants, expressing their willingness to participate by setting aside parcels of land to demonstrate BIFS methods, implementing recommendations of the management team, assisting in monitoring key variables, and sharing this information freely with other farmers, the management team, and the community at large. (Please include the farm names and phone numbers of participating growers or ranchers.)
         
      3. Include signatures of all cooperators, signifying that they have read the project proposal and intend to participate as described in the proposal.
         
         
6. Optional attachments
   
   
   1. Expressions of intent (signed letters or memoranda) to provide matching contributions, rebates, or cost-sharing from other entities, for example, industry organizations such as commodity groups, governmental agencies, academic institutions, non-profit organizations, and private businesses.
      
      
   2. Letters of intent from scientists documenting "piggyback" or ancillary research projects to be conducted in coordination with the proposed BIFS extension efforts. These projects could involve monitoring selected variables or evaluating proposed improvements to BIFS technology.

---

Further Information

For more information on current BIFS projects and other demonstration projects on-going in California, or on the original template program for BIFS, the Community Alliance with Family Farmer's Biologically Integrated Orchard Systems (BIOS), see the following articles available on SAREP's World Wide Web site at http://www.sarep.ucdavis.edu/bifs/ or by request from SAREP at (530) 752-7556:

• Swezey S.L. & J.C. Broome. 2000. Growth Predicted in Organic and Biologically Integrated Farming Systems. California Agriculture 54(4):26-35.
  
• Broome J.C., & W. Liebhardt. 1997. Agricultural Partnerships in California, Sustainable Agriculture, (3):1-4.
  
  
• Schaefer, Kristen S. (Editor). 1997. Learning from the BIOS Approach: A Guide for Community-Based Biological Farming Programs. Community Alliance with Family Farmers (Davis, CA) and World Resources Institute (Washington, D.C.).
  
• Dlott, J., T. Nelson, R. Bugg, M. Spezia, R. Eck, J. Redmond, J. Klein, and L. Lewis. 1996. California, USA: Merced County BIOS Project. In: L.A. Thrupp, ed. New Partnerships for Sustainable Agriculture. World Resources Institute. Washington, D.C.

UC SAREP staff is available for consultation with prospective applicants; we strongly encourage you to attend SAREP's Proposal Development Workshop. For further information, please contact:

Dr. Marco Barzman, Telephone: 530-754-8548 or E-Mail: msbarzman@ucdavis.edu, or Ms. Bev Ransom, Telephone: 530-754-8546 or E-Mail: baransom@ucdavis.edu.

The University of California prohibits discrimination against or harassment of any person on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, physical or mental disability, medical condition (cancer-related or genetic characteristics), ancestry, marital status, age, sexual orientation, citizenship, or status as a covered veteran (special disabled veteran, Vietnam-era veteran or any other veteran who served on active duty during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized).

University Policy is intended to be consistent with the provisions of applicable State and Federal laws.

Inquiries regarding the University's nondiscrimination policies may be directed to the Affirmative Action/Staff Personnel Services Director, University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, 300 Lakeside Dr., 6th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612-3550 (510) 987-0096.

---

Click here to receive a Microsoft Word version of this cover sheet

Cover Page - SAREP 2001 Biologically Integrated Farming Systems (BIFS) Project Proposal

(Attach a completed copy of this page to each copy of your proposal.)

Project Title:___________________________________________________________________________

County(ies) project would be conducted in: ____________ Crop(s): ________________________________

Project leader(s): (If there is more than one project leader, please list main contact first.)

Name ______________________________ Institution/Organization _______________________________

Mailing Address ________________________________________________________________________

Telephone _____________________FAX ______________________ Email ________________________

Management Team:
Name & Affiliation                            Mailing Address                        Telephone                         email

 

 

 

Other Cooperators:
Name & Affiliation                            Mailing Address                        Telephone                         email

 

 

 

Budget Totals (Total requested from SAREP)

Year 1:___________Year 2:______________Year 3:____________

Approvals:

___________________________                    ___________________________________________
Project leader                                                   Office of Research/Representative of Organization

                             ___________________
for University P.I.s: Department Chair

                                                                          _________________           ________________________
                                             for UC Coop. Ext: County Director            and          Regional Director