Attendance: 24 members from 16 organizations, plus Elli Morris (SCCORR Facilitator). 

​

Meeting Purpose

Update on new Regional Partnership grant requirements and how these impact the proposed projects actions SCCORR seeks to fund. Develop next steps for mvoing toward potential funding options.

 

Summary

The meeting reviewed the Regional Partnership (RP) funding changes; examined the options of Capacity and Plan Implementation Grant (Regional Impacts grant) and the Capacity, Plan Development, and Early Wins grant, selecting to move forward with the CEW grant; brainstormed strategies to select which projects to progress in the CEW grant; and determined a path forward to submit a Letter of Intent (LoI) by the due date of May 29, 2026.

 

Recap

After brief introductions and overview of the meeting goals, Stephanie Weber explained that the CPW Implementation grant (with a cap of $2.5 million per RP) has been reframed as a "Regional Impacts" category. The intent to apply for an Implementation grant informed SCCORR’s timing for the Fall 2025 Request for Proposals. However, the new requirements for the Regional Impacts grant state the RP must have a finalized regional plan and that plan must be submitted to CPW prior to submitting a LoI (due date, May 29, 2026). SCCORR’s draft Priority Plan of Wildlife Conservation and Outdoor Recreation (PPWR), submitted to CPW in June 2025, was slated to be finalized and submitted by Spring 2027. Limitations on completing the PPWR under the new deadline were mentioned, which include the need for community feedback and opportunities for input from all stakeholders. Therefore, Weber recommended SCCORR shift its focus to target the Capacity, Plan Development, and Early Wins Grant (CEW) funding ($50,000–$350,000). The CEW grant gives SCCORR a realistic near-term approach while still building a region-wide narrative for larger grants later. The CEW which also has a LoI due date of May 29, 2026, does not require a finalized submitted Plan. The CEW application expects a single project scope, 1- to 3-year timeframe, and includes a $150,000 capacity sub-cap for coordinator/contractor costs with an overall cap at $350,000.

 

The list of projects changed when Nick Olson, with National Forest Foundation, announced their project, Upper Hermosa Creek Restoration received external full funding so it was removed from SCCORR’s consideration. Upper Hermosa Creek had been the highest-ranking SCCORR project.

 

The group briefly discussed projects for the PPWR asking if there was any danger in including all the proposed projects as the voting reveals an overwhelming support for all projects. Incorporation of all projects would allow the roundtable to show broad regional support. Folding each project into the PPWR could bolster organizations' alternative funding efforts, such as a Letter of Support.

 

Participant engagement supported pursuing a CEW application which lead to discussing how to pursue a CEW grant. Specifically, should the CEW be a single concentrated project led by one partner or could multiple projects be combined across a landscape, woven together into a watershed-scale narrative? Could SCCORRlink various individual project proposals, such as trail maintenance, educational outreach, campground wildlife measures, and citizen science to form a marquee CEW proposal? Tori Manogue, with CPW, clarified that early-win applications should have broad stakeholder support and can include geographically dispersed activities as a single request if packaged collaboratively. Manogue confirmed a multiple-project approach has precedent, receiving prior year CEW grant funding, An additional concerns raised was if SCCORR has enough funding from existing capacity grants to complete the priority plan and prepare for pursuing a larger regional grant? Weber answered that the roundtable has received two planning grants, the current timeline extends through spring 2027, and pursuing CEW would likely simplify alignment within the current grant cycle.

 

The group agreed to include the most high-scoring projects in a CEW application, which will also set SCCORR up for future competitiveness. However, the Animas River Corridor project, the second highest-scoring project, has a budget request beyond the CEW funding so the group decided to postpone pursing funding for this project until SCCORR is ready to seek an invitation for the Regional Impacts grant in 2027. Once the path forward was identified, CPW shared their acumen on potential wildlife impacts associated with each of the 16 (now 15) proposed projects. Combining CPW’s insight with the GIS mapping data and the projects’ ranking gives stakeholders the necessary skills to evaluate which projects to include in SCCORR’s PPWR and which to include in the LoI for an CEW grant.

 

Participants defined the next step as identifying the top 2 or 3 high-ranking candidates with budget requests under $350,000 (including the 2 City of Durango projects that requested no funding) to see if these various stakeholders are willing to work will then begin the LoI knowing the direction the roundtable wants to pursue. Via email, stakeholders will offer any comment on the CEW watershed approach by May 8; the Advisory Committee will incorporate the input then share the edited version with stakeholders. The option for a follow-up virtual SH meeting remains on the table. The meeting was then adjourned. 

​​

CPW discussed potential alternative funding sources for numerous proposed projects:

CPW discussed potential alternative funding sources for numerous proposed projects:

- Non-motorized trail grant (applications due in October)

- Off-Highway Vehicles Motorized trail grant (applications due in December)

- Snowmobile grant (applications due in April)

- CPW Human-Bear Conflict Reduction grant (applications due in May)

 

In addition to the grant information above, here is the link to the CPW Grants Program Website that has information about all CPW grant opportunities and here is a link to the Great Outdoors Colorado Grant Website with information about GOCO grant opportunities. ​​​

​​​​

Content from the Chat:

Colorado Outdoor Regional Partnerships Initiative & Grant Program

2026 Regional Partnerships Grant Guidelines.pdf

 

Anthony Culpepper:

Thinking about the new scope, what feedback did you get on how a project could be spread across a landscape. In our case, how could several of our project weave together into that marquee project for our RPI, eg. trail maintenance/improvements connected with a strong outreach and cit sci component. Or should this be one focused project, in one location, led by one partner?

 

Tori Manogue:

We also have a webinar and Q&A on May 13th, 2026 from 1 PM - 2:30 PM MST if questions come up after this meeting https://cpw-state-co.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_ZAK5bYVHSsKmOwEUvO6mpw#/registration

 

Ken Hilfiker:

Could I get a quick definition of "Regional"

 

Jordan Williams:

Also, what was the cap for each RPI on the "capacity and early wins" grant category again?

​

Chara Ragland:

What is the deadline for the Early Win grant?

 

SCCORR:

May 29. Same date but very different deliverables.  

​

Tori Manogue:

This is the definition of "Regional impact" from our grant guidelines document: Regional impact projects are visionary, demonstrating broad stakeholder support and long-term benefit to Colorado’s lands, water, wildlife, and/or working farms and ranches, while advancing at least one of Colorado's Outdoors Strategy’s North Star Goals. Projects have regional or statewide importance, benefiting multiple counties (though may occur within a single county or municipality), reflecting the priorities of multiple government agencies, private and nonprofit partners, and aligning with Colorado’s Outdoors Strategy goals and objectives. Competitive projects have well-developed plans, matching funds, and momentum. The project considers equitable access to quality outdoor recreation experiences and/or conservation benefits for underrepresented communities (low-income, rural, aging, youth, and communities of color). Proposals from landscape-scale/cross-jurisdictional coalitions and projects that are regionally significant will be the most competitive during the application review and scoring process.

 

Attendees who wrote in favor of seeking an Early Wins application: 

Jordan Williams, Ken Hilfiker, Brittany Leffel, Chara Ragland, Dan “dannythek” King, Nicholas Olson, Andy Hawk, Teresa DiTore, Tim Funk, SCC Durango, Amy Schwarzbach, Anthony Culpepper.

 

Tori Manogue:

From grant guidelines: An “Early win” project should advance Colorado’s Outdoors Strategy while supporting collaborative momentum. An "Early win" project should be modest and collaboratively identified with coalition membership, with clear metrics, deliverables, and scope. Funding preference may be given to on-the-ground projects that will be completed in the ensuing field season (examples include trail cameras, signage, seasonal crew, and planning larger projects, such as safe passageways for wildlife).

 

Town of Silverton Colorado:

I believe this is the best route to go for the collective. Looking at it from a biased personal lens I would love to see the Animas River Corridor Project viewed as a project that would fit the mold for the regional impact

 

Jordan Williams:

I do think the ARC is more of a regional impact grant than an early wins category from what I have seen. ARC is a great project though, but it is a big one

Brittany Leffel:

I would love to see the data collection be put into the early wins grant.

 

Molly McKeon:

I'm also curious on the timing for ARC. If construction isn't slated to start until later would it be better served as part of the larger grant next year?

 

Bryan Peterson:

What’s the total cost of those 3 projects? Could aspects from all 3 be integrated into one ask?

 

Tori Manogue:

I'll also highlight that part of the Letter of Intent process is CPW and GOCO reviewers providing feedback which will include mention of other grant programs if they align more closely with other existing grant programs.

 

Bryan Peterson:

USFS food lockers.

 

Town of Silverton Colorado:

Timing on ARC: this is progressing well and Silverton is looking to enter into contract with CWCB hopefully by June. This would fund design and engineering for the restoration of the river corridor at the confluence of Cement creek and the improvement wetland that would receive the bifurcated cement creek. The +/- 6.7 acre fen restoration work has been designed and engineered. Restoration work I understand would start summer 2027. The angle for pursuit of funding for trail work and a bridge is that it would preserve the restoration work. It can be phased in as restoration work is completed. Restoration work will intentionally leave a blank canvas for trail creation.

 

Ken Hilfiker:

CPW..good feedback and appreciate the help in funding source recommendations.

 

Chara Ragland:

 Now We need to have the 'other funding source' noted in this meeting added to the document of ProjectPriorities_Selections. And, ask the project requestors to resubmit whether they will pursue those funds and if not, how much for a single year budget.

 

Ken Hilfiker:

I think the feedback from CPW would help on sources of fundings and dates per project

 

(Didn't record individual): 

Agree. Thinking get the top project folks together and see what they can put together that achieves an overall goal.

 

I think the Care for Durango and Citizen Science is a great bundling opportunity (plus the "free" mapping/survey options of course).

 

It seems to make a stronger application having multiple projects woven together. Really exciting!!

​

Attending Organizations

Bear Smart Durango

Colorado Parks and Wildlife

Continental Divide Trail Coalition

Durango Nordic Ski Club

Durango Running Club

Great Old Broads for Wilderness

Mountain Studies Institute

National Forest Foundation

Pagosa Trail Riders

San Juan Mountains Association

Southern Ute Indian Tribe

Southwest Conservation Corp

Southwest Sierra Club

Town of Silverton Colorado

US Forest Service

Winter Wildlands Alliance​​

​

April 28, 2026 Meeting Transcript PDF