Green Infrastructure Grant Opportunities (FY 2026)

All GIGO applications shall be reviewed for completeness, technical merit, cost effectiveness, and adherence to the competitive grant evaluation criteria described in this NOFO. Applications found to be complete shall undergo a comprehensive, merit-based review performed in compliance with GATA Legislation, 30 ILCS 708 and Uniform Administrative Requirements, 2 C.F.R. § 200. The merit-based review is designed to evaluate the applications against the following criteria:

Project Need (0 – 20 points)

Distance of the proposed project(s) upstream or downstream of riverine or localized flooding?

• The project is entirely within or directly adjacent to riverine or localized flooding (5 points)
• The project site(s) is within 1,000 linear feet from riverine or localized flooding (3 points).
• The project site(s) are than 3,000 linear feet from riverine or localized flooding (1 points).

Area serviced by storm sewers

• The application documents flood areas with 100% storm or combined sewer system coverage (5 points).
• The application documents flood areas do not have storm or combined sewers (1 points)

Impact on riverine or localized flooding

• The project documents riverine or localized flood area, more than 12” deep and greater than 10 acres in size (5 points).
• The project documents riverine or localized flood area, more than 8” deep and greater than 4 acres in size (4 points).
• The project documents riverine or localized flood area more than 4” deep and greater than 3 acres in size (3 points).
• The project documents localized flooding that is 12” deep but less than 3 acres in size (2 points)
• The project does not document any flooding (0 points)

Distance of the proposed project upstream or downstream of a river, stream or lake

• The project site(s) with storm or combined sewer system coverage is directly adjacent to river, stream, or lake (5 points).
• The project site(s) with storm or combined sewer system coverage, is within 1,000 linear feet from river, stream, or lake, but not directly adjacent to it (4 points).
• The project site(s) with storm or combined sewer system coverage, is between 1,000 and 3,000 linear feet from river, stream, or lake (3 points).
• The project site(s) is WITHOUT storm or combined sewer system coverage, (1 points).

Project Effectiveness (20 points)

Number of days the BMP designed to detain the captured stormwater

• The BMP drains stormwater detained within one day (5 points).
• The BMP drains stormwater detained between 1 - 3 days (3 points).
• The BMP drains stormwater detained between 4 - 7 days (1 points).
• The BMP does not have an outlet to drain stormwater detained or takes more than 7 days to drain stormwater detained (0 points).

The project will reconnect the river, stream, or lake to its floodplain

• The BMPs are designed to reconnect the river, stream, or lake to its floodplain (5 points).
• The BMPs are designed to partially reconnect the river, stream, or lake to its floodplain (3 points).
• The BMPs do not reconnect the river, stream, or lake to its floodplain (1 point).

Number of gallons retained per year on average.

• Reductions over 4 million gallons per year (5 points)
• Reductions from 2 million to 3,999,999 million gallons per year (4 points)
• Reductions from 1,000,000 to 1,999,999 gallons per year (3 points)
• Reductions from 100,001 to 999,999 gallons per year (2 points)
• Reductions from 1 to 100,000 gallons per year (1 Point)
• No reduction (0 points)

The flooding reduction model results inclusion in the application.

• The application includes full stormwater reduction model input and model results in a pdf or spreadsheet format from an approved stormwater reduction model (5 points).
• The application includes stormwater reduction model input and model results in a pdf or spreadsheet format from an approved stormwater reduction model in the Additional Details spreadsheet. (3 points)
• The application does not include information on stormwater reductions (0 points).

Cost-effectiveness (0 – 10 points)

Average BMP cost/acre for the proposed project

• Cost from $0 - $2,500 per acre (5 points)
• Cost from $2,501 - $10,000 per acre (4 point)
• Cost from $10,001 - $15,000 per acre (3 points)
• Cost from $15,001 - $30,000 per acre (2 points)
• Cost over $30,000 per acre (1 point)

Cost per gallon retained for the proposed project

• Cost from $0 - $1.00 per gallon (5 points)
• Cost from $1.01 - $5.00 per gallon (4 point)
• Cost from $5.01 - $10.00 per gallon (3 points)
• Cost from $10.00 - $20,00 per gallon (2 points)
• Cost over $20.00 per gallon (1 point)

Project Readiness (0 – 20 points)

BMP(s) types and location identification

• All sites and BMP(s) identified (5 points).
• BMP types are identified, but specific locations have not been identified (3 points)
• No sites or BMP types have been identified (0 point).

Site landowners have confirmed permission to implement the project

• BMP(s) owned 100% by applicant or have a legally binding agreements already in place (5 points).
• BMP(s) with multiple landowners that submitted written confirmation from ALL landowners that they plan to participate (3 points).
• BMP(s) that have some but not all landowner confirmation (2 points).
• BMP(s) without documentation of landowner participation (0 points).

BMP(s) design(s) readiness

• BMP(s) design with PE stamped designs 100% complete (5 points).
• BMP(s) with 60 – 90% designs complete (3 points).
• BMP(s) with only a conceptual design(s) (2 points).
• BMP(s) with only narrative of the proposed project(s) (1 points).

Local, State, and Federal permits 

• All required permits secured or no permits required (5 points).
• Some, but not all required permits secured (4 points).
• Permits applied for or all permits that will be needed are described (3 points).
• No discussion of permits (0 points).

Sustainability (0 – 10 points)

BMPs designed lifespan(s)

• Projects that include 100% of BMPs with lifespan greater than 25 years (5 points).
• Projects that include BMPs with lifespan between 10 and 25 years (4 points).
• Projects that do not exceed the required 10-years of O&M (0 points)

Description of relevant and robust operation and maintenance (O&M) plan, including funds to implement said plan and identification of the entity responsible to implement the O&M plan

• Application specifically outlines the O&M activities necessary for the proposed BMP, source of funding, and responsible entity that has a secured capacity to conduct the required work (5 points).
• Applications provide brief description of required O&M activities, source of funds, and responsible entity (3 points).
• Applications provide no information on O&M activities (0 points).

Green Infrastructure Activity Coordination (0 – 10 points)

Application continues implementation of other nonpoint source pollution control activities such as BMP construction and/or watershed-based plan implementation

• Applications that document that the project is part of a larger layered effort (ordinances, planning, BMP implementation) to reduce flooding (5 points).
• Applications that link the project only to other individual BMP implementation (3 points).
• Applications that document the project as the only work happening within their jurisdiction (1 point).

Environmental Justice Area

• The project is located in or benefits an Environmental Justice Area (5 points)
• The project is not located in or benefits an Environmental Justice Area (0 points)

Illinois EPA staff will be responsible for evaluating and scoring applications. 

The complete applications shall be reviewed by an Evaluation Panel that is composed of Illinois EPA staff.

Application scores shall be calculated as follows:

1. Applications will be ranked based on the sum of the scoring criteria.
2. Applications will be ranked highest to lowest based on total project score.
3. Applications with the highest scores will be considered for an award.

Additional review and selection processes are provided below.

• If the amount of available grant funding is not sufficient to fund a higher-ranked application in its entirety, the Illinois EPA shall review the application to determine if a discrete portion or phase of the project meeting the mission of this NOFO can be funded. If the Evaluation Panel determines that it cannot fund the application in full or part, the next highest-ranked application will be reviewed for a discrete portion or phase to be funded to meet the mission of the NOFO or the funds may not be awarded and may be made available through a subsequent NOFO.
• If the Illinois EPA determines that an applicant incorrectly calculated or indicated the project cost, match, and/or total funding request based on the applicable cost estimate, required match, or eligible costs, the application shall still be accepted and reviewed. If the applicant is awarded a grant, the Illinois EPA shall contact the applicant and request a decision from the applicant as to whether it will accept the award based on the Illinois EPA’s determination of the project cost, applicant match, and/or total funding requested. If the applicant does not accept the Illinois EPA’s determination, the application shall not be funded.

Following a decision of intent to award, the Illinois EPA is required by GATA to conduct a programmatic risk assessment of the applicant. Additional information may be required at that time from the successful applicant. To remain eligible for the award, the applicant must provide the requested information within the time specified by the Illinois EPA. The Programmatic Risk Assessment evaluates the applicant’s ability to successfully carry out the terms of the GIGO Program and assesses four risk categories: 1) quality of management systems and ability to meet the management standards; 2) history of performance; 3) reports and findings from audits performed on prior awards; and 4) the applicant’s ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements imposed on a Grantee.

Appeal Process

An appeal process is available to applicants and other interested parties; however, appeals are limited to the Illinois EPA evaluation process. Evaluation scores may not be protested. An appeal must be submitted in writing to the following address: Illinois EPA, Attn: GIGO Grant Program, Bureau of Water, Mail Code #15, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, Illinois 62794-9276 and must be received within 14 calendar days after the date that the grant award notice has been published by the Illinois EPA on Grants.Illinois.gov. The written appeal shall include at a minimum the following: the name and address of the appealing party, identification of the grant, and a statement of reasons for the appeal. Illinois EPA shall acknowledge receipt of an appeal within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date the appeal was received.

When an appeal is received, the execution of the grant in contention that Illinois EPA intends to make under this NOFO shall be stayed until the appeal is resolved, unless the agency head or designee determines that the needs of the State require that the grant program move forward despite the appeal. This determination, and its rationale, must be documented in writing.

Illinois EPA shall respond to the appeal within 60 days or supply a written explanation to the appealing party as to why additional time is required. The appealing party must supply any additional information requested by Illinois EPA within the time period set in the request. The Director of the Illinois EPA may appoint one or more Appeal Review Officers (ARO) to consider the grant-related appeal and make a recommendation to the Director of the Illinois EPA or designee for resolution. The ARO shall make a recommendation to the Director of the Illinois EPA or designee as expeditiously as possible after receiving all relevant, requested information. In determining the appropriate recommendation, the ARO shall consider the integrity of the competitive grant process and the impact of the recommendation on the Illinois EPA. The Illinois EPA shall resolve the appeal by means of written determination, which shall include, but not be limited to: review of the appeal, appeal determination, and rationale for the determination.