Case Study Template

Delta Harvest Community Coalition (DHCC) Case Study: Delta Fresh Mobile Pantry & Cooking Circles, 2024 Program Year (Sunflower and Leflore Counties, Mississippi Delta)

Tone: PROFESSIONAL (plain-language, balanced for practitioners and small funders)

1) Executive Summary - Reached 1,180 low-income households (3,420 individuals) living in USDA-defined food deserts; 56% were seniors 60+ and 41% were families with children under 12 (not mutually exclusive). - Conducted 32 mobile pantry distributions and 18 Cooking Circles; distributed 130,400 pounds of fresh produce and staple foods (≈108,700 meals). - Among repeat participants with complete data (n=402), households screening as food insecure on the 6-item USDA module declined from 38% at baseline to 24% at 60 days (14 percentage point drop). This is an association, not proof of causation. - Facilitated 210 SNAP applications with Sunflower County Department of Human Services; 172 were approved (82%) by year-end. - Program delivered by 2 full-time staff with partners: Mid-South Food Bank, Mississippi State University (MSU) Extension—Sunflower County, First Baptist Church of Indianola, and Sunflower County DHS. 2024 operating costs: $180,000–$240,000.

Pull-quote/stat callouts: - “Food insecurity fell 14 percentage points among repeat participants with complete follow-up (n=402).” - “130,400 pounds of healthy food delivered across two Mississippi Delta counties in 2024.”

2) Context/Challenge (need, baseline, equity considerations) Sunflower and Leflore Counties are rural, majority-Black communities with longstanding barriers to nutritious food access, including limited full-service grocery stores, high transportation costs, and high poverty rates. Many neighborhoods meet USDA’s definition of low-income and low-access (often called “food deserts”). CDC PLACES estimates place both counties above national averages for diet-related chronic conditions, including diabetes and hypertension. These structural conditions contribute to higher household food insecurity.

At baseline (January 2024), DHCC used the six-item U.S. Household Food Security Module to screen new enrollees. Among those with completed intake (n=960), 38% screened food insecure (low or very low food security). Transportation was a common barrier: GIS mapping showed a median distance of 9.8 miles from clients’ homes to the nearest full-line grocery. Equitable access considerations guided site selection: we prioritized census tracts with higher concentrations of seniors, households with children, and areas flagged as low-access by the USDA Food Access Research Atlas.

3) Intervention (what we did, dosage, timeline, staffing, partners, budget) - What: Delta Fresh Mobile Pantry & Cooking Circles delivered healthy groceries and hands-on nutrition education directly to neighborhoods, prioritizing seniors 60+ and families with children under 12. - Dosage: - Mobile Pantry: 24 scheduled monthly stops (12 per county) plus 8 partner pop-ups = 32 events. Each household received 25–35 lbs of produce, lean proteins (e.g., chicken, beans), whole grains, and shelf-stable staples per visit. - Cooking Circles: 18 small-group sessions (8–15 participants) led by MSU Extension educators, featuring 60–90 minutes of practical instruction, recipes, and tastings using pantry items. Participants could borrow low-cost tools (peelers, measuring cups) to reduce barriers at home. - Timeline: January–December 2024, with consistent routes published quarterly. Weather or church conflicts led to three rescheduled events. - Staffing: 2 FTE—Program Coordinator (logistics, data, partnerships) and Driver/Outreach Specialist (truck operations, client navigation). Volunteers (avg. 12 per event) assisted with registration, packing, and load-out. - Partners: - Mid-South Food Bank: primary food sourcing and cold-chain support. - MSU Extension—Sunflower County: nutrition education and Cooking Circles facilitation. - First Baptist Church of Indianola: distribution site, volunteer base, storage for dry goods. - Sunflower County Department of Human Services (DHS): SNAP enrollment assistance and verification. - Budget (2024 operating range: $180,000–$240,000): - Refrigerated truck lease and maintenance: $68,000 - Food procurement (produce, protein, culturally relevant staples): $70,000 - Personnel (2 FTE, benefits): $72,000–$82,000 - Fuel, insurance, and supplies: $22,000 - Outreach and evaluation: $10,000–$14,000

4) Methodology (design, instruments, sample, measures, comparison, privacy) - Design: Single-group pre/post design with routine administrative data. We used a quasi-experimental approach—no random assignment or external comparison group. Findings show associations, not causation. - Data sources and instruments: - Client intake forms (demographics, contact, consent, priorities: seniors/families). - Monthly distribution logs (households served, pounds distributed). - Attendance sheets (pantry visits and Cooking Circles). - Food security: 6-item USDA Household Food Security Module at intake and at 60-day follow-up for repeat participants. - SNAP enrollment verification (submission and outcome) via Sunflower County DHS. - CDC PLACES county health indicators (context). - GIS mapping of distribution sites and client-reported addresses to assess proximity. - Sample: - Households enrolled: 1,180 - Completed intake food security screen: 960 (82%) - Completed 60-day follow-up food security screen: 402 (repeat participants with matched data) - Cooking Circles attendance: 18 sessions; 176 unique participants; 138 completed both pre/post attendance-linked surveys. - Measures: - Outputs: households served, pounds of food, events, volunteer hours, SNAP applications and approvals. - Outcomes: change in proportion screening food insecure (6-item module), SNAP approval rate, and repeat attendance rate (≥3 pantry visits or ≥2 Cooking Circles). - Comparison/baseline: January–March intakes as baseline; 60-day follow-up for repeats as post. County-level health indicators used for context, not as outcome measures. - Consent & privacy: - Written opt-in obtained at intake for data collection and optional follow-up; services not affected by consent decisions. - De-identified unique IDs used in analysis; no personally identifiable information (PII) is reported. - For the client vignette, a pseudonym is used; written opt-in was obtained for story use without photos; participation is not affected by consent.

Data gaps and assumptions: - Baseline food security scores missing for ~18% of households due to late intake or declined survey. - Need a standardized definition of “regular attendee” across pantry and class activities; we used ≥3 pantry visits or ≥2 classes in 90 days. - Follow-up: only households granting contact permission were eligible for 60-day surveys. - Address confirmation: some addresses incomplete; we recommend a minimal two-step address verification for more accurate GIS mapping.

5) Results (outputs and outcomes) Outputs: - 32 mobile pantry distributions; 18 Cooking Circles. - 1,180 households (3,420 individuals) served; 56% seniors 60+; 41% families with children under 12; 92% identified as Black/African American; 84% lived in USDA-defined low-access tracts. - 130,400 pounds of food distributed (≈108,700 meals using 1.2 lbs = 1 meal). - 3,840 volunteer hours (avg. 12 volunteers x 10 hours per event). - SNAP navigation: 210 applications submitted; 172 approvals (82%) as verified by DHS.

Outcomes (comparisons to baseline/targets): - Food security: Among repeat participants with matched data (n=402), the share screening food insecure declined from 38% at baseline to 24% at 60-day follow-up (target: 10 pp reduction; actual: 14 pp). This improvement correlates with program participation and SNAP uptake but cannot be attributed solely to the program. - Reach and access: GIS showed 76% of clients received services within 2 miles of their homes (baseline median to full-service grocery was 9.8 miles). - Engagement: 58% of enrolled households met our “regular attendee” definition (target: 50%). - SNAP success: 82% approval rate (target: 75%); expected to reduce month-to-month gap at the end of benefit cycles per published research.

Client vignette (pseudonym; consent obtained): “Ms. Lila J.”, a 71-year-old Sunflower County resident, began visiting the mobile pantry in March and joined three Cooking Circles. With SNAP approved in May and monthly pantry produce, she reported fewer skipped meals and learned a low-sodium greens recipe she shared at her church. Written opt-in was obtained at intake; pseudonym is used; no photos or quotes without a separate release; participation and services are not affected by consent decisions.

6) Analysis (why it worked; alignment with research) - Proximity and predictability: Bringing fresh food to neighborhoods reduced transportation barriers—consistent with USDA findings that low-access tracts face distance and mobility constraints. - Blend of relief and skills: Pairing groceries with MSU Extension-led cooking classes helped households stretch benefits and use fresh produce confidently, which aligns with evidence that food resource management skills can support food security. - SNAP navigation: On-site application support and verification with DHS helped convert eligible households into enrolled participants; peer-reviewed and federal evaluations show SNAP participation is associated with reduced food insecurity. - Partnerships: Mid-South Food Bank ensured reliable sourcing; church and local partners provided trusted venues and volunteers—important in rural communities where social trust influences program uptake.

7) Lessons Learned & Limitations - Lessons: - Publish routes quarterly and text reminders 48 hours prior; attendance increased by 11% after implementing SMS reminders in April. - Offer culturally familiar items (greens, okra, field peas) alongside recipes; waste decreased and client satisfaction rose on comment cards. - Co-locate SNAP navigation at high-traffic sites; approvals improved when we scheduled DHS staff on distribution days. - Limitations: - Missing baseline data (~18%) limits generalizability of food security results. - Single-group pre/post design cannot establish causation; results may reflect concurrent factors (e.g., seasonal employment). - Address data quality affected GIS accuracy; two-step verification is planned. - “Regular attendee” definition evolved mid-year; we will standardize from program start in 2025.

8) Next Steps & Funding Needs - Sustain and scale: Maintain 32 distributions and increase to 24 Cooking Circles in 2025, adding Leflore county sites anchored by faith partners. - Data quality: Implement standardized “regular attendee” criteria and address verification; secure permissions for 60- and 90-day follow-ups to improve outcome tracking. - Deeper nutrition impact: Pilot blood pressure screenings in partnership with local clinics at four 2025 distributions (data de-identified and voluntary). - Funding needs: $210,000–$260,000 for 2025 to cover rising fuel/food costs, a 0.5 FTE data/evaluation assistant, and expanded classes. Donor opportunities: - $50 supports one family with a month of fresh groceries and recipes. - $1,500 sponsors a Cooking Circle series (venue, instructor, ingredients, take-home tools). - $7,500 underwrites a full mobile pantry stop (food, fuel, staffing).

Proposed visuals - Bar chart: Percentage of households screening food insecure at baseline vs. 60-day follow-up among repeat participants (n=402), showing 38% → 24%. - Service flow funnel: Outreach → Intake (n=1,180) → Regular attendees (n=684) → Follow-up completed (n=402) → SNAP applications (n=210) → SNAP approved (n=172).

Photo concept and consent language - Photo: Outdoor mobile pantry line under shade tents at First Baptist Church of Indianola, with volunteers loading mixed produce boxes into wagons; no identifying information visible on forms. - Required consent: “I voluntarily consent to DHCC using my image and/or quotes for educational and fundraising materials. I understand my participation in services will not be affected by my decision. I may revoke consent at any time in writing.” Use separate photo and story release; pseudonyms for stories unless explicit name use is approved.

9) Citations & Acknowledgments - USDA Economic Research Service. U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/survey-tools - USDA. Food Access Research Atlas (definition of low-income/low-access areas). https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas - CDC. PLACES: Local Data for Better Health (Sunflower and Leflore County indicators). https://www.cdc.gov/places - Feeding America. Meal Equivalent (1.2 pounds = 1 meal) and Map the Meal Gap methodology. https://www.feedingamerica.org/ways-we-fight-hunger/research - Mabli, J., Ohls, J., Dragoset, L., et al. (2013). Measuring the Effect of SNAP Participation on Food Security. USDA Food and Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/measuring-effect-snap-participation-food-security

Acknowledgments: DHCC thanks Mid-South Food Bank; MSU Extension—Sunflower County; First Baptist Church of Indianola; Sunflower County DHS; and the volunteers and clients who informed this report.

Author: By Alicia Gomez, Development & Programs Associate. Reviewed by Rev. Thomas Lee, Board Chair.

Note on replicability: This case study includes instruments, dosage, staffing model, and data limitations to support adaptation by small teams across rural regions without overstating impact.

Bridge to Tech Chicago (IT Support and Data Analytics): FY24 Case Study (July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024) Population served: Immigrant and refugee jobseekers in Chicago and Cook County, ages 18–45, intermediate English (CASAS 211+), incomes under 200% of Federal Poverty Level, unemployed or underemployed.

Tone: PROFESSIONAL (balanced, plain-language for practitioners/policymakers)

1) Executive Summary - 224 enrolled; 176 completed (79%); 126 placed into employment within 180 days of completion (72% of completers). - Median starting wage among placed graduates: $22.50/hour vs. $14.75/hour at intake for those employed—a 53% wage gain (self-reported/paystub verified). - 118 earned at least one industry-recognized credential (53% of all enrollees), including CompTIA A+ and Google Career Certificates. - 84% 90-day retention among placed graduates with employer verification. - Cost per completion: $7,670; cost per placement: $10,700 on a $1.35M FY24 budget.

Pull-quote/stat callouts: - “72% of graduates secured employment within six months, with a median starting wage of $22.50/hour.” - “A 53% median wage increase from intake to placement for participants who gained employment.”

2) Context/Challenge (need, baseline, equity) Immigrants comprise a significant share of Chicago’s workforce but face credential transfer barriers, language hurdles, and underemployment, particularly in entry pathways to the tech sector. Prior to enrollment, 64% of participants were unemployed and 36% were working below their skill level with median wages of $14.75/hour (n=81 employed at intake). Research indicates IT support and data analytics offer accessible on-ramps with stackable credentials and strong local demand, yet many newcomers lack affordable training, devices, and professional networks. Equity considerations included language access (intermediate English required but with multilingual supports), childcare stipends, and devices/hotspots to reduce digital inequities. We prioritized neighborhoods with high immigrant density and coordinated with the Chicago Mayor’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Rights to align with city priorities.

3) Intervention (what we did; dosage; timeline; staffing; partners; budget) Bridge to Tech Chicago delivered two tracks: - IT Support (16 weeks; ~180 contact hours): hardware/software fundamentals, networking basics, ticketing systems, customer support, and exam prep for Google IT Support Professional Certificate and CompTIA A+. - Data Analytics (20 weeks; ~220 contact hours): spreadsheet and SQL fundamentals, data cleaning, visualization (Tableau), and the Google Data Analytics Professional Certificate.

Dosage and supports: - Weekly schedule: 10–12 instructional hours plus 2–4 hours tutoring/lab; 1:1 career coaching biweekly; 4 employer-facing events per cohort (panels, mock interviews, case challenges). - Learner supports: loaner laptops (n=150), hotspots (n=120), childcare vouchers (up to $500/learner), transit cards, and milestone stipends (up to $1,200 per learner).

Timeline and delivery: - FY24 ran three cohorts (Fall 2023, Winter 2024, Spring 2024). - Instruction delivered in partnership with City Colleges of Chicago—Malcolm X (IT Support labs) and Harold Washington (Data Analytics labs); courses hosted in Moodle (learning management system). - Industry-recognized credentials: Google Career Certificates (Grow with Google) and CompTIA A+ (two-part exam). - Employer and ecosystem partners: Accenture (case challenge, mentoring), Aon and Northern Trust (mock interviews, job previews), Illinois workNet (job postings, labor exchange tools), and the Chicago Mayor’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Rights (outreach and policy alignment).

Staffing: - 3 FTE Career Coaches; 1 FTE Employer Engagement Manager; 0.5 FTE Data/Evaluation Manager; 4 part-time instructors (City Colleges adjuncts); 1 Program Manager (shared).

Budget: - FY24 total: $1,350,000 (within the $1,200,000–$1,500,000 range), including instruction, 3 FTE coaches, credential exam fees, laptops/hotspots, learner stipends, childcare vouchers, and external evaluation support.

4) Methodology (design, data, measures, consent & privacy) Design: - Internal cohort study with pre-post measures, using administrative and survey data. We report correlations; we do not claim causation.

Data sources: - Moodle LMS course completion and attendance. - CompTIA A+ and Google Career Certificate pass records (official score reports). - Participant surveys (baseline and exit) and paystub uploads (encrypted portal). - Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES) wage match for opt-in participants. - Employer verification at 90 days for employed graduates.

Sample and measures: - Sample: 224 enrolled (IT Support n=140; Data Analytics n=84). - Primary measures: course completion; credential attainment; employment within 180 days of completion; median starting wage; 90-day retention. - Baseline/comparison: self-reported employment status and wage at intake; program targets set pre-year (70% completion, 50% credential attainment, 65% placement within 180 days, $20/hour median wage).

Consent and privacy: - Participants received an information sheet and provided written consent to share credential and wage data. Wage verification via IDES and employer contact is opt-in through an encrypted portal. Declining consent does not affect services. We report aggregated results only; no personally identifiable information (PII) is included.

5) Results (outputs and outcomes) Outputs: - Enrollment: 224 (IT Support 140; Data Analytics 84). - Completion: 176 (79%); IT Support 112/140 (80%); Data Analytics 64/84 (76%). - Credential attainment: 118 earned at least one credential (53% of enrollees). - CompTIA A+ pass rate among test takers: 68% (62/91). - Google IT Support Certificate completion: 61% (66/108). - Google Data Analytics Certificate completion: 57% (36/63).

Outcomes: - Employment within 180 days of completion: 126/176 (72%). Target: 65%. - Role types: 55% IT support/help desk; 18% data analyst/BI associate/intern; 27% adjacent (desktop support, ops/QA). - Median starting wage: $22.50/hour (n=121 with verified wage), exceeding the $20/hour target and 53% above median intake wage of $14.75/hour among those employed at intake (n=81). - 90-day retention: 84% among placed graduates with employer verification (n=104 of 126). - Equity and access: 100% of learners needing a device/hotspot received one; 61% used at least one supportive service (stipend, childcare, or transit).

Comparison to baseline/targets: - Completion exceeded the 70% target (achieved 79%). - Credential attainment exceeded the 50% target (achieved 53%). - Placement exceeded the 65% target (achieved 72%). - Wages exceeded the $20/hour target (achieved $22.50/hour median).

Client vignette: - “Samira” (pseudonym), an asylee from Eritrea, completed the Data Analytics track while working evenings. With consent, she shared her Google certificate and first paystub through our encrypted portal. Three months later, her employer verified her role as a junior data analyst at $25/hour with benefits.

6) Analysis (why it worked; alignment with research) - Stackable, recognized credentials: CompTIA A+ and Google Career Certificates are valued by employers and provide clear skill signals, consistent with evidence that industry-recognized credentials improve entry into IT support roles with solid wage potential in Chicago’s labor market.1–3 - Work-based learning and employer touchpoints: Accenture, Aon, and Northern Trust engaged in mock interviews and case challenges that improved job readiness and network access, addressing a common barrier for immigrants—limited professional ties. - Supports that reduce friction: Stipends, devices, and childcare vouchers likely contributed to higher completion by reducing attendance and persistence barriers. - Alignment with demand: BLS projects steady demand for computer support specialists with wages above local service-sector jobs.1

Correlation vs. causation: While results align with research and program logic, we cannot isolate the program effect from external factors (e.g., regional hiring cycles). The combination of credentialing, coaching, and employer engagement correlates with higher placement and wage outcomes.

7) Lessons Learned & Limitations Lessons: - Early exam scheduling increased credential attainment. Test dates set at week 3 and week 10 (IT Support) improved study pacing and pass rates. - Employer-validated projects boosted Data Analytics placements. A short Accenture case challenge yielded stronger interviews and portfolios. - Multilingual coaching mattered even with English-proficient participants; coaches who could clarify complex terms in learners’ first language increased confidence and retention.

Limitations and data gaps: - Wage match data: Approximately 20% of graduates did not opt in to IDES wage matching; for them we relied on self-reports or could not verify wages, which may bias wage medians upward or downward. - Job quality metrics: We lack standardized measures on benefits, full-time status, and schedule stability across all placements; collecting this consistently is a priority. - Pre-program digital literacy: We did not administer a standardized baseline digital skills assessment, limiting cross-cohort comparisons on learning gains.

Recommended minimal follow-ups for staff: - Add a 10-minute digital literacy screener at intake for all cohorts. - Standardize a job quality checklist at placement and 90 days (benefits, hours, remote/hybrid). - Continue opt-in wage verification but incorporate two additional secure reminders post-placement to increase response rates.

8) Next Steps & Funding Needs Scale and improvement priorities for FY25: - Expand seat capacity to 260 learners while maintaining support ratios. - Add CompTIA Network+ and Google Advanced Data Analytics as second-stack credentials. - Pilot an employer-paid apprenticeship for 20 IT Support graduates with Aon and Northern Trust.

Funding needs: - $1.4–$1.6M to sustain and responsibly expand, including: - Instructional delivery and exam vouchers (CompTIA and Google). - 3 FTE career coaches and 1 additional retention coach. - 180 laptops and 150 hotspots replacement/refresh. - Learner stipends and childcare vouchers at current levels. - Evaluation upgrade: digital literacy baseline, standardized job quality tracking, and extended 12-month wage follow-up.

Proposed visuals for appendices or decks: - Bar chart: Median wage at intake ($14.75) vs. median starting wage post-placement ($22.50). - Funnel: 224 enrolled → 176 completed → 142 tested → 118 credentialed → 126 placed → 106 retained at 90 days.

Photo concept (with consent language): - Concept: A classroom lab at Malcolm X College showing a small group troubleshooting a desktop tower, with an instructor guiding. - Consent language: “Photo used with written consent under the CWW media release. Participation is voluntary and not tied to services. No PII displayed. Consent may be revoked at any time.”

9) Citations & Acknowledgments Citations 1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Computer Support Specialists—Occupational Outlook. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/computer-support-specialists.htm 2) Grow with Google. Google Career Certificates: Impact and Outcomes. https://grow.google/certificates/ (see Impact section) 3) CompTIA. Why CompTIA A+ Is the Industry Standard for IT Support. https://www.comptia.org/certifications/a 4) Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES). Wage Record and Employment Data—Privacy and Access. https://www2.illinois.gov/ides 5) CASAS. About CASAS and Scale Levels. https://www.casas.org/product-overviews/casas-assessments

Acknowledgments Chicago Welcome Workforce thanks City Colleges of Chicago—Malcolm X College and Harold Washington College; CompTIA and Grow with Google; employer partners Accenture, Aon, and Northern Trust; Illinois workNet; and the Chicago Mayor’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Rights for collaboration during FY24.

Author line By Priya Raman, Director of Evaluation. Reviewed by Michael Torres, Executive Director.

Title: Klamath Forest Resilience Initiative: Prescribed Fire and Fuels Reduction in the Klamath River Basin (2021–2024)

Style: PROFESSIONAL (balanced, plain-language for practitioners and policymakers)

1) Executive Summary - Treated 12,340 acres across Karuk and Yurok ancestral territories (10,120 acres prescribed fire; 2,220 acres hand thinning/pile burning), January 2021–June 2024, with zero reportable injuries. - Established an Indigenous- and agency-led operations model with Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources (Karuk DNR), Yurok Fire, CAL FIRE, and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Region 5; trained 142 local fire practitioners (59% tribal members). - Documented a 38% reduction in surface fuel loads and a 21% reduction in canopy bulk density across 120 monitoring plots; modeled flame lengths decreased from 8.2 ft to 4.6 ft under 97th-percentile conditions. - Household preparedness gains (n=412): defensible space compliance increased from 34% to 57% and evacuation “go-bag” readiness from 28% to 49% in high-severity fire zones. - Total investment: $9.3 million (3.5 years) for Rx fire operations, hand thinning, crew training, equipment, NEPA/CEQA compliance, cultural burning planning, monitoring, and community engagement.

2) Context/Challenge The Klamath River Basin in Siskiyou and Humboldt Counties faces a high frequency of lightning ignitions, topographic wind events, and a legacy of fire exclusion. Communities—many low-income and geographically isolated—experience recurrent smoke exposure and evacuation risk. Tribal communities (Karuk and Yurok) hold deep knowledge of cultural burning practices but face regulatory and capacity barriers to applying them at scale.

Baseline conditions (2020) from LANDFIRE and CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) data indicated heavy surface and ladder fuel accumulations and elevated crown fire potential in mixed conifer–hardwood stands. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 identified several census tracts along the Klamath and lower Klamath as disadvantaged, with high wildfire vulnerability and limited access to preparedness resources.

Equity considerations guided site selection and workforce pipelines: 63% of treatment acreage lay within or adjacent to disadvantaged tracts or tribal lands; paid training slots prioritized local residents and tribal practitioners to reduce travel barriers and increase career pathways.

3) Intervention What we did and with whom - Operations: Implemented low- to moderate-intensity prescribed burns and hand thinning with pile burning in strategic polygons to create/strengthen fuel breaks near communities, cultural resources, and critical habitat corridors. - Partnership backbone: Karuk DNR and Yurok Fire provided cultural burning leadership and crews; CAL FIRE and USFS Region 5 provided permitting, planning, and suppression-readiness coordination; UC Cooperative Extension supported monitoring design; The Nature Conservancy’s Fire Learning Network (FLN) provided peer learning; Siskiyou County OES aligned public safety messaging and evacuation planning.

Dosage, timeline, and staffing - Timeline: Jan 2021–Jun 2024. Burn windows in spring and fall, with opportunistic winter burns. - Staffing: 4 interagency Rx modules (15–20 personnel each), 2 tribal cultural burn teams, and a monitoring unit (4 techs + 1 analyst). - Capacity built: 142 firefighters trained to wildland Firefighter Type 2; 36 upskilled to Rx ignition/burn boss task books; equipment purchases included two Type 6 engines, four UTV slip-on units, PPE, and 120 drip torches.

Budget - Total: $9.3M within a planned $8–$10M range over 3.5 years. - Major cost centers: operations (42%), workforce/training (18%), equipment (12%), environmental compliance and burn plan development (16%), monitoring and community engagement (12%).

4) Methodology Design and data sources - Remote sensing: LANDFIRE fuels layers and Landsat 8/9 time series to validate treatment footprints and infer burn severity patterns. - Field monitoring: 120 permanent plots sampled using Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) protocols pre-treatment and 6–18 months post-treatment; metrics included surface fuels (1-hr to 1000-hr), canopy bulk density, basal area, and ladder fuel presence. - Air quality: AirNow and PurpleAir sensors tracked 24-hr average PM2.5 during Rx burn windows and wildfire smoke days to compare exposure profiles. - Preparedness survey: Household survey (n=412 unique households) in and near treatment polygons; measures included defensible space compliance, go-bag readiness, sign-ups for emergency alerts, and evacuation planning. Consent obtained; no personally identifiable information retained; responses aggregated by tract. - Incident data: CAL FIRE FRAP incident reports for ignitions, containment, and structure impacts in/near the footprint.

Privacy and Indigenous data governance - Community stories shared with documented consent. - Tribal data reviewed by Karuk DNR prior to publication. - No sacred site locations or sensitive cultural information disclosed.

5) Results Outputs - Acres treated: 12,340 total (10,120 prescribed fire; 2,220 hand thinning/pile burning). Target: 10,000 acres Rx + 2,000 thinning. Achieved/exceeded. - Workforce: 142 new FFT2 certifications; 36 advanced qualifications; 59% tribal members, 31% women or non-binary. - Engagement: 26 public workshops (n=627 participants); 9 school demonstrations; bilingual smoke and evacuation materials distributed to 2,900 households.

Outcomes (measured and modeled) - Fuels and fire behavior: Across 120 plots, mean surface fuel load decreased 38% (from 23.1 to 14.3 tons/acre); canopy bulk density decreased 21%; modeled flame length (97th-percentile weather) decreased from 8.2 ft to 4.6 ft; crown fire potential score declined 44%. These modeled outcomes indicate reduced intensity and improved initial attack feasibility; they are not direct measures of avoided loss. - Ignitions and containment: Five lightning ignitions (2022–2023) within treatment mosaics were contained at initial attack with zero structure loss. Correlation with treatments is suggestive but not proof of causation; other factors (weather, crew availability) contributed. - Air quality: During Rx windows, median 24-hr PM2.5 at local sensors was 19 µg/m3 versus 98 µg/m3 on peak wildfire smoke days. Rx smoke was shorter in duration (1–2 days) and communicated in advance. - Household preparedness (n=412): - Defensible space compliance rose from 34% baseline to 57% at follow-up (+23 points). - Go-bag readiness rose from 28% to 49% (+21 points). - Emergency alert enrollment rose from 41% to 72% (+31 points). Response bias and uneven tract participation limit generalizability.

Stat callouts - 38% reduction in surface fuels across 120 monitored plots. - 5 lightning ignitions contained at initial attack, 0 structures lost in treatment areas.

Client vignette “Maria” (pseudonym), a Yurok elder, joined two cultural burn days near her community forest. She reported seeing huckleberry and beargrass sprout within weeks and said advance smoke texts helped her plan around a respiratory condition. Consent on file; no site details disclosed.

6) Analysis Why it worked - Indigenous leadership anchored burn objectives in cultural resource and habitat needs, producing low-severity fire effects consistent with desired ecological outcomes. - Cross-jurisdiction coordination (tribal–state–federal–county) reduced permitting delays and maximized narrow burn windows. - Workforce localization increased staffing reliability and community trust, improving participation in smoke-readiness and evacuation planning. Alignment with research - Patterns observed—reduced surface/ladder fuels, lower modeled flame lengths, and mosaic burn severity—are consistent with the literature on prescribed fire and cultural burning as tools to moderate extreme fire behavior and support biodiversity.

7) Lessons Learned & Limitations - Burn window volatility: Drought and smoke management constraints compressed operations; contingency plans and pre-positioning were necessary. - Data limits: Avoided-loss estimates remain modeled counterfactuals; robust attribution would require incident-by-incident fire behavior simulations. - Monitoring gaps: Biodiversity indicators beyond 24 months post-treatment were not consistently collected; add multi-year vegetation and wildlife protocols. - Survey unevenness: Response rates varied by tract; future cycles should include minimal reminders and on-site intercepts to reduce bias. - Workforce retention: Seasonal employment led to turnover; multi-year funding improves retention and training ROI.

8) Next Steps & Funding Needs Scale and sustain - Treat an additional 20,000 acres (FY2025–2027) emphasizing community buffers, cultural resources, and critical habitat linkages. - Strengthen the local workforce pipeline (additional 180 FFT2 trainees; 60 advanced roles) with year-round positions. - Expand monitoring to include multi-year biodiversity and cultural-resource indicators; add more low-cost PM sensors for smoke tracking.

Policy alignment and asks - Maintain and expand Good Neighbor Authority and cross-boundary NEPA/CEQA efficiencies. - Enhance smoke management flexibility for low-intensity burns, with health-protective communications and clean-air shelter support.

Funding request - $12.5M over three years for operations, workforce, monitoring, and equipment renewal; includes $1.2M for long-term monitoring and data stewardship in partnership with tribes.

Suggested visuals - Bar chart: Pre/post modeled flame length and surface fuel load reductions across 120 plots. - Service flow funnel: Recruitment → Training (FFT2) → Advanced qualifications → Seasonal/perm roles → Retention after 12 months.

Photo concept - Image of Karuk and Yurok practitioners conducting a low-intensity understory burn in mixed conifer, with fireline brief in progress. Consent: Obtain written releases from all identifiable individuals; tribal review before publication; exclude sacred/culturally sensitive locations; caption must credit partners.

9) Citations & Acknowledgments Citations - LANDFIRE Program. Fuels and vegetation datasets. https://landfire.gov - U.S. EPA AirNow. Air quality data and PM2.5 resources. https://www.airnow.gov - California OEHHA. CalEnviroScreen 4.0. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen - CAL FIRE FRAP. Fire perimeters and incident data. https://frap.fire.ca.gov - The Nature Conservancy, Fire Learning Network. Prescribed fire learning and practice. https://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationPractices/FireLandscapes/FireLearningNetwork

Acknowledgments Pacific Crest Conservation Alliance thanks Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources, Yurok Fire, CAL FIRE, USFS Region 5, UC Cooperative Extension, The Nature Conservancy’s Fire Learning Network, and Siskiyou County Office of Emergency Services. Tribal data and narratives were reviewed by Karuk DNR prior to publication. Community stories were shared with documented consent. No sacred site locations or sensitive cultural information are disclosed.

Data gaps and assumptions noted - Modeled counterfactual for avoided loss (requires fire behavior simulations). - Biodiversity indicators beyond 24 months post-treatment require expanded monitoring. - Household preparedness survey response rates varied by census tract; minimal follow-ups recommended to program staff for future cycles.

Author By Dr. Lauren Kim, Senior Impact Analyst. Reviewed by Ethan Caldwell, Vice President, Programs & Science.