Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant Proposals: FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program, 69795-69800 [05-22804]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices organization.5 Specifically, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,6 which requires that the rules of the self-regulatory organization provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among members and issuers and other persons using any facilities or system which it operates or controls. The Commission notes that this proposal would retroactively modify pricing for non-NASD members using the Nasdaq’s Brut Facility to be implemented as of November 1, 2005. This proposal would permit the schedule for non-NASD members to mirror the schedule applicable to NASD members that became effective October 26, 2005, pursuant to SR–NASD–2005– 125 and that Nasdaq stated it would implement on November 1, 2005. The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day of the date of publication of the notice thereof in the Federal Register. The Commission notes that the proposed fees for non-NASD members are identical to those in SR– NASD–2005–125, which implemented those fees for NASD members and which became effective as of October 26, 2005. The Commission notes that this change will promote consistency in Nasdaq’s fee schedule by applying the same pricing schedule with the same date of effectiveness for both NASD members and non-NASD members. Therefore, the Commission finds that there is good cause, consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 to approve the proposed change on an accelerated basis. V. Conclusion It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,8 that the proposed rule change (File No. SR– NASD–2005–126), is approved on an accelerated basis. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.9 Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5–6356 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 5 The Commission has considered the proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 6 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(5). 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 I. Funding Opportunity Description DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5230] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant Proposals: FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement. Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/ A/S/X–06–02. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 00.000. Key Dates: Application Deadline, January 12, 2006. Executive Summary: The Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch in the Office of Global Educational Programs of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA), U.S. Department of State, announces an open competition for an assistance award in the amount of $2,750,000 to support the FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program, a series of concurrent six- to seven-week professional enrichment programs in the U.S. for outstanding secondary-level teachers from selected countries in Eurasia and South Asia, followed by subsequent programs involving U.S. teachers with the Eurasian and South Asian teachers in their countries. Applicant organizations should be prepared to conduct recruitment and accommodate participants from the following countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. During the course of this twoyear program, approximately 136 teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and the social sciences in groups of 20 to 25 teachers in each cohort will take part in U.S.-based professional development institutes to learn new teaching methodologies and approaches to curriculum development through workshops, seminars and, where possible, team-teaching in secondary-level classes with U.S. mentor teachers. Approximately 36 outstanding U.S. teachers will subsequently travel to Eurasia and South Asia to take part in shorter programs with their Eurasian/ South Asian counterparts. To build on the achievements of the exchange visits, small grants will be awarded to individual foreign and U.S. teacher alumni in support of follow-on projects. PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69795 Authority: Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87– 256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is ‘‘to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.’’ The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. Purpose: Overview: The Eurasia/ South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program will expand the impact of the former Teaching Excellence Awards Program by bringing outstanding secondary school teachers from Eurasia and South Asia to the United States to augment their subject area teaching skills and knowledge of the U.S. The goals of the program are: (1) To contribute to the improvement and status of teaching in the participating countries; (2) to create resident experts on the U.S. in schools across the regions; (3) to develop longlasting partnerships and mutual understanding between American and international teachers and their students; and (4) to provide opportunities for under-served foreign populations, especially women, to develop their leadership skills. Proposals should outline three distinct program components: A. A total of six six- to seven-week U.S.-based institutes (each comprising a group of 20 to 25 teachers from Eurasia and South Asia), three of which should occur concurrently in summer or fall of 2006, and three of which should occur concurrently in summer or fall of 2007; B. Visits of four cohorts of U.S. teachers (two cohorts to each region) during the 2006–07 and 2007–08 academic years to reciprocate the visits of the Eurasian and South Asian teachers to the U.S.; and C. Follow-on grants. Applicant organizations should propose a calendar that will include a coherent sequence of program components for each of the two program years. Although the number of participants may be greater in the second year than the first, each year’s E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 69796 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices program should include both participating regions. A. Professional Development Institutes The institutes should be based at competitively selected Schools of Education at U.S. universities. The assignment of teachers to U.S. host campuses will be made based on the similarity of candidates’ qualifications and their English proficiency. The grantee organization should administer an open sub-grant competition among U.S. schools of education to host a cohort of international teachers. Institutions that perform well in the first year may host a cohort of teachers in the second year as well. In the first year of program activity, the grantee organization should arrange a three-day orientation program in Washington, DC, for all three cohorts of international teachers. Then, the international participants will travel to the U.S. host universities for the six-to seven-week institute. The program will conclude with a three-day end-ofprogram conference and debriefing session at one of the host universities for all of the international and U.S. participant teachers in the first year’s cohort. This schedule should repeat in the second year of activity. In each year of program activity, the institutes should provide: (1) English language instruction, if necessary; (2) Intensive training in the Teaching of English as a Foreign Language (or in the teaching of one of the social sciences, depending on the specializations of the participants) and teaching methodologies; (3) Training in the use of computers for Internet and word processing and as tools for teaching EFL or other coursework; (4) Consultations with leading U.S. teacher training and curriculum development specialists and practitioners and, to the extent possible, school visits and collaborations with U.S. teachers on teaching and observing a variety of teaching methods (inquiry, active classroom, group projects, etc.); (5) Individual and group work periods for research and curriculum writing activities; (6) Involvement with Americans at civic and volunteer organizations, at school board meetings, parent-teacher conferences or other community and cultural activities, and through short home stays. Participants in the institutes should be younger teaching professionals with five or more years of experience and strong written and oral English skills. Teachers will be selected primarily from VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 the discipline of English as a Foreign Language, with teachers of social sciences (including social studies, civics, and history) also eligible. Both for Eurasia and South Asia, applicant organizations should propose creative, cost-efficient recruitment and selection strategies involving a combination of partner organizations, branch offices, or other cooperating agencies to attract qualified teachers to the program. The recruitment strategy should attract a sufficient number of applicants to ensure a pool of highly qualified candidates, while limiting the number that will not be accepted. We anticipate 200 nominations from international partner organizations for each year of the program cycle. Applicant organizations are invited to suggest, based on their experience and knowledge, appropriate grant-toapplicant ratios that should be targeted in the recruitment effort. Applicants should identify field offices or other local partner organizations and individuals with whom they propose to collaborate, and should describe in detail previous projects undertaken by the organization(s) or individual(s). Please include letters of project commitment from all partners. A subgrant agreement and an accompanying budget are required if an applicant partners with another organization. Please include this documentation with your proposal submission. In Eurasia and South Asia the grantee organization, together with all local partners, should collaborate with the Regional English Language Officers (RELO) for Eurasia and South Asia, who are based at the U.S. Embassies in Kiev, Tashkent, and New Delhi. The RELOs will be encouraged to participate in reviewing applications, interviewing and nominating candidates, and the approval and monitoring of follow-up activities. In all cases, the top candidates’ applications will be submitted to the grantee organization, which should organize external peer review panels to help determine the final selection of candidates in collaboration with ECA. ECA’s role is to ensure that these programs help support U.S. foreign policy goals. master teachers about teaching styles, curriculum, and educational issues in the host country. The grantee organization should invite applications from outstanding and, preferably, award-winning U.S. teachers and, in consultation with the Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X), should select approximately thirty-six for participation over the course of two program cycles. These U.S. teachers will join their Eurasian and South Asian counterparts for the U.S.-based conference and debriefing session in the summer or fall preceding their reciprocal visits to Eurasia or South Asia in fall 2006/winter 2007 or fall 2007/winter 2008. The grantee organization should work with ECA/A/ S/X and international counterparts to identify and arrange host placements in Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. teachers. B. Reciprocal Visits The program will provide two-week reciprocal visits to Eurasia and South Asia for a total of 36 U.S. teachers during the course of the program. The visits should feature the sharing of best practices, team-teaching with counterparts abroad, teacher-training, seminars on regional educational topics, and opportunities to learn from regional Program Planning and Implementation Applicant organizations are requested to submit a narrative outlining a comprehensive strategy for the administration and implementation of the Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program. The narrative should include a proposed design for the institutes and the reciprocal visits by U.S. teachers, a PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 C. Follow-On Programming The third component, which will take place after the international participants return home, is follow-on programming. International teachers will be eligible to apply for small grants after the program ends, to purchase essential materials for their schools, to offer follow-on training for other teachers, and to conduct other activities that will build on the exchange visits. The development and approval of follow-on grants must be coordinated by the grantee organization with the relevant non-governmental organizations, Fulbright Commissions, U.S. Embassies in Eurasia and South Asia (including RELOs, where appropriate), and the Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch. The possible range of follow-on programs across Eurasia and South Asia includes organizing teacher training workshops (in such areas as EFL or tolerance education), donating books and school supplies, and opening a teacher resource center. Applicant organizations’ proposals should allot a total of $40,000 ($20,000 after each program cycle) to fund approximately 10 or 12 small grants. The Bureau will work with the recipient of this cooperative agreement award on administrative and program issues and questions as they arise over the duration of the award. E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices strategy for selecting university hosts and for cooperating with them through subgrants, a plan for recruiting, selecting, and placing applicants from Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. institutes, a plan for monitoring the teachers’ academic and professional programs, a plan to identify U.S. teachers and the Eurasian/South Asian teachers who will host them, a plan to assess and improve the program based on experience with the first program cycle, and a proposal for alumni programming follow-on support. Employees of the grantee organization will be named Alternate Responsible Officers and will be responsible for issuing DS–2019 forms to participants on behalf of the Teacher Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X) and performing all actions to comply with the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). The comprehensive program strategy should reflect a vision for the Program as a whole, interpreting the goals of the Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program with creativity and providing innovative ideas for the Program. The strategy should include a description of how the various components of the Program will be integrated to build upon and reinforce one another. Pending availability of funds, this grant should begin on March 1, 2006, and will run through June 30, 2008. In a cooperative agreement, ECA’s Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X) will be substantially involved in program activities above and beyond routine grant monitoring. ECA/A/S/X activities and responsibilities for this program are as follows: • Formulation of program policy; • Clearing texts and program guidelines for publication; • Establishing which countries are eligible and the number of participants from each country; • Approval of recruitment mechanisms; • Review and approval of universitybased programs and enhancement activities for the teachers such as the Washington, DC, orientation and the end-of-program conference/debriefing; • Oversight of selection of U.S. and international teacher participants and alumni awards. II. Award Information Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement. ECA’s level of involvement in this program is listed under number I above. Fiscal Year Funds: 2006. Approximate Total Funding: $2,750,000. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 Approximate Number of Awards: 1. Approximate Average Award: Pending availability of funds, $2,750,000. This would include $1,500,000 in FY 2005 ECA resources and $1,250,000 in FY 2006 ECA resources, pending a FY 2006 appropriation. Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, March 1, 2006. Anticipated Project Completion Date: June 30, 2008. Additional Information: Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA’s intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal years before openly competing it again. III. Eligibility Information III.1. Eligible Applicants Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, applicants must maintain written records to support all costs, which are claimed as their contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A–110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA’s contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III.3 Other Eligibility Requirements Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates issuing one award in an amount up to $2,750,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this exchange program. PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69797 Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. The Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete Federal Register announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1 Contact Information to Request an Application Package Please contact Patricia Mosley of the Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch, ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. Department of State, SA–44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone: (202)453–8897, fax (202)453–8890, email: MosleyPJ@state.gov to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/ S/X–06–02 when making your request. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction (PSI) document which consists of required application forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document, which provides specific information, award criteria and budget instructions tailored to this competition. IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau’s website at http://exchanges.state.gov/ education/rfgps/menu.htm. Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. Content and Form of Submission Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The original and seven copies of the application should be sent per the instructions under IV.3e. ‘‘Submission Dates and Times section’’ below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access http://www.dunandbradstreet.com or call 1–866–705–5711. Please ensure that E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 69798 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF–424 which is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) document and the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1 Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa. The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is placing renewed emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantees and sponsors to all regulations governing the J visa. Therefore, proposals should demonstrate the applicant’s capacity to meet all requirements governing the administration of the Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR 62, including the oversight of Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of prearrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements. An employee of the Bureau will be named the Responsible Officer for the program; employees of the grantee organization will be named Alternate Responsible Officers and will be responsible for issuing DS–2019 forms to participants and performing all actions to comply with the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor (J) programs is available at http://exchanges.state.gov or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA–44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 Washington, DC 20547, Telephone: (202) 401–9810, FAX: (202) 401–9809. Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information. IV.3.d.2. Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to the Bureau’s authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. ‘‘Diversity’’ should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the ‘Support for Diversity’ section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104–319 provides that ‘‘in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,’’ the Bureau ‘‘shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.’’ Public Law 106–113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3.d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project’s success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants and partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project’s objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, how PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators), and how these outcomes relate to the above goals. The more that outcomes are ‘‘smart’’ (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions of teachers to apply knowledge in home schools and community; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained to school administrators and other colleagues; continued contacts between participants and others. 4. Institutional changes influencing policy improvement, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a shortterm outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it (1) specifies intended outcomes; (2) gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured; (3) identifies when E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices particular outcomes will be measured; and (4) provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) ECA/A/S/X and the Bureau’s Office of Policy and Evaluation will work with the recipient of this cooperative agreement to develop appropriate evaluation goals and performance indicators. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3.d.4. Describe your plans for staffing: Please provide a staffing plan which outlines the responsibilities of each staff person and explains which staff member will be accountable for each program responsibility. Wherever possible please streamline administrative processes. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3.e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the program. The budget should not exceed $2,750,000 for program and administrative costs. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets for host campus and foreign teacher involvement in the program. Applicants should provide separate sub-budgets for the summer institutes, reciprocal visits by U.S. teachers, and the follow-on grant component. The summary and detailed administrative and program budgets should be accompanied by a narrative which provides a brief rationale for each line item including a methodology for estimating appropriate average maintenance allowance levels and tuition costs for the participants, the number that can be accommodated at the levels proposed. The total administrative costs funded by the Bureau must be reasonable and appropriate. IV.3.e.2. Allowable costs for the program and additional budget guidance are outlined in detail in the POGI document. Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 IV.3f. Submission Dates and Times. Application Deadline Date: Thursday, January 12, 2006. Explanation of Deadlines: Due to heightened security measures, proposal submissions must be sent via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be shipped no later than the above deadline. The delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. It is each applicant’s responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Applications may not be submitted electronically at this time. Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF–424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to ‘‘ECA/ EX/PM’’. The original and seven copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA–44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/A/S/X–06–02, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF– 424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) of the solicitation document. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69799 be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State’s Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards (cooperative agreements) resides with the Bureau’s Grants Officer. Review Criteria Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation: 1. Program Development and Management: The proposal narrative should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to the Bureau’s mission as well as the objectives of the Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program. It should include an effective program plan and demonstrate how the distribution of administrative resources will ensure adequate attention to program administration, including host institution selection. 2. Multiplier effect/impact: The proposed administrative strategy should maximize the program’s potential to build on the participants’ training upon their return to their countries. 3. Support of Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive support of the Bureau’s policy on diversity. Achievable and relevant features should be cited in both program administration (selection of participants, program venue and program evaluation) and program content, resource materials and follow-up activities). 4. Institutional Capacity and Record: Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past Bureau grants as determined by Bureau Grants Staff. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the program’s goals. 5. Follow-on and Alumni Activities: Proposals should provide a plan for continued follow-on activity (both with E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 69800 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices and without Bureau support) ensuring that the Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program training is not an isolated event. Activities should include tracking and maintaining updated lists of all alumni and facilitating follow-up activities for alumni. 6. Project Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan and methodology to evaluate the Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program’s degree of success in meeting program objectives, both as the activities unfold, at the end of the first program iteration, and at their conclusion. Draft survey questionnaires or other techniques plus description of methodologies to use to link outcomes to original project objectives are recommended. Successful applicants will be expected to submit intermediate reports after each project component is concluded, or quarterly, whichever is less frequent. 7. Cost-effectiveness and Cost Sharing: The overhead and administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and appropriate. Proposals should maximize cost-sharing through other private sector support as well as institutional direct funding contributions. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notices Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document (AAD) from the Bureau’s Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient’s responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A–122, ‘‘Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.’’ VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 Office of Management and Budget Circular A–21, ‘‘Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.’’ OMB Circular A–87, ‘‘Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments.’’ OMB Circular No. A–110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A–102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A–133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Nonprofit Organizations. Please reference the following Web sites for additional information: http:// www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.; http://exchanges.state.gov/education/ grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI. VI.3. Reporting Requirements You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the following reports: Quarterly financial reports; Annual program reports for the first and second year of the agreement; and final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. Notice The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: November 9, 2005. C. Miller Crouch, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. 05–22804 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710–05–U DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Publication of the Tier 2 Tax Rates ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Publication of the tier 2 tax rates for calendar year 2006 as required by section 3241(d) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. section 3241). Tier 2 taxes on railroad employees, employers, and employee representatives are one source of funding for benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act. VII. Agency Contacts The tier 2 tax rates for calendar year 2006 apply to compensation paid in calendar year 2006. For questions about this announcement, contact: Michael Kuban, Office of Global Educational Programs, ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. Department of State, SA–44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone: 202– 453–8878, fax: 202–453–8890, KubanMM@state.gov. All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the title and number ECA/A/S/X–06–02. Please read the complete Federal Register announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ligeia M. Donis, CC:TEGE:EOEG:ET1, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, Telephone Number (202) 622–0047 (not a toll-free number). TIER 2 TAX RATES: The tier 2 tax rate for 2006 under section 3201(b) on employees is 4.4 percent of compensation. The tier 2 tax rate for 2006 under section 3221(b) on employers is 12.6 percent of compensation. The tier 2 tax rate for 2006 under section 3211(b) on employee representatives is 12.6 percent of compensation. PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DATES: E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69795-69800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22804]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5230]


Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for 
Grant Proposals: FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and 
Achievement Program

    Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement.
    Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/A/S/X-06-02.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 00.000.
    Key Dates: Application Deadline, January 12, 2006.
    Executive Summary: The Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch in the 
Office of Global Educational Programs of the Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs (ECA), U.S. Department of State, announces an open 
competition for an assistance award in the amount of $2,750,000 to 
support the FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and 
Achievement Program, a series of concurrent six- to seven-week 
professional enrichment programs in the U.S. for outstanding secondary-
level teachers from selected countries in Eurasia and South Asia, 
followed by subsequent programs involving U.S. teachers with the 
Eurasian and South Asian teachers in their countries.
    Applicant organizations should be prepared to conduct recruitment 
and accommodate participants from the following countries: Armenia, 
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, 
Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri 
Lanka. During the course of this two-year program, approximately 136 
teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and the social sciences 
in groups of 20 to 25 teachers in each cohort will take part in U.S.-
based professional development institutes to learn new teaching 
methodologies and approaches to curriculum development through 
workshops, seminars and, where possible, team-teaching in secondary-
level classes with U.S. mentor teachers.
    Approximately 36 outstanding U.S. teachers will subsequently travel 
to Eurasia and South Asia to take part in shorter programs with their 
Eurasian/South Asian counterparts.
    To build on the achievements of the exchange visits, small grants 
will be awarded to individual foreign and U.S. teacher alumni in 
support of follow-on projects.

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Authority: Overall grant making authority for this program is 
contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, 
Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. 
The purpose of the Act is ``to enable the Government of the United 
States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the 
United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen 
the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the 
educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of 
the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to 
assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful 
relations between the United States and the other countries of the 
world.'' The funding authority for the program above is provided 
through legislation.
    Purpose: Overview: The Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and 
Achievement Program will expand the impact of the former Teaching 
Excellence Awards Program by bringing outstanding secondary school 
teachers from Eurasia and South Asia to the United States to augment 
their subject area teaching skills and knowledge of the U.S. The goals 
of the program are: (1) To contribute to the improvement and status of 
teaching in the participating countries; (2) to create resident experts 
on the U.S. in schools across the regions; (3) to develop long-lasting 
partnerships and mutual understanding between American and 
international teachers and their students; and (4) to provide 
opportunities for under-served foreign populations, especially women, 
to develop their leadership skills.
    Proposals should outline three distinct program components:
    A. A total of six six- to seven-week U.S.-based institutes (each 
comprising a group of 20 to 25 teachers from Eurasia and South Asia), 
three of which should occur concurrently in summer or fall of 2006, and 
three of which should occur concurrently in summer or fall of 2007;
    B. Visits of four cohorts of U.S. teachers (two cohorts to each 
region) during the 2006-07 and 2007-08 academic years to reciprocate 
the visits of the Eurasian and South Asian teachers to the U.S.; and
    C. Follow-on grants.
    Applicant organizations should propose a calendar that will include 
a coherent sequence of program components for each of the two program 
years. Although the number of participants may be greater in the second 
year than the first, each year's

[[Page 69796]]

program should include both participating regions.

A. Professional Development Institutes

    The institutes should be based at competitively selected Schools of 
Education at U.S. universities. The assignment of teachers to U.S. host 
campuses will be made based on the similarity of candidates' 
qualifications and their English proficiency. The grantee organization 
should administer an open sub-grant competition among U.S. schools of 
education to host a cohort of international teachers. Institutions that 
perform well in the first year may host a cohort of teachers in the 
second year as well.
    In the first year of program activity, the grantee organization 
should arrange a three-day orientation program in Washington, DC, for 
all three cohorts of international teachers. Then, the international 
participants will travel to the U.S. host universities for the six-to 
seven-week institute. The program will conclude with a three-day end-
of-program conference and debriefing session at one of the host 
universities for all of the international and U.S. participant teachers 
in the first year's cohort. This schedule should repeat in the second 
year of activity. In each year of program activity, the institutes 
should provide:
    (1) English language instruction, if necessary;
    (2) Intensive training in the Teaching of English as a Foreign 
Language (or in the teaching of one of the social sciences, depending 
on the specializations of the participants) and teaching methodologies;
    (3) Training in the use of computers for Internet and word 
processing and as tools for teaching EFL or other coursework;
    (4) Consultations with leading U.S. teacher training and curriculum 
development specialists and practitioners and, to the extent possible, 
school visits and collaborations with U.S. teachers on teaching and 
observing a variety of teaching methods (inquiry, active classroom, 
group projects, etc.);
    (5) Individual and group work periods for research and curriculum 
writing activities;
    (6) Involvement with Americans at civic and volunteer 
organizations, at school board meetings, parent-teacher conferences or 
other community and cultural activities, and through short home stays.
    Participants in the institutes should be younger teaching 
professionals with five or more years of experience and strong written 
and oral English skills. Teachers will be selected primarily from the 
discipline of English as a Foreign Language, with teachers of social 
sciences (including social studies, civics, and history) also eligible.
    Both for Eurasia and South Asia, applicant organizations should 
propose creative, cost-efficient recruitment and selection strategies 
involving a combination of partner organizations, branch offices, or 
other cooperating agencies to attract qualified teachers to the 
program. The recruitment strategy should attract a sufficient number of 
applicants to ensure a pool of highly qualified candidates, while 
limiting the number that will not be accepted. We anticipate 200 
nominations from international partner organizations for each year of 
the program cycle. Applicant organizations are invited to suggest, 
based on their experience and knowledge, appropriate grant-to-applicant 
ratios that should be targeted in the recruitment effort. Applicants 
should identify field offices or other local partner organizations and 
individuals with whom they propose to collaborate, and should describe 
in detail previous projects undertaken by the organization(s) or 
individual(s). Please include letters of project commitment from all 
partners. A sub-grant agreement and an accompanying budget are required 
if an applicant partners with another organization. Please include this 
documentation with your proposal submission.
    In Eurasia and South Asia the grantee organization, together with 
all local partners, should collaborate with the Regional English 
Language Officers (RELO) for Eurasia and South Asia, who are based at 
the U.S. Embassies in Kiev, Tashkent, and New Delhi. The RELOs will be 
encouraged to participate in reviewing applications, interviewing and 
nominating candidates, and the approval and monitoring of follow-up 
activities.
    In all cases, the top candidates' applications will be submitted to 
the grantee organization, which should organize external peer review 
panels to help determine the final selection of candidates in 
collaboration with ECA. ECA's role is to ensure that these programs 
help support U.S. foreign policy goals.

B. Reciprocal Visits

    The program will provide two-week reciprocal visits to Eurasia and 
South Asia for a total of 36 U.S. teachers during the course of the 
program. The visits should feature the sharing of best practices, team-
teaching with counterparts abroad, teacher-training, seminars on 
regional educational topics, and opportunities to learn from regional 
master teachers about teaching styles, curriculum, and educational 
issues in the host country. The grantee organization should invite 
applications from outstanding and, preferably, award-winning U.S. 
teachers and, in consultation with the Fulbright Teacher Exchange 
Branch (ECA/A/S/X), should select approximately thirty-six for 
participation over the course of two program cycles. These U.S. 
teachers will join their Eurasian and South Asian counterparts for the 
U.S.-based conference and debriefing session in the summer or fall 
preceding their reciprocal visits to Eurasia or South Asia in fall 
2006/winter 2007 or fall 2007/winter 2008. The grantee organization 
should work with ECA/A/S/X and international counterparts to identify 
and arrange host placements in Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. 
teachers.

C. Follow-On Programming

    The third component, which will take place after the international 
participants return home, is follow-on programming. International 
teachers will be eligible to apply for small grants after the program 
ends, to purchase essential materials for their schools, to offer 
follow-on training for other teachers, and to conduct other activities 
that will build on the exchange visits. The development and approval of 
follow-on grants must be coordinated by the grantee organization with 
the relevant non-governmental organizations, Fulbright Commissions, 
U.S. Embassies in Eurasia and South Asia (including RELOs, where 
appropriate), and the Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch. The possible 
range of follow-on programs across Eurasia and South Asia includes 
organizing teacher training workshops (in such areas as EFL or 
tolerance education), donating books and school supplies, and opening a 
teacher resource center. Applicant organizations' proposals should 
allot a total of $40,000 ($20,000 after each program cycle) to fund 
approximately 10 or 12 small grants.
    The Bureau will work with the recipient of this cooperative 
agreement award on administrative and program issues and questions as 
they arise over the duration of the award.
Program Planning and Implementation
    Applicant organizations are requested to submit a narrative 
outlining a comprehensive strategy for the administration and 
implementation of the Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence and 
Achievement Program. The narrative should include a proposed design for 
the institutes and the reciprocal visits by U.S. teachers, a

[[Page 69797]]

strategy for selecting university hosts and for cooperating with them 
through subgrants, a plan for recruiting, selecting, and placing 
applicants from Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. institutes, a plan 
for monitoring the teachers' academic and professional programs, a plan 
to identify U.S. teachers and the Eurasian/South Asian teachers who 
will host them, a plan to assess and improve the program based on 
experience with the first program cycle, and a proposal for alumni 
programming follow-on support. Employees of the grantee organization 
will be named Alternate Responsible Officers and will be responsible 
for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants on behalf of the Teacher 
Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X) and performing all actions to comply with 
the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS).
    The comprehensive program strategy should reflect a vision for the 
Program as a whole, interpreting the goals of the Teaching Excellence 
and Achievement Program with creativity and providing innovative ideas 
for the Program. The strategy should include a description of how the 
various components of the Program will be integrated to build upon and 
reinforce one another. Pending availability of funds, this grant should 
begin on March 1, 2006, and will run through June 30, 2008.
    In a cooperative agreement, ECA's Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch 
(ECA/A/S/X) will be substantially involved in program activities above 
and beyond routine grant monitoring. ECA/A/S/X activities and 
responsibilities for this program are as follows:
     Formulation of program policy;
     Clearing texts and program guidelines for publication;
     Establishing which countries are eligible and the number 
of participants from each country;
     Approval of recruitment mechanisms;
     Review and approval of university-based programs and 
enhancement activities for the teachers such as the Washington, DC, 
orientation and the end-of-program conference/debriefing;
     Oversight of selection of U.S. and international teacher 
participants and alumni awards.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement. ECA's level of involvement in 
this program is listed under number I above.
    Fiscal Year Funds: 2006.
    Approximate Total Funding: $2,750,000.
    Approximate Number of Awards: 1.
    Approximate Average Award: Pending availability of funds, 
$2,750,000. This would include $1,500,000 in FY 2005 ECA resources and 
$1,250,000 in FY 2006 ECA resources, pending a FY 2006 appropriation.
    Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, March 1, 
2006.
    Anticipated Project Completion Date: June 30, 2008.
    Additional Information: Pending successful implementation of this 
program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is 
ECA's intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal years before 
openly competing it again.

III. Eligibility Information

III.1. Eligible Applicants

    Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit 
organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code 
section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3).

III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds

    There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this 
competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide 
maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs.
    When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the 
applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its 
proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost 
sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For 
accountability, applicants must maintain written records to support all 
costs, which are claimed as their contribution, as well as costs to be 
paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The 
basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must 
be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23--Cost 
Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum 
amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's 
contribution will be reduced in like proportion.

III.3 Other Eligibility Requirements

    Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than 
four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited 
to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates issuing one award in an 
amount up to $2,750,000 to support program and administrative costs 
required to implement this exchange program. Therefore, organizations 
with less than four years experience in conducting international 
exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. The Bureau 
encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and 
funding in support of its programs.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    Note: Please read the complete Federal Register announcement 
before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP 
deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition 
with applicants until the proposal review process has been 
completed.

IV.1 Contact Information to Request an Application Package

    Please contact Patricia Mosley of the Fulbright Teacher Exchange 
Branch, ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone: (202)453-8897, fax 
(202)453-8890, e-mail: MosleyPJ@state.gov to request a Solicitation 
Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/S/X-06-02 
when making your request.
    The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission 
Instruction (PSI) document which consists of required application 
forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation.
    It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation 
(POGI) document, which provides specific information, award criteria 
and budget instructions tailored to this competition.

IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet

    The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's 
website at http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm. Please 
read all information before downloading.

IV.3. Content and Form of Submission

    Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation 
Package. The original and seven copies of the application should be 
sent per the instructions under IV.3e. ``Submission Dates and Times 
section'' below.
    IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal 
Numbering System (DUNS) number to apply for a grant or cooperative 
agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit 
identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. 
Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a 
DUNS number, access http://www.dunandbradstreet.com or call 1-866-705-
5711. Please ensure that

[[Page 69798]]

your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 which 
is part of the formal application package.
    IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal 
narrative and budget.
    Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory 
Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) document and the Project 
Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document for additional 
formatting and technical requirements.
    IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of 
application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not 
received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three 
years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS 
within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation 
to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to 
do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible.
    IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information 
when preparing your proposal narrative:
    IV.3d.1 Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa. The 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is placing renewed emphasis 
on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) 
Programs and adherence by grantees and sponsors to all regulations 
governing the J visa. Therefore, proposals should demonstrate the 
applicant's capacity to meet all requirements governing the 
administration of the Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR 
62, including the oversight of Responsible Officers and Alternate 
Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, 
provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, 
monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, 
record-keeping, reporting and other requirements.
    An employee of the Bureau will be named the Responsible Officer for 
the program; employees of the grantee organization will be named 
Alternate Responsible Officers and will be responsible for issuing DS-
2019 forms to participants and performing all actions to comply with 
the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS).
    A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of 
Exchange Visitor (J) programs is available at http://
exchanges.state.gov or from: United States Department of State, Office 
of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD--SA-44, Room 734, 
301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone: (202) 401-9810, 
FAX: (202) 401-9809.
    Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information.
    IV.3.d.2. Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to 
the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-
political character and should be balanced and representative of the 
diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. 
``Diversity'' should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass 
differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, 
religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. 
Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this 
principle both in program administration and in program content. Please 
refer to the review criteria under the `Support for Diversity' section 
for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. 
Public Law 104-319 provides that ``in carrying out programs of 
educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not 
fully enjoy freedom and democracy,'' the Bureau ``shall take 
appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such 
programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.'' 
Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries 
described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection 
process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their 
program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible.
    IV.3.d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include 
a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the 
activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends 
that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other 
technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes 
to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee 
will track participants and partners and be able to respond to key 
evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning 
as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the 
program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in 
which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan 
should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as 
well as substantive knowledge.
    Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting 
clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation 
plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your 
anticipated project outcomes, how and when you intend to measure these 
outcomes (performance indicators), and how these outcomes relate to the 
above goals. The more that outcomes are ``smart'' (specific, 
measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable 
time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You 
should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the 
program described in this RFGP.
    Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish 
between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services 
delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important 
to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot 
substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the 
results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people 
trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, 
represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is 
usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and 
outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes.
    We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, 
as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in 
increasing order of importance):
    1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange 
experience.
    2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, 
skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both 
substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding.
    3. Participant behavior, concrete actions of teachers to apply 
knowledge in home schools and community; interpretation and explanation 
of experiences and new knowledge gained to school administrators and 
other colleagues; continued contacts between participants and others.
    4. Institutional changes influencing policy improvement, such as 
increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new 
programming, and organizational improvements.

    Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate 
timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, 
satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas 
behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-
term outcomes.


    Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be 
judged on how well it (1) specifies intended outcomes; (2) gives clear 
descriptions of how each outcome will be measured; (3) identifies when

[[Page 69799]]

particular outcomes will be measured; and (4) provides a clear 
description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., 
surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation 
plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] 
will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.)
    ECA/A/S/X and the Bureau's Office of Policy and Evaluation will 
work with the recipient of this cooperative agreement to develop 
appropriate evaluation goals and performance indicators.
    Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their 
evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All 
data collected, including survey responses and contact information, 
must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the 
Bureau upon request.
    IV.3.d.4. Describe your plans for staffing: Please provide a 
staffing plan which outlines the responsibilities of each staff person 
and explains which staff member will be accountable for each program 
responsibility. Wherever possible please streamline administrative 
processes.
    IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration 
when preparing your budget:
    IV.3.e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the 
program. The budget should not exceed $2,750,000 for program and 
administrative costs. There must be a summary budget as well as 
breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets for host 
campus and foreign teacher involvement in the program. Applicants 
should provide separate sub-budgets for the summer institutes, 
reciprocal visits by U.S. teachers, and the follow-on grant component.
    The summary and detailed administrative and program budgets should 
be accompanied by a narrative which provides a brief rationale for each 
line item including a methodology for estimating appropriate average 
maintenance allowance levels and tuition costs for the participants, 
the number that can be accommodated at the levels proposed. The total 
administrative costs funded by the Bureau must be reasonable and 
appropriate.
    IV.3.e.2. Allowable costs for the program and additional budget 
guidance are outlined in detail in the POGI document.
    Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget 
guidelines and formatting instructions.
    IV.3f. Submission Dates and Times. Application Deadline Date: 
Thursday, January 12, 2006.
    Explanation of Deadlines: Due to heightened security measures, 
proposal submissions must be sent via a nationally recognized overnight 
delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or 
U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be shipped no 
later than the above deadline. The delivery services used by applicants 
must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking 
systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who 
are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. 
Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA 
more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further 
consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the 
established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this 
competition. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each 
package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm 
delivery to ECA via the Internet. ECA will not notify you upon receipt 
of application. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local 
courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will 
not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above 
will be considered. Applications may not be submitted electronically at 
this time.
    Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation 
Package.


    Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure 
to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it 
in an envelope addressed to ``ECA/EX/PM''.


    The original and seven copies of the application should be sent to: 
U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural 
Affairs, Ref.: ECA/A/S/X-06-02, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 
534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547.
    Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above 
Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory 
Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) of the solicitation document.
    IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 
12372 does not apply to this program.

V. Application Review Information

V.1. Review Process

    The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. 
Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the 
guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible 
proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public 
Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will 
be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and 
guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. 
Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by 
other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the 
discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for 
Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for 
assistance awards (cooperative agreements) resides with the Bureau's 
Grants Officer.
Review Criteria
    Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed 
according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank 
ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation:
    1. Program Development and Management: The proposal narrative 
should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to the 
Bureau's mission as well as the objectives of the Eurasia/South Asia 
Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program. It should include an 
effective program plan and demonstrate how the distribution of 
administrative resources will ensure adequate attention to program 
administration, including host institution selection.
    2. Multiplier effect/impact: The proposed administrative strategy 
should maximize the program's potential to build on the participants' 
training upon their return to their countries.
    3. Support of Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive 
support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. Achievable and relevant 
features should be cited in both program administration (selection of 
participants, program venue and program evaluation) and program 
content, resource materials and follow-up activities).
    4. Institutional Capacity and Record: Proposals should demonstrate 
an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including 
responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting 
requirements for past Bureau grants as determined by Bureau Grants 
Staff. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be 
adequate and appropriate to achieve the program's goals.
    5. Follow-on and Alumni Activities: Proposals should provide a plan 
for continued follow-on activity (both with

[[Page 69800]]

and without Bureau support) ensuring that the Teaching Excellence and 
Achievement Program training is not an isolated event. Activities 
should include tracking and maintaining updated lists of all alumni and 
facilitating follow-up activities for alumni.
    6. Project Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan and 
methodology to evaluate the Teaching Excellence and Achievement 
Program's degree of success in meeting program objectives, both as the 
activities unfold, at the end of the first program iteration, and at 
their conclusion. Draft survey questionnaires or other techniques plus 
description of methodologies to use to link outcomes to original 
project objectives are recommended. Successful applicants will be 
expected to submit intermediate reports after each project component is 
concluded, or quarterly, whichever is less frequent.
    7. Cost-effectiveness and Cost Sharing: The overhead and 
administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and 
honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be 
necessary and appropriate. Proposals should maximize cost-sharing 
through other private sector support as well as institutional direct 
funding contributions.

VI. Award Administration Information

VI.1a. Award Notices

    Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by 
Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. 
Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document (AAD) 
from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant 
proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the 
only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. 
Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and 
mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the 
application.
    Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of 
the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this 
competition.

VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements 
include the following:
    Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, ``Cost Principles 
for Nonprofit Organizations.''
    Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, ``Cost Principles 
for Educational Institutions.''
    OMB Circular A-87, ``Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian 
Governments.''
    OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative 
Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher 
Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit Organizations.
    OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for 
Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments.
    OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and 
Non-profit Organizations.
    Please reference the following Web sites for additional 
information: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.; http://
exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI.

VI.3. Reporting Requirements

    You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the 
following reports:
    Quarterly financial reports; Annual program reports for the first 
and second year of the agreement; and final program and financial 
report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award.
    Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their 
evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. 
(Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) 
above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.
    All data collected, including survey responses and contact 
information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and 
provided to the Bureau upon request.
    All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program 
Officer listed in the final assistance award document.

VII. Agency Contacts

    For questions about this announcement, contact: Michael Kuban, 
Office of Global Educational Programs, ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. 
Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, 
telephone: 202-453-8878, fax: 202-453-8890, KubanMM@state.gov.
    All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should 
reference the title and number ECA/A/S/X-06-02. Please read the 
complete Federal Register announcement before sending inquiries or 
submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff 
may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal 
review process has been completed.

Notice

    The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may 
not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information 
provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be 
binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment 
on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, 
revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of 
the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject 
to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 
above.

    Dated: November 9, 2005.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 05-22804 Filed 11-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-U