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 https://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
https://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 https://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: https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.;
https://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 https://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 https://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 https://
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: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.; https://
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