Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant Proposals: FY 2006 U.S.-Russia Language, Technology, Math, and Sciences (LTMS) Teacher Program, 25879-25885 [06-4122]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 2, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25879-25885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4122]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5400]


Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for 
Grant Proposals: FY 2006 U.S.-Russia Language, Technology, Math, and 
Sciences (LTMS) Teacher Program

    Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement.
    Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/A/S/X-06-13.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 00.000.
    Key Dates: Application Deadline, June 5, 2006.
    Executive Summary: The 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 $700,000 to support the FY 
2006 U.S.--Russia Language, Technology, Math, and Sciences (LTMS) 
Teacher Program. This program provides a three- to four-week 
professional development program in the U.S. for secondary-level 
teachers from Russia, followed by a program in Russia for U.S. teachers 
and the Russian educators, and a series of workshops in Russia led by 
the Russian teachers for their colleagues. U.S. organizations meeting 
the provisions described in

[[Page 25880]]

Internal Revenue Code section 26 501(c)(3) are eligible to apply.
    In a proposal, applicants should address their capacity to recruit 
teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), history, social 
studies, math, science, and information technology in Russia.

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 U.S.-Russia Language, Technology, Math, and Sciences 
(LTMS) Teacher Program will bring outstanding secondary school teachers 
from Russia to the United States to augment their subject area teaching 
skills and knowledge of the U.S., as well as provide opportunities for 
U.S. teachers to participate in a professional development program in 
Russia. The goals of the program are: (1) To provide opportunities for 
Russian and U.S. teachers to learn from one another's education systems 
and foster excellence in the classroom through increased exchange of 
ideas and expertise; (2) to develop the leadership skills of Russian 
and U.S. teachers by providing opportunities to share educational best 
practices in professional development through seminars and workshops in 
the United States and Russia; (3) to raise the status of teaching in 
Russia and create among key Russian professionals a deeper 
understanding of the U.S., so that they may share their experiences of 
living in a diverse democratic society with students and teachers in 
their home communities.
    Proposals should outline six distinct program components:

    A. Program publicity, recruitment, and selection in Russia.
    B. Program publicity, recruitment, and selection of U.S. 
teachers.
    C. Two three- to four-week U.S.-based institutes (each 
comprising a group of 16 teachers from Russia): The first institute 
should support teachers of English as a Foreign Language (EFL), 
social studies, and history and should be given in English in spring 
of 2007; the second institute should support teachers of math, 
science, and information technology and should be given in Russian 
in fall of 2007. Russian participants should be teaching 
professionals with at least five to ten years of experience. 
Teachers participating in the English-speaking institute should have 
strong written and oral English skills, as evidenced by an 
institutional TOEFL score of 195 CBT or higher. The second 
institute, for teachers from the disciplines of math, science, and 
information technology, will be conducted in Russian with 
facilitators and translators;
    D. Visit of a group of eight U.S. teachers to the home schools 
of the Russian teachers who participated in the U.S. program to 
share best practices during the 2007-08 academic year;
    E. Professional development workshops in Russia led by teachers 
who participated in the U.S. program for their non-English-speaking 
colleagues; and
    F. Follow-On Activities.

Applicants should propose a calendar that will include a coherent 
sequence of the various program phases.

A. Recruitment/Selection of Russian Teachers

    Applicants should propose creative, cost-efficient recruitment and 
selection strategies involving an on-the-ground partner organization in 
Russia to attract qualified teachers to the program. The recruitment 
strategy should ensure a pool of highly qualified candidates, while 
also limiting the number that will not be accepted. Applicants are 
invited to propose, based on their experience and knowledge, 
appropriate grant-to-applicant ratios that should be targeted in the 
recruitment effort. Please include letters of project commitment from 
the on-the-ground partner and describe in detail relevant previous 
projects undertaken by the organization or individuals. A sub-grant 
agreement and an accompanying budget are required. Please include this 
documentation with your proposal submission.
    The cooperating institution, together with the local partner, 
should collaborate in Russia with the English Language Officer (ELO) on 
the program for English-speaking teachers. The ELO, based at the U.S. 
Embassy in Moscow, is a credentialed, experienced Foreign Service and 
English as a Foreign Language officer who works with the Russian 
Ministry of Education, universities and teacher-training officials on 
targeted English language programs. The ELO may participate in 
reviewing applications, interviewing and nominating candidates, and 
approving and monitoring follow-up activities.
    In all cases, the top candidates' applications will be submitted to 
the cooperating institution, which should organize external peer review 
panels to determine the final selection of candidates in collaboration 
with ECA.

B. Recruitment and Selection of U.S. Teachers

    The cooperating institution should invite applications from 
outstanding U.S. teachers in the fields of English, English as a 
Foreign Language (EFL), social studies, history, math, science, and 
information technology. In consultation with the Teacher Exchange 
Branch (ECA/A/S/X), the cooperating institution should select 
approximately 8 teachers for participation.

C. U.S. School-Based Internships/Professional Development Institutes

    Two competitively selected schools of education at U.S. 
universities should coordinate the professional development 
institutes--one for the spring institute in English, history, and 
social studies, and one for the fall institute in math, science, and 
information technology. The cooperating institution should administer 
an open sub-grant competition among U.S. schools of education to host 
the teachers. The cooperating institution should arrange a three-day 
orientation program in Washington, DC, for each group of Russian 
teachers. Then, the teachers will travel to the U.S. host university 
for the three-to four-week institute. Each program will conclude with a 
two- or three-day conference and debriefing session at the host 
university.
    For each cohort of participants, the institutes should provide:

    (1) Intensive training in teaching methodologies in the Teaching 
of English as a Foreign Language, social studies, civics, history, 
or math, science, and technology, especially student-centered and 
applied or problem-based learning;
    (2) Training in the use of technology appropriate for the 
Russian classroom (all subjects) and in the use of computers for 
Internet research and word processing;
    (3) Consultations with leading U.S. teacher training and 
curriculum development specialists and practitioners;
    (4) Visits to various types of U.S. schools to observe a variety 
of teaching methods (inquiry, applied/problem-based learning, 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

[[Page 25881]]

community and cultural activities, and through home stays;
    (7) The English-speaking group should be provided a school-based 
internship with U.S. mentor teachers and opportunities to teach or 
team-teach in a U.S. classroom.
    (8) At the end of each institute, the host university should 
organize a conference/debriefing meeting with the visiting Russian 
educators and the selected U.S. teachers who will travel to Russia. 
The conference may include joint presentations, poster sessions or 
round-table discussions on topics such as technology in the 
classroom, effective instruction, teacher professional development, 
school partnerships, and civic education.

D. Russia Visit

    The program will provide a two-week visit to Russia for 8 U.S. 
teachers to foster school linkages and collaboration on joint projects. 
The visits should feature the sharing of best practices, team-teaching 
with counterparts abroad, seminars on methodology, and opportunities to 
learn from regional master teachers about teaching styles, curriculum, 
and educational issues in Russia. The cooperating institution should 
work with ECA/A/S/X and international counterparts to identify and 
arrange host placements in Russia for the U.S. teachers.

E. Professional Development Workshops in Russia

    The third component, which will take place after the Russian 
participants return home, is a series of workshops they will conduct 
for their non-English-speaking colleagues. Proposals should outline a 
plan for Russian teachers who have taken part in the program to 
organize and lead professional development workshops in Russia in 
summer 2008, with the collaboration and guidance of U.S. education 
consultants from the host universities. The workshops are designed to 
reach as many (non-English-speaking, particularly) Russian teachers as 
possible. While still in the U.S., the teachers should develop 
curriculum units to be used in their Russian classrooms. During the in-
country workshops, the participants in the U.S. program should share 
their curriculum units with fellow teachers, as well as information 
they received while on the exchange about student-centered learning, 
applied and problem-based learning, technology in education, civic 
education, and new pedagogical methods. The participating teachers and 
their host university education consultants should develop the 
workshops in coordination with the cooperating institution, relevant 
in-country non-governmental organization, the Russian Ministry of 
Education, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow (including the ELO for workshops 
in EFL, where appropriate), and the ECA Teacher Exchange Branch.
    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.

F. Follow-On Activities

    After the Russian participants return home, follow-on programming 
will take place. The Russian teachers will be eligible to apply for 
small grants to purchase essential materials for their schools, to 
offer follow-on training for other teachers (in addition to the 
workshops previously described), to open a teacher resource center, 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 
cooperating institution with the relevant non-governmental 
organizations, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow (including the ELO, where 
appropriate), and the Teacher Exchange Branch. Cooperating 
institutions' proposals should allot a total of $40,000 to fund a total 
of 10 or 12 small grants.
Program Planning and Implementation
    Applicants are requested to submit a narrative outlining a 
comprehensive strategy for the administration and implementation of the 
U.S.-Russia Language, Technology, Math, and Sciences (LTMS) Teacher 
Program. The narrative should include a proposed design for the 
institutes, a strategy for selecting university hosts and for 
cooperating with them through subgrants, a plan for recruiting, 
selecting, and placing Russian teachers at the U.S. institutes, a plan 
for monitoring the teachers' academic and professional programs, an 
idea for the end-of-program debriefing/conference for Russian and U.S. 
teachers, a design for the Russia visits by U.S. teachers, and a 
proposal for follow-on support.
    The comprehensive program strategy should reflect a vision for the 
program as a whole, interpreting the goals of the U.S.-Russia LTMS 
Teacher 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 September 1, 2006, and will run through June 30, 2008.
    In a cooperative agreement, ECA's Teacher Exchange Branch 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;
     Approval of recruitment mechanisms and the selection of 
Russian and U.S. teachers;
     Review and approval of solicitation materials for sub-
grant competition of university hosts;
     Review and approval of the university-based program 
schedules and enhancement activities for Russian teachers, the 
Washington, DC, orientation and the end-of-program debriefing 
schedules; and
     Approval of schedules for in-country workshops and follow-
on 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: $700,000.
    Approximate Number of Awards: 1.
    Approximate Average Award: Pending availability of funds, $700,000.
    Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, September 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

[[Page 25882]]

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 $700,000 
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 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 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-06-13 when making your 
request.
    Alternatively, an electronic application may be obtained from 
grants.gov. Please see section IV.3f. for further information.
    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 Web site at 
https://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm or from the Grants 
office Web site at https://www.grants.gov. 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.3f. 
``Application Deadline and Methods of Submission 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 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 
part 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 cooperating institution 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) 203-5029. FAX: 
(202) 453-8640.
    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.

[[Page 25883]]

    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 cooperating 
institution 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 
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.
    The cooperating institution 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. HJ Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the 
program. The budget should not exceed $700,000 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 professional institutes/
internships, Russia visits by U.S. teachers, and the in-country 
workshop components in Russia.
    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 (as applicable) for the 
participants, and 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. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission:
    Application Deadline Date: Monday, June 5, 2006.
    Reference Number: ECA/A/S/X-06-13.
    Methods of Submission: Applications may be submitted in one of two 
ways:

    (1) In hard copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery 
service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. 
Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or
    (2) Electronically through https://www.grants.gov.

    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.3f.1 Submitting Printed Applications: Applications must be 
shipped no later than the above deadline. 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.

[[Page 25884]]

ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. 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. 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.


    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-06-13, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 
534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547.
    Applicants submitting hard-copy applications must also submit the 
``Executive Summary'' and ``Proposal Narrative'' sections of the 
proposal in text (.txt) format on a PC-formatted disk. The Bureau will 
provide these files electronically to the appropriate Public Affairs 
section at the U.S. embassy for its review.
    IV.3f.2. Submitting Electronic Applications: Applicants have the 
option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov 
(https://www.grants.gov). Complete solicitation packages are available 
at Grants.gov in the ``Find'' portion of the system. Please follow the 
instructions available in the ``Get Started'' portion of the site 
(https://www.grants.gov/GetStarted).
    Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.) of the closing date to 
ensure that their entire applications have been uploaded to the 
grants.gov site. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of 
the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the 
grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible.
    Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon 
the successful submission of an application. ECA will not notify you 
upon receipt of electronic applications.
    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 U.S.-Russia Language, 
Technology, Math, and Sciences (LTMS) Teacher Program. It should 
include an effective, feasible program plan for U.S.-based institutes 
and in-country workshops in Russia 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, host institutions chosen through sub-grants, 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 and without Bureau support) 
ensuring that the U.S.-Russia LTMS Teacher Program training is not an 
isolated event. Activities should include administering a small grants 
competition for alumni, and tracking and maintaining updated lists of 
all alumni and facilitating follow-up activities.
    6. Project Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan and 
methodology to evaluate the U.S.-Russia Language, Technology, Math, and 
Sciences (LTMS) Teacher 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.

[[Page 25885]]

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 
reports no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award.
    The cooperating institution 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-06-13.
    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: April 21, 2006.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 06-4122 Filed 5-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P