Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant Proposals: Study of the United States Institutes for Scholars and Secondary Educators, 56645-56651 [2010-23145]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
improve the transparency of this
process.
With respect to an event that causes
the price to cross to a different specified
percentage threshold for breaking
trades, the Commission believes that the
proposal is sufficiently clear regarding
the applicability of the new rule. As to
the specific example provided by the
commenter, under the proposed rule, if
a stock triggers a trading pause, the
Trading Pause Trigger Price would be
used as the Reference Price. The
Trading Pause Trigger Price is
calculated by the listing market over a
rolling five minute period. If the
Trading Pause Trigger Price is
calculated at a level below $25.00, as
identified in the example, then the 10%
threshold would apply to clearly
erroneous execution reviews of the
Trigger Trade and other transactions
that occur immediately after a Trigger
Trade but before the trading pause is
fully implemented across markets. If
another series of transactions trigger a
second trading pause, the review
process set forth in the rule would be
repeated and a new Reference Price
would be calculated to determine the
appropriate percentage threshold.
With respect to the potential for
market participants to engage in
manipulation in order to achieve a
higher trade break percentage threshold,
the Commission emphasizes that it will
vigorously pursue instances of illegal
market manipulation. In addition,
during the pilot period, the Commission
will work with FINRA to review the
operation of the amended rule, and
make improvements as warranted,
including if it appears the selected
percentage thresholds create distortions
or incent improper or illegal behavior.
With respect to the chosen
parameters, the Commission notes that
the parameters that were selected were
the product of a coordinated and
deliberate effort by FINRA and the
Exchanges to improve the handling of
clearly erroneous trades. Regarding the
specific comment expressing concern
that breaking trades only when they are
10%, 5% or 3% away from the Trading
Pause Trigger Price has the practical
effect of doubling the trading pause
parameters, the Commission notes that,
as an initial matter, implementation of
the individual stock trading pause
should prevent most trades from
occurring at prices outside of the
Trading Pause Trigger Price. To the
extent trades occur outside of such price
before the trading pause is fully applied
across all markets, the Commission
believes that it is appropriate to break
these ‘‘leakage’’ trades only when they
are a meaningful percentage away from
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
the Trading Pause Trigger Price. This is
consistent with the traditional approach
of the Exchanges and FINRA to take the
more extreme step of breaking a trade
only in cases where it occurs at a price
sufficiently away from the current
market price that the parties should
have been on notice it may be ‘‘clearly
erroneous.’’ Of course, the pilot program
may indicate that different parameters
are better to accomplish the stated goals.
If so, the parameters could be changed
as part of the overall initiative. The
Commission will further study and
consider the examples and suggestions
offered by the commenters during the
pilot period.
D. Commission Findings
The Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to FINRA. In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Section 15A(b)(6) of the
Act,51 which, among other things,
requires that the rules of FINRA be
designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market
system, and in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
In the Commission’s view, the
proposed rule change will help assure
that the determination of whether a
clearly erroneous trade has occurred
will be based on clear and objective
criteria, and that the resolution of the
incident will occur promptly through a
transparent process. The proposed rule
change also should help assure
consistent results in handling erroneous
trades across the U.S. markets, thus
furthering fair and orderly markets, the
protection of investors and the public
interest. Finally, the Commission notes
that the proposed rule change is being
implemented on a pilot basis so that the
Commission and FINRA can monitor
the effects of the pilot on the markets
and investors, and consider appropriate
adjustments, as necessary.
56645
By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–23075 Filed 9–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 7173]
Bureau of Educational and Cultural
Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant
Proposals: Study of the United States
Institutes for Scholars and Secondary
Educators
Announcement Type: New
Cooperative Agreement.
Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/
A/E/USS–11–05–09.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Number: 19.401.
Key Dates:
Application Deadline: October 27,
2010.
Executive Summary: The Branch for
the Study of the United States, Office of
Academic Exchange Programs, Bureau
of Educational and Cultural Affairs,
invites proposal submissions for the
design and implementation of five
different Study of the United States
Institutes to take place over the course
of six weeks beginning in June 2011,
pending the availability of funds. These
Institutes should provide a
multinational group of experienced
educators with a deeper understanding
of U.S. society, culture, values, and
institutions.
Four of these Institutes will be for
groups of 18 foreign university level
faculty, focusing on American Politics
and Political Thought, Contemporary
American Literature, Religious
Pluralism in the United States, and U.S.
Foreign Policy. The fifth Institute will
be a general survey course on the study
of the United States for a group of 30
foreign secondary educators.
Applicants may propose to submit
one proposal to host only one Institute
listed under this competition. Should an
applicant submit multiple proposals
under this competition, all proposals
will be declared technically ineligible
and given no further consideration in
the review process.
I. Funding Opportunity Description
IV. Conclusion
Authority
It is therefore ordered, pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,52 that the
proposed rule change (SR–FINRA–
2010–032), be, and hereby is, approved.
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 FulbrightHays Act. The purpose of the Act is ‘‘to
enable the Government of the United
51 15
52 15
PO 00000
U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(6).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
Frm 00145
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
56646
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
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: Study of the United States
Institutes are intensive academic
programs whose purpose is to provide
foreign university faculty, secondary
educators, and other scholars the
opportunity to deepen their
understanding of American society,
culture, and institutions. The ultimate
goal is to strengthen curricula and to
improve the quality of teaching about
the United States in academic
institutions abroad.
The Bureau is seeking detailed
proposals for five different Study of the
United States Institutes. Applications
may be submitted by public and private
U.S. colleges, universities, and other
not-for-profit academic organizations
that have an established reputation in a
field or discipline related to the specific
program theme, and which meet the
provisions described in Internal
Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C.
501(c)(3).
Overview: Each program should be six
weeks in length; participants will spend
approximately four weeks at the host
institution, and approximately two
weeks on an educational study tour,
including four to five days in
Washington, DC, at the conclusion of
the Institute. The educational travel
component should directly complement
the academic program, and should
include visits to cities and other sites of
interest in the region around the
recipient institution, as well as to
another geographic region of the
country. The recipient institution also
will be expected to provide participants
with guidance and resources for further
investigation and research on the topics
and issues examined during the
Institute after they return home.
The Study of the United States
Institute on American Politics and
Political Thought should provide a
multinational group of 18 experienced
foreign university faculty and
practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. political
institutions and major currents in
American political thought. The
Institute should provide the foreign
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
participants insight into how
intellectual and political movements
have influenced modern American
political institutions. The Institute
should provide an overview of political
thought during the founding period
(constitutional foundations), and the
development and current functioning of
the American presidency, Congress, and
the federal judiciary. The examination
of political institutions might be
expanded to include the electoral
system, political parties and interest
groups, the civil service system, media
and think tanks, or the welfare/
regulatory state. The Institute should
address modern political and cultural
issues in the United States (including
but not limited to civil rights, women’s
rights, immigration, etc.), and the
significance of public discourse in the
formulation of public policy. One award
of up to $290,000 will support this
Institute.
The Study of the United States
Institute on Contemporary American
Literature should provide a
multinational group of up to 18
experienced foreign university faculty
and practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. society and
culture, past and present, through an
examination of contemporary American
literature. Its purpose is twofold: (1) To
explore contemporary American writers
and writing in a variety of genres; and
(2) to suggest how the themes explored
in those works reflect larger currents
within contemporary American society
and culture. The program should
explore the diversity of the American
literary landscape, examining how
major contemporary writers, schools
and movements reflect the traditions of
the American literary canon. At the
same time, the Institute should expose
participants to writers who represent a
departure from that tradition, and who
are establishing new directions for
American literature. One award of up to
$290,000 will support this Institute.
The Study of the United States
Institute on Religious Pluralism in the
United States should provide a
multinational group of up to 18
experienced foreign university faculty
and practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. society and
culture, past and present, through an
examination of religious pluralism in
the United States and its intersection
with American democracy. Employing a
multi-disciplinary approach, drawing
on fields such as history, political
science, sociology, anthropology, law
and others where appropriate, the
program should explore both the
historical and contemporary
relationship between church and state
PO 00000
Frm 00146
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in the United States; examine the ways
in which religious thought and practice
have influenced, and been influenced
by, the development of American-style
democracy; examine the intersections of
religion and politics in the United States
in such areas as elections, public policy,
and foreign policy; and explore the
sociology and demography of religion in
the United States today, including a
survey of the diversity of contemporary
religious beliefs and its impact on
American politics. One award of up to
$290,000 will support this Institute.
The Study of the U.S. Institute on U.S.
Foreign Policy should provide a
multinational group of 18 experienced
foreign university faculty and
practitioners with a deeper
understanding of how U.S. foreign
policy is formulated and implemented
with an emphasis on the post Cold War
period. This Institute should begin with
a review of the historical development
of U.S. foreign policy and cover
significant events, individuals, and
philosophies that have dominated U.S.
foreign policy. In addition, the Institute
should explain the role of key players in
the field of foreign policy including the
executive and legislative branches, the
media, public opinion, think-tanks, nongovernmental and international
organizations and how these players
debate, cooperate, influence policy, and
are held accountable. Regional sessions,
for the entire group, highlighting salient
topics such as energy security and
environmental policy in Europe; trade
and human rights issues in Asia; foreign
aid and humanitarian assistance in
Africa; drug trafficking and immigration
issues for the Western Hemisphere; and
combating terrorism in the Near East
and South Asia are among the relevant
issues that might be explored. In
addition, sessions focusing on current
issues such as nuclear disarmament, the
Middle East peace process, or U.S.
military actions would be appropriate.
The host institution should provide a
comprehensive and cohesive program,
ensuring that a diversity of views is
presented and remain flexible based on
final composition of the participant
group. One award of up to $290,000 will
support this Institute.
The Study of the U.S. Institute for
Secondary Educators should provide a
multinational group of 30 experienced
secondary school educators (teachers,
teacher trainers, curriculum developers,
textbook writers, or education ministry
officials) with a deeper understanding of
U.S. society, education, and culture—
past and present. The Institute should
be organized around a central theme or
themes in U.S. civilization and should
have a strong contemporary component.
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
Through a combination of traditional,
multi-disciplinary, and interdisciplinary
approaches, program content should be
imaginatively integrated in order to
elucidate the history and evolution of
U.S. educational institutions and values,
broadly defined. The program should
also serve to illuminate contemporary
political, social, and economic debates
in American society. One award of up
to $360,000 will support this Institute.
Program Design: Each Study of the
U.S. Institute should be designed as an
intensive, academically rigorous
seminar for an experienced group of
educators from abroad. Each Institute
should be organized through an
integrated series of lectures, readings,
seminar discussions, and regional travel
and site visits, and also should include
sessions that expose participants to U.S.
pedagogical philosophy and practice for
teaching the discipline. Each Institute
also should include some opportunity
for limited but well-directed
independent research. Each program
should draw from a diverse disciplinary
base, and should itself provide a model
of how a foreign university might
approach the study of United States.
Applicants are encouraged to design
thematically coherent programs in ways
that draw upon the particular strengths,
faculty, and resources of their
institutions as well as upon the
nationally recognized expertise of
scholars and other experts throughout
the United States.
Participants: Participants will be
nominated by U.S. Embassies and
Fulbright Commissions from all regions
of the world, with final selection made
by the Bureau’s Branch for the Study of
the United States. Every effort will be
made to select a balanced mix of male
and female participants. Participants
will be diverse in terms of age,
professional position, and experience
abroad. All participants will have a
good knowledge of English.
Program Dates: The Institutes should
be a maximum of 44 days in length
(including participant arrival and
departure days) and should begin by
June 2011, pending the availability of
funds.
Program Guidelines: While the
conception and structure of the Institute
agenda is the responsibility of the
recipient, it is essential that proposals
provide a detailed and comprehensive
narrative describing the objectives of the
Institute; the title, scope and content of
each session; planned site visits; and
how each session relates to the overall
Institute theme. Proposals must include
a syllabus that indicates the subject
matter for each lecture, panel
discussion, group presentation, or other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
activity. The syllabus also should
confirm or provisionally identify
proposed speakers, trainers, and session
leaders, and clearly show how assigned
readings will advance the goals of each
session. Overall, proposals will be
reviewed on the basis of their
responsiveness to RFGP criteria,
coherence, clarity, and attention to
detail. The accompanying Project
Objectives, Goals, and Implementation
(POGI) document provides programspecific guidelines that all proposals
must address fully.
Please note: In a cooperative agreement,
the Branch for the Study of the United States
is substantially involved in program
activities above and beyond routine grant
monitoring. The Branch will assume the
following responsibilities for the Institute:
Participate in the selection of participants;
oversee the Institute through one or more site
visits; debrief participants in Washington, DC
at the conclusion of the Institute; and engage
in follow-on communication with the
participants after they return to their home
countries (see POGI document for additional
details). The Branch may request that the
recipient make modifications to the academic
residency and/or educational travel
components of the program. The recipient
will be required to obtain approval of
significant program changes in advance of
their implementation.
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: FY 2011.
Approximate Total Funding:
$1,520,000 (pending the availability of
funds).
Approximate Number of Awards: Five
(5).
Approximate Average Award: Four
awards of $290,000 for 18 participants
each; one award of $360,000 for 30
participants.
Floor of Award Range: Approximately
$290,000.
Ceiling of Award Range: $360,000.
Anticipated Award Date: Pending
availability of funds, February 1, 2011.
Anticipated Project Completion Date:
March 2012.
Additional Information: Pending
successful implementation of these
programs and the availability of funds
in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA’s
intent to renew these cooperative
agreements for two additional fiscal
years before openly competing them
again.
III. Eligibility Information
III.1. Eligible Applicants
Applications may be submitted by
public and private U.S. colleges,
PO 00000
Frm 00147
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56647
universities, and other not-for-profit
academic organizations that have an
established reputation in a field or
discipline related to the specific
program theme, and which meet 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
agreement. Cost sharing may be in the
form of allowable direct or indirect
costs. For accountability, you must
maintain written records to support all
costs which are claimed as your
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
(a) Bureau grant guidelines require
that organizations with fewer than four
years experience in conducting
international exchanges be limited to
$60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA
anticipates making five awards, four in
an amount up to $290,000, and in one
in an amount up to $360,000 to support
the program and administrative costs
required to implement this exchange
program. Therefore, organizations with
fewer 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.
(b) Technical Eligibility: It is the
Bureau’s intent to award five separate
cooperative agreements to five different
institutions under this competition.
Therefore prospective applicants may
submit only one proposal under this
competition. All applicants must
comply with this requirement. Should
an applicant submit multiple proposals
under this competition, all proposals
will be declared technically ineligible
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
56648
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
and given no further consideration in
the review process.
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 the Branch for the
Study of the United States, ECA/A/E/
USS, Fourth Floor, U.S. Department of
State, SA–5, 2200 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20522–0504, (202) 632–
3340 to request a Solicitation Package.
Please refer to the Funding Opportunity
Number ECA/A/E/USS–11–05–09
located at the top of this announcement
when making your request.
Alternatively, an electronic
application package 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.
Please specify Brendan M. Walsh and
refer to the Funding Opportunity
Number ECA/A/E/USS–11–05–09
located at the top of this announcement
on all other inquiries and
correspondence.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
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/grants/
open2.html, or from the Grants.gov 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 application should be submitted
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
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.
Please note: Effective January 7, 2009,
all applicants for ECA federal assistance
awards must include in their
application the names of directors and/
or senior executives (current officers,
trustees, and key employees, regardless
of amount of compensation). In
fulfilling this requirement, applicants
must submit information in one of the
following ways:
(1) Those who file Internal Revenue
Service Form 990, ‘‘Return of
Organization Exempt From Income
Tax,’’ must include a copy of relevant
portions of this form.
(2) Those who do not file IRS Form
990 must submit information above in
the format of their choice.
In addition to final program reporting
requirements, award recipients will also
be required to submit a one-page
document, derived from their program
reports, listing and describing their
grant activities. For award recipients,
the names of directors and/or senior
executives (current officers, trustees,
and key employees), as well as the onepage description of grant activities, will
be transmitted by the State Department
to OMB, along with other information
required by the Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act
(FFATA), and will be made available to
the public by the Office of Management
and Budget on its USASpending.gov
Web site as part of ECA’s FFATA
reporting requirements.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00148
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 places
critically important emphases on the
security and proper administration of
the Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs
and adherence by award recipients 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 prearrival information and orientation to
participants, monitoring of participants,
proper maintenance and security of
forms, record-keeping, reporting and
other requirements.
ECA will be responsible for issuing
DS–2019 forms to participants in this
program.
A copy of the complete regulations
governing the administration of
Exchange Visitor (J) programs is
available at https://exchanges.state.gov
or from: Office of Designation, Private
Sector Programs Division, U.S.
Department of State, ECA/EC/D/PS, SA–
5, 5th Floor, 2200 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20522–0505.
Please refer to Solicitation Package for
further information.
IV.3d.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
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
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.3d.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
recipient organization will track
participants or 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, and
how and when you intend to measure
these outcomes (performance
indicators). 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 to apply knowledge in work or
community; greater participation and
responsibility in civic organizations;
interpretation and explanation of
experiences and new knowledge gained;
continued contacts between
participants, community members, and
others.
4. Institutional changes, 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
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.)
Recipient organizations 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.3e. Please take the following
information into consideration when
preparing your budget:
IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit SF–
424A—‘‘Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs’’ along with a
comprehensive budget for the entire
program. Budget requests for either of
the two scholar institutes may not
exceed $290,000, and administrative
costs should be no more than
approximately $95,000. Budget requests
for the Institute for Secondary Educators
may not exceed $360,000, and
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56649
administrative costs should be no more
than approximately $110,000. There
must be a summary budget as well as
breakdowns reflecting both
administrative and program budgets.
Applicants may provide separate subbudgets for each program component,
phase, location, or activity to provide
clarification.
IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the
program include the following:
(1) Institute staff salary and benefits;
(2) Participant housing and meals;
(3) Participant travel and per diem;
(4) Textbooks, educational materials,
and admissions fees;
(5) Honoraria for guest speakers;
(6) Follow-on programming for
alumni of Study of the United States
programs.
Please refer to the Solicitation
Package for complete budget guidelines
and formatting instructions.
IV.3f. Application Deadline and
Methods of Submission:
Application Deadline Date: October
27, 2010.
Reference Number: ECA/A/E/USS–
11–05–09.
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., 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.
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.
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
56650
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
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 six (6) copies of the
application should be sent to: Program
Management Division, ECA–IIP/EX/PM,
Ref.: ECA/A/E/USS–11–05–09, SA–5,
Floor 4, Department of State, 2200 C
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20522–
0504.
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.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Please Note: ECA bears no responsibility
for applicant timeliness of submission or data
errors resulting from transmission or
conversion processes for proposals submitted
via Grants.gov.
Please follow the instructions
available in the ‘Get Started’ portion of
the site (https://www.grants.gov/
GetStarted).
Several of the steps in the Grants.gov
registration process could take several
weeks. Therefore, applicants should
check with appropriate staff within their
organizations immediately after
reviewing this RFGP to confirm or
determine their registration status with
Grants.gov.
Once registered, the amount of time it
can take to upload an application will
vary depending on a variety of factors
including the size of the application and
the speed of your internet connection.
In addition, validation of an electronic
submission via Grants.gov can take up
to two business days.
Therefore, we strongly recommend
that you not wait until the application
deadline to begin the submission
process through Grants.gov.
The Grants.gov Web site includes
extensive information on all phases/
aspects of the Grants.gov process,
including an extensive section on
frequently asked questions, located
under the ‘‘For Applicants’’ section of
the Web site. ECA strongly recommends
that all potential applicants review
thoroughly the Grants.gov Web site,
well in advance of submitting a
proposal through the Grants.gov system.
ECA bears no responsibility for data
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
errors resulting from transmission or
conversion processes.
Direct all questions regarding
Grants.gov registration and submission
to: Grants.gov Customer Support.
Contact Center Phone: 800–518–4726.
Business Hours: Monday–Friday, 7
a.m.–9 p.m. Eastern Time.
E-mail: support@grants.gov.
Applicants have until midnight
(12 a.m.), Washington, DC time of the
closing date to ensure that their entire
application has been uploaded to the
Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions
to the above deadline. 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.
Please refer to the Grants.gov Web
site, for definitions of various
‘‘application statuses’’ and the difference
between a submission receipt and a
submission validation. Applicants will
receive a validation e-mail from
grants.gov upon the successful
submission of an application. Again,
validation of an electronic submission
via Grants.gov can take up to two
business days. Therefore, we strongly
recommend that you not wait until the
application deadline to begin the
submission process through Grants.gov.
ECA will not notify you upon receipt of
electronic applications.
It is the responsibility of all
applicants submitting proposals via the
Grants.gov web portal to ensure that
proposals have been received by
Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA
bears no responsibility for data errors
resulting from transmission or
conversion processes.
Optional—IV.3f.3. You may also state
here any limitations on the number of
applications that an applicant may
submit and make it clear whether the
limitation is on the submitting
organization, individual program
director or both.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 cooperative
agreements resides with the Bureau’s
Grants Officer.
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. Quality of Program Plan and Ability
to Achieve Program Objectives:
Proposals should exhibit originality,
substance, precision, and relevance to
the Bureau’s mission. A detailed agenda
and relevant work plan should
demonstrate substantive undertakings
and logistical capacity. Objectives
should be reasonable, feasible, and
flexible. Proposals should demonstrate
clearly how the institution will meet the
program’s objectives and plan.
2. Support for Diversity: Proposals
should demonstrate substantive support
of the Bureau’s policy on diversity.
Achievable and relevant features should
be cited in both program administration
(program venue and program
evaluation) and program content
(orientation and wrap-up sessions,
program meetings, presenters, and
resource materials).
3. Evaluation: Proposals should
include a plan to evaluate the activity’s
success, both as the activities unfold
and at the end of the program. A draft
survey questionnaire or other technique
plus a description of a methodology to
use to link outcomes to original project
objectives is strongly recommended.
4. Cost-effectiveness/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.
5. Institutional Track Record/Ability:
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. The
Bureau will consider the past
performance of prior recipients and the
demonstrated potential of new
applicants. Proposed personnel and
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Notices
institutional resources should be fully
qualified to achieve the project’s goals.
6. Follow-up and Follow-on Activities:
Proposals should discuss provisions
made for follow-up with returned
participants as a means of establishing
longer-term individual and institutional
linkages. Proposals also should provide
a plan for continued follow-on activity
(without Bureau support) ensuring that
Bureau supported programs are not
isolated events.
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 a
Federal Assistance Award (FAA) from
the Bureau’s Grants Office. The FAA
and the original proposal with
subsequent modifications (if applicable)
shall be the only binding authorizing
document between the recipient and the
U.S. Government. The FAA 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.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
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 Nonprofit Organizations.
Please reference the following Web
sites for additional information: https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants;
https://fa.statebuy.state.gov.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:19 Sep 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
VI.3. Reporting Requirements
You must provide ECA with a hard
copy original plus one copy of the
following reports:
Mandatory:
(1) A final program and financial
report no more than 90 days after the
expiration of the award;
(2) A concise, one-page final program
report summarizing program outcomes
no more than 90 days after the
expiration of the award. This one-page
report will be transmitted to OMB, and
be made available to the public via
OMB’s USAspending.gov Web site—as
part of ECA’s Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act
(FFATA) reporting requirements.
(3) A SF–PPR, ‘‘Performance Progress
Report’’ Cover Sheet with all program
reports.
Award recipients 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: Brendan M.
Walsh, U.S. Department of State, Branch
for the Study of the United States, ECA/
A/E/USS, SA–5, Fourth Floor, ECA/A/
E/USS–11–05–09, 2200 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20522–0503, (202) 632–
3340, WalshBM@state.gov.
All correspondence with the Bureau
concerning this RFGP should reference
the above title and number ECA/A/E/
USS–11–05–09.
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.
VIII. Other Information
Notice
Frm 00151
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: September 9, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010–23145 Filed 9–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Notice of Cancellation of Meeting of
the Chairs of the Industry Trade
Advisory Committee (ITACs)
Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice of meeting cancellation.
AGENCY:
A notice was published in the
Federal Register dated September 7,
2010, Volume 75, No. 172, Page 54416,
announcing a meeting of the Industry
Trade Advisory Committee Chairs
(ITACs), scheduled for September 17,
2010, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon. The
meeting was to be closed to the public
from 10 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. and open to
the public from 11 a.m. to 12 noon.
However, the meeting has been
postponed. The new time and
additional details will be provided in a
later Federal Register announcement.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ingrid Mitchem, DFO at (202) 482–3269,
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC.
SUMMARY:
Myesha Ward,
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for
Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2010–23146 Filed 9–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190–W0–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ITS Joint Program Office; Trucking
Industry Mobility & Technology
Coalition Annual Meeting
Research and Innovative
Technology Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
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.
PO 00000
56651
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Trucking Industry Mobility &
Technology Coalition (TIMTC) Annual
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 179 (Thursday, September 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56645-56651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23145]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 7173]
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for
Grant Proposals: Study of the United States Institutes for Scholars and
Secondary Educators
Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement.
Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 19.401.
Key Dates:
Application Deadline: October 27, 2010.
Executive Summary: The Branch for the Study of the United States,
Office of Academic Exchange Programs, Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, invites proposal submissions for the design and
implementation of five different Study of the United States Institutes
to take place over the course of six weeks beginning in June 2011,
pending the availability of funds. These Institutes should provide a
multinational group of experienced educators with a deeper
understanding of U.S. society, culture, values, and institutions.
Four of these Institutes will be for groups of 18 foreign
university level faculty, focusing on American Politics and Political
Thought, Contemporary American Literature, Religious Pluralism in the
United States, and U.S. Foreign Policy. The fifth Institute will be a
general survey course on the study of the United States for a group of
30 foreign secondary educators.
Applicants may propose to submit one proposal to host only one
Institute listed under this competition. Should an applicant submit
multiple proposals under this competition, all proposals will be
declared technically ineligible and given no further consideration in
the review process.
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
[[Page 56646]]
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: Study of the United States Institutes are intensive
academic programs whose purpose is to provide foreign university
faculty, secondary educators, and other scholars the opportunity to
deepen their understanding of American society, culture, and
institutions. The ultimate goal is to strengthen curricula and to
improve the quality of teaching about the United States in academic
institutions abroad.
The Bureau is seeking detailed proposals for five different Study
of the United States Institutes. Applications may be submitted by
public and private U.S. colleges, universities, and other not-for-
profit academic organizations that have an established reputation in a
field or discipline related to the specific program theme, and which
meet the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26
U.S.C. 501(c)(3).
Overview: Each program should be six weeks in length; participants
will spend approximately four weeks at the host institution, and
approximately two weeks on an educational study tour, including four to
five days in Washington, DC, at the conclusion of the Institute. The
educational travel component should directly complement the academic
program, and should include visits to cities and other sites of
interest in the region around the recipient institution, as well as to
another geographic region of the country. The recipient institution
also will be expected to provide participants with guidance and
resources for further investigation and research on the topics and
issues examined during the Institute after they return home.
The Study of the United States Institute on American Politics and
Political Thought should provide a multinational group of 18
experienced foreign university faculty and practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. political institutions and major currents in
American political thought. The Institute should provide the foreign
participants insight into how intellectual and political movements have
influenced modern American political institutions. The Institute should
provide an overview of political thought during the founding period
(constitutional foundations), and the development and current
functioning of the American presidency, Congress, and the federal
judiciary. The examination of political institutions might be expanded
to include the electoral system, political parties and interest groups,
the civil service system, media and think tanks, or the welfare/
regulatory state. The Institute should address modern political and
cultural issues in the United States (including but not limited to
civil rights, women's rights, immigration, etc.), and the significance
of public discourse in the formulation of public policy. One award of
up to $290,000 will support this Institute.
The Study of the United States Institute on Contemporary American
Literature should provide a multinational group of up to 18 experienced
foreign university faculty and practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. society and culture, past and present, through an
examination of contemporary American literature. Its purpose is
twofold: (1) To explore contemporary American writers and writing in a
variety of genres; and (2) to suggest how the themes explored in those
works reflect larger currents within contemporary American society and
culture. The program should explore the diversity of the American
literary landscape, examining how major contemporary writers, schools
and movements reflect the traditions of the American literary canon. At
the same time, the Institute should expose participants to writers who
represent a departure from that tradition, and who are establishing new
directions for American literature. One award of up to $290,000 will
support this Institute.
The Study of the United States Institute on Religious Pluralism in
the United States should provide a multinational group of up to 18
experienced foreign university faculty and practitioners with a deeper
understanding of U.S. society and culture, past and present, through an
examination of religious pluralism in the United States and its
intersection with American democracy. Employing a multi-disciplinary
approach, drawing on fields such as history, political science,
sociology, anthropology, law and others where appropriate, the program
should explore both the historical and contemporary relationship
between church and state in the United States; examine the ways in
which religious thought and practice have influenced, and been
influenced by, the development of American-style democracy; examine the
intersections of religion and politics in the United States in such
areas as elections, public policy, and foreign policy; and explore the
sociology and demography of religion in the United States today,
including a survey of the diversity of contemporary religious beliefs
and its impact on American politics. One award of up to $290,000 will
support this Institute.
The Study of the U.S. Institute on U.S. Foreign Policy should
provide a multinational group of 18 experienced foreign university
faculty and practitioners with a deeper understanding of how U.S.
foreign policy is formulated and implemented with an emphasis on the
post Cold War period. This Institute should begin with a review of the
historical development of U.S. foreign policy and cover significant
events, individuals, and philosophies that have dominated U.S. foreign
policy. In addition, the Institute should explain the role of key
players in the field of foreign policy including the executive and
legislative branches, the media, public opinion, think-tanks, non-
governmental and international organizations and how these players
debate, cooperate, influence policy, and are held accountable. Regional
sessions, for the entire group, highlighting salient topics such as
energy security and environmental policy in Europe; trade and human
rights issues in Asia; foreign aid and humanitarian assistance in
Africa; drug trafficking and immigration issues for the Western
Hemisphere; and combating terrorism in the Near East and South Asia are
among the relevant issues that might be explored. In addition, sessions
focusing on current issues such as nuclear disarmament, the Middle East
peace process, or U.S. military actions would be appropriate. The host
institution should provide a comprehensive and cohesive program,
ensuring that a diversity of views is presented and remain flexible
based on final composition of the participant group. One award of up to
$290,000 will support this Institute.
The Study of the U.S. Institute for Secondary Educators should
provide a multinational group of 30 experienced secondary school
educators (teachers, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, textbook
writers, or education ministry officials) with a deeper understanding
of U.S. society, education, and culture--past and present. The
Institute should be organized around a central theme or themes in U.S.
civilization and should have a strong contemporary component.
[[Page 56647]]
Through a combination of traditional, multi-disciplinary, and
interdisciplinary approaches, program content should be imaginatively
integrated in order to elucidate the history and evolution of U.S.
educational institutions and values, broadly defined. The program
should also serve to illuminate contemporary political, social, and
economic debates in American society. One award of up to $360,000 will
support this Institute.
Program Design: Each Study of the U.S. Institute should be designed
as an intensive, academically rigorous seminar for an experienced group
of educators from abroad. Each Institute should be organized through an
integrated series of lectures, readings, seminar discussions, and
regional travel and site visits, and also should include sessions that
expose participants to U.S. pedagogical philosophy and practice for
teaching the discipline. Each Institute also should include some
opportunity for limited but well-directed independent research. Each
program should draw from a diverse disciplinary base, and should itself
provide a model of how a foreign university might approach the study of
United States.
Applicants are encouraged to design thematically coherent programs
in ways that draw upon the particular strengths, faculty, and resources
of their institutions as well as upon the nationally recognized
expertise of scholars and other experts throughout the United States.
Participants: Participants will be nominated by U.S. Embassies and
Fulbright Commissions from all regions of the world, with final
selection made by the Bureau's Branch for the Study of the United
States. Every effort will be made to select a balanced mix of male and
female participants. Participants will be diverse in terms of age,
professional position, and experience abroad. All participants will
have a good knowledge of English.
Program Dates: The Institutes should be a maximum of 44 days in
length (including participant arrival and departure days) and should
begin by June 2011, pending the availability of funds.
Program Guidelines: While the conception and structure of the
Institute agenda is the responsibility of the recipient, it is
essential that proposals provide a detailed and comprehensive narrative
describing the objectives of the Institute; the title, scope and
content of each session; planned site visits; and how each session
relates to the overall Institute theme. Proposals must include a
syllabus that indicates the subject matter for each lecture, panel
discussion, group presentation, or other activity. The syllabus also
should confirm or provisionally identify proposed speakers, trainers,
and session leaders, and clearly show how assigned readings will
advance the goals of each session. Overall, proposals will be reviewed
on the basis of their responsiveness to RFGP criteria, coherence,
clarity, and attention to detail. The accompanying Project Objectives,
Goals, and Implementation (POGI) document provides program-specific
guidelines that all proposals must address fully.
Please note: In a cooperative agreement, the Branch for the
Study of the United States is substantially involved in program
activities above and beyond routine grant monitoring. The Branch
will assume the following responsibilities for the Institute:
Participate in the selection of participants; oversee the Institute
through one or more site visits; debrief participants in Washington,
DC at the conclusion of the Institute; and engage in follow-on
communication with the participants after they return to their home
countries (see POGI document for additional details). The Branch may
request that the recipient make modifications to the academic
residency and/or educational travel components of the program. The
recipient will be required to obtain approval of significant program
changes in advance of their implementation.
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: FY 2011.
Approximate Total Funding: $1,520,000 (pending the availability of
funds).
Approximate Number of Awards: Five (5).
Approximate Average Award: Four awards of $290,000 for 18
participants each; one award of $360,000 for 30 participants.
Floor of Award Range: Approximately $290,000.
Ceiling of Award Range: $360,000.
Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, February 1,
2011.
Anticipated Project Completion Date: March 2012.
Additional Information: Pending successful implementation of these
programs and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it
is ECA's intent to renew these cooperative agreements for two
additional fiscal years before openly competing them again.
III. Eligibility Information
III.1. Eligible Applicants
Applications may be submitted by public and private U.S. colleges,
universities, and other not-for-profit academic organizations that have
an established reputation in a field or discipline related to the
specific program theme, and which meet 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 agreement. Cost sharing may
be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For
accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs
which are claimed as your 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
(a) Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with fewer
than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be
limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates making five
awards, four in an amount up to $290,000, and in one in an amount up to
$360,000 to support the program and administrative costs required to
implement this exchange program. Therefore, organizations with fewer
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.
(b) Technical Eligibility: It is the Bureau's intent to award five
separate cooperative agreements to five different institutions under
this competition. Therefore prospective applicants may submit only one
proposal under this competition. All applicants must comply with this
requirement. Should an applicant submit multiple proposals under this
competition, all proposals will be declared technically ineligible
[[Page 56648]]
and given no further consideration in the review process.
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 the Branch for the Study of the United States, ECA/
A/E/USS, Fourth Floor, U.S. Department of State, SA-5, 2200 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20522-0504, (202) 632-3340 to request a
Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number
ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09 located at the top of this announcement when
making your request.
Alternatively, an electronic application package 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.
Please specify Brendan M. Walsh and refer to the Funding
Opportunity Number ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09 located at the top of this
announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence.
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/grants/open2.html, or from the
Grants.gov 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 application should be submitted 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. Please note: Effective January 7, 2009, all applicants for
ECA federal assistance awards must include in their application the
names of directors and/or senior executives (current officers,
trustees, and key employees, regardless of amount of compensation). In
fulfilling this requirement, applicants must submit information in one
of the following ways:
(1) Those who file Internal Revenue Service Form 990, ``Return of
Organization Exempt From Income Tax,'' must include a copy of relevant
portions of this form.
(2) Those who do not file IRS Form 990 must submit information
above in the format of their choice.
In addition to final program reporting requirements, award
recipients will also be required to submit a one-page document, derived
from their program reports, listing and describing their grant
activities. For award recipients, the names of directors and/or senior
executives (current officers, trustees, and key employees), as well as
the one- page description of grant activities, will be transmitted by
the State Department to OMB, along with other information required by
the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), and
will be made available to the public by the Office of Management and
Budget on its USASpending.gov Web site as part of ECA's FFATA reporting
requirements.
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 places critically important
emphases on the security and proper administration of the Exchange
Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by award recipients 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.
ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants
in this program.
A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of
Exchange Visitor (J) programs is available at https://exchanges.state.gov or from: Office of Designation, Private Sector
Programs Division, U.S. Department of State, ECA/EC/D/PS, SA-5, 5th
Floor, 2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20522-0505.
Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information.
IV.3d.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
[[Page 56649]]
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.3d.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 recipient
organization will track participants or 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, and how and when you intend to measure
these outcomes (performance indicators). 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 to apply knowledge in
work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic
organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new
knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community
members, and others.
4. Institutional changes, 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.)
Recipient organizations 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.3e. Please take the following information into consideration
when preparing your budget:
IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit SF-424A--``Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs'' along with a comprehensive budget for the
entire program. Budget requests for either of the two scholar
institutes may not exceed $290,000, and administrative costs should be
no more than approximately $95,000. Budget requests for the Institute
for Secondary Educators may not exceed $360,000, and administrative
costs should be no more than approximately $110,000. There must be a
summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and
program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each
program component, phase, location, or activity to provide
clarification.
IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the program include the following:
(1) Institute staff salary and benefits;
(2) Participant housing and meals;
(3) Participant travel and per diem;
(4) Textbooks, educational materials, and admissions fees;
(5) Honoraria for guest speakers;
(6) Follow-on programming for alumni of Study of the United States
programs.
Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget
guidelines and formatting instructions.
IV.3f. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission:
Application Deadline Date: October 27, 2010.
Reference Number: ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09.
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., 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. 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.
[[Page 56650]]
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 six (6) copies of the application should be sent
to: Program Management Division, ECA-IIP/EX/PM, Ref.: ECA/A/E/USS-11-
05-09, SA-5, Floor 4, Department of State, 2200 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20522-0504.
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 Note: ECA bears no responsibility for applicant
timeliness of submission or data errors resulting from transmission
or conversion processes for proposals submitted via Grants.gov.
Please follow the instructions available in the `Get Started'
portion of the site (https://www.grants.gov/GetStarted).
Several of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process could
take several weeks. Therefore, applicants should check with appropriate
staff within their organizations immediately after reviewing this RFGP
to confirm or determine their registration status with Grants.gov.
Once registered, the amount of time it can take to upload an
application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the
size of the application and the speed of your internet connection. In
addition, validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can
take up to two business days.
Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the
application deadline to begin the submission process through
Grants.gov.
The Grants.gov Web site includes extensive information on all
phases/aspects of the Grants.gov process, including an extensive
section on frequently asked questions, located under the ``For
Applicants'' section of the Web site. ECA strongly recommends that all
potential applicants review thoroughly the Grants.gov Web site, well in
advance of submitting a proposal through the Grants.gov system. ECA
bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or
conversion processes.
Direct all questions regarding Grants.gov registration and
submission to: Grants.gov Customer Support.
Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726.
Business Hours: Monday-Friday, 7 a.m.-9 p.m. Eastern Time.
E-mail: grants.gov">support@grants.gov.
Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.), Washington, DC time of
the closing date to ensure that their entire application has been
uploaded to the Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions to the above
deadline. 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.
Please refer to the Grants.gov Web site, for definitions of various
``application statuses'' and the difference between a submission
receipt and a submission validation. Applicants will receive a
validation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an
application. Again, validation of an electronic submission via
Grants.gov can take up to two business days. Therefore, we strongly
recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the
submission process through Grants.gov. ECA will not notify you upon
receipt of electronic applications.
It is the responsibility of all applicants submitting proposals via
the Grants.gov web portal to ensure that proposals have been received
by Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA bears no responsibility for
data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes.
Optional--IV.3f.3. You may also state here any limitations on the
number of applications that an applicant may submit and make it clear
whether the limitation is on the submitting organization, individual
program director or both.
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
cooperative agreements resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer.
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. Quality of Program Plan and Ability to Achieve Program
Objectives: Proposals should exhibit originality, substance, precision,
and relevance to the Bureau's mission. A detailed agenda and relevant
work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and logistical
capacity. Objectives should be reasonable, feasible, and flexible.
Proposals should demonstrate clearly how the institution will meet the
program's objectives and plan.
2. Support for Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive
support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. Achievable and relevant
features should be cited in both program administration (program venue
and program evaluation) and program content (orientation and wrap-up
sessions, program meetings, presenters, and resource materials).
3. Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan to evaluate the
activity's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the
program. A draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a
description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original
project objectives is strongly recommended.
4. Cost-effectiveness/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.
5. Institutional Track Record/Ability: 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. The Bureau will consider the past performance of prior
recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Proposed
personnel and
[[Page 56651]]
institutional resources should be fully qualified to achieve the
project's goals.
6. Follow-up and Follow-on Activities: Proposals should discuss
provisions made for follow-up with returned participants as a means of
establishing longer-term individual and institutional linkages.
Proposals also should provide a plan for continued follow-on activity
(without Bureau support) ensuring that Bureau supported programs are
not isolated events.
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 a Federal Assistance Award (FAA)
from the Bureau's Grants Office. The FAA and the original proposal with
subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding
authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The
FAA 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://fa.statebuy.state.gov.
VI.3. Reporting Requirements
You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the
following reports:
Mandatory:
(1) A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after
the expiration of the award;
(2) A concise, one-page final program report summarizing program
outcomes no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award. This
one-page report will be transmitted to OMB, and be made available to
the public via OMB's USAspending.gov Web site--as part of ECA's Federal
Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reporting
requirements.
(3) A SF-PPR, ``Performance Progress Report'' Cover Sheet with all
program reports.
Award recipients 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: Brendan M. Walsh,
U.S. Department of State, Branch for the Study of the United States,
ECA/A/E/USS, SA-5, Fourth Floor, ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09, 2200 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20522-0503, (202) 632-3340, WalshBM@state.gov.
All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should
reference the above title and number ECA/A/E/USS-11-05-09.
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.
VIII. Other Information
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: September 9, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. 2010-23145 Filed 9-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P