15-crop protection.pdf

Crop Protection and Pest Management Competitive Grants Program

FY 2015 Request for Applications (RFA)

APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 7, 2015

ELIGIBILITY: See Part III, A. of RFA

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE

CROP PROTECTION AND PEST MANAGEMENT – APPLIED RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT COMPETITIVE GRANTS PROGRAM

INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE: This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under 10.329, Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program.

DATES: Applications must be received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 7, 2015.

Applications received after this deadline will normally not be considered for funding (see Part IV, C. of this RFA). Comments regarding this request for applications (RFA) are requested within 6 months from the issuance of this notice. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

STAKEHOLDER INPUT: The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) seeks your comments about this RFA. We will consider the comments when we develop the next RFA for the program, if applicable, and we’ll use them to meet the requirements of section 103(c)(2) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act (AREERA) of 1998 (7 U.S.C.

7613(c)(2)). Submit written stakeholder comments to: Policy@nifa.usda.gov. (This e-mail address is intended only for receiving comments regarding this RFA and not requesting information or forms.) In your comments, please state that you are responding to the Crop Protection and Pest Management Program RFA.

As part of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture’s (NIFA) strategy to successfully implement the 2014 Farm Bill, NIFA is soliciting stakeholder input on NIFA’s centers of excellence strategy. Between January and March 2015 NIFA will hold webinars to collect stakeholder input about the centers of excellence strategy in fiscal year (FY) 2015. Upcoming dates for the webinars will be announced on the NIFA website. The full transcript of the webinars will also be available on the NIFA website. NIFA will also request to receive input through an advertised call-in number, fax and email. All comments and suggestions for the FY 2015 centers of excellence should be received by March 30, 2015.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: NIFA requests applications for the Crop Protection and Pest Management (CPPM) Competitive Grants Program for fiscal year (FY) 2015 to ensure food security and effectively respond to other major societal challenges. The CPPM program supports projects that address high priority integrated pest management (IPM) challenges with coordinated state, regional, and national research and extension efforts. The impact of these research and extension efforts will be increased by the establishment of communication networks and stakeholder participation in setting priorities. In FY 2015 NIFA will competitively solicit only Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP) applications under the Crop Protection and Pest Management (CPPM) program.

mailto:Policy@nifa.usda.gov http://nifa.usda.gov/ http://nifa.usda.gov/

Pursuant to H.R. 83, the 2015 Appropriations Act, the amount available for support of ARDP projects in FY 2015 is approximately $4 million.

This notice identifies the objectives for ARDP projects, the eligibility criteria for projects and applicants, and the application forms and associated instructions needed to apply for an ARDP grant.

In this RFA, NIFA is soliciting applications for:

Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP)

a. Project Period – Two to four years.

b. Budget – Awards must not exceed $300,000 per project.

c. Depending upon project budget requests, NIFA anticipates making in the range of 13 to 23 awards.

d. Purpose – To enhance the development, adoption, and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM tactics and strategies that address regional and/or national IPM priorities.

NIFA will administer ARDP awards as fully-funded projects (i.e., all funds provided in year one, without continuations).

Table of Contents

PART I—FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Legislative Authority and Background B. Purpose and Priorities C. Program Area Description

PART II—AWARD INFORMATION

A. Available Funding B. Types of Applications C. Project Types D. Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research

PART III—ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing or Matching C. Centers of Excellence

PART IV—APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Electronic Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

PART V—APPLICATION REVIEW REQUIREMENTS

A. General B. Evaluation Criteria C. Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality D. Organizational Management Information E. Centers of Excellence Status F. Application Disposition

PART VI—AWARD ADMINISTRATION

A. General B. Award Notice C. Administrative and National Policy Requirements D. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements

PART VII—AGENCY CONTACT

PART VIII—OTHER INFORMATION

A. Access to Review Information B. Use of Funds; Changes C. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards D. Regulatory Information E. Definitions

PART I—FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Legislative Authority and Background

H.R. 83, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015, provided NIFA with funding for the Crop Protection and Pest Management Competitive Grants Program authorized under section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act (AREERA) of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7626), and reauthorized by Section 7302 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79). These funds are available to support integrated, multifunctional agricultural research, extension, and education activities. Subject to the availability of appropriations to carry out this program, the Secretary may award grants to colleges and universities (as defined by section 1404 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA) (7 U.S.C. 3103)), as amended. These grants are awarded on a competitive basis for projects that address priorities in United States agriculture and involve integrated research, education, and extension activities, as determined by the Secretary in consultation with the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board.

Section 7206 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 amended section 406(b) of AREERA to add the 1994 Land-Grant Institutions as eligible to apply for grants under this authority. Section 7129 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) (Pub. L.

110-246) amended section 406(b) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7626(b)), adding Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and universities (HSACU) as eligible entities for competitive funds awarded under this authority (see Part III, A. for more information).

Background

Crop Protection and Pest Management Program

This RFA solicits applications for the Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP) of the CPPM program. The ARDP is one of three program areas supported by the CPPM program; the other two program areas are: (1) Extension Implementation Program Area (EIP) and (2) Regional Coordination Program Area (RCP).

The purpose of the CPPM program is to address high priority issues related to pests and their management using integrated pest management (IPM) approaches at the state, regional and national levels. The CPPM program supports projects that will increase food security and respond effectively to other major societal challenges with comprehensive IPM approaches that are economically viable, environmentally sound and will help protect human health. The CPPM program addresses IPM challenges for emerging issues and existing priority pest concerns that can be addressed more effectively with new and emerging technologies. The outcomes of the CPPM program are effective, affordable, and environmentally sound IPM practices and strategies supporting more vital communities.

The CPPM program provides support for research to develop new IPM approaches, extension to disseminate IPM knowledge and improve adoption of IPM practices, and coordination of IPM activities at the regional and national levels to increase the adoption and implementation of IPM practices on a broad scale. The CPPM program provides support for these functions with three linked programs that emphasize research and development for discovery of IPM knowledge;

extension activities for IPM adoption and implementation; and enhanced coordination, collaboration and communications among related CPPM programs and grantees. Together the ARDP, EIP, and RCP program areas represent a comprehensive approach for developing IPM practices and strategies and extending this new knowledge across many environments through a coordinated national network. It is anticipated that the application of this evidence-based science will have positive outcomes for society.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Strategic Plan

The CPPM program supports the following USDA Strategic Plan, FY 2014 – 2018 (www.usda.gov/documents/usda-strategic-plan-fy-2014-2018.pdf) strategic goals:

• Goal 1 – Assist Rural Communities to Create Prosperity so They Are Self-Sustaining, Repopulating, and Economically Thriving.

• Goal 3 – Help America Promote Agricultural Production and Biotechnology Exports as America Works to Increase Food Security.

• Goal 4 – Ensure That All of America’s Children Have Access to Safe, Nutritious, and Balanced Meals.

Research, Education, and Economics (REE) Action Plan

The CPPM program directly aligns with the USDA, REE Plan (www.ree.usda.gov/ree/news/USDA_REE_Action_Plan_03-2014.pdf) and specifically addresses the following goals:

• Goal 1 – Sustainable Intensification of Agricultural Production, Subgoals 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D (which focus on Crop and Animal Production; Crop and Animal Health; Crop and Animal Genetics, Genomics, Genetic Resources, and Biotechnology; and Consumer and Industry Outreach, Policy, Markets, and Trade);

• Goal 2 – Responding to Climate and Energy Needs;

• Goal 3 – Sustainable Use of Natural Resources, Subgoals 3A and 3B (which focus on

Water Availability: Quality and Quantity; and Landscape-Scale Conservation, Management and Resiliency;

• Goal 5 – Food Safety;

• Goal 6 – Education and Science Literacy; and

• Goal 7 – Rural Prosperity/Rural-Urban Interdependence.

The CPPM program aligns well with major specific goals in the REE Action Plan, which calls for efforts to:

• Develop and extend effective, affordable, and environmentally-sound integrated management strategies to reduce losses caused by crop and animal disease pathogens, insect pests, and weeds, including early detection, identification, monitoring, and http://www.usda.gov/documents/usda-strategic-plan-fy-2014-2018.pdf http://www.ree.usda.gov/ree/news/USDA_REE_Action_Plan_03-2014.pdf implementation of biologically-based and area wide strategies to manage key native and invasive species and postharvest pests.

• Optimize integrated pest management practices for crops by developing knowledge and tools for cultural methods, biological control, and host plant resistance management tactics.

• Improve ability to provide surveillance, early detection, rapid response, and appropriate recovery for emerging or reemerging plant and animal diseases of high consequence through the development of tools and enhancement of national plant and animal disease diagnostic networks.

National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) Strategic Plan

The CPPM program directly supports the NIFA Strategic Plan for FY 2014-2018, Science Goal 1

– Catalyze exemplary and relevant research, education and extension programs, sub-goal 1.1 Advance our Nation’s ability to achieve global food security and fight hunger.

National IPM Roadmap

The CPPM program is aligned with the goals identified in the National IPM Roadmap for Integrated Pest Management (National IPM Roadmap). The National IPM Roadmap identifies strategic directions for IPM research, implementation, and measurement for pests in all settings throughout the nation (see www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/pest/pdfs/ipm_roadmap.pdf). In FY 2015, successful CPPM program applicants will develop knowledge and information needed for the adoption and implementation of IPM methods that:

• Result in improved cost-benefit ratios when IPM practices are adopted and implemented;

• Reduce potential human health risks from pests and related pest management strategies; and

• Minimize adverse environmental impacts from pests and related pest management strategies.

B. Purpose and Priorities

In this RFA, NIFA is soliciting applications for the ARDP program area of CPPM (see Part I, Section C – Program Area Descriptions). ARDP funds projects that develop new IPM tactics, technologies, practices, and strategies. Applied Research (single-function) projects develop innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems that address regional and/or national IPM priorities. Research-led projects enhance the adoption of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems. Extension-led projects increase levels of implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems by IPM practitioners and growers.

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/pest/pdfs/ipm_roadmap.pdf

Schematic Representation of the CPPM Program’s Desired Outcomes and Goals

Figure 1. The three CPPM program areas at the center of the figure address IPM needs in the five focus areas described below, thereby contributing to the achievement of the goals of the National IPM Roadmap and sustainable food security.

The three CPPM program areas (ARDP, EIP, and RCP) will address IPM needs in five focus areas as funding is available:

1) Plant Protection Tactics and Tools. This focus area represents the need for discovery, development, and introduction of new pest management tactics for use in IPM systems.

2) Diversified IPM Systems. This focus area represents the need for long-term sustainable solutions to pest management problems.

3) Enhancing Agricultural Biosecurity. This focus area represents the need to develop and maintain key information systems, networks, and decision support tools that provide the knowledge infrastructure needed for early detection and the application of science-based IPM systems for invasive, emerging and high-consequence pests that threaten U.S.

agriculture. For example, early warning and decision support systems such as the Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education (ipmPIPE) have a direct effect on biosecurity.

4) IPM for Sustainable Communities. This focus area represents the need for direct application of IPM knowledge and expertise to address pest management challenges in non-traditional settings such as urban structures, landscapes and gardens, homes and schools.

5) Development of the Next Generation of IPM Scientists. This focus area represents the need to develop pre-doctoral and post-doctoral education programs to prepare the next generation of IPM scientists.

For more detailed descriptions of the focus areas, see:

www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/cppm/cppm_info.html.

In FY 2015, the ARDP program area will provide funding for Plant Protection Tactics and Tools (focus area one), Enhancing Agricultural Biosecurity (focus area three), and IPM for Sustainable Communities (focus area four) (see Part I. C.).

CPPM Logic Model: The logic model for the CPPM program (Figure 2) incorporates stakeholder input, anticipated outcomes, appropriate elements from IPM logic models from previously funded NIFA IPM programs, and goals for the REE Action Plan and strategic plans for USDA and NIFA. NIFA will use the logic model to guide the development of future funding priorities and to document the impact of investments made by the CPPM program.

Please Note: All applicants are required to: (1) submit a project-specific logic model chart as part of each application and (2) explain how the logic model supports the CPPM programmatic logic model provided in Figure 2. See Program Area Descriptions (Part I, Section C) and Application and Submission Information (Part IV, Section B, item 3b, Field 8-Project Narrative) for specific logic model requirements. The project-specific logic model chart must provide details for the inputs, outputs (activities and participants), and outcomes of the proposed project.

The logic model chart must also include the project specific situations, assumptions, and external factors statements. See the logic model on page 10 to see where these elements are placed in the logic model. For more general information on logic model charts, see www.ipm.gov/LogicModels/index.cfm.

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/cppm/cppm_info.html http://www.ipm.gov/LogicModels/index.cfm

Figure 2. Crop Protection and Pest Management Program Logic Model Situation: Emerging diseases, insects, weeds and other pests continue to negatively impact U.S. agricultural production, natural areas, and urban settings including places where people live, work, and attend school. Obtaining new science-based IPM knowledge and extending that knowledge with effective, affordable, and environmentally-sound IPM strategies at the local, state, regional and national levels are needed to address these priority IPM challenges.

Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts Participants Activities / Products Short Term Medium Term Long Term

Legislative authority

Annual appropriation

USDA involvement

NIFA intra-agency coordination

Multi-state projects

Program directors

Support staff

Panel Managers

Peer Review Panels

Stakeholder and partner comments

Stakeholders

Commodity associations

Public interest groups

Farmers

Ranchers

General public

NGOs

End users or consumers

Underserved individuals or communities

Land-grant university partners

Cooperative Extension

Research, teaching and extension faculty

State agencies

Federal agencies

USDA-NIFA

Other allied state and federal agencies

Regional IPM stakeholders eXtension CoPs

NGOs

Public interest groups

Respond to Congressional authorization and appropriation

Publish RFA

Recruit panel managers and peer review panelists

Conduct peer review panel meetings

Award funds to meritorious applications

Support IPM research to address priority IPM needs

Promote collaborative team-building through national and regional coordination meetings and activities and broad-based stakeholder participation

Promote the development and implementation of IPM by facilitating coordination and collaboration across states, disciplines and programs

Establish and maintain pest management information networks

Build partnerships and address challenges and opportunities

Develop notable IPM training programs and foster their sustainability

Review and evaluate impacts of IPM implementation and communicate successes

Communicate positive outcomes to key stakeholders

Manage funding resources effectively

Collect program impact data

Increase knowledge and adoption of new IPM tools and tactics in integrated strategies for IPM

Adapt existing science-based IPM knowledge to new pest scenarios and foster sound IPM solutions

Engage broadest possible IPM scientific, extension, and education communities in challenges faced by IPM

Engage new stakeholder communities challenged by pest issues who could benefit from IPM

Facilitate production of audience-appropriate information/training materials including mobile, web-based, and other digital, as well as traditional formats

Facilitate communication among the scientific IPM community and among the research, teaching and extension communities, practitioners, stakeholders, and consumers in a proactive communication strategy

Facilitate production of original materials and collaboration with existing or new eXtension CoPs

Innovative and diversified IPM systems are implemented on an area-wide or landscape scale

Key information systems, networks, and decision-support tools are adopted for emerging and high-consequence pests and diseases. Enhanced coordination and responsiveness of IPM research, education, and extension effort for critical, priority pest management and food security challenges

New stakeholders are using IPM; Stakeholders are using more advanced IPM best management practices

Producers and processors adopt newly developed IPM technologies and innovations

Regional and national trans-disciplinary systems approaches are being used to solve IPM problems

A new generation of research and extension scientists capable of and adept at working in effective, trans-disciplinary regional and national teams are in place

Networks improve information flow among IPM components, among stakeholders, and among IPM research, education, and extension communities

Stakeholders can document why IPM was beneficial for them and the environment

Crop protection systems are more profitable with IPM

Agricultural production increased through reduced pest and disease losses

Cost benefit ratios of adopting IPM practices are improved

Sustainable IPM practices are implemented

Human health and environmental risks from managing pests are reduced

U.S. food producers are more competitive globally

Global capacity to meet growing food demand improved

Safe, affordable and high-quality crops are widely available to consumers

Hunger is reduced through improved food security in vulnerable populations

Effective, affordable, and environmentally-sound IPM strategies are in place to reduce economic, environmental, and societal losses from pests and diseases that affect crops and livestock, human well-being and community vitality

Coordinated state-based, region-wide and national research, education, and extension programs function as catalysts for promoting further development and use of new IPM approaches

Assumptions:

Sustainability is a foundation of integrated pest management (IPM).

IPM plays a significant role in U.S. agricultural production.

Complementary and coordinated state, regional and national approaches are needed in obtaining increased adoption of IPM in agricultural, natural and urban settings.

External Factors:

Congressional appropriations/funding Stakeholder input Emerging and critical issues requiring IPM practices and technologies New pests and pathogens

C. Program Area Description

Program Code – ARDP Proposed Budget Requests – Budgets may not exceed $300,000 total per project for (1) applications with Project Directors (PDs) from more than one state/territory or (2) applications that address a significant crop/commodity that is predominately produced in one state/territory and where multistate collaboration is not practical. Budgets must be $175,000 or less for all other applications with PDs from one state/territory. (See table below and Multi-State/Territory and/or Regional/National Involvement (page 14)).

Project Period – Two to four years Requested Project Type – The ARDP supports three project types:

• Applied Research (single-function) projects develop innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems that address regional and/or national IPM priorities.

• Research-led projects enhance the adoption of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems.

• Extension-led projects extend implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems by IPM practitioners and growers.

Please Note – Project proposals must indicate in the Project Summary whether the project is Applied Research (single-function), Research-led, or Extension-led.

Maximum Award for Each ARDP Project

Project Directors (PDs) from one state/ territory

PDs from more than one state/territory or PDs from one state/territory addressing a significant crop/commodity predominately produced in one state/territory.

$175,000 $300,000

Program Area Priorities

Applied Research (single-function) Projects

Applied Research (single-function) projects develop the foundation of IPM knowledge needed for on-going IPM adoption and implementation efforts. Applied Research (single-function) projects develop innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems that address regional and/or national IPM priorities. Research may be proposed 1) to develop individual tools and tactics needed for pest management systems (e.g., biocontrol, cultural/physical/mechanical control, host plant resistance, and particularly novel uses of chemicals, monitoring methods or decision support) or 2) to increase the understanding of how interactions among tactics alter the effectiveness of pest management within agricultural, recreational, suburban, and urban ecosystems. The experimental approach for ARDP proposals should emphasize field-scale experiments over multiple seasons and/or locations, where appropriate. IPM practices should be designed to reduce initial pest populations, lower the carrying capacity of the ecosystem for pests, increase tolerance of hosts to pest injury, and/or provide tools for making management decisions, such as monitoring methods and action thresholds.

Long-term fundamental research is not appropriate for funding in this category. We encourage research on novel, cutting-edge methods, for which data exist to support the likelihood of successful integrated pest management research and adoption. Research involving chemical pesticides should be designed to reduce the amount applied, frequency of applications, increase the selectivity, reduce the risks associated with their use, and/or develop novel resistance management strategies. Project proposals should be designed to minimize adverse impacts on beneficial organisms and to limit buildup of resistant pest populations. Proposals should clearly describe how the tactic or IPM system, once developed, can be incorporated into an existing production or management system. Proposals should also clearly describe the economic, social, and environmental benefits of the proposed IPM strategies, and identify ways to overcome constraints to greater adoption of IPM methods by users.

Applied Research (single-function) Projects

The following are examples of possible topic areas covered in Applied Research (single-function) proposals. Identification of these topic areas is not intended to be exclusionary and should not deter submission of applications that address other topic areas appropriate for Applied Research (single-function) projects.

• Documenting (measuring) the impacts of IPM adoption;

• Developing an effective strategy or tactic for a pest problem that currently limits production efficiency in a plant or animal production system, and is recognized by the user community as a key priority;

• Addressing multiple cycles of pests (arthropods, nematodes, vertebrates, pathogens, or weeds) over seasons, and/or multiple species and complexes at the landscape or ecosystem level (agricultural production, urban, or natural systems) with consideration of the interactions of the entire system;

• Promoting biological diversity in pest management systems and integration of multiple pest management tactics;

• Identifying constraints to greater adoption of IPM strategies and developing approaches to overcome these constraints;

• Promoting an interdisciplinary, IPM systems approach;

• Developing effective pest management tactics for invasive pests (arthropods, nematodes, vertebrates, pathogens, or weeds) in cropping systems and natural and urban areas; and

• Developing projects that enhance the development of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems for current and/or emerging pests of national importance.

Research-led Projects

Research-led projects primarily address the priorities identified for Applied (single-function) projects (listed above), but at least 20 percent of the project effort must be focused on the topic areas identified for Extension-led projects (listed below). Proposals should clearly describe how Extension personnel will be involved at the beginning of project planning and how the extension activities will be conducted concurrently with research activities throughout the life of the project.

Extension-led Project

Extension-led projects enhance outreach efforts that support IPM methods and maximize opportunities to build strategic alliances with stakeholders to expand their active participation in increasing the implementation of IPM methods. Projects may be proposed to 1) develop extension materials and information delivery systems for outreach efforts, 2) conduct field-scale or on-farm demonstrations, or 3) deliver IPM extension outreach and training. The proposals should document the existence of a research base relevant to the extension effort. ARDP funding is not intended to support ongoing extension programmatic efforts. At least 20 percent of project effort should be focused on the topic areas identified for Applied Research (single-functions) projects (listed above).

Examples of possible topic areas covered in Extension-led proposals are listed below.

Identification of these topic areas is not intended to be exclusionary and should not deter submission of applications that address other topic areas appropriate to Extension-led priorities.

• Providing IPM outreach and training to individuals involved with the production, processing, storage, transporting, and marketing of food and agricultural commodities;

• Developing educational materials and information delivery systems that provide IPM personnel in the public and private sectors with timely, state-of-the-art information about effective IPM strategies;

• Providing outreach on endangered species protection related to IPM;

• Developing IPM programs for urban and natural systems, and address human and environmental health issues when appropriate; and

• Enhancing the development and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems for current and/or emerging pests of national importance.

Successful ARDP applications will fully address each of the following:

• Stakeholder-identified IPM Needs. Proposals should address IPM needs identified by diverse regional and national stakeholders. Applications must include at least one explicit citation that documents the specific stakeholder-identified needs addressed by the proposed project. Clearly reference identified needs to corresponding citations. The citation of stakeholder IPM needs is important because it demonstrates that a project is both important to stakeholders and that PDs are engaged with the stakeholder community. Sources of stakeholder-identified needs include, but are not limited to:

o Needs identified by the Regional IPM Centers. See:

www.ncipmc.org/priorities/index.cfm www.northeastipm.org/grant-programs/stakeholder-priorities http://www.ncipmc.org/priorities/index.cfm http://www.northeastipm.org/grant-programs/stakeholder-priorities/ www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities westernipm.org/index.cfm/center-grants/priorities/;

o Needs identified in crop profiles. See www.ipmcenters.org/CropProfiles;

o Needs identified in Pest Management Strategic Plans. See www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp;

o Recommendations or reports from state IPM programs;

o Recommendations from relevant IPM research and/or extension multi-state committees;

o IPM needs from Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension (SARE) sub-regional conferences;

o Recommendations from other IPM stakeholder groups; and o Other documented IPM needs assessment evaluations.

• Multi-State/Territory and/or Regional/National Involvement. Proposals must address regional and/or national IPM priorities and should include multi-state, regional, and national collaborations for purposes of efficiency, economy, and synergy. All applications, including those with PDs from one state/territory, must clearly describe how the project will provide benefits to more than one state/territory. Multi-state/territory, regional, and national proposals must describe the role of each collaborating partner in enough detail to convince the peer reviewers of the application that the multi-state/territory collaboration is meaningful. Projects undertaken by PDs in a single state/territory will be accepted, but the expected benefits for other states/territories must be described (see Part III, Section A, Eligible Applicants). Please note the exception below for PD(s) from one state/territory who are studying a significant crop/commodity that is produced predominately in one state/territory. The need for multi-state/regional/national involvement is exempted in the case where the project addresses a crop/commodity that is predominately produced in one state/territory and where multistate collaboration is not practical. When a proposal involves a crop/commodity that is of regional or national importance and is produced predominately in one state/territory, the proposal must include documentation that the crop/commodity is grown predominately in one state/territory and must describe why multistate collaboration is impractical.

• Multi-Disciplinary and Systems-Oriented. Proposals should promote cooperative efforts across appropriate disciplines, with linkages between research and extension efforts, and components of existing or emerging pest management systems. The proposal must describe the role of each member of the multi-disciplinary team and their responsibilities to the project.

• Systems Approach. Proposals should describe a plan for enhancing the development, adoption, and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems. The IPM strategies that are developed should have the potential to significantly enhance and protect environmental quality, reduce the risk of health problems and other problems associated with pest control practices, promote biological diversity in pest management systems, and integrate multiple pest management tactics. The primary emphasis of the proposed project should be to enhance productivity and profitability while addressing critical environmental quality and human health issues. Proposals may address major acreage http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities http://westernipm.org/index.cfm/center-grants/priorities/ http://www.ipmcenters.org/CropProfiles/ http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/ http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/ agricultural production systems, high value crops such as key fruit and vegetable systems, urban systems, or other agro-ecosystems including natural areas.

• Implementation Plan. Proposals must include a plan for implementation of results generated by the project, and a plan for measuring and assessing implementation, adoption and potential impact using cost-effective approaches and criteria.

• Timeline. Proposals must include a detailed timeline with key milestones for the project objectives and other important project tasks.

• Logic Model. Proposals must include a project-specific logic model chart, and explain how the project logic model supports the CPPM programmatic logic model (see Application and Submission Information, Part IV, B, item 3b, Field 8-Project Narrative). The project-specific logic model chart must provide details for the inputs, outputs (participants and activities/products), outcomes/impacts (short term, medium term, and long term), situations, assumptions, and external factors of the proposed project.

• Coordination. Successful applicants must participate in appropriate Hatch Multistate IPM

Education/Extension and Research Activities (e.g., NEERA1004, NCERA222, SERA003, and WERA1017. See the National Information Management and Support System (NIMSS) – http://nimss.umd.edu/lgu_v2/), other relevant research multi-state committees, and other regional programmatic efforts coordinated through relevant regional IPM centers. The purpose of this coordination is to facilitate collaboration and cooperation; move research results to actual application through IPM adoption and implementation; and achieve CPPM program outcomes.

• Partnerships. Applicants are strongly encouraged to develop partnerships that include collaboration with small- or mid-sized, accredited colleges and universities; 1890 land-grant institutions; 1994 land-grant institutions; Hispanic-serving institutions; Hispanic-serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACUs); and/or other institutions that serve high-risk, under-served, or hard-to-reach audiences.

• National IPM Roadmap. Proposals should address goals and priorities identified by the

National IPM Roadmap for Integrated Pest Management (see www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/pest/pdfs/ipm_roadmap.pdf).

• Project Director (PD) Workshop. Successful applicants, or a designee, will be required to attend a PD workshop during the term of their project. NIFA may hold this workshop in conjunction with another conference or separately from any other meeting. For the purpose of budget development, applicants are required to request funds for attending this workshop.

The request for these funds should be clearly indicated in the budget narrative section of the application.

Please Note: The CPPM program encourages all project applications to develop content and programs suitable for delivery through the Cooperative Extension System’s eXtension Initiative.

http://nimss.umd.edu/lgu_v2/ http://www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/pest/pdfs/ipm_roadmap.pdf

You may use funds to develop new or to enhance eXtension: (1) Communities of Practice (CoPs), (2) Learning Networks, or (3) Innovation Hubs focused on appropriate IPM topic areas.

You must have a letter of acknowledgement from eXtension. Letters of support are also encouraged from the relevant CoPs. For detailed guidance on how to partner with eXtension, go to http://create.extension.org/node/2057.

http://create.extension.org/node/2057

PART II—AWARD INFORMATION

A. Available Funding

Pursuant to H.R. 83, the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015, NIFA anticipates that approximately $4 million will be available for new awards in the Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP) of the Crop Protection and Pest Management (CPPM) program in FY 2015. The funds will be awarded through grants. There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular application or to make a specific number of awards.

Awards issued as a result of this RFA will have designated the Automated Standard Applications for Payment System (ASAP), operated by the Department of Treasury’s Financial Management Service, as the payment system for funds. For more information see www.nifa.usda.gov/business/method_of_payment.html.

B. Types of Applications

In FY 2015, you may submit applications to the ARDP program area as one of the following two types of requests:

(1) New application. This is a project application that has not been previously submitted to the ARDP program area. We will review all new applications competitively using the selection process and evaluation criteria described in Part V—Application Review Requirements.

(2) Resubmitted application. This is an application that had previously been submitted to the ARDP program area but was not funded. Project Directors (PDs) must respond to the previous review panel summary (see Response to Previous Review, Part IV, B. 3. b.).

Resubmitted applications must be received by the relevant due dates, will be evaluated in competition with other pending applications in the appropriate area to which they are assigned, and will be reviewed according to the same evaluation criteria as new applications.

C. Project Types

Three types of proposals can be submitted: Applied Research (single-function) projects, Research-led projects, or Extension-led projects. Applicants must indicate the type of project they are proposing in the Project Summary.

D. Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research

The responsible and ethical conduct of research (RCR) is critical for excellence, as well as public trust, in science and engineering. Consequently, we consider education in RCR essential to the preparation of future scientists. In accordance with sections 2, 3, and 8 of 2 CFR Part 422, http://www.nifa.usda.gov/business/method_of_payment.html institutions that conduct USDA-funded extramural research must foster an atmosphere conducive to research integrity, bear primary responsibility for prevention and detection of research misconduct, and maintain and effectively communicate and train their staff regarding policies and procedures. In the event an application to NIFA results in an award, the Authorized Representative (AR) assures, through acceptance of the award that the institution will comply with the above requirements. Per award terms and conditions, grant recipients shall, upon request, make available to NIFA the policies, procedures, and documentation to support the conduct of the training.

Note that the training referred to herein shall be either on-campus or off-campus training. The general content of the ethics training will, at a minimum, emphasize three key areas of research ethics: authorship and plagiarism, data and research integration, and reporting misconduct. Each institution will be responsible for developing its own training system, as schools will need flexibility to develop training tailored to their specific student needs. Grantees should consider the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) program for RCR (https://www.citiprogram.org/rcrpage.asp). Typically this RCR education addresses the topics of:

Data Acquisition and Management - collection, accuracy, security, access; Authorship and Publication; Peer Review; Mentor/Trainee Responsibilities; Collaboration; Conflict of Interest;

Research Misconduct; Human Subject Research; and Use of Animals in Research.

https://www.citiprogram.org/rcrpage.asp

PART III—ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants

Pursuant to Section 7214 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79), beginning in Fiscal Year 2015, for applicable competitive research and extension programs, NIFA will be recognizing and providing priority in the receipt of funding to applications from “centers of excellence” that have been established for purposes of carrying out research, extension, and education activities relating to the food and agricultural sciences. In July of 2014, NIFA held listening sessions and accepted written comments from stakeholders to inform NIFA’s implementation of the centers of excellence provision. Information from the webinars and a summary of the input gathered are available on NIFA’s website at http://www.nifa.usda.gov/about/offices/legis/cntr_ex_webinar_documents.html

A center of excellence is composed of 1 or more of the following entities that provide financial or in-kind support to the center of excellence. Therefore, an eligible applicant who wishes to be considered as a center of excellence must be one of the following entities that provides financial or in-kind support to the center being proposed, as described in the grant application.

(A) State agricultural experiment stations;

(B) colleges and universities;

(C) university research foundations;

(D) other research institutions and organizations;

(E) Federal agencies;

(F) national laboratories;

(G) private organizations, foundations, or corporations;

(H) individuals; or

(I) any group consisting of 2 or more of the entities described in (A) through (H).

Applications may only be submitted by colleges and universities (as defined in section 1404 of NARETPA) (7 U.S.C. 3103). Section 1404 of NARETPA was amended by section 7101 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) to define Hispanic-serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACUs) (defined in 7 CFR 3430), and to include research foundations maintained by eligible colleges or universities. Section 406(b) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7626), was amended by section 7206 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to add the 1994 Land-Grant Institutions as eligible to apply for grants under this authority.

For the purposes of this program, the terms “college” and “university” mean an educational institution in any state which (1) admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate; (2) is legally authorized within such state to provide a program of education beyond secondary education; (3) provides an educational program for which a bachelor’s degree or any other higher degree is awarded; (4) is a public or other nonprofit institution; and (5) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association. Applications also may be http://www.nifa.usda.gov/about/offices/legis/cntr_ex_webinar_documents.html submitted by 1994 Land-Grant Institutions (defined in 7 CFR 3430), HSACUs, and research foundations maintained by eligible colleges or universities.

The 2014 Farm Bill required NIFA to establish an ongoing process allowing public colleges and universities that offer 4-year or advanced degrees in the food and agricultural sciences to apply for designation as NLGCA institutions. HSACUs are given the opportunity to opt out of their status to be considered for designation as a NLGCA; however, this decision will be binding on them until September 30, 2018.

Pursuant to section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA) (7 U.S.C. 7626), which authorized the Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grant Program, all four-year HSIs are eligible to apply for integrated projects as identified in this RFA. Two-year HSIs may also be eligible to apply but only if the institution has been certified as a HSACU for the fiscal year in which funding is being provided.

Approximately by January 2014, a list of the institutions certified and therefore eligible to apply as HSACUs for grants under FY 2015 RFAs, including this RFA, will be made available at www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/education/in_focus/hispanic_if_hispanic_HSACU.html. Institutions appearing on this list are granted HSACU certification by the Secretary for the period starting October 1, 2014, and ending September 30, 2015. Certifications are valid for FY 2015 only.

Additional questions on HSACU eligibility can be addressed to Ms. Lisa DePaolo, Policy Specialist, by email at ldepaolo@nifa.usda.gov or phone at (202) 401-5061.

Award recipients may subcontract to organizations not eligible to apply provided such organizations are necessary for the conduct of the project. Failure to meet an eligibility criterion by the time of application deadline may result in the application being excluded from consideration or, even though an application may be reviewed, will preclude NIFA from making an award.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching

In accordance with section 1492 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3371), as added by section 7128 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79), for grants awarded after October 1, 2014, the recipient of an award from the CPPM program must provide funds, in-kind contributions, or a combination of both, from sources other than funds provided through such grant in an amount that is at least equal to the amount awarded by NIFA. The matching funds requirement does not apply to grants awarded:

1. To a research agency of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA); or

2. To an entity eligible to receive funds under a capacity and infrastructure program (as defined in section 251(f)(1)(C) of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994, 7 U.S.C. 6971(f)(1)(C)), including a partner (see Part VIII, E. Definitions for definition of partnership) of such an entity.

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/education/in_focus/hispanic_if_hispanic_HSACU.html mailto:ldepaolo@nifa.usda.gov

Entities eligible to receive funds under a capacity and infrastructure program and exempt from the matching funds requirement include:

a. 1862 Land-grant Institutions, including State Agricultural Experiment Stations receiving funding under the Hatch Act of 1887;

b. 1890 Land-grant Institutions;

c. 1994 Land-grant Institutions;

d. Recipients of Continuing Animal Health and Disease, Food Security, and Stewardship

Research, Education, and Extension Program Funds — Capacity and Infrastructure Program

(CIP);

e. Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACU);

f. Insular Area Schools Eligible to Receive Funds from the Distance Education/Resident

Instruction Grant Programs;

g. Recipients of McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Program Funds;

h. Non-Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture (NLGCA) – (for exemption from the new matching requirement, these applications must include NLGCA certification. Instructions for requesting certification are available at: http://www.nifa.usda.gov/form/form.html, and for attaching the certification to the application in Part IV, C. 3. d. of this RFA.

i. Recipients of funds under a program established under section 1417(b) of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3152(b)), including: (1) 1890 Institution Teaching, Research, and Extension Capacity Building Grants Program; (2) Higher Education Challenge Grants Program; (3) Higher Education Multicultural Scholars Program; and (4) Food and Agricultural Sciences National Needs Graduate and Postgraduate Fellowship Grants Program.

A proposal submitted in response to this RFA may indicate that the work will be completed by multiple entities as a collaborative partnership. All partners must have a substantial involvement in the project throughout the life of the project. If a partnership among multiple entities is proposed, the proposal must clearly identify the following:

1) A narrative of each entity’s clearly established role in the project;

2) How each entity involved as a partner on the project will contribute to execution of project objectives, determination of experimental design, development of the project work plan and time table, and submission of collaborative, timely reports; and

3) A comprehensive project budget…