20190528 Bayelsa Program NOFO FINAL.docx

United States Department of State Notice Funding Opportunity for Organizations Qualified Under Request for Statements of Interest and Capacity – Opportunity Number SFOP0005923 Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO)

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY OVERVIEW

Catalog of Federal Domestic

Type of Applicant: Organizations only.

Number of Applications: One (1) per applicant organization

This funding opportunity is posted on SAMS Domestic and may be amended. Answers to questions from potential applicants will be posted as an attachment to this NOFO. Applicants should regularly check the websites for the most recent information pertaining to this NOFO. Department of State bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes associated with electronic submissions Incomplete application packages will not be considered. E-mailed, faxed or mailed documents will NOT be considered.

Applicants must provide a Unique Entity Identifier, or Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS), when submitting application in response to this NOFO.

SAM.gov registration (www.sam.gov) is required. Applicants that do not have a valid DUNS number and completed www.sam.gov registration will NOT be eligible for consideration.

It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application package has been received in SAMS Domestic in its entirety. Incomplete applications will be considered ineligible. Individual e-mailed or faxed documents will not be considered.

The decision for the final eligibility and award determination rests with the Grants Officer.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CSO’s mission is to anticipate, prevent, and respond to conflict that undermines U.S. national interests. The bureau implements this mission in two complementary ways: through data-driven analysis and forward deploying stabilization advisors to conflict zones. The objective is to inform U.S. strategy, policy, and programs on conflict prevention and stabilization.

CSO announces a full and open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for programs addressing electoral violence in Bayelsa State, Nigeria.

Pending availability of funds and satisfactory performance, including compliance with the award’s terms and conditions (bureau) may consider adding funds to the award. (Bureau) intends to support one (1) award as a result of this NOFO.

Department of State reserves the right to fund any or none of the proposals submitted and reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase the budget in accordance with the needs of the project and the availability of funds.

The Federal award signed by the State Department Grants Officer is the only authorizing document.

This NOFO consists of the Overview and Executive Summary, plus the following sections:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

BACKGROUND

Nigeria’s history of electoral violence spans political party affiliation, and candidates at all levels use violence as a tool for political gain. The recent February 2019 general elections saw violence breakout in the Niger Delta region, increasing the likelihood for violence during Bayelsa State’s off-cycle gubernatorial election. Two factors indicate that Bayelsa is at high risk of electoral violence in the state elections scheduled for December 2019: past irregularities forced Bayelsa to delay polling, pushing it out of the standard state electoral schedule, and Amnesty International reported violence prior to the February 2019 national election. “Cults,” or gangs with a religious dynamic, and other violent groups have historically carried out election violence in Bayelsa to address political grievances related to the lack of legitimate employment opportunities. These cults appeal to many youth and community members who feel disenchanted by the government’s inability to provide basic services, and seek opportunities for a better life.

Bayelsa State is an oil hub and epicenter of oil bunkering, pipeline attacks, and electoral violence. Any serious threat to Bayelsa’s stability could disrupt over a billion dollars of U.S. oil industry revenue and harm Nigeria’s economy. The U.S. government is interested in working with local communities to understand, prevent, and mitigate the risk of electoral interference in Bayelsa State so that cults and other violent groups are unable to threaten U.S. interests, and those of the host country. This program would fall under CSO’s Political Instability line of effort.

Effective electoral interference prevention programs require a locally-nuanced understanding of the dynamics surrounding elections. Analysis suggests that Bayelsa communities would benefit from resilience and peacebuilding trainings that increase the awareness of negative effects of illicit cult activities and provide alternative ways for youth to engage.

PROJECT GOAL

The goal of the program is to reduce incidences of violence committed by cults in the period surrounding the November 2019 elections, by increasing community resilience in high risk areas.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES & ACTIVITIES

The following objectives and activities are illustrative. The program may include, but is not limited to, the following objectives:

Objective 1: Increase marginalized youth and influential female family member engagement in neighborhoods with high levels of cult activity, to strengthen community resilience and motivation to reduce high rates of violence in the pre and post-election periods. Activities could include, but are not limited to:

· Conducting meetings with community leaders and/or their families to ensure coordination in the pre-election period.

· Convening community, peer group, and government forums to share and increase awareness of risks.

· Promoting nonviolence within communities leading up to the elections, during, and after the elections.

Objective 2: Build the capacity of youth and their communities to identify and mitigate the risks of electoral interference through targeted programming. Activities could include, but are not limited to:

· Training of community leaders and local government actors in peacebuilding and community resilience.

· Educating young men and the women who influence them on the ills of violence and illicit activity in Bayelsa, including environmental degradation and the weakening of government institutions.

· Identifying local youth to participate in peacebuilding, community resilience, and election observation trainings.

· Training citizens to conduct election observation.

· Supporting local communities to establish early warning and early response networks to mitigate violence.

PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS

Target groups – Youth who are members of or at risk of recruitment by violent groups that carry out illicit activities, such as participating in electoral violence, either for pay or to address perceived injustices. Communities, and in particular the mothers and/or wives, who have influence over those recruited into cults or other violent groups.

Geographic focus – Areas in Bayelsa State with a history of cult violence around elections.

Measuring Impact – After selection of an implementer, CSO will work with them to develop and approve a monitoring plan which will establish indicators and the qualitative and quantitative data collection tools to be used during the program. With guidance from CSO, the implementer will establish an initial baseline that will be used to measure outcome-level changes for each objective.

Partnerships – The implementer will be responsible for identifying key actors, partnering with these individuals and organizations, and facilitating cooperation across agencies and organizations. The implementer is encouraged to coordinate with national and local bodies when appropriate. The implementer must prioritize coordination with existing U.S.-funded programs and make every effort to ensure optimal use of resources and continuous de-confliction of efforts.

Enhancing Women’s Role – Per the Women Peace and Security Act of 2017, the United States is committed to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution. This includes promoting the physical safety of women and girls, collecting and analyzing gender data for the purpose of developing and enhancing early warning systems for conflict and violence, and integrating the perspectives and interests of affected women into conflict-prevention activities and strategies.

Risk Mitigation – Implementers are encouraged to develop risk mitigation strategies to ensure the safety of implementing staff, communities, and program beneficiaries.

II. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION

CSO expects to award one cooperative agreement based on this NOFO and in an amount not to exceed the total ceiling amount of $296,250. The period of performance is 12 months with an anticipated start date of September 01, 2019. CSO may extend the award contingent on CSO priorities, good performance of the recipient, Department of State management approval, and funding availability.

It is Department of State policy that English is the official language and U.S. dollar is the controlling currency. Proposal and related supporting documents must be English and accompanying budget in U.S. dollars.

Eligible applications will be evaluated by an independent review panel consisting of subject matter experts from other DOS bureaus/or offices or other USG agencies.

Cooperative Agreement: This cooperative agreement will include substantial involvement by CSO. For example, CSO will work closely with successful applicants to advise on revisions to the theory-of-change (TOC), design, indicators, and data collection instruments, working to ensure an approach that benefits the wider conflict community. Additionally, CSO seeks to ensure that qualitative and quantitative information from the program is shared with CSO in ways that can feed into the broader analysis of conflict dynamics at subnational, national, and regional levels. As a result, CSO will work with the successful applicants to develop a documentation and reporting plan that meets those needs.

Due to the sensitive political and security-related nature electoral violence (EV) work, including potential for targeting of program participants by violent actors and government-imposed limitations on EV-related research and activities, any decisions to change the scope or purpose of activities in the statement of work, to bring in other organizations to assist with activities and to engage with media will be made in consultation with CSO, Embassy Abuja, Consulate General Lagos, and with Host Nation authorities as appropriate. CSO also expects to assist with the development of in-country partners who would be interested and capable of continuing this effort beyond the duration of the cooperative agreement.

Issuance of the solicitation does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government. CSO reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase application budgets in accordance with program evaluation requirements. In the event of an award, CSO reserves the right to terminate the agreement in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and the Department of State Standard Terms and Conditions. Specifically, an award may be terminated if the Recipient is not meeting the objectives of the program or if the program no longer is consistent with the national security or foreign policy interest of the United States.

All applicants should be familiar with OMB Circular 2 CFR Part 200.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

Applicant must have acute awareness of conflict-related sensitivities in Nigeria, through prior work in Nigeria or through thematic expertise. Applicants are encouraged to partner with relevant organizations with the ability to execute such programming throughout Nigeria.

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information and complete instructions on how to apply to this NOFO, including information on proposal’s content and formatting. Please use both the PSI and the NOFO to ensure that the proposal submission is in full compliance with the requirements. Proposal submissions that do not meet all of the requirements outlined in the NOFO and PSI will NOT be considered.

PROPOSAL NARRATIVE

The Proposal Narrative is a key part of the application. The Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten pages, single-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman font in Microsoft Word, at least one-inch margins) should be organized into the following five components:

Executive Summary:

· A succinct one-page summary containing information that the applicant believes best represents its proposed program and includes: the name and contact information for the program’s main point of contact; the program’s goal and objectives; program’s approach and methodology; and program’s expected outcomes.

Approach and Methodology:

· Conflict/Context Analysis: Successful applications under this funding opportunity will describe an approach based on a context and conflict analysis that leads to a concrete program change hypothesis. In this section, please provide background on the conflict/context in which the proposed program will be operating.

· Gender Analysis of Conflict: Proposals should also include a gender analysis of conflict to address how the program will identify the relevance of gender norms and power relations in Nigerian electoral violence. This includes institutional practices, cultural norms, gender roles, access to and control over assets and resources, and patterns of decision-making. The gender analysis should present how gender norms interact with other factors to drive or mitigate conflict, the differential impact of conflict on women and men, and an understanding of the roles of women and men in conflict and peacebuilding. Refer to the CSO Gender Analysis of Conflict template for sample questions.

· Program Goal and Objectives: In this section, please fully explain the program’s goal and objectives. The overarching goal statement should be visionary in nature, and outline what the overall activities and objectives should be building towards. It is important that the program goal aligns with (CSO/Department/U.S. government) policy. The objectives of the program should describe where you expect to be by the end of your program. The objectives should be measureable, results-focused, and achievable in within the timeframe of the program.

· Activities: All activities should be clearly developed and sufficiently detailed to understand the resource and time requirements, and how they contribute to the objectives and goal. Please identify: target areas for activities; target participant groups or selection criteria for participants; how the program will engage relevant stakeholders, including women; and local partners as appropriate, among other pertinent details. If partners are included, the narrative should clearly describe the division of labor between the direct applicant and partners.

· Theory of Change: Provide a theory of change for your program that elaborates explicit causal connections between the program’s activities, key intermediate outcomes, objectives, and the long-term goal. Generally, this should involve a chain of “if…then…because…” statements, or something similar. The program theory of change should apply and contextualize any relevant general theory about how this type of intervention works, and how to avoid negative outcomes. It should specify any key assumptions about the context (including relevant gender dynamics), the program design, or companion interventions that are required for success. It should cogently establish that the activities can reasonably be expected to be sufficient in kind, amount and timing with the resources applied, in this context. In addition, briefly explain how the program theory of change interacts with the broader system of conflict interventions by the U.S. government and others. A useful resource for guidance on developing theories of change is USAID’s Theories and Indicators of Change (THINC).

· Integration of Target Groups: It is likely that you will identify groups of individuals who will need special consideration as you develop your program. Please address how you will incorporate these target groups in your planned activities. These groups may include at-risk populations, such as women, ethnic and/or religious minorities, persons with disabilities, or youth.

Implementation Plan

· Resources, Key Steps and Timeline for Activities (including sequential logic): Describe the proposed activities and how they will achieve the objectives and goal of this program. In doing so, this section should demonstrate how the proposed activities build upon one another and are logically sequenced to achieve the desired outcomes, based on the proposed approach and methodology. The application must identify and address gaps in current responses to the conflict (as identified in the context and conflict analysis), including any gender dynamics that currently, or have the potential to, exacerbate or mitigate conflict . The applicant must submit an illustrative first year activity plan, which sets out a realistic outline of tasks and deliverables, anticipated time frames, challenges, opportunities and due dates, and persons responsible for achieving each task. This narrative description will be complemented by a Gantt chart in the Additional Attachments.

· Do No Harm: List any significant risks of harm to implementers, participants, beneficiaries or their communities, or of exacerbating conflict or creating new conflicts, which may result from this program. Based on your gender analysis, include specific risks to women and girls. Consider how resources or skills provided might be misused, create grievances among non-recipients, or cause key actors to react in harmful ways. Explain how these risks will be minimized.

· Local Engagement and Sustainability: This section must demonstrate a clear understanding of the role that local organizations and institutions are playing or can play in conflict mitigation and peacebuilding. The conflict analysis and the program design should reflect local perspectives, and explain how the program will engage with local partners, including women-led organizations, throughout its lifecycle. Strong proposals will also describe strategies to sustain the activities beyond CSO funding and contribute to building the capacity of communities to address their own concerns in the future. One way this can be done is through sub grants to local organizations, although that is not a requirement; capacity-building and sustainment can be achieved indirectly as well. The proposal should describe how the applicant will work with local entities to build their organizational and technical capacities. Applicants may submit signed Letters of Intent from organizations that will participate in the program. Letters of Intent should address the willingness of partner organizations to participate in the effort, and the understanding all parties have as to their unique roles and responsibilities in terms of the proposed program. In cases where an applicant (i.e., non-local) was not able to partner with a local organization or institution, does not consider it feasible to do so, or does not consider it in the program’s best interest, the applicant must clearly explain the rationale.

Institutional Capabilities and Past Performance

· Organization: Provide a description of the applicant organization – including its general purpose, goals, annual budget (including funding sources), and major past and current activities and programs undertaken.

· Relevant Programmatic and Thematic Experience: Applications should demonstrate the ability to develop and implement programs of the kind outlined in this proposal. Previous experience designing and implementing similar programs is highly desirable and should be detailed and documented in the application. Applicants should demonstrate how organizational resources, capabilities, and experience, and lessons learned from literature on this type of endeavor, will enable the applicant to achieve the grant’s stated objectives.

· Regional/Country Experience: Applicants should specify relevant experience in the country(ies) identified in the proposal, or in similar situations in other countries. Applicants should be able to legally operate in the country where they propose to work. Identify in-country partners; the successful applicant will already have in place at least one partnership with regional institutions and/or organizations. Specify the expertise that each partner brings.

· Key Program Staff: Applications should highlight key staff, their positions, percentage of time devoted to this program, and management structure for the program. The resumes of key staff should highlight relevant educational and field experience and be included as an appendix (see additional attachments below). The person(s) principally responsible for M&E design and technical oversight should be included. The resumes should be no more than two pages and should all follow a consistent format. The applicant should also clarify roles for local partners and staff.

Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan:

· CSO considers monitoring to be essential for responsible program management. Successful applicants will submit a draft monitoring plan within 15 days of award notification. After CSO review, a final monitoring plan must be submitted within 30 days of the award notification.

· For the purposes of the application, please submit a notional logic model/PMP (use template provided). This must include notional indicators at each of the following levels: objective, intermediate outcome, and output. Provide an explanation if data will not be disaggregated by sex. Also, describe how any risks of harm listed above will be monitored. In addition, use this section to describe the applicant’s approach to monitoring and evaluation and why this approach is appropriate for this program and context. This may include the type of data you may collect (qualitative and/or quantitative). If possible, include applicable State Department standard gender indicators (see attachment). Also, describe the timing of data collection and analysis and how this information will inform midstream program management decision-making.

· Please describe the resources needed to implement your M&E plan and address these in your budget. In most cases, CSO will fund program evaluations separately. If you want to propose including specific monitoring and evaluation activities in the program budget (outside of monitoring, which is required), please specify whether you are requesting funds for a baseline, mid-term and/or final evaluation. Additionally, please elaborate on the type of evaluation (quasi-experimental, developmental, outcome harvesting, process tracing, etc.).

ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENTS AND BUDGET COMPONENTS

Additional attachments listed below, budget components, and the SF-424s are not part of the proposal narrative and do not count as part of the 10-page limit for the proposal narrative.

Additional Attachments:

· Logic Model/PMP: The logic model/PMP should include theories of change; goal and objectives; activities; output and outcome indicators; data collection tools; key definitions and risks and assumptions.

· Timeline: The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout (not to exceed one [1] page). Please use the GANTT chart template provided.

· Key Personnel: Please include CVs of key personnel that highlight relevant professional experience (not to exceed two [2] pages each).

· Past Performance References (minimum of 3): When past performance information is present, applicants shall furnish award numbers and other details with contact information for no more than three similar programs funded over the past three years by the State Department, or any other government entity or third party source. The details shall include the following: name of the organization or agency which funded the program(s), award number, point of contact‘s name, mailing address, email address and phone number, and the overall dollar value of the program. The applicant must include information on any problems encountered, and the applicant’s corrective action(s). Applicants must not provide general information on their performance. Applicants may describe any quality awards or certificates that indicate exceptional capacity to conduct the program described in this NOFO. Please use the PPR template provided.

· Data Collection and Reporting Plan: Describe how you will collect and share both qualitative and quantitative information from various sources, through your research, activities, and or monitoring efforts. As dynamics on the ground in this region are constantly evolving, CSO seeks an implementer capable of providing frequent and nuanced information.

Budget Components:

· Budget Appropriateness: Budgeted items are necessary and sufficient to the achievement of the goal, objectives, activities and program monitoring as presented in the proposal. This should consist of both an Excel budget breakdown and a budget narrative attached as an annex. The budget narrative must include clear, substantive explanations for each line-item and how the amounts were derived, as well as the source and description of all cost-share offered. Refer to the Excel Budget Template for guidance on compiling a budget and associated budget narrative.

· Cost-effectiveness: The Department of State must determine that the costs paid for this award are reasonable, allowable, and allocable to the proposed program activities. This will consist of a review of the Budget to determine if the overall costs are realistic for the work to be performed, if the costs reflect the applicant’s understanding of the allowable cost principles established by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 2 CFR 200 (OMB Circular A-122), and if the costs are consistent with the program narrative. Programs should seek to produce innovative and cost-effective outcomes that reach more beneficiaries. As per Section C2 of 2 CFR 200, cost-share is not required, but funding contributed by the applicant and other partners shows a commitment to the success of the program. Applicants may incorporate cost-share through leveraging existing programs, partnering, and/or providing in-kind goods and services.

Include a PDF file copy of your organization’s most recent program (A-133 /2 CFR 200) audit, if applicable. If not, please include a copy of your most recent independent audit, if available.

V. APPLICATION EVALUATION AND SCORING

The U.S. government may issue an award resulting from this NOFO to the responsible applicant whose application is the most responsive to the goals and objectives set forth in this NOFO. The U.S. government may (a) reject any or all applications, and/or (b) waive informalities and minor irregularities in applications received.

The U.S. government may make an award on the basis of initial applications received without discussion or negotiations. Therefore, applications should contain the applicant’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.

U.S. government also reserves the right, but is not obliged, to enter into discussions with an applicant in order to obtain clarification, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the program’s description, budget, or other aspects of an application.

Applicants should note that the following criteria will serve as a standard against which all applications will be evaluated. Department of State will issue an award to the applicant whose proposal represents the best value to the U.S. Government on the basis of technical merit, efficient use of USG funds, and satisfactory organizational capacity. In addition, each application will be evaluated and scored on the Proposal Components using a 100-point scale by a peer review committee of Department of State.

CSO will conduct a merit review of all eligible applications as outlined in this NOFO. Applications will be reviewed by an independent review panel consisting of qualified representatives from other DoS bureaus, offices, and Posts. Final approval resides with the CSO relevant programming office.

The point value for each section outlined below indicates its relative importance in the application review process. Evaluation values are based on five narrative components and two budget components.

Based on eligible applications that are responsive to the requirements outlined above, the review panel will use the following criteria when rating proposals:

Quality of Program Idea Total Possible = 25 points

· Responsive to the solicitation and appropriate in the country context (10 points)

· Clearly states theory of change (5)

· Establishes direct connection between proposed activities and the desired results (5)

· Exhibits originality, prioritizes innovation, but is feasible (5) Program Planning / Ability to Achieve Objectives Total Possible = 30 points

· Includes a clear articulation of how the proposed program activities contribute to the overall program objectives (5)

· Activities are developed and detailed. Objectives are clear, specific, attainable, measurable results-focused and placed in a reasonable time frame (4)

· Addresses need for flexibility and ability to adapt (4)

· Provides a comprehensive quarterly work plan for program activities (3)

· Describes the division of labor among the direct applicant, any partners, and any potential sub-grantees; addresses how the program will engage or obtain support from relevant stakeholders; and identifies local partners where appropriate (3)

· Includes contingency plans for potential difficulties in executing the original work plan (3)

· Demonstrates an institutional record of successful programs in the target country or content area (4)

· Provides a thoughtful and appropriately detailed Gender Analysis of Conflict, and the identified dynamics are considered and integrated across activities and indicators (3) Cost Effectiveness Total Possible = 15 points

· Explains and justifies overhead and administration costs of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria. (5)

· All budget items are necessary, appropriate and linked to program objectives and demonstrate efficient use of U.S. Government funds (10)

· Note: Cost share is not required. Applicants may offer cost share, but cost share will not be considered or factored in when proposals are reviewed.

Program Monitoring and Evaluation Total Possible = 20 points The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan includes:

· Explains how monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for monitoring and evaluation activities (5)

· Robust M&E framework includes output- and outcome-based performance indicators for each program objective with baselines and (yearly and cumulative) targets; data collection tools; data sources; types of data disaggregation, including by sex, if applicable; and frequency of monitoring and evaluation (15) Multiplier Effect / Sustainability of Impact Total Possible = 10 points

· Clearly delineates how elements of the program will have a multiplier effect (5)

· Clearly delineates how impact will be sustainable beyond the life of the grant (5)

VI. FEDERAL AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION:

Issuance of this NOFO does not constitute a commitment on the part of the Department of State to issue an award nor does it commit the U.S. Government to pay for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of an application. Furthermore, award cannot be issued until funds have been fully appropriated, allocated, and committed through internal DOS procedures. While it is anticipated that these procedures will be successfully completed, potential applicants are hereby notified of these requirements. All preparation and submission costs are at the applicant’s expense.

Pursuant to 2 CFR 200.400 g, it is U.S. Department of State policy not to award profit under assistance instruments.

2 CFR §200.501 requires domestic/US non-federal entities that expend $750,000, or more, in federal assistance during organization’s fiscal year to have a single or program-specific audit conducted for that year. In addition, the entity must report the collected audit data elements on the form SF-SAC and submit it to the FAC. Any findings such as material weaknesses, significant deficiencies, or material noncompliance are reported on the SF-SAC.

The Federal award signed by the Grants Officer is the only authorizing document.

Reporting Requirements Recipients will, at a minimum, be required to submit Quarterly Progress Reports and Quarterly Financial Reports (SF-425) describing key activities undertaken during the preceding month towards accomplishment of the stated objectives. Progress Reports will compare actual to planned performance and indicate the progress made in accomplishing each assistance award task/goal noted in the grant agreement and will contain analysis and summary of findings, both quantitative and qualitative, for key indicators. Financial Reports will provide a means of monitoring expenditures and comparing costs incurred with progress. In difficult environments may require additional reporting and briefings in order to monitor program developments. Applicants should account for this in their M&E staffing plans.

NOTE: It is Department’s of State policy that English is the official language NOTE: It is Department of State policy that English is the official language of all documents. If reports or any supporting documents are provided in both English and a foreign language, it must be stated in each version that the English language version is the controlling version.

U.S. dollar is the controlling currency.

Mandatory Disclosures (2 CFR 200.113) The non-federal entity or applicant for a federal award must disclose, in a timely manner, in writing to the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity all violations of federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the federal award. Non-federal entities that have received a Federal award including the term and condition outlined in Appendix XII of the 2 CFR 200—Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters are required to report certain civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings to SAM. Failure to make required disclosures can result in any of the remedies described in §200.338 Remedies for noncompliance, including suspension or debarment.

Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) A federal awarding agency, prior to making a federal award will review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently FAPIIS) (see 41 U.S.C. 2313). Applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM and comment on any information about itself that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through www.sam.gov. Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance.

Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in §200.205 Federal awarding agency review of risk posed by applicants.

Other Information Applicant organizations must demonstrate adherence to equal opportunity employment practices and commitment to non-discrimination with respect to beneficiaries. Non-discrimination includes equal treatment without regard to race, religion, ethnicity, gender, and political affiliation. Applicants are reminded that U.S. Executive Orders and U.S. law prohibits transactions with or support to individuals or organizations associated with terrorism.

Proposals that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated to terrorist organization or narcotics trafficker, including elected members of government, will NOT be considered. This provision must be included in any sub‐awards/sub-contracts issued under this award.

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Any prospective applicant desiring an explanation or interpretation of this NOFO must request it in writing by the deadline for questions specified in the cover letter to allow a reply to reach all prospective applicants before the submission of their applications. Any information given to a prospective applicant concerning this NOFO will be furnished promptly to all other prospective applicants as a Questions and Answers attachment to this NOFO, if that information is necessary in submitting applications or if the lack of it would be prejudicial to any other prospective applicants.

Any questions concerning this NOFO must be submitted in writing by email to:

U.S. Department of State Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) c/o Jean Phillipson PhillipsonJN@state.gov

(202) 472-8541