NOFO Q&A (OFOP0003355) 8-24-2026.pdf

Questions and Answers for

Kenya: Crowd Control and Less-Than-Lethal Riot Response Training

OFOP0003355

Date: August 24, 2026

Question 1, 2, and 3:

Section C lists six eligible applicant types, including both U.S.-based and foreign-based for-profit organizations. The same section then states that applicants must also meet the following requirement to be eligible: "Current registration under the Public Benefit Organizations (PBO) Act

2013."

That requirement cannot be met by any for-profit entity. The PBO Act replaced the NGO

Coordination Act of 1990 and regulates Kenya's nonprofit sector specifically. The Act defines a public benefit organization as non-profit making, and it further provides that an organization registered under any other law in Kenya may not be registered under the PBO Act while that registration subsists. A U.S. for-profit firm cannot register as a PBO, and neither can a Kenyan branch or subsidiary of one. Registration under the Companies Act 2015 forecloses PBO status rather than supporting it.

As written, then, Section C names for-profit organizations as eligible and simultaneously imposes a condition none of them can satisfy. Two other parts of the NOFO suggest the intent was to admit for-profit applicants. Appendix C sets out cost principles specifically for U.S. and foreign for-profit entities under FAR 48 CFR Part 31, including the prohibition on profit and fee, which would serve no purpose if for-profits were excluded. Section D also asks applicants to confirm whether the organization is a registered business entity in the target country, which is a question directed at commercial entities

The PBO clause may be residual language carried over from a prior INL Kenya solicitation limited to nonprofit applicants. Could you confirm that the PBO requirement applies only to applicant types for which registration is legally available would resolve it and would let qualified U.S. firms compete on the merits?

INL Response:

The PBO Act requirement is only relevant for NGOs, and is not applicable to for-profit companies, as they are unable to register under the PBO Act. Both non-profit organizations and for-profit organizations are eligible to apply for this opportunity.

Question 4:

In-country business registration. Section D asks applicants to confirm whether the organization is a registered business entity within Kenya. Is Kenyan legal registration a condition of eligibility or award for a foreign applicant, or is it a disclosure item only? If it is a condition, is it required at the application stage or prior to award?

Kenya requires business registration under the Companies Act, Part XXXVII – Foreign

Companies, Section 974. This is required prior to award.

Question 5:

Less-than-lethal training consumables and munitions. The NOFO prohibits procurement of less-than-lethal weapon systems or munitions and directs that strategies rely on resources currently available to Kenyan law enforcement. For the delivery of hands-on training, may the budget include consumable training aids and inert, marking, or training-grade munitions (e.g., non-hazardous marking rounds or training-grade OC/CS substitutes) used solely for instruction, or are all munitions — including inert training rounds — excluded?

Consumable equipment and munitions for training purposes may be procured under this award but must be the same or similar equipment and munitions as Kenyan law enforcement currently uses and must be pre-approved by INL writing prior to procurement.

Question 6:

Use of existing Kenyan police inventory in training. May hands-on instruction incorporate the less-than-lethal systems already held in National Police Service inventory?

Yes, this will depend on sufficient and available training supplies in the NPS inventory.

Question 7:

Target scale of the training effort. Does INL have a target number of law enforcement personnel and/or units to be trained, or an expected number of counties/sub-counties, that applicants should design toward — or is the scale left to the applicant's proposed approach and needs assessment?

This will be determined jointly with NPS at the post award phase.

Question 8:

Selection of target units and counties. The NOFO states that INL anticipates a role in the selection of targeted units and counties/sub-counties. At the application stage, should applicants propose specific NPS units, counties, and sub-counties, or design around selection criteria and finalize the specific targets jointly with INL after award? Does INL have any preferred units in mind, or know of any units that should be specifically excluded from consideration due to Leahy vetting challenges or other disqualifications?

Applicants can propose specific NPS units, counties and sub counties and propose selection criteria. Final unit selection criteria will be developed between INL, the award recipient, and NPS.

Besides the stated units in the NOFO, INL neither has preferred units nor knowledge of units to be excluded.

Question 9:

Prior or existing related programming. Has INL or another U.S. Government entity previously funded crowd control, public order management, or less-than-lethal training for the National Police

Service? If so, are there prior assessments, lessons learned, or identified gaps that applicants should build upon in order to avoid duplication of services?

There are neither prior assessments, lessons nor identified gaps from previous USG funded programs relevant to this NOFO.

Question 10:

Receiving-state counterpart for the letter of support and MOU. Section D requires a letter of support from the receiving state and prefers an MOU. Who is the intended receiving-state counterpart — the National Police Service, the Ministry of Interior and National Administration, or another entity? Is a single letter sufficient, or is buy-in expected at multiple levels (e.g., NPS leadership and the police academies referenced for institutionalization)?

The intended receiving-state counterpart is the National Police Service. A single letter from NPS is sufficient.

Question 11:

Documentation for permitted protective equipment. For the protective equipment the NOFO permits (e.g., body armor, shields, helmets, gas masks), what import/export licensing documentation does INL expect, and at what stage (application versus implementation)?

Per the NOFO, written documentation of current licenses or other applicable import/export requirements for any proposed protective equipment (e.g., body armor, shields, helmets, gloves, gas masks) must be included in the proposal at the time of submission. This is a proposal content requirement, not a post-award or pre-implementation deliverable.

Question 12:

Eligibility states that for profit companies may apply however the guidance is also that applicants must have current registration under the Public Benefit Organizations (PBO) Act 2013. As for-profit companies cannot register under this act can you confirm that this registration requirement is not applicable to for profit companies and that for profit companies may indeed apply.

Repeats question 1. The PBO Act requirement is only relevant for NGOs, and is not applicable to for-profit companies, as they are unable to register under the PBO Act. Both non-profit organizations and for-profit organizations are eligible to apply for this opportunity.

Question 13:

Can you confirm if the 25 pages for the proposal narrative also includes the PMP, project risk analysis and timeline or not.

The PMP, project risk analysis and timeline are not included in the 25-page proposal narrative page limit.

Question 14:

Can a host government entity participate as a government beneficiary and/or technical partner under this funding opportunity, notwithstanding the stated eligibility requirements for applicants?

Host Government entities are not eligible to apply as a prime recipient, as this type of entity does not fall within the listed applicant categories (U.S./foreign-based NGOs, educational institutions, or for-profit organizations). The host government entity may benefit from the programming conducted under this Notice of Funding Opportunity.

Question 15:

Does INL already have preferred or pre-identified eligible implementing partners through whom the proposed programme will be delivered in Kenya?

No. This is a publicly posted, competitive funding opportunity, and INL has not pre-identified or designated any preferred implementing partner for this program. All eligible applicants who meet the criteria outlined in the NOFO are encouraged to apply, and applications will be evaluated on a fair and competitive basis in accordance with the stated review criteria.

Question 16:

If no implementing partner has been pre-identified, may a government entity identify an eligible international organisation, educational institution, or NGO to jointly develop and submit a proposal with APS as the government technical and beneficiary partner?

or for-profit organizations). The host government entity may benefit from the programming conducted under this Notice of Funding Opportunity.

Question 17:

What documentation or formal expression of commitment would INL require from the Host

Government entity to demonstrate its institutional support, technical capacity, and readiness to participate in the proposed programme?

or for-profit organizations). A letter of support from the benefiting Service(s) or unit is welcome.

Question 18:

Organization, Staff and Partners states that a letter of support from the receiving state is required, and memorandums of understanding (MOUs) between the applicant and the receiving state lead agency is preferred. Can you confirm whether a) this is required for the lead organisation or can be provided by its partner(s); and b) whether demonstrating ability to secure letter of support /

MoU upon contract signature is acceptable.

The prime applicant must provide this information. The proposed partners can provide a letter of support or other documentation to the prime applicant who will include that documentation with their application.

Question 19:

Are the details on the "Organization, Staff and Partners" starting on NOFO p11 included in the 25 page limit, e.g. biographical info on vendor, key personnel, letters of support, etc?

No, the organization, staff and partners are not included in the 25-page proposal narrative limit.

Question 20:

Are the details on "Applicant Management Capabilities" starting on NOFO p13 included in the 25 page limit, e.g. vendor History of USG Federal Assistance Awards, FY26 INL Applicant Pre-

Award Risk Survey, Organizational Audit?

No, the "Applicant Management Capabilities" is not included in the 25-page proposal narrative limit.

Question 21:

Are the Risk Assessment and M&E pieces included in the 25-page limit?

No, the Risk Assessment and M&E pieces are included in the 25-page proposal narrative limit.

Question 22:

The NOFO lists foreign-based NGOs, educational institutions and for-profit organizations as eligible applicants but also requires current registration under Kenya’s PBO Act 2013. Could INL clarify whether a government-affiliated national training institution based in Kenya, established under the Kenya Defence Forces Act, and not registered as a PBO, is eligible to apply as the prime applicant?

NGOs in Kenya must be registered under the PBO to apply as the prime applicant. Based on the above information. Government-affiliated national training institutions are not eligible to apply as the prime applicant.

Question 23:

Is current PBO Act 2013 registration an eligibility requirement for all prime applicants, including

Kenyan public institutions, or is it intended specifically for NGO/non-governmental applicants?

PBO registration is an eligibility requirement for all not-for-profit institutions/NGOs, whether

U.S., or foreign based. Kenyan government/public institutions are not eligible to apply.

Question 24:

If it is not eligible as a prime applicant due to the PBO requirement, would a government-affiliated national training institution be eligible to participate as a sub-recipient or consortium/technical partner under an eligible organization, while implementing substantial programme activities?

A government-affiliated national training institution could be a sub-recipient or technical partner.

Question 25:

Would a Kenyan government institution be eligible to serve as the prime applicant, or must the prime applicant be one of the organisational categories specifically listed in Section C?

Host Government entities are not be eligible to apply as a prime recipient, as this type of entity does not fall within the listed applicant categories (U.S./foreign-based NGOs, educational institutions, or for-profit organizations).

Question 26:

Would INL consider a partnership between an eligible prime organisation/ a government-affiliated national training institution and the National Police Service, with the government-affiliated national training institution leading curriculum development, training, human-rights integration, scenario-based learning, monitoring and institutionalization, and NPS providing operational policing expertise and access to the targeted units?

An eligible prime organization is expected to work with the National Police Service.

Question 27:

At the application stage, what form of government commitment is required would a formal NPS

Letter of Support be sufficient, or does INL require an MOU or other formal agreement?

A letter of support is sufficient.

Question 28:

To what extent does INL expect proposals to incorporate human rights, civilian protection, accountability, gender considerations, and international standards governing the use of force within the curriculum and training program?

INL expects proposals to incorporate civilian protection and international standards governing the use of force within the training program. Human rights and gender considerations are not required.

Question 29:

Is there a previous (recent) Assessment of the National Police Service capabilities? If so, will this assessment available to the vendors prior or after the award?

There are no previous INL assessments of the NPS capabilities relevant to this NOFO.

Question 30:

Will an inventory of existing less-lethal equipment and resources be provided before or after award?

An inventory of existing less than lethal equipment will be provided after the award.

Question 31:

Past protests occurred in multiple counties outside Nairobi, should the proposal cover travel, lodging, etc. for the trainers to these locations or expect the trainers or trainees to attend training in a central location?

Both training models are valid. Applications should be designed for maximum impact while remaining cost effective.

Question 32:

INL has no standardized indicators for reporting crowd control outcomes. The most applicable indicators address Specialized Tactical Units (STUs) that engage in targeted enforcement operations related to drugs, customs, and high value targets. Should the proposed Change Map and

PIRS provide illustrative custom indicators, or only utilize standard INL indicators?

Given the absence of standardized indicators, custom indicators reflecting the specific project are encouraged.

Question 33:

Could INL clarify the expected scope of training in less-than-lethal riot response, particularly the distinction between training on lawful/proportionate use of existing equipment and techniques and any practical tactical training involving such equipment? This is because the NOFO expressly says proposals may not include procurement of less-than-lethal weapon systems or munitions, although protective equipment may be proposed.

The activities and programming provided under the final award should leverage existing equipment and systems that the Government of Kenya can sustain and apply after the life of the project. This guidance is intended to avoid proposals that depend upon purchase of equipment at scale that cannot be completed under this award.

Question 34:

Will awardees be expected to use Kenyan police incident data to measure outcomes? If so, what data access does INL expect?

Kenyan Police Incident Data may be used to measure outcomes alongside other available data.

Sharing of relevant data would be a reasonable issue to address in a letter of support from the host nation.

Question 35:

If custom indicators are allowed, can they include reporting the outcomes of preventative patrol functions performed by STUs when they are not deployed for active crowd control?

Custom indicators are permitted.

Question 36:

Will the awardee be able/expected to assist INL Kenya in implementing the Performance

Monitoring Plan in INL's custom DevResults instance?

Yes.

Question 37:

The NOFO identifies a total funding availability of $1.6 million with an anticipated one to two awards. If an applicant proposes a comprehensive solution addressing all objectives described in the NOFO, but INL elects to make two awards, how does INL anticipate allocating the scope of work between recipients? For example, would work be divided by technical area, geographic area, target population, or another methodology?

The determination of whether multiple awardees will each be responsible for the full scope of work, or whether INL will assign specific components to individual recipients, is made by INL based on the outcomes of the technical/merit review and funding availability — not predetermined during the solicitation drafting stage. During technical review, the panel evaluates each proposal against the published evaluation criteria. Following that review, INL's award decision — including whether to make complementary or full-scope awards — is informed by the panel's findings, the comparative strengths of proposals, and programmatic/budgetary considerations.

Question 38

If multiple awards are made, will each award recipient be responsible for delivering all required strategies and deliverables, or will INL assign specific portions of the program to individual recipients?

The determination of whether multiple awardees will each be responsible for the full scope of work, or whether INL will assign specific components to individual recipients, is made by INL based on the outcomes of the technical/merit review and funding availability — not predetermined during the solicitation drafting stage. During technical review, the panel evaluates each proposal against the published evaluation criteria. Following that review, INL's award decision — including whether to make complementary or full-scope awards — is informed by the panel's findings, the comparative strengths of proposals, and programmatic/budgetary considerations.

Question 39:

Does INL anticipate that the selected recipient will conduct a comprehensive baseline institutional capability assessment prior to curriculum development and implementation, or has INL already completed an assessment that will be provided to the recipient?

An assessment is part of Program Objective One in the NOFO. The project is time limited.

Proposals should take the time available into account to ensure project design is reasonable.

Question 40:

Approximately how many personnel does INL anticipate participating during the initial 12-month project, broken down by commanders, supervisors, instructors, recruit trainees, and operational personnel?

This depends on the project design.

Question 41:

Will INL identify the participating General Service Unit (GSU), Rapid Deployment Unit, Sub-

County Quick Response Units, and Police Station Commanders after award, or should applicants identify proposed participants within their applications?

Applicants may identify proposed participating units, which would reflect reality of the constrained time and budget available. But the final participating units will be determined jointly between INL, the award recipient and NPS.

Question 42:

Will INL designate the training locations, or should applicants propose training venues and regional implementation plans?

Applicants are encouraged to propose training venues and regional implementation plans.

However, the final training venues and implementation plans will be developed jointly between

INL, the award recipient and NPS.

Question 43:

Will Government (US or Kenyan) facilities be available for classroom instruction and practical exercises, or should applicants’ budget commercial training facilities?

INL expects Kenyan Government facilities to be available for classroom instruction and practical exercises, which could be addressed in a letter of support from the host government.

Question 44:

Will any Government-furnished (US or Kenyan) public order equipment be made available during training events?

It is reasonable to anticipate Government of Kenya public order equipment will be made available during training events and that could be addressed in a letter of support from the host government.

Question 45:

Will INL assign the required Standard Indicators after award, or should applicants identify proposed indicators within their technical applications?

Applicants may identify proposed indicators within their technical applications; however, the final indicators will be developed jointly between INL and the award recipient and maybe revised within the life of the project.

Question 46:

Will Government (US or Kenyan) facilities be available for classroom instruction and practical exercises, or should applicants budget commercial training facilities?

INL expects Kenya Government facilities to be available for classroom instruction and practical exercises.

Question 47:

Will any Government-furnished (US or Kenyan) public order equipment be made available during training events?

Government of Kenya public order equipment will be made available during training events.

Question 48:

Will INL assign the required Standard Indicators after award, or should applicants identify proposed indicators within their technical applications?

Applicants may identify proposed indicators within their technical applications; however, the final indicators will be developed jointly between INL and the award recipient and maybe revised within the life of the project.

Question 49:

Are applicants expected to budget for consumable training materials (e.g., inert training aids, simulation equipment, personal protective equipment for exercises), or will these be provided by the Government (US or Kenyan)?

Applicants should budget for consumable training materials (e.g., inert training aids, simulation equipment, personal PPE).

Question 50:

The NOFO states that proposals may include protective equipment but should rely primarily on existing Kenyan law enforcement resources. Can INL identify the baseline protective equipment currently available to participating units to assist applicants in developing realistic training scenarios?

Baseline protective equipment is currently available to participating units.

Question 51:

The NOFO identifies U.S.-based for-profit organizations as eligible applicants but also states that applicants must have current registration under Kenya's Public Benefit Organizations (PBO) Act

2013. Please clarify whether a U.S.-based for-profit prime applicant is required to independently obtain PBO registration in Kenya prior to application or award, particularly where the applicant proposes a light-footprint implementation model consisting of U.S.-based program management, rotational technical personnel, and limited in-country coordination rather than establishing a permanent office or operating entity in Kenya.

Question 52:

May a U.S.-based for-profit prime applicant satisfy the Kenya registration requirement through an appropriately registered Kenyan partner or local entity that provides in-country administrative, logistical, transportation, office, and life-support services, while the U.S.-based prime retains responsibility for program management, technical direction, institutional assessment, training, monitoring and evaluation, and the majority of project scope and budget?

Question 53:

Timing of Registration:

If PBO registration is required specifically of the U.S.-based prime applicant, must that registration be completed at the time of application submission, or may the applicant provide evidence of registration or other required Kenyan legal authorization following selection and prior to commencement of in-country activities?

As stated in the NOFO, current registration under the PBO Act 2013 is listed as one of the eligibility requirements to apply — not a post-award or pre-implementation requirement. This means the U.S.-based prime applicant must hold current PBO registration at the time of application submission in order to be considered eligible. If the applicant does not hold this registration at submission, the application would not meet the stated eligibility criteria.

Question 54:

Please clarify whether the PBO Act registration requirement applies to U.S.-based for-profit applicants, given that Section C.1 expressly identifies U.S.-based for-profit organizations as eligible applicants. If PBO registration is not the applicable Kenyan registration mechanism for a foreign for-profit entity, what form of Kenyan registration, authorization, exemption, or other documentation will INL accept to satisfy this eligibility requirement?

Registration under the Companies act of Kenya will be required for foreign for-profit applicants.

Question 55:

Threshold for Local Registration:

Where a U.S.-based prime recipient does not establish a permanent office in Kenya and instead conducts program management from the United States, deploys technical personnel to Kenya on a rotational basis, utilizes temporary or serviced workspace, and contracts with an established

Kenyan entity for local logistics and administrative support, does INL consider the U.S.-based prime to be required to establish or register a separate legal presence in Kenya for purposes of this

NOFO?

The recipient of the award must be registered in Kenya through the Public Benefit Organization

Act process if a non-profit entity or through the Companies Act if a for-profit entity.

Question 56:

Will the award(s) be Deliverable based or Time and Materials?

The NOFO outlines the required deliverables.

Question 57:

What will be the involvement of INL besides monitoring the program. Will INL be coordinating any efforts with the Kenyan NPS or its subordinate units? Please advise on the level of support from INL.

The U.S. government role, as defined in a Cooperative Agreement, will include INL concurrence on selection of units, training plans, required Leahy vetting, and overall program oversight. INL may assist to address implementation related challenges as needed but the greater responsibility of coordinating the units within the NPS will be borne by the award recipient.

Question 58:

If Offerors traveled to Kenya prior to proposal submission, will INL assist in setting up meetings with the OIG or Commandants of the KPS or GSU?

INL cannot provide pre-award support to any prospective applicants as we do not have sufficient capacity to provide equal support to all potential applicants.

Question 60:

When will Offerors find out who the trainees will be? It states various groups within the two large groups GSU and the NPS, but who will determine and who will do the Leahy Vetting?

INL, the award recipient and NPS will jointly determine the trainees. Proposals that outline a strategy for training (selection of units/content) are encouraged. INL will conduct required Leahy

Vetting with biographic data provided by the grantee in coordination with the NPS.

Question 61:

Who are the other groups (General Service ie, Unit, Rapid Deployment Unit, Sub County Quick

Response Units, Police Station Commanders etc.)?

These are additional groups that also have riot response responsibility that may be identified for training.

Question 62:

Who determines where the training will be conducted? Are all the individual groups going to a specific location (eg - Kiganjo or Embakasi) to be trained?

Training locations will be jointly determined by INL, award recipient and NPS based on suitability, proximity/centrality to the trainee duty stations and availability.

Question 63:

Will they all be housed in one area and 100% dedicated for the duration of the training?

This depends upon the concurrence of the National Police Service. Dedication of personnel and housing could reasonably be addressed in a letter of support.

Question 64:

Will the Offerors be able to conduct a Training Needs Assessment (TNA) as part of the program delivery?

An assessment is part of Program Objective One in the NOFO.

Question 65:

Will officers be sent to take part in the training as an individual, or unit (e.g. - platoon), or whole company form different locations?

This will depend on availability of officers for training based on NPS operational demands.

Question 67:

Who will select the officers for training? What are the criteria? Is the Offeror to be part of the selection process?

INL Response

The grantee will be part of the final selection process along with INL and NPS.

Question 68:

Does INL - US Embassy Nairobi know what, if any, less-than-lethal weapons systems or munitions are being used and by what unit or element of the NPS?

The LTL weapons usually used by NPS are rubber bullets, teargas and watercannons.

Question 69:

Though not required, proposals may include procurement of protective equipment including, but not limited to, full-body armor, shields, helmets, gloves, and gas masks. However, the general strategy must be based on resources currently available to Kenyan law enforcement officers and proposals may not include procurement of less-than-lethal weapon systems or munitions.

Applicants must provide written documentation in their proposal of current licenses or other import/export requirements if applicable for all protective equipment proposed.

How do we know what less-than-lethal resources they have on hand unless an assessment has been completed? If we are to provide training on less-than-lethal options, including less-than-lethal weapons and munitions, we will need to provide training on those being provided or those on hand.

The main LTL weapons used by NPS are rubber bullets, teargas and watercannons. These are available in the NPS inventory. An assessment, as included as Program Objective One in the

NOFO could determine their adequacy.

Question 70:

If training is elected to be done at both academies, will they provide classrooms, gear etc. to be able to use for training in the classroom / gym / field training?

Provision of space such as classrooms and gear should be addressed with the National Police

Service and could be formalized in a letter of support from the receiving state.

Question 71:

Is submission via the Grants.gov portal? When will the "Apply" portion be activated?

As outlined in the NOFO:

Grants.gov

To submit an application to this NOFO, applicants must register in grants.gov.

• Go to www.grants.gov and select “Register” from the banner at the top of the page.

• This should be the last step of the entity registration processes, completed after obtaining a UEI number, NCAGE/CAGE Code (if applicable), and SAM.gov registration.

Help with grants.gov registrations and application submission:

• Go to the grant.gov support page at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html

• Call +1 800-518-4726

• Email support@grants.gov

Each applicant is responsible for ensuring that their application is correctly submitted through www.grants.gov. INL is not responsible for errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes during application submission.

Question 72:

Is in audit required to be completed and an audit report submitted with the grant proposal?

As outlined in the NOFO:

Organizational Audit

• If the applicant organization is required to undergo an audit per 2 CFR 200.501 (Subpart

F – Audit Requirements), a complete copy of the organization's most recent audit must be submitted. Organizations (domestic and foreign) that expend $1,000,000 or more in federal awards during their fiscal year must submit a single audit report conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200.514. The submission of financial statements alone does not satisfy the audit submission requirement.

• If the applicant organization is not required to undergo an audit (per the regulation cited above), a brief explanation must be submitted with the application. This explanation shall include confirmation that the organization is under the threshold for which an audit is required and/or plans for the organization to undergo an audit in the future. The brief explanation can be included in the FY2026 INL Applicant Pre-Award Risk Survey.

Question 73:

Are the Budget Narrative (BudgetNarrativeAttachments_1_2-V1.2) and Project Narrative

(ProjectNarrativeAttachments_1_2-V1.2) submitted with the proposal or via a portal?

The budget documents must be submitted with your application via Grants.gov. The budget documents are not included in the 25-page proposal narrative limit.