Responses to FY20 Food for Progress NOFO Questions Received May 14 - 27.pdf

Responses to FY2020 Food for Progress NOFO Questions

Questions received May 14 – 27, 2020

1. Are organizations that have strong and relevant agricultural development experience but lack a directly relevant Past Performance Review (PPR) eligible to present an application based on otherwise verifiable qualifications and experience?

A: Applicants are strongly encouraged to include at least one form from a reference with knowledge of the Applicant’s performance of a past or active award outside of the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, the USDA Local and Regional Food Aid Procurement Program, or the FFPr Program. Further, applicants are not required to have FAS project PPR, but PPR must be directly relevant to project(s) to which the applicant is applying (for instance other significant agricultural development work with other US agencies).

2. Must the requisite monetization experience reside in/derive from the lead offeror, or can it derive from the experience of a sub-offeror within a consortium?

A: The proposal requirements for the monetization are contained in Section D.3 (c(i) of the NOFO. All requirements contained therein may be met by a subawardee or proposed contractor for the prime applicant. Each subrecipient organization must also have an active SAM registration before the subaward is signed, unless the organization has an exemption approved by FAS under 2 CFR section 25.110(d). FAS may review and approve proposed subawards and contracts, prior to award.

3. Can an awardee use Food for Progress project money to capitalize a fund managed by the awardee and use that fund to make investments to ensure future funding to support the sustainability of the project’s goals?

A: An awardee may use award funds to capitalize an investment vehicle if that vehicle meets Food for Progress programmatic goals, which can be found in the relevant Country Guidance(s) located in Appendix B of the NOFO. The details of project activities, including investment vehicles, will be subject to negotiations after the objective review process.

Part 2: Is there a limit on what percentage of the project budget can be executed through investments rather than used for grants and program related expenditure?

A: No, there is no prescribed limit. The applicant must provide an effective programmatic justification for any proposed activity budget.

4. USDA suggests a budget within each country specific guidance. Does this figure reflect the projected project budget (projected monetization proceeds + Commodity Credit Corporation cash) or the anticipated value of the award (projected cost of commodity + freight + Commodity Credit Corporation cash)?

A: The estimated budgets provide in the Country Guidance documents in the Appendix B refer to the projected project budgets resultant from the monetization process and CCC administrative funds. The budget estimates are do not reflect the full anticipated value of the award, which is the sum of the projected cost of commodity, freight/shipping, and CCC administrative funds.

5. Will you consider funding proposals that are for sectors not on the priority list and/or in countries not on the priority list?

A: FAS will give priority consideration to proposals for priority countries, however, FAS may also review submissions for non–prioritized countries.

6. How frequent will FAS post questions to Grants.gov? Weekly? Bi-weekly? Monthly?

A: As stated in Part D, section 1 of the NOFO under “Key Dates and Times,” questions and answers will be posted to Grants.gov weekly. Please check the “Related Documents” tab of the Food Progress announcement on Grants.gov:

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=327100

7. NOFO page 15 indicates that the page limit for the budget narrative is 25 pages, but page 27 indicates that the page limit for the budget narrative is 20 pages. Can USDA please clarify the budget narrative page limit?

A: The budget narrative page limit is 25.

8. NOFO page 62 refers applicants to the general budget narrative guidance on FAIS. In that guidance document, pages 5 and 6 in the indirect cost guidance it states: "Provide a separate attachment, in Microsoft Excel format, demonstrating how indirect costs were calculated." This additional Excel attachment is not mentioned anywhere in the NOFO. Can USDA clarify whether an additional attachment is requested, or if applicants should provide further detail on indirect cost calculations within the Budget Narrative?

A: FAS requests further details on indirect cost calculations and will accept this in any format from the applicant.

9. Can USDA clarify the nature of the “financial assistance” envisioned in relation to the $45 million capital investment fund described on NOFO page 59? Does USDA anticipate contributing additional funds or in-kind resources that are separate from the $21 million committed for the West Africa regional cashew program?

A: “Financial assistance” as referred to on page 59 of the FY2020 NOFO, refers only to the funding made available under the future agreement for this project. It is not separate from the $21 million, and the applicant should include a detailed plan for how a portion of the project funds will be used to leverage outside funding sources and a plan for addressing the challenges in raising the funds from private and public actors.

10. Does USDA have an existing model in mind for the farmer investment fund described on

NOFO page 60?

A: Various international agricultural development projects utilize investments instruments to build farmer beneficiary capital and incentives to working with a larger processing entity.

One such example is the Vegetable Oil Development Project (VODP) funded by the UN-IFAD in Uganda.

11. NOFO page 58 mentions the target country governments’ interest in growing the cashew sector, citing specific initiatives such as Ghana’s Tree Crops Development Bill. Does USDA expect part of the West Africa regional cashew program scope to focus on policy?

A: While USDA does not expect the applicant to this NOFO to explicitly focus on policy, we do expect that the applicant to “work within the overarching structure that currently exists in the cashew sector in West Africa to complement existing projects and future work in the sector.” This includes aligning with West African governments’ agricultural development strategies.

12. The NOFO indicates on page 24 that each reference should complete a Past Performance Review form and submit it to the provided email address by the closing date of the announcement.

*Please confirm how applicants can verify that these reviews are received by USDA in advance of the deadline, since they are sent directly to USDA.

A: FAS can confirm receipt of Past Performance Report Review forms submitted to PPDED@usda.gov.

*Please confirm if applicants should also submit the Past Performance Review forms with part 1 complete and part 2 blank as part of the application on FAIS, or if the entire form should only be submitted by the Reviewer to the email address specified on page 24.

A: Applicants are encouraged to get confirmation of submission from references as well. No, applicants should not submit a completed part 1 to FAIS. Past Performance References should only be submitted completed to PPDED@usda.gov.

13. The NOFO indicates on page 19 that if a proposed sub recipient receives 30% or more of the proposed operating budget, then then one Past Performance Review must be submitted.

Please confirm if this one review is in addition to the 3 requested from the prime recipient for a total of 4 reviews to be submitted, or if the sub recipient Past Performance Review would replace one of the prime’s, for a total of 3 submitted for the entire consortium.

A: Yes, any Past Performance Review for a proposed subrecipient is in addition to the 3 required for the prime applicant.

14. When will it be possible to create a proposal in FAIS? Currently this is not a possible option, as the FY20 NOFO does not yet exist in the FAIS system.

A: The ability to create a proposal in FAIS for FY20 is now available for both programs.

mailto:PPDED@usda.gov

15. Please can USDA clarify which sections of the proposal need to be uploaded in the FAIS system fields compared to those sections of the proposal that need to be uploaded as an attachment.

A: For a complete list of all attachments, please see Appendix A, Application Checklist, in the

NOFO.

16. Can USDA clarify if the 14-page Evaluation Plan is submitted as a stand-alone document as an attachment?

A: Yes, the Evaluation Plan should be submitted as an attachment in FAIS. Please see the checklist in Appendix A; the Evaluation Plan is listed there in section 2 as one of the documents that should be submitted as an attachment in FAIS.

17. Can USDA clarify that for Appendix G, Past Performance Review template, the Applicant is responsible for completing Part 1? If a sub-recipient who will receive 30% of the operating budget is proposed, do they need to complete Part 1 of the Past Performance Review template?

A: An applicant should complete part 1 then send it to their reference to complete part 2 and

3. The reference should then submit the fully completed reference form to PPDED@usda.gov.

18. Does USDA require an impact evaluation?

A: No, USDA does not require an impact evaluation. We require the most rigorous evaluation possible in the given context, and if this isn’t an impact evaluation, the applicant must explain why an impact evaluation isn’t feasible in their draft Evaluation Plan.

19. Will USDA be confirming receipt of all Past Performance Reviews to ensure organizations can confirm submission?

A: FAS can confirm receipt of Past Performance Review forms submitted to PPDED@usda.gov. Applicants are encouraged to get confirmation of submission from references as well.

20. Are INGOs eligible to apply for this program?

A: Yes, eligible applicants are defined in Part C section 1 of the NOFO.

21. Do FAS Proposals that are directed to address primarily one Results Frameworks need reflect BOTH Results Frameworks in that section?

A: For FAS proposals that are directed to address primarily one RF, both objectives in the RF should still be reflected in the proposal – specifically, the instruction to explain in the RF narrative any results that the applicant does not plan to address, and why, should still be done. This explanation can reference the direction from another section in the NOFO.

22. In terms of increasing the processing of cashews under the FFPr, would it be possible to setup operations to process in the USA which would probably be more beneficial to west Africa.

A: Food for Progress funds cannot be used for US development efforts, which is outside the scope of the authorizing legislation (Food for Progress Act of 1985 as amended in 2018).

23. Will USDA consider altering the MGD/FFPr application process in FY21 to a two-stage process, i.e. Concept Note stage, followed by invitation to submit Full Proposal package?

A: FFPr will consider a two-stage process in the future year if the timeline allows.

24. Where specifically on Grants.gov will these questions and answers be posted?

A: Q&A will be posted to Grants.gov weekly alongside the FY2020 NOFO. Specifically, please check the “Related Documents” tab of the Food Progress announcement on Grants.gov:

25. In the Dominican Republic country description, it states that, PVOs should leverage and expand on the cold chain activities of award # FCC-517-2015/015-00 and #FCC-517- 2015/008-00. There are no evaluations of those projects on the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). Would USDA kindly share the evaluations and any cold chain related reports produced under those awards so that all applicants can adequately and equally leverage and expand on those activities?

A: USDA is currently working to make those project evaluations available to the public through the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse.

26. Cost share is discussed in section C.5 on p. 13 and in Part E Section 1 (Evaluation Criteria), saying that cost share will be considered for bonus points. Will leverage also be considered favorably?

A: Yes. Cost share may include cash or in-kind contributions. The inclusion of well-reasoned cost share contributions may result in the addition of up to 2 bonus points within the Budget scoring criteria. To be considered for bonus points, cost share should be equivalent to 1 percent or more of the total operating budget. Cost share will be evaluated in terms of both dollar value and reasonableness (ability to implement).

27. Page 55 of the NOFO indicates that it recommends a metric: “Outcomes: amount of facility income from testing, number of items successfully tested.” The proposed activities for Dominican Republic SPS do not include laboratory testing or a specific facility. Please clarify if this is related to imported product testing using risk-based procedures, or if USDA desires applicants to support testing at a specific facility or group of facilities. Alternatively, are there other metrics USDA would consider?

A: Correct, this is related to imported product testing under risk-based procedures. USDA does not have specific facilities that are being targeted and leaves it to the applicants to propose a sound strategy to support the development of a risk management system. USDA also encourages the applicant to propose any relevant indicators that can effectively measure project performance.

https://www.usaid.gov/results-and-data/information-resources/development-experience-clearinghouse-dec

28. Kindly confirm that the Organizational Chart as outlined on page 18 should be submitted as a separate attached file to FAIS and that it is not part of the 3-page limit for the Organizational Capacity and Staffing narrative document.

A: Correct. The Organizational Capacity and Staffing narrative page limit is three pages. The Organizational Chart is not included in that three-page limit. The Organizational Chart page limit is one page. Applicants may upload these as one or multiple attachments in FAIS. FAS has no preference.

29. Kindly confirm that the In-Country Registration documents, as outlined on page 18 should be submitted as a separate attached file to FAIS and that it is not part of the 3-page limit for the Organizational Capacity and Staffing narrative document.

A: Correct. The In-Country Registration document is not included in the three-page limit for the Organizational Capacity and Staffing narrative. The In-Country Registration document page limit is one page. Applicants may upload these as one or multiple attachments in FAIS.

FAS has no preference.

30. Please confirm the budget values in Appendix B indicate the budget ceiling for each country.

A: Correct.

31. Page 39, Section H. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, 4. Program Income, states: In the event program income becomes available, per 7 CFR section 1499.11, it must be used in accordance with the agreement.

Question: Please confirm that the Program Income is in addition to the budget ceiling provided for each program.

A: Correct. Program income does not include proceeds from the sale of donated commodities; CCC-provided funds or interest earned on such funds; or funds provided for cost sharing or matching contributions, refunds or rebates, credits, discounts, or interest earned on any of them.

32. Page 41, APPENDIX A – Application Content Checklist, Required Fields in FAIS, states “indicate where this information can be found.”

Question: These sections include pull-down menus and text fields. In these sections do we “indicate where this information can be found” by continuing to cut and use the pull-down menus?

A: Whenever possible, applicants may choose to indicate which attachment the information can be found in rather than copying and pasting content from the attachment into the textboxes. With regard to the pull-down menus, for example in the Activity tab in FAIS, the applicant may opt to simply input one custom activity from the pull-down menu and in the textbox reference where the complete information can be found (e.g. See Attachment X).

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=9dfff371eeaeee4cef83c4cee94eeee5&mc=true&node=pt7.10.1499&rgn=div5#se7.10.1499_111

33. Page 41, APPENDIX A – Application Content Checklist, Required Fields in FAIS, states “indicate where this information can be found.”

Question: For those sections with only text boxes, should Offerors simply state in which attachment the information can be found?

A: Correct. Due to the technical limitations of FAIS, data must be input into each of the textboxes in order for an application to be successfully submitted in FAIS. Applicants can simply indicate which attachment the information can be found in rather than copying and pasting content from the attachment into the textbox.

34. Page 61, APPENDIX C – Budget Summary. The third column of the “Project Operating Budget” requests Offerors to include the value of “FAS or CCC Funds.”

Question: Would USDA confirm the value of the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) funds to be anticipated?

A: The total amount of CCC funding available for the FFPr Program in FY20 is $190,000,000.

(See Part B on page 10 of the NOFO). The estimated funding per award is $15 – $35 million.

Please refer to Appendix B, Country Guidance, for specific budget ranges for each country.

35. Page 61, APPENDIX C, Attachment C1, Budget Summary.

Question: Please confirm, as in past years, the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) administrative costs are additive to program budget ceiling stated in NOFO.

A: Correct. Commodity + Freight + Administrative Costs = Total Federal Funding Obligated.

36. Since bonus points for Cost Share will be offered can USDA share how it will monitor actual performance in this regard versus projected amount? Also, is this hard or soft match or both?

A: In the event that the applicant becomes a recipient, cost sharing specifically pledged in the application becomes a binding part of the award agreement. If the recipient falls short of fulfilling its pledged cost share, the recipient is responsible for making up the difference;

Federal funds cannot be used. Voluntary committed cost sharing or matching contributions may be provided in the form of cash or in-kind contributions. Cost share must meet all criteria outlined 2 CFR section 200.306(b).

37. Can USDA share its formula for calculating monetization rate of return?

A: USDA calculates rate of return based on the sales price in the recipient country divided by the sum of the purchase price of the commodity plus the freight. For budget planning purposes, applicants should look at their budget and monetization plan to determine how many tranches they will need to sell the requested commodities. It is recommended that applicants focus on these factors first and then work backwards to understand the rate of return.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=3972ddd90082f6c497110233eb7243d6&mc=true&node=se2.1.200_1306&rgn=div8

Is U.S. flag on ocean freight put in at 100% or actual percentage used?

A: The ocean freight budget is based on the tonnage shipped on the vessel. The 50 percent rule for U.S. flagged vessels applies to a recipient country for a class of cargo (bulk dry vs.

bulk liquid) for a particular fiscal year. U.S. flagged freight costs are the basis for USDA’s budgeting as it is the most expensive scenario. Then a 50/50 (U.S. flagged freight v. non- U.S.) scenario is calculated. Freight budget reasonableness is assessed based on where between these two scenarios the estimate falls.

38. Does the budget for each country NOFO include the cost of commodity shipping?

A: Correct. Commodity + Freight + Administrative Costs = Total Federal Funding Obligated.

39. Page 10 of the NOFO says estimated funding per award is $15 - $35 million. The Dominican Republic program budget is $13 million. Could USDA please clarify this discrepancy?

A: The estimated program budget does not include freight funds provided by USDA under Food for Progress awards. Applicants should draft their project budgets based on the $13-million figure.

40. Will USDA accept a table of contents and acronym list as additional attachments?

A: USDA will accept a table of contents and acronym list as additional attachments.

41. At H.3 of the FY 2020 FFPr NOFO it is stated that USDA prior approval will be required for cumulative transfers among direct cost categories that exceed 10%. 7 CFR 1499.12(h)(1) is then referenced. However, this section of 7 CFR 1499 regards Monitoring and Evaluation requirements and does not include a part (h)(1). We assume this is an inadvertent error.

Could you please provide the relevant regulation?

A: 7 CFR part 1499.11(h)(1) should have been cited. It states that: “Except as provided in paragraph (h)(2) of this section, a recipient may make adjustments within the agreement budget between direct cost line items without further approval, provided that the total amount of adjustments does not exceed the amount specified in the agreement.

Adjustments beyond these limits require the prior approval of CCC.”

42. At H.3 of the NOFO it is stated: “The recipient is not authorized at any time to transfer an amount budgeted for a direct cost to an indirect cost or vice versa, without prior written approval.” This requirement in inconsistent with 2 CFR 200.308; this requirement was removed from the federal regulations in 2014 with the implementation of 2 CFR 200. Would USDA consider removing this prior approval requirement?

A: USDA will not consider removing this prior approval requirement at this time. 2 CFR part 200.308(e) states that: The Federal awarding agency may, at its option, restrict the transfer of funds among direct cost categories or programs, functions and activities for Federal awards in which the Federal share of the project exceeds the Simplified Acquisition Threshold and the cumulative amount of such transfers exceeds or is expected to exceed 10 percent of the total budget as last approved by the Federal awarding agency.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=69c0fad32a21ef5c57ac09ac88173dda&mc=true&node=se2.1.200_1308&rgn=div8 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=69c0fad32a21ef5c57ac09ac88173dda&mc=true&node=se2.1.200_1308&rgn=div8

43. On page 15 of the NOFO it states that the Budget Narrative should be 25 pages, while on page 27 of the NOFO it states the Budget Narrative should be 20 pages. Can USDA please clarify how many pages the Budget Narrative should be?

A: The budget narrative page limit is 25.