BHA MY APS Q&A Response - 508 Compliant.pdf

AID

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

AID

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

Date: December 14, 2023

Subject: Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance’s (BHA) responses to questions received on the BHA Multi Year Annual Program Statement (MYAPS) base released on June 22, 2023 - Funding Opportunity Number: 720BHA23APS00002

Summary

U.S. Agency for International Development Assistance’s (USAID) Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) has summarized below the questions that BHA received on the Multi Year Annual Program Statement (MYAPS) base.

BHA has made changes to the MY APS in the following sections:.

● The addition of Sustained Response Program (Introduction Letter and Section A -

Program Description - Section A 1.2 and Section A 2)

● Section A.3 Programming Principles

○ Clarifications within

■ People Centered Approaches

■ Localization and Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction

■ Use of Evidence and Learning for High Quality and Adaptive Management

● Section B. 5 Authorized Geographic Code

● Section C. 1 Eligibility Information

● Section D. 5 Technical Application Format

● Section D. 5.c Construction, Alteration, or Repair of Structures/Infrastructure

● Section D. 7 Changed Business (Cost) Application to Cost Application.

● Oher- Changed ‘beneficiary’ to ‘participant’ throughout.

BHA has revised the base APS where appropriate and reissued it as Modification #1. BHA did not reply to all questions and comments received during the Questions and Answers (Q&A) period individually. BHA has however tried to provide responses to as many individual questions received as possible which are found below. BHA has grouped questions and responses according to thematic relevance. Due to procurement sensitivity and the nature of this framework APS, which leaves open the possibility for rounds that have not yet been drafted, BHA cannot state definitively what interventions may appear in future rounds. BHA is not accepting additional questions on the base.

AID

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

AID

FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

Date: December 14, 2023

Subject: Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance’s (BHA) responses to questions received on the BHA Multi Year Annual Program Statement (MYAPS) base released on June 22, 2023 - Funding Opportunity Number: 720BHA23APS00002

Summary

U.S. Agency for International Development Assistance’s (USAID) Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) has summarized below the questions that BHA received on the Multi Year Annual Program Statement (MYAPS) base.

BHA has made changes to the MY APS in the following sections:.

● The addition of Sustained Response Program (Introduction Letter and Section A -

Program Description - Section A 1.2 and Section A 2)

● Section A.3 Programming Principles

○ Clarifications within

■ People Centered Approaches

■ Localization and Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction

■ Use of Evidence and Learning for High Quality and Adaptive Management

● Section B. 5 Authorized Geographic Code

● Section C. 1 Eligibility Information

● Section D. 5 Technical Application Format

● Section D. 5.c Construction, Alteration, or Repair of Structures/Infrastructure

● Section D. 7 Changed Business (Cost) Application to Cost Application.

● Oher- Changed ‘beneficiary’ to ‘participant’ throughout.

BHA has revised the base APS where appropriate and reissued it as Modification #1. BHA did not reply to all questions and comments received during the Questions and Answers (Q&A) period individually. BHA has however tried to provide responses to as many individual questions received as possible which are found below. BHA has grouped questions and responses according to thematic relevance. Due to procurement sensitivity and the nature of this framework APS, which leaves open the possibility for rounds that have not yet been drafted, BHA cannot state definitively what interventions may appear in future rounds. BHA is not accepting additional questions on the base.

Date: December 14, 2023

Subject: Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance's {BHA) responses to questions received on the

BHA Multi Year Annual Program Statement {MYAPS) base released on June 22, 2023 - Funding

Opportunity Number: 720BHA23APS00002

Summary

U.S. Agency for International Development Assistance's {USAID) Bureau for Humanitarian

Assistance {BHA) has summarized below the questions that BHA received on the Multi Year

Annual Program Statement {MYAPS) base.

BHA has made changes to the MY APS in the following sections:.

• The addition of Sustained Response Program {Introduction Letter and Section A -

Program Description - Section A 1.2 and Section A 2)

• Section A.3 Programming Principles o Clarifications within

■ People Centered Approaches

■ Localization and Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction

■ Use of Evidence and Learning for High Quality and Adaptive Management

• Section B. 5 Authorized Geographic Code

• Section C. 1 Eligibility Information

• Section D. 5 Technical Application Format

• Section D. 5.c Construction, Alteration, or Repair of Structures/Infrastructure

• Section D. 7 Changed Business {Cost) Application to Cost Application.

• Oher- Changed 'beneficiary' to 'participant' throughout.

BHA has revised the base APS where appropriate and reissued it as Modification #1. BHA did not reply to all questions and comments received during the Questions and Answers {Q&A) period individually. BHA has however tried to provide responses to as many individual questions received as possible which are found below. BHA has grouped questions and responses according to thematic relevance. Due to procurement sensitivity and the nature of this framework APS, which leaves open the possibility for rounds that have not yet been drafted, BHA cannot state definitively what interventions may appear in future rounds. BHA is not accepting additional questions on the base.

Questions on APS and BHA Responses

1. Questions related to Shock Response and Early Action

● On page 10 can BHA clarify whether it will consider anticipatory, early, or forecast-based actions to mitigate the impact of foreseeable shocks (Cyclones, droughts) and support vulnerable communities to prepare and absorb the shocks, through, for example, transfer of assets or cash?

● Within the RFSAs, will BHA consider flexible funding to be able to respond to shocks without impeding the investments made toward building resilience?

● Is there any opportunity to provide emergency relief support during disasters?

● Section 1.2 describes two major conceptual areas, Declaration of Humanitarian Need

(DHN) and Early Response, Recovery and Resilience (ER4). How will anticipatory action be included in the MY APS? If anticipatory action is included, which conceptual area does this fall under?

BHA Response: While BHA cannot provide specifics on future funding rounds, the USAID Climate Strategy and BHA's ER4 Framework both state the importance of Early and Anticipatory Action. In addition, some recent RFSAs incorporated response funding into planned activities separate from the crisis modifier flexibility to shift funding to response. Funding to establish systems and/or pre-planned financing for Anticipatory Action (AA) would conceptually need to occur prior to a Declaration of Humanitarian Need (DHN) since those AA activities would occur before a specific shock and specific needs had been identified.

Stand-alone response to rapid onset disaster is outside the scope of this APS. Yet, rapid response mechanisms or anticipatory action mechanisms could be included in multi-year activities. See future funding rounds for specifics on the types of activities BHA seeks to fund.

2. Questions related to Climate, Environmentally Protected Areas, and Environmental Safeguards and Requirements

● How do environmental requirements coordinate with climate risk reduction?

● If BHA identifies a geographic area that includes protected areas, will it be acceptable for applicants to state that they will not program in those areas despite unmet needs? What if there are high levels of malnutrition, food insecurity, poverty, displaced people or refugees in those areas?

● Please state when and if an IEE and other environmental documents need to be submitted or if each round will indicate which environmental documents are required.

The IEE and other environmental documents (PERSUAP, etc) should be listed and indicated for submission in the table on pages 20-21. Partner would also suggest that consideration be given to whether these documents must be submitted with the application, or later in the process by apparently successful applicants.

BHA Response: USAID requirements exist to address environmental and climate challenges that are inextricably linked. Environmental sustainability can help build resilience to climate shocks, Questions on APS and BHA Responses

1. Questions related to Shock Response and Early Action

• On page 10 can BHA clarify whether it will consider anticipatory, early, or forecast-based actions to mitigate the impact of foreseeable shocks {Cyclones, droughts) and support vulnerable communities to prepare and absorb the shocks, through, for example, transfer of assets or cash?

• Within the RFSAs, will BHA consider flexible funding to be able to respond to shocks without impeding the investments made toward building resilience?

• Is there any opportunity to provide emergency relief support during disasters?

• Section 1.2 describes two major conceptual areas, Declaration of Humanitarian Need

{DHN) and Early Response, Recovery and Resilience {ER4). How will anticipatory action be included in the MY APS? If anticipatory action is included, which conceptual area does this fall under?

BHA Response: While BHA cannot provide specifics on future funding rounds, the USAID

Climate Strategy and BHA's ER4 Framework both state the importance of Early and Anticipatory

Action. In addition, some recent RFSAs incorporated response funding into planned activities separate from the crisis modifier flexibility to shift funding to response. Funding to establish systems and/or pre-planned financing for Anticipatory Action {AA) would conceptually need to occur prior to a Declaration of Humanitarian Need {DHN) since those AA activities would occur before a specific shock and specific needs had been identified.

Stand-alone response to rapid onset disaster is outside the scope of this APS. Yet, rapid response mechanisms or anticipatory action mechanisms could be included in multi-year activities. See future funding rounds for specifics on the types of activities BHA seeks to fund.

2. Questions related to Climate, Environmentally Protected Areas, and Environmental

Safeguards and Requirements

• How do environmental requirements coordinate with climate risk reduction?

• If BHA identifies a geographic area that includes protected areas, will it be acceptable for applicants to state that they will not program in those areas despite unmet needs? What if there are high levels of malnutrition, food insecurity, poverty, displaced people or refugees in those areas?

• Please state when and if an IEE and other environmental documents need to be submitted or if each round will indicate which environmental documents are required.

The IEE and other environmental documents {PERSUAP, etc) should be listed and indicated for submission in the table on pages 20-21. Partner would also suggest that consideration be given to whether these documents must be submitted with the application, or later in the process by apparently successful applicants.

BHA Response: USAID requirements exist to address environmental and climate challenges that are inextricably linked. Environmental sustainability can help build resilience to climate shocks, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/USAID-Climate-Strategy-2022-2030.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/USAID-Climate-Strategy-2022-2030.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/ER4_Framework-10.13.2022.pdf while climate change's impacts can negatively impact the environment. The humanitarian community has demonstrated commitment to the greening of assistance through USAID’s signing of the Climate and Environment Charter for Humanitarian Organizations. Using international safeguarding standards, the USAID Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) is codified by US regulation (22 CFR 216) to assess environmental/social impacts and document climate risk management practices in order to promote the greening of humanitarian assistance awards. Achievement of integration of climate and environmental risks into design and implementation are monitored by USAID performance indicators for Climate Adaptation, the Climate and Environment checklist in the BHA RFSA Annual Reporting Guidance, and via a Climate Keyword for awards via the Emergency Application Guidelines (EAG).

In the MY APS, BHA requires a strong justification to program in environmentally protected areas. That justification requires compelling precautions to mitigate impacts of aid intervention on the local ecosystem. In addition, an Environmental Assessment (EA) is required per 22 CFR 216 for Development Assistance (DA) and Title II Development funded activities implemented in environmentally protected areas.

IEE and other environmental and climate requirements (PERSUAP, etc) will be detailed in funding rounds.

3. Questions related to HDP Approaches

● Will the MY APS support appropriate interventions in line with HDP coherence and humanitarian principles in order to manage and mitigate conflict, integrate a conflict-sensitivity and conflict-prevention lens, and/or strengthen social cohesion?

● Partner would like to encourage BHA to ensure that their funding facilitates integrated HDP nexus programming under the new MYAPS. For example, this may include:

○ a. extending grant periods for humanitarian funding, allowing reallocation between development and humanitarian funding, and providing flexible funding for nexus programming.

○ b. Strengthening coordination between development, humanitarian and peace donors to define collective priorities

○ c. Recognizing and covering the true costs of working in fragile contexts. This is particularly important when operating in contexts of constant insecurity which includes specific risks for implementing partner staff, partners, and project participants. We urge BHA to recognize and allow for the full operational costs for partners.

○ d. Supporting and covering the costs of decentralizing support services in program implementation.

○ e. Providing seed funding to allow implementing partners to develop and test new models within their programming, which would allow successful models to be taken to scale and have transformational impact.

○ f. Prioritizing engagement in the safe participation and engagement of women who represent affected communities.

while climate change's impacts can negatively impact the environment. The humanitarian community has demonstrated commitment to the greening of assistance through USAID's signing of the Climate and Environment Charter for Humanitarian Organizations. Using international safeguarding standards, the USAID Initial Environmental Examination {IEE) is codified by US regulation {22 CFR 216) to assess environmental/social impacts and document climate risk management practices in order to promote the greening of humanitarian assistance awards. Achievement of integration of climate and environmental risks into design and implementation are monitored by USAID performance indicators for Climate Adaptation, the

Climate and Environment checklist in the BHA RFSA Annual Reporting Guidance, and via a

Climate Keyword for awards via the Emergency Application Guidelines {EAG).

In the MY APS, BHA requires a strong justification to program in environmentally protected areas. That justification requires compelling precautions to mitigate impacts of aid intervention on the local ecosystem. In addition, an Environmental Assessment {EA) is required per 22 CFR

216 for Development Assistance {DA) and Title II Development funded activities implemented in environmentally protected areas.

IEE and other environmental and climate requirements {PERSUAP, etc) will be detailed in funding rounds.

3. Questions related to HDP Approaches

• Will the MY APS support appropriate interventions in line with HDP coherence and humanitarian principles in order to manage and mitigate conflict, integrate a conflict-sensitivity and conflict-prevention lens, and/or strengthen social cohesion?

• Partner would like to encourage BHA to ensure that their funding facilitates integrated

HDP nexus programming under the new MYAPS. For example, this may include:

o a. extending grant periods for humanitarian funding, allowing reallocation between development and humanitarian funding, and providing flexible funding for nexus programming.

o b. Strengthening coordination between development, humanitarian and peace donors to define collective priorities o c. Recognizing and covering the true costs of working in fragile contexts. This is particularly important when operating in contexts of constant insecurity which includes specific risks for implementing partner staff, partners, and project participants. We urge BHA to recognize and allow for the full operational costs for partners.

o d. Supporting and covering the costs of decentralizing support services in program implementation.

o e. Providing seed funding to allow implementing partners to develop and test new models within their programming, which would allow successful models to be taken to scale and have transformational impact.

o f. Prioritizing engagement in the safe participation and engagement of women who represent affected communities.

○ g. Support implementing partner regional and country offices to raise humanitarian concerns at the global level through pragmatic advocacy approaches and avenues.

● Does BHA intend to fund, or will it be amenable to funding, any activities under the MY APS in the areas of social cohesion strengthening and conflict management/integration?

BHA Response: BHA is unable to provide specifics on future rounds of funding. Nothing in the base APS precludes identifying elements of social cohesion as a goal, purpose, or otherwise within a Theory of Change if this was determined to be necessary to achieve prioritized humanitarian outcomes.

BHA supports HDP approaches. BHA is able to allow flexibility for reallocation in funding with Title II and CDF between development and humanitarian assistance specifically with RFSAs. BHA does not build in flexibility from emergency programming to development. BHA will take under advisement partner needs in contexts of conflict-sensitive programming, the potential for seed funding, and support for engagement in global coordination fora.

4. Questions related to Technical Areas and Sectors

Learning and Capacity Strengthening

● Learning and capacity strengthening is a round although, monitoring and evaluation is a sector and yet monitoring and evaluation is part of every round. Could you clarify what will distinguish it as [a] sector?

● Will research and learning be considered part of one or more of the sectors listed that BHA will fund? If not, how will BHA anticipate integrating research and learning to ensure that BHA-funded programs contribute to the wider humanitarian-nexus learning base?

Sector Guidance

● Why are technological risks paired with natural hazards and not listed separately?

Definitions of each would be helpful to understand why they are related as they seem very different.

● Can BHA clarify what is meant by “significant” in this statement: "…bounce back from crises without significant losses." Alternatively, partner suggests revising to "…bounce back from crises without devastating / catastrophic losses." The term "significant" is relative, depending on a variety of factors. Devastating or Catastrophic loss is what we really try to minimize; significant loss results from virtually any emergency situation.

● Can BHA please confirm each of the sectors listed on pages 6 and 7 will correspond to the sector specific guidance BHA currently has in place? Will the sector guidance be applicable for RFSA rounds of applications?

● In the programme area “Early Recovery, Risk Reduction and Resilience (ER4)", does it include small scale infrastructural resilience activities?

● If there are any climate related risks in the targeted location, can we apply DRR o g. Support implementing partner regional and country offices to raise humanitarian concerns at the global level through pragmatic advocacy approaches and avenues.

• Does BHA intend to fund, or will it be amenable to funding, any activities under the MY

APS in the areas of social cohesion strengthening and conflict management/integration?

BHA Response: BHA is unable to provide specifics on future rounds of funding. Nothing in the base APS precludes identifying elements of social cohesion as a goal, purpose, or otherwise within a Theory of Change if this was determined to be necessary to achieve prioritized humanitarian outcomes.

BHA supports HDP approaches. BHA is able to allow flexibility for reallocation in funding with

Title II and CDF between development and humanitarian assistance specifically with RFSAs. BHA does not build in flexibility from emergency programming to development. BHA will take under advisement partner needs in contexts of conflict-sensitive programming, the potential for seed funding, and support for engagement in global coordination fora.

4. Questions related to Technical Areas and Sectors learning and Capacity Strengthening

• Learning and capacity strengthening is a round although, monitoring and evaluation is a sector and yet monitoring and evaluation is part of every round. Could you clarify what will distinguish it as [a] sector?

• Will research and learning be considered part of one or more of the sectors listed that

BHA will fund? If not, how will BHA anticipate integrating research and learning to ensure that BHA-funded programs contribute to the wider humanitarian-nexus learning base?

Sector Guidance

• Why are technological risks paired with natural hazards and not listed separately?

Definitions of each would be helpful to understand why they are related as they seem very different.

• Can BHA clarify what is meant by "significant" in this statement: " ...bounce back from crises without significant losses." Alternatively, partner suggests revising to " ...bounee back from crises without devastating / catastrophic losses." The term "significant" is relative, depending on a variety of factors. Devastating or Catastrophic loss is what we really try to minimize; significant loss results from virtually any emergency situation.

• Can BHA please confirm each of the sectors listed on pages 6 and 7 will correspond to the sector specific guidance BHA currently has in place? Will the sector guidance be applicable for RFSA rounds of applications?

• In the programme area "Early Recovery, Risk Reduction and Resilience {ER4)", does it include small scale infrastructural resilience activities?

• If there are any climate related risks in the targeted location, can we apply DRR interventions to mitigate those risks?

● Would BHA consider not requiring the use of sector and subsector for MY APS proposals in such a rigid manner?

Transfers and Modalities

● "Purposes may be multi-sector (e.g., food security) or single sector." This is unclear. Food security is a single sector. Could BHA consider deleting "(e.g., food security)" or providing a better example of multi-sector?

● What if applicants will not provide transfers? Do they need to justify this based on a market analysis and the modality decision tool? Should justification be provided based on the appropriateness of a modality to accomplish outcomes in the Theory of Change?

For instance, applicants may determine based on the TOC that transfers will be appropriate to use at certain times during the project life, but not at others, and that the nature of the transfers may change in order to bring about certain outcomes. Should an applicant state this as part of the justification of the modality to be used?

● The APS states that BHA prioritizes response analysis and that applicants should utilize a context-driven approach to modality selection, specifically the Modality Decision Tool (MDT) for Humanitarian Assistance. Does this mean that all modalities will be available to applicants for resource transfers? If not, how can applicants use the MDT to “guide their decision-making and the content of the narrative” if certain modalities are mandated (e.g. with mandated levels of USG GIK food commodities for RFSAs)?

Agriculture, Markets, Nutrition and Health

● While market appropriateness is one criterion in the MDT, there do not seem to be any specific requirements in this section (or elsewhere in the MY APS) regarding market assessment and market monitoring. It would be good to include an initial market assessment and annual market monitoring reports among APS requirements (or at least for certain program types, e.g., RFSA). Including these as required activities will ensure these activities are appropriately planned and budgeted at the proposal stage.

● Is training of community health workers/health workers something BHA would consider in terms of resilience and early recovery?

● Partner staff have been invited by USAID/Advancing Nutrition to participate in a virtual consultation that includes solicitation of feedback on the draft USAID SBC Handbook for RFSAs in the Refinement Phase. It would be useful to see this document referenced in MY APS given the specific information in the handbook on TOC content.

● Is there any opportunity to include climate smart agriculture practices in the project interventions?

● Could BHA please provide information that would give background to this position, as in, why are keyhole or tower gardens unlikely to yield a sustainable impact, and how is "a sustainable impact" being defined here?

BHA Response:

The list of sectors in the MY APS coincides with the current list of sectors in the EAGs. The EAGs apply where stated in the base MY APS and as explicitly specified in future funding rounds.

interventions to mitigate those risks?

• Would BHA consider not requiring the use of sector and subsector for MY APS proposals in such a rigid manner?

Transfers and Modalities

• "Purposes may be multi-sector {e.g., food security) or single sector." This is unclear. Food security is a single sector. Could BHA consider deleting "{e.g., food security)" or providing a better example of multi-sector?

• What if applicants will not provide transfers? Do they need to justify this based on a market analysis and the modality decision tool? Should justification be provided based on the appropriateness of a modality to accomplish outcomes in the Theory of Change?

For instance, applicants may determine based on the TOC that transfers will be appropriate to use at certain times during the project life, but not at others, and that the nature of the transfers may change in order to bring about certain outcomes. Should an applicant state this as part of the justification of the modality to be used?

• The APS states that BHA prioritizes response analysis and that applicants should utilize a context-driven approach to modality selection, specifically the Modality Decision Tool

{MDT) for Humanitarian Assistance. Does this mean that all modalities will be available to applicants for resource transfers? If not, how can applicants use the MDT to "guide their decision-making and the content of the narrative" if certain modalities are mandated {e.g. with mandated levels of USG GIK food commodities for RFSAs)?

Agriculture, Markets, Nutrition and Health

• While market appropriateness is one criterion in the MDT, there do not seem to be any specific requirements in this section {or elsewhere in the MY APS) regarding market assessment and market monitoring. It would be good to include an initial market assessment and annual market monitoring reports among APS requirements {or at least for certain program types, e.g., RFSA). Including these as required activities will ensure these activities are appropriately planned and budgeted at the proposal stage.

• Is training of community health workers/ health workers something BHA would consider in terms of resilience and early recovery?

• Partner staff have been invited by USAID/Advancing Nutrition to participate in a virtual consultation that includes solicitation of feedback on the draft USAID SBC Handbook for

RFSAs in the Refinement Phase. It would be useful to see this document referenced in

MY APS given the specific information in the handbook on TOC content.

• Is there any opportunity to include climate smart agriculture practices in the project interventions?

• Could BHA please provide information that would give background to this position, as in, why are keyhole or tower gardens unlikely to yield a sustainable impact, and how is "a sustainable impact" being defined here?

BHA Response:

The list of sectors in the MY APS coincides with the current list of sectors in the EAGs. The EAGs apply where stated in the base MY APS and as explicitly specified in future funding rounds.

Learning and Capacity Strengthening

● The EAG Sector Requirements contain additional details on the Monitoring and

Evaluation sector requirements on pages 136-142. "It is intended to complement BHA-funded investments with targeted and enhanced M&E support beyond the M&E requirements for an individual BHA activity. " Natural hazards and technological risks are described in more detail on pages 149-153 of the Sector Requirements in the EAGs.

● Learning and Capacity Strengthening is stated as one of the Programming Areas under Section A.2. In ER4 and RFSA awards, these activities could fall under the Humanitarian Policy, Studies, Analysis, or Applications Sector or in any of a number of other sectors if the research and/or learning contributes to those sectoral outcomes.

Sector Guidance

● BHA has updated phrasing in the MY APS on page 10 to read, "DRR lays the foundation for resilience and adaptation by reducing the impact of recurrent disasters, which enables communities and countries to invest resources for development and bounce back from crises without consequential losses."

● At this time, BHA is not able to share details of future rounds of funding.

● At this time, BHA is not removing requirements for sectors and sub-sectors for ER4 and

Learning and Capacity Strengthening programs in the interests of aligning to existing systems and processes. Those may be updated in the future, but overhauling broader BHA systems was outside of the scope of this solicitation.

Transfers and Modalities

● Applications with no resource transfers do not need to complete the section entitled

"Market Analysis and Modality Selection (for activities with resource transfers only)." If a funding round requires distribution of resource transfers, this will be stated in the funding round.

● Any restrictions on modality will be articulated in individual funding rounds. The preponderance of BHA's funding is IDA, which has no modality restrictions. When soliciting activities with Title II funding, BHA will comply with the requirements of the Food for Peace Act including any and all applicable statutory language on availability and use of 202(e) funding.

Agriculture, Markets, Nutrition and Health

● BHA understands food security to be multi-sectoral, as illustrated in our Resilience Food

Security Activities, which may include food assistance, agriculture, economic recovery and market systems, nutrition, WASH, disaster risk reduction policy and practice, and/or other sectoral activities in an integrated fashion to achieve a food security purpose.

Since RFSAs are such a prominent example of multi-sector programming in BHA and represent one of the programming areas in this APS, BHA prefers to continue to use this as an example.

● The APS does not set a formal minimum requirement on market assessment and monitoring for all types of programming. More specific requirements may be included in learning and Capacity Strengthening

• The EAG Sector Requirements contain additional details on the Monitoring and

Evaluation sector requirements on pages 136-142. "It is intended to complement

BHA-funded investments with targeted and enhanced M&E support beyond the M&E requirements for an individual BHA activity. " Natural hazards and technological risks are described in more detail on pages 149-153 of the Sector Requirements in the EAGs.

• Learning and Capacity Strengthening is stated as one of the Programming Areas under

Section A.2. In ER4 and RFSA awards, these activities could fall under the Humanitarian

Policy, Studies, Analysis, or Applications Sector or in any of a number of other sectors if the research and/or learning contributes to those sectoral outcomes.

Sector Guidance

• BHA has updated phrasing in the MY APS on page 10 to read, "DRR lays the foundation for resilience and adaptation by reducing the impact of recurrent disasters, which enables communities and countries to invest resources for development and bounce back from crises without consequential losses."

• At this time, BHA is not able to share details of future rounds of funding.

• At this time, BHA is not removing requirements for sectors and sub-sectors for ER4 and

Learning and Capacity Strengthening programs in the interests of aligning to existing systems and processes. Those may be updated in the future, but overhauling broader

BHA systems was outside of the scope of this solicitation.

Transfers and Modalities

• Applications with no resource transfers do not need to complete the section entitled

"Market Analysis and Modality Selection (for activities with resource transfers only)." If a funding round requires distribution of resource transfers, this will be stated in the funding round.

• Any restrictions on modality will be articulated in individual funding rounds. The preponderance of BHA's funding is IDA, which has no modality restrictions. When soliciting activities with Title II funding, BHA will comply with the requirements of the

Food for Peace Act including any and all applicable statutory language on availability and use of 202(e) funding.

Agriculture, Markets, Nutrition and Health

• BHA understands food security to be multi-sectoral, as illustrated in our Resilience Food

Security Activities, which may include food assistance, agriculture, economic recovery and market systems, nutrition, WASH, disaster risk reduction policy and practice, and/or other sectoral activities in an integrated fashion to achieve a food security purpose.

Since RFSAs are such a prominent example of multi-sector programming in BHA and represent one of the programming areas in this APS, BHA prefers to continue to use this as an example.

• The APS does not set a formal minimum requirement on market assessment and monitoring for all types of programming. More specific requirements may be included in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uv2N9MpWVWR0PqDGcurxUhexQeFLFhgeMLpPtuwy5UI/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uv2N9MpWVWR0PqDGcurxUhexQeFLFhgeMLpPtuwy5UI/edit funding rounds based on type of funding and context. For example, Title II funding has mandatory requirements to comply with the Bellmon Amendment.

● BHA will not require applicants to use the SBC handbook at this time for Theory of Change guidance.

● Climate smart agriculture could factor in ER4 or RFSA activities. ER4 could include small-scale infrastructural resilience activities. Risk Reduction is also part of the ER4 Framework and may feature in ER4 or RFSA programs. See future funding rounds for any specifics on the types of activities BHA seeks to fund.

● BHA developed the list of activities that require robust justification through a review of past BHA programmatic experience and available literature on evidence. BHA's conclusion was that the available evidence was weak on the sustainable impact of keyhole and tower gardens on food security and nutrition outcomes.

5. Questions related to RFSAs

● Does USAID anticipate that the forecasted FY24 RFSAs (Madagascar and Somalia) will be released under the new Multi-Year APS?

● Does USAID anticipate that RFSA solicitations will be released as country-specific RFAs or all within a single round under the new Multi-Year APS? For example, would the FY24 RFSAs (Madagascar and Somalia) be released as individual RFAs or would all RFSAs in a fiscal year be released under a single round?

● Would USAID please consider sharing an anticipated schedule of future RFSAs that will be awarded under MYAPS or a list of current RFSAs, their periods of performance, and implementing partner(s)?

● If RFSAs will be released under the MY APS, does USAID anticipate a multi-phase application for the RFSAs?

● Would USAID/BHA please clarify whether the new MY APS mechanism will be used for all RFSA procurements going forward including those that were in the USAID business forecast before the MY APS release?

● Will the MY APS round replace standalone NOFOs for RFSA solicitations?

● If MY APS will be used for some or all RFSA procurements, could the Business Forecast be updated to reflect which RFSAs are intended to be released as a round under MY

APS?

● Would USAID/BHA please clarify whether a concept note stage will be included in RFSA procurements under this MY APS?

● Under the MY APS mechanism, would USAID/BHA please clarify whether the practice of releasing draft RFAs for RFSAs will continue?

● If continuation of the practice of releasing draft RFAs for RFSAs is planned, will they be issued as a round under the MY APS?

● Will BHA issue draft amendments for rounds of applications for RFSA for comment? If yes, when will they be expected to be released?

● The definitions of ER4s and RFSAs overlap to some extent. What are the major differences between the contexts in which each of these types of programs would be used?

funding rounds based on type of funding and context. For example, Title II funding has mandatory requirements to comply with the Bellmen Amendment.

• BHA will not require applicants to use the SBC handbook at this time for Theory of

Change guidance.

• Climate smart agriculture could factor in ER4 or RFSA activities. ER4 could include small-scale infrastructural resilience activities. Risk Reduction is also part of the ER4

Framework and may feature in ER4 or RFSA programs. See future funding rounds for any specifics on the types of activities BHA seeks to fund.

• BHA developed the list of activities that require robust justification through a review of past BHA programmatic experience and available literature on evidence. BHA's conclusion was that the available evidence was weak on the sustainable impact of keyhole and tower gardens on food security and nutrition outcomes.

5. Questions related to RFSAs

• Does USAID anticipate that the forecasted FY24 RFSAs {Madagascar and Somalia) will be released under the new Multi-Year APS?

• Does USAID anticipate that RFSA solicitations will be released as country-specific RFAs or all within a single round under the new Multi-Year APS? For example, would the FY24

RFSAs {Madagascar and Somalia) be released as individual RFAs or would all RFSAs in a fiscal year be released under a single round?

• Would USAID please consider sharing an anticipated schedule of future RFSAs that will be awarded under MYAPS or a list of current RFSAs, their periods of performance, and implementing partner{s)?

• If RFSAs will be released under the MY APS, does USAID anticipate a multi-phase application for the RFSAs?

• Would USAID/BHA please clarify whether the new MY APS mechanism will be used for all RFSA procurements going forward including those that were in the USAID business forecast before the MY APS release?

• Will the MY APS round replace standalone NOFOs for RFSA solicitations?

• If MY APS will be used for some or all RFSA procurements, could the Business Forecast be updated to reflect which RFSAs are intended to be released as a round under MY

APS?

• Would USAID/BHA please clarify whether a concept note stage will be included in RFSA procurements under this MY APS?

• Under the MY APS mechanism, would USAID/BHA please clarify whether the practice of releasing draft RFAs for RFSAs will continue?

• If continuation of the practice of releasing draft RFAs for RFSAs is planned, will they be issued as a round under the MY APS?

• Will BHA issue draft amendments for rounds of applications for RFSA for comment? If yes, when will they be expected to be released?

• The definitions of ER4s and RFSAs overlap to some extent. What are the major differences between the contexts in which each of these types of programs would be used?

● Will RFSAs require breaking out sectors using keywords? Why or why not?

● BHA states “rounds for RFSAs will provide specific guidance on applicable technical areas.” Will this also be the case for ER4s and Learning and Capacity Strengthening rounds? How much leeway is there for RFSA applicants to include sectors not included in the RFSA rounds, or to not include technical areas included in guidance for RFSA rounds if evidence shows that different approaches are needed and/or the budget provided will not allow for adequate achievement in sector guidance? This would especially be the case for awards with large, required food aid components.

● Would USAID/BHA please publish a list of all current RFSA award numbers and urge all RFSA implementers to ensure all reports are uploaded to the DEC per their agreements?

BHA Response: Questions related to specific solicitations already on the USAID Business Forecast will not be addressed here. Applicants should continue to monitor www.grants.gov for more information. The APS provides a framework for soliciting RFSAs under funding rounds.

Future RFSA rounds (as stated in the APS) may be issued as a round under the APS or they may be issued as stand alone solicitations. In general, BHA may choose to issue future rounds under the APS as single country awards, multiple awards per country/region etc. As stated in the APS, USAID reserves the right to issue stand alone solicitations separate from this APS.

If a phased approach to applications is required, the phases will be determined by funding round. All opportunities to partner with BHA will be listed on the business forecast. At this time, we are not able to release details on activities that have not been announced yet. BHA may consider if it is possible to share a list of current RFSAs, their period of performance and implementing partner in the future. However, BHA is unlikely to provide a list of future RFSAs that will be issued under the MY APS. BHA plans to publish rounds with a question period in line with the requirements that the funding type requires.

ER4 is a strategic framework which applies to RFSAs. RFSAs are one type of ER4 activity that fall under distinct Title II and/or CDF funding authorities. Applicants may find the ER4 Framework on page 4 of the MY APS. RFSA Budgets will be categorized by Sector according to entry into BHA's financial systems. However, RFSA technical narratives will continue to use technical areas.

Any of the funding rounds may include specific guidance on applicable technical areas. Merit review criteria will be stated in each funding round that will dictate how approaches must be evaluated. BHA cannot share details of future opportunities at this time. Partners are required to follow the conditions in their award terms for submitting documents to the DEC. At this time, BHA does not plan to publish a comprehensive list of active RFSA award numbers.

6. Questions related to Future Rounds

● Will this APS include programs under BHA’s Climate Smart Disaster Ready APS? Is there a plan to align these APS more intentionally for future rounds?

● In general, does BHA plan to share a draft round before publishing the final version?

● Can USAID confirm that funding opportunities released under this APS will be added to the Business Forecast so applicants can have sufficient time to prepare and analyze the opportunity?

• Will RFSAs require breaking out sectors using keywords? Why or why not?

• BHA states "rounds for RFSAs will provide specific guidance on applicable technical areas." Will this also be the case for ER4s and Learning and Capacity Strengthening rounds? How much leeway is there for RFSA applicants to include sectors not included in the RFSA rounds, or to not include technical areas included in guidance for RFSA rounds if evidence shows that different approaches are needed and/or the budget provided will not allow for adequate achievement in sector guidance? This would especially be the case for awards with large, required food aid components.

• Would USAID/BHA please publish a list of all current RFSA award numbers and urge all

RFSA implementers to ensure all reports are uploaded to the DEC per their agreements?

BHA Response: Questions related to specific solicitations already on the USAID Business

Forecast will not be addressed here. Applicants should continue to monitor www.grants.gov for more information. The APS provides a framework for soliciting RFSAs under funding rounds.

Future RFSA rounds {as stated in the APS) may be issued as a round under the APS or they may be issued as stand alone solicitations. In general, BHA may choose to issue future rounds under the APS as single country awards, multiple awards per country/region etc. As stated in the APS, USAID reserves the right to issue stand alone solicitations separate from this APS.

If a phased approach to applications is required, the phases will be determined by funding round. All opportunities to partner with BHA will be listed on the business forecast. At this time, we are not able to release details on activities that have not been announced yet. BHA may consider if it is possible to share a list of current RFSAs, their period of performance and implementing partner in the future. However, BHA is unlikely to provide a list of future RFSAs that will be issued under the MY APS. BHA plans to publish rounds with a question period in line with the requirements that the funding type requires.

ER4 is a strategic framework which applies to RFSAs. RFSAs are one type of ER4 activity that fall under distinct Title II and/or CDF funding authorities. Applicants may find the ER4 Framework on page 4 of the MY APS. RFSA Budgets will be categorized by Sector according to entry into

BHA's financial systems. However, RFSA technical narratives will continue to use technical areas.

Any of the funding rounds may include specific guidance on applicable technical areas. Merit review criteria will be stated in each funding round that will dictate how approaches must be evaluated. BHA cannot share details of future opportunities at this time. Partners are required to follow the conditions in their award terms for submitting documents to the DEC. At this time, BHA does not plan to publish a comprehensive list of active RFSA award numbers.

6. Questions related to Future Rounds

• Will this APS include programs under BHA's Climate Smart Disaster Ready APS? Is there a plan to align these APS more intentionally for future rounds?

• In general, does BHA plan to share a draft round before publishing the final version?

• Can USAID confirm that funding opportunities released under this APS will be added to the Business Forecast so applicants can have sufficient time to prepare and analyze the opportunity?

http://www.grants.gov

● When a new amendment announcing a funding round under the APS is posted, is it possible to ensure that this is visible as a change to the APS on grants.gov? Our past experience with other Annual Program Statements is that the amendment does not result in an updated Posted Date?

● Can BHA share how many anticipated rounds there will be to the MY APS, and when they might be released?

● For the purposes of rounds under this APS, would BHA please consider allowing a minimum of five to six months from final “round” issuance to submission? Alternatively, Partner would suggest a robust concept, followed by a structured refinement phase that allows for that deeper stakeholder engagement upon approval of the initial concept design

● Does BHA anticipate that all future multi-year awards will fall under this APS, or will there also be opportunities for organizations to submit unsolicited or standalone proposals for multi-year projects?

● Will BHA continue to accept stand-alone concept papers for Learning and Capacity Building, or must all proposed projects fall under a future APS round?

● Does USAID/BHA still intend to accept unsolicited concept notes for ER4 programming, or will all ER4 opportunities be released through this MY APS?

● Is an applicant able to submit multiple applications to a particular round (in the case of a regional call for proposals)?

● Is there a possibility that rounds focusing on different programming areas will be released at the same time/within the same period? If yes, can an eligible applicant respond to more than one round/call at any one given?

● Will rounds overlap with sectors over-lapping and would an entity be allowed to apply for more than one sector/round if they are overlapping?

● Can BHA provide parameters for when they anticipate releasing broad calls for proposal versus specific Scopes of Work? Meaning, will the APS mean that applicants will be provided wider scope to design programs, or will BHA release requests for applications that respond to specific programmatic needs identified by BHA?

● Are the currently forecasted BHA opportunities (USAID Business Forecast) for Ethiopia and Sudan (BHA Ethiopia Rapid Response Mechanism and Sudan ER4, respectively) expected to be issued as amendment rounds of applications to the MYAPS?

● Can BHA clarify if the forecasted Optimizing Food Assistance Program, Processes and Products for Nutrition (O3P) opportunity might be released as a round under the MYAPS NOFO as part of the Learning and Capacity Programming?

● In DRC, Ituri, North Kivu, South Kivu, and Tanganyika are humanitarian crisis zones due to armed conflict.