Civil Society and Governance NOFO Q&A.pdf

Supporting Local Governance and Civil Society in Syria (opportunity #SFOP0005916) Questions and Answers

SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

Q: Will NEA/AC give preference to submissions that address more than one area (Northeast Syria, Opposition-Held Syria, Regime-Held Syria)?

A: While no preference will be given to applications which target more than one objective or area, NEA/AC envisions the bulk of initial work under the award will take place in northeast Syria. All applications will be evaluated against the Application Evaluation Criteria published in the NOFO regardless of their area of focus.

Q: Does NEA/AC envision program design could include governance and capacity building activities as part of its methodology to address local challenges, priorities, and service needs?

A: Capacity building activities are an acceptable method of advancing the objectives of the

NOFO.

Q: Does the award envision direct, on-the-ground activities in regime-held areas of Syria or is it limited to digital, indirect, research, or information-gathering activities?

A: Direct, on-the-ground activities in regime-held Syria are allowable, pending guidance from NEA/AC, but should be conducted discretely and after careful consideration of the security risks.

As stated in the NOFO, “Given the high risk and inhospitable operating environment, the applicant should describe opportunities to discretely support such efforts and articulate security measures that may be adopted to mitigate risks to beneficiaries and prevent assistance from benefitting the Syrian regime.”

Q: NEA gives equal weight to Achievable Objectives and Organizational Capacity; however, as described in Page 7, regime-held areas are higher-risk, and inhospitable. Are proposed activities in regime-held areas evaluated within the context of being implemented in a riskier operating environment (i.e. in regime-held areas, is Organizational Capacity given more weight than Achievable Objectives?)

A: All applications will be evaluated per the evaluation criteria published in the NOFO regardless of the proposed areas or objectives selected by the applicant. “Extra credit” is not given for proposing activities in higher-risk areas. The applicant’s Security, Risk Mitigation, & Contingency Planning Summary, which is a required component of the application, should address the risks associated with the proposed activities and appropriate risk mitigation measures.

Q: How will NEA evaluate activities that support local political processes and local political development among and between governance structures and civil society actors but fall outside the scope of UNSCR 2254?

A: Political process development outside the scope of UNSCR 2254 is not an objective of this

NOFO.

Q: Pg 5, Funding Opportunity Description, “Each applicant must present a plan on how it will be flexible and responsive to time-sensitive requirements.” To what extent will NEA support project grants that support local governance structures and civil society actors in their time-sensitive requirements to adequately respond to and fill humanitarian and emergency needs – particularly in increasingly volatile opposition-held areas such as Idlib and western Aleppo?

A: NEA/AC does not provide direct humanitarian assistance. This type of assistance is offered by other donors. That said, assistance under this NOFO could be used to strengthen the ability of local governance and civil society actors to provide such assistance as needed through building the capacity of partner organizations to meet the needs of their communities.

Q: Pgs 6-7, Problem Statement: In Northeast Syria, NEA seeks “applications that build on and advance ongoing USG work with local governance entities.” Furthermore, NEA seeks to “provide capacity building and support for networking, coalitions, and initiatives to foster productive relationships with local authorities for the civil society sector more broadly.” Do these local governance entities and authorities include police units such as the Raqqa Internal Security Forces or other community policing units, or are they limited to local and provincial councils and other affiliated technical directorates and professional associations?

A: Assistance offered under this award should focus on civilian governance entities rather than police or security forces.

Q: Page 7, Problem Statement: In opposition-held Syria, NEA describes previous support to essential service delivery and traditional civil society work in Idlib and Western Aleppo.

Furthermore, NEA indicates “Applicants should be prepared to support civil society and other independent actors in northwest Syria or other opposition-controlled areas to undertake activities in ways that support moderate voices and undercut the extremism of HTS.” Is NEA willing to support specific local councils in northwest Syria that remain independent of HTS?

If so, are local councils in relatively stable areas such as Turkish-border areas and areas controlled by Turkish-backed forces preferred to independent local councils and other actors in other opposition-held areas that are subject to greater levels of violence?

A: Yes, NEA/AC is willing to consider support for local councils in the northwest which remain independent of HTS. NEA/AC will work with the award recipient to identify specific councils which meet this criterion. It is the responsibility of the applicant to assess the security situation in locations where work is proposed and to propose appropriate risk mitigation measures in the Security, Risk Mitigation, & Contingency Planning Summary which is a required component of the application.

Q: Page 7, Problem Statement, “Opportunities may exist for applicants to pilot support for community initiatives and activities inside regime-held territory to hold the regime accountable to the government’s human rights obligations and commitments.” In regime-held areas, is there a limit to the number of pilot projects the applicant may propose?

A: No, there is no limit on the number of such pilots which may be proposed.

Q: In "Eligible Countries and Territories," it notes that applications that focus on activities in countries other than Syria will not be considered. However, a significant portion of the proposal refers to UN negotiations and the national opposition. Any activities relevant to individuals participating in these negotiations would not take place in Syria. Does this mean that these activities should not be proposed if they cannot take place in Syria?

and Q: The solicitation solicits support to the political process and negotiations yet states that programming must be focused inside Syria. Are program activities targeting negotiation actors, constitutional committee work, and capacity building or technical support to opposition leaders envisioned to be focused through work inside Syria only, or will NEA/AC consider programs working in Istanbul, Geneva, or elsewhere on these specific issues?

A: NEA/AC expects that applicants will manage their operations from outside Syria. Applicants may propose project activities which take place in other countries as long as Syria remains the focus of those activities.

Q: NOFO Section I, page 6, says that "NEA/AC seeks applications from which one or of the following areas" and four areas are listed (pgs 6 -8). Based on the language stated above, a proposal focusing on one area, for example topic 2: Opposition-Held Syria, will meet the NOFO requirements, correct?

and Q: Should a response include every activity mentioned in the Northeast Syria topic or should one select from those mentioned?

and Q: In Section I Funding Opportunity Description on page 5, NEA lays out three assistance objectives and states that “applicants may elect to submit proposals for a combined governance and civil society program or focus proposals on one or more of the assistance objectives.” In the same section under Problem Statement on pages 6-7, NEA states that they “seek applications which focus on one or more of the following areas,” which include Northeast Syria, Opposition-held Syria, Regime-held Syria, and Political Process Support.

Please confirm that NEA will accept applications that focus either on one or more of the three stated objectives or on one or more of the stated areas, or a combination.

and Q: In the Problem Statement of the NOFO, it states that NEA/AC seeks applications which focus on one or more of the following areas: Northeast Syria, Opposition-Held Syria, Regime- Held Syria, and/or Political Process Support. The Project Design then states activities for support to local governance, civil society, and political transition process. Can NEA/AC confirm if applicants are to design activities across all three activity areas (local governance, civil society, political transition process) even if applicants focus on less than all focus areas (Northeast Syria, Opposition-Held, Syria, Regime-Held Syria, and/or Political Process Support)?

and Q: The NOFO funding opportunity synopsis states that applicants “may elect to submit proposals for a combined governance and civil society program or focus proposals on one or more of the assistance objectives above”, referencing the assistance objectives: a) Strengthen responsive and credible governance and civil society entities to capably serve and represent communities liberated from ISIS; b) Advance a political solution to the Syrian conflict under the auspices of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2254; and c) Counter extremism and information perpetuated by Iranian forces, designated terrorist organizations, and other malign actors through support for local governance actors and civil society organizations. However, the Problem Statement section of the NOFO states that NEA/AC seeks applications which focus on one or more of the following areas: 1) Northeast Syria, 2) Opposition-Held Syria, 3) Regime-Held Syria, and/or 4) Political Process Support. Please confirm that offerors who chose to focus proposals on a subset of the scope (rather than proposing a combined governance and civil society program) may focus on either one or more of the assistance objectives listed in the Synopsis or one or more of the listed geographic/technical focus areas listed in the Problem Statement.

A: As stated in the NOFO, NEA/AC will accept applications which advance one or more of the three stated objectives in one or more of the areas highlighted in the NOFO.

Q: In the case of topic area 1: Northeast Syria, the description sounds like it is directed at both governance and civil society, is that correct?

A: Proposed activities in Northeast Syria may focus on any one or more of the three assistance objectives described on page 2 of the NOFO.

Q: NOFO Section I, page 5, states that "applicants may elect to submit proposals for a combined governance and civil society program or focus proposals on more or more of the assistance objectives." Can NEA/AC provide more clarity on what constitutes 'governance and civil society programs' and how they differ from the assistance objectives?

A: “Strengthen responsive and credible governance and civil society entities to capably serve and represent communities liberated from ISIS,” is the first of the NOFO’s three stated objectives.

Applicants may focus their proposals on this objective, one of the other objectives, or a combination of two or three objectives.

Q: For topic area 2: Opposition-Held Syria, can NEA/AC provide some examples of acceptable activities tied to "support(ing) moderate voices and undercut(ing) the extremism of HTS?" Are there any activities that wouldn't be allowed (ex. developing digital content, videos, teaching curricula, ads, radio program, counseling program)?

A: It is up to the applicant to propose activities which it believes will have the greatest potential to undercut extremism and support moderate voices in Opposition-Held Syria. All of the potential examples given in the question above would be allowable. As stated in the NOFO, NEA/AC does not envision supporting service delivery under this award in northwest Syria.

Q: For topic area 3: Regime-Held Syria, can NEA/AC provide some examples of acceptable activities tied to 'holding the regime accountable for its human rights obligations and commitments'? Will NEA/AC assist activists with holding the regime accountable?

A: It is up to the applicant to propose activities which it believes will have the greatest potential to achieve this outcome. As stated in the NOFO, NEA/AC expects to have substantial involvement in the award and will be able to offer the recipient advice and suggestions on appropriate activities. However, the recipient is ultimately responsible for proposing, developing, and executing all activities under the award.

Q: Do the the four topics (Northeast Syria, Opposition-Held Syria, Regime-Held Syria, Political Process Support) have an order of prioritization by NEA/AC in any manner?

A: While Northeast Syria is the current USG focus, we envision the need to expand into other areas as opportunities arise.

Q: NOFO Section I, page 9 states "applicants should consider how to foster productive relationships between local governance entities and CSOs." Would NEA/AC define what is meant by 'productive'? Is sustainability a factor in how productive is defined?

A: A productive relationship will advance the objectives of the NOFO. Activities intended to strengthen local governance and civil society organizations should be undertaken with long-term impact and sustainability in mind.

LOCATION

Q: Can NEA clarify if applicants are expected to have a field presence in Erbil, Iraq, for programming occurring in northeast Syria?

A: As stated in the NOFO, applicants should be prepared to manage activities from Berlin, Germany where other NEA/AC implementing partners are located to facilitate close coordination. The NOFO also states that applicants should be able to manage activities from Turkey should the need to do so arise. The NOFO does not mention or require applicants to have a presence in Iraq.

Q: Does NEA/AC envision any restrictions on where program or partner staff may be based outside of Syria for project management or oversight?

A: As stated in the NOFO, NEA/AC asks recipients to manage their activities from Berlin, Germany to facilitate close coordination with other implementing partners. Applicants should also have the ability to manage activities from Turkey should the need to do so arise. Aside from these requirements, there are no restrictions placed on the location of individual members of staff or headquarters-type operations supporting work on the award.

Q: Registration in Berlin is it required or the ability to travel to Berlin and attend meetings?

Q: Does our organization have to have an office in Germany/Turkey if we are approaching one objective? Could we use our office in Lebanon?

A: Applicants are strongly encouraged to manage activities from Berlin to facilitate close coordination with other NEA/AC implementing partners. Applicants which chose not to locate in Berlin will not be disqualified from consideration, but will be at a significant disadvantage.

Q: What level of implementer presence does NEA/AC require in Berlin and/or Turkey to constitute fulfillment of this requirement? Does NEA/AC expect a full field team presence, a senior level field representative, or something else?

A: NEA/AC expects a full field team presence in Berlin to facilitate close coordination with other implementing partners. Recipients are not expected to be present in Turkey at this time, but should have the ability to operate there should the need to do so arise.

Q: Would all partners in a consortium need to demonstrate the ability to manage activities out of Germany and Turkey or would it suffice to have just one registration via a prime or sub partner?

and Q: The NOFO mentions a requirement to be able to manage project activities out of Berlin, Germany. Is this a requirement of the prime organization (to be able to be registered in Germany), or can the registration be through the subawardee organization?

A: This refers to the prime applicant.

Q: NOFO Section I, page 5, states that applicants should demonstrate they are able to secure all necessary legal paperwork and government permissions to manage activities out of Germany and Turkey. What specific method does the government wish the applicants to demonstrate this ability?

and Q: Can NEA/AC please provide further details on what documentation would be required to demonstrate ability to secure necessary paperwork to manage activities out of Germany and Turkey?

and Q: Is current, active registration in Germany and/or Turkey a requirement for submission, or just demonstrated ability to seek registration?

A: It is up to the applicant to determine how to most effectively demonstrate these capabilities.

Possible examples include copies of valid registration documents, a demonstration of the applicant’s understanding of registration requirements and a plan/ timeline for meeting them, etc.

Q: Which method should applicants show their ability to deliver cash and assistance inside of Syria?

A: It is up to the applicant to determine how to most effectively demonstrate these capabilities.

Possible examples include description of past experience, demonstration of the applicant’s understanding of the methods available, associated challenges, and the applicant’s plan for meeting the requirement.

BUDGET

Q: NOFO Section 1, pages 8 - 10 outline various kinds of assistance. Given that providing subawards and financial assistance is mentioned in all 3 categories, what percentages of the (i) project plan, (ii) management and (iii) budget should be tied to subawardees and providing financial assistance?

A: NEA/AC has not defined numerical thresholds for this purpose. Note that the Application Review and Selection criteria (beginning on page 19) assign 10 of 100 possible points to the proposed budget to be awarded against criteria including (among others):

The costs proposed are reasonable in relation to the proposed activities and anticipated results, which are clearly explained in the budget narrative.

The preponderance of the budget is spent on supporting the project participants/activities in country.

Q: Does NEA/AC have an envisioned funding split between the three program areas of Support Local Governance Subaward Activities, Support Civil Society Cash Subaward Support for Activities, and Support Political Transitional Processes?

A: No. The ultimate allocation of funds between objectives will depend on the types and quality of proposals received.

POST-AWARD

Q: Since the duration is 36 months and the situation is volatile and fluid, can the action plan be amended during the course of the project to take into account changes and needs on the ground? A clear example is the restriction placed on Turkish-registered NGOs to operate in northeast Syria. This may change in the future, and hence would require a change in area of operation.

A: Yes. A successful applicant will demonstrate its ability to make adjustments during the course of the project based on changing conditions in country. NEA/AC aims to have a collaborative relationship with its implementing partners to best address unforeseen events which arise during the project.

Q: Should applicants assume that third party output monitoring will be conducted by a company or organization directly engaged by NEA/AC and that such costs should not be included in applicants’ proposal budgets?

A: Recipients will be required to report project results to NEA/AC per the Results Monitoring Plan which is to be submitted as a component of the application. Recipients may contract a third-party monitor, but are not required to do so. Such costs may be included in a proposed budget. Additionally, NEA/AC will directly engage its own third-party monitoring contractor to monitor recipient performance and project results.

Q: On page 24, the NOFO states that “Grantees awarded under this announcement will be required to report all sub-awardees receiving funds of $25,000 or more to http://www.fsrs.gov.” Could NEA/AC please confirm that due to the sensitive nature of this activity, the resulting award(s) will not be subject to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reporting requirements?

A: This requirement can be waived if public disclosure poses a danger to the award recipients, sub-recipients, or beneficiaries. Applicants may request that this requirement be waived by the Grants Officer prior to making an award.

Q: Per the U.S Department of State Standards Terms and Conditions XII. Payments, could NEA/AC please confirm that eligible organizations will be entitled to advances?

A: Per 2 CFR 200.305, a recipient may receive advance payments, “… provided it maintains or demonstrates the willingness to maintain both written procedures that minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds and disbursement by the non-Federal entity, and financial management systems that meet the standards for fund control and accountability as established in

[2 CFE 200].”

Q: Pg. 12, IV. Substantial Involvement, NEA/AC Responsibilities e), “Each subaward package must include a proposal narrative, budget and budget justification, monitoring and evaluation plan, risk assessment, risk mitigation plan, vetting requirements, and branding requirements, and subaward agreement template for the proposed project.” If the prime applicant is proposing subaward partners, does the subaward package need to be completed at the time of proposal submission?

A: This is an excerpt from the terms and conditions which will appear in awards made under this NOFO. These requirements apply to subawards made after the award to the prime. If subawards are proposed in the application, the full subaward package does not need to be included in the application. The Project Narrative should clearly describe the subawardee’s responsibilities in the project, and the proposed budget should clearly identify the portion of the proposed budget allocated to sub-recipients.

Q: To what extent may NEA support the applicant’s potential facilitation of travel to and from northeastern Syria/opposition-held areas to areas outside of Syria, in order to foster ties and encourage engagement between Syrian diaspora and Syrians inside Syria, including among and between governance structures, civil society actors, and political opposition bodies?

A: Travel which is necessary to achieve the objectives of the NOFO is allowed under the award, but arranging and facilitating travel is the responsibility of the recipient. All international travel taking place under an award must be approved in advance by NEA/AC. The applicant’s Security, Risk Mitigation, & Contingency Planning Summary, which is a required component of the application, should address the risks associated with such travel and propose appropriate risk mitigation measures to ensure that travel can be done safely.

Q: Per page 5 of the NOFO, “applicants must incorporate plans on how their proposals will be de-conflicted with ongoing civilian assistance efforts implemented by other USG entities and international donors”. Given the sensitivity of the environment there is limited transparency into other USG entities and international donors’ current and planned activities in Syria.

Would DOS/NEA please provide a summary list (with necessary redactions, if any) of the ongoing civilian assistance efforts implemented by other USG entities and international donors considered to be at greatest risk of conflicting with Supporting Local Governance and Civil Society in Syria awards?

A: For the safety of NEA/AC’s partners in Syria, NEA/AC will not identify its current partners or beneficiaries at this time. NEA/AC will work with award recipients to identify other relevant activities, but applicants are expected to demonstrate a strong awareness of ongoing assistance activities in Syria, other donors, and partners.

Q: What level of coordination does NEA/AC anticipate with the START team?

A: NEA/AC coordinates all activities with the START team. Award recipients should anticipate coordinating closely with both NEA/AC and START.

SUBAWARDS AND PARTNERS

Q: In the requirements it says all sub-awardees should have a UEI or DUNS number. Does this apply to partners or to sub-grantees from local councils and civil society groups inside Syria?

and Q: NOFO Section V, page 13 says that both prime applicants and sub grantees must have a DUNs number and be active in SAM. For subgrantees, do they need to have a DUNs number and be active in SAM before the project start date or before the proposal submission date?

A: Thank you for noticing this error. Only the prime applicant is required to have a UEI or DUNS number and to be registered in SAM.gov. This is not required of proposed sub-recipients or beneficiaries.

Q: NOFO Section I, page 9 states "applicants should also articulate approaches to identifying appropriate partners." Will NEA/AC provide any guidance in determining what organization would be consider 'appropriate' by NEA/AC standards?

and Q: Will NEA/AC assist in making connections to the local governance entities and CSOs it has already supported in Northeast Syria?

Q: NOFO Section I, page 5, states that "the government seeks proposals to carry out targeted assistance projects in partnership with local governance entities and CSOs." Will the government identify local governance entities and CSOs that already have a good relationship with NEA/AC? Will the government identify local governance entities and CSOs that are not allowed to work with USG because of suspected ties to malign actors?

A: For the safety of NEA/AC’s partners in Syria, NEA/AC will not identify its current partners or beneficiaries at this time. NEA/AC will work closely with award recipients to identify potential partners in Syria. Equally, recipients are expected to identify partners and beneficiaries through their own efforts. As stated in the NOFO, vetting of recipients and sub-recipients is a condition of award and will be performed by the Department of State’s Office of Risk Analysis Management. This is the Department of State’s primary means of ensuring that assistance does not benefit malign actors.

Q: NOFO Section IV, page 12 states that "DOS will assume the lead in identifying areas of opportunity and introducing potential programming partners to the recipient." How will this process be carried out? Does the awardee have any say in who is awarded a subgrant?

and Q: On page 20 of the NOFO, under VIII. Application Review and Selection Process, it states that beneficiaries selection criteria and process will be evaluated under the project design.

However, on page 5 of the NOFO it states: “NEA/AC’s DC and field staff will work closely with the grantee and provide direction regarding planned beneficiaries of assistance, including but not limited to the selection of beneficiary organizations and scope of programming.” Can NEA clarify how applicants will be reviewed on selection criteria when NEA will conduct selection of beneficiary organizations?

and Q: The solicitation notes that NEA/AC responsibilities may include substantial subaward involvement. What is the envisioned role of NEA/AC in subaward selection and management?

Can NEA/AC elaborate on what is meant by “DOS will assume the lead in identifying areas of opportunity and introducing potential programming partners to the recipient”?

A: The Department of State will have substantial involvement in the award, meaning that the recipient will be expected to collaborate very closely with DoS in identifying opportunities and subawards. Many subaward partners will be identified by DoS and put in touch with the recipient. Equally, recipients are expected to identify partners and beneficiaries through their own efforts. All subawards must be approved by DoS prior to commencing, but DoS does not have the authority to force a recipient to make a subaward to an organization it does not wish to partner with.

Q: Does donor approval of a program award constitute approval of named partners who are written as part of the program design in the proposal, or would there be an additional level of approval?

A: Sub-awards which are described in the application and accounted for in the proposed budget are considered to be approved at the time of award unless stated otherwise by NEA/AC. All sub-awards made after the initial award must receive approval from NEA/AC prior to proceeding.

Additionally, all recipients and sub-recipients are subject to vetting as a condition of award.

ELIGIBILITY

Q: I work for a commercial company that aims to disrupt violent extremism in the online space - could you clarify whether for-profit companies are eligible to apply?

A: Yes, for-profit companies are eligible to apply. However, no recipient may earn a profit from an award under this NOFO. All awards will be made on a cost-reimbursable basis (including advance payments for short-term cash needs).

Q: Can a prime applicant contract with a for-profit company for specific services and products? Such as a training company or a survey company? How will this relationship be governed?

A: Yes, applicants may contract with for-profit companies for services under an award.

Information on how to conduct and manage such procurements can be found in the Procurement Standards (2 CFR 200.317 through 2 CFR 200.326).

APPLICATION DOCUMENTS

Q: Please confirm that the Results Monitoring Plan (RMP) is an Optional Document subject to the 10-page limit for Optional Documents.

A: As stated in the NOFO, the Logic Model/ Results Monitoring Plan is a required document which may not exceed 3 pages.

Q: Page 13 of the Application Guidance notes that the Key Personnel should include a Program Director and/or Program Coordinator. The guidance then goes on to list a Program Director, Program Coordinator, and Financial or Business Official. However, these positions are not listed in the NOFO. Can NEA confirm that applicants are able to identify Key Personnel that best align with their proposed program activities and results and not limited to these two (or three) individuals?

A: The key personnel positions described in the Application Guidance document are illustrative examples. The applicant should propose key personnel who best align with the proposed activities.

Q: Is there a limit to the number of key personnel applicants may propose?

A: There is no limit on the number of key personnel which may be proposed, but please note that key personnel are defined as individuals whose leadership ability, experience, or subject matter expertise are essential to the successful completion of the proposed activities.

Q: Will NEA/AC consider increasing the Project Narrative page limit for bidders who submit proposals for two or more of the assistance objectives listed on page 2? May bidders include a one-page coversheet as part of the Project Narrative without it counting against the 15 page limitation? Will NEA/AC consider approving the inclusion of an Executive Summary of up to two pages, to be counted separately from the Project Narrative page limits? May bidders include a one-page acronyms list as part of the Project Narrative without it counting against the 15 page limitation?

and Q: May offerors provide a cover page, table of contents, acronym list, and/or executive summary that are non-counting pages as part of the Project Narrative?

A: No. The page limit for the Project Narrative section of the proposal is 15 pages for all applicants. Cover sheets, executive summaries and acronym lists will be counted against the 15 page limit. Such documents may be provided as Optional Documents, but these will count against the 10 page limit for the Optional Documents portion of the application. Pages submitted in excess of the stated page limits will not be reviewed by the technical evaluation panel.

Q: Is Project Timeline optional or required? If Project Timeline is required, will the project narrative be increased from 15 to 17 pages?

A: As stated in the NOFO, the Project Timeline is a required document with a maximum length of 2 pages. This is separate from the Project Narrative which has a maximum length of 15 pages.

Q: Is Sustainability Plan optional or required? If the Sustainability plan is optional, can NEA confirm the 10 page limit for the section Optional Documents?

A: As stated in the NOFO, the Sustainability Plan is an optional document with a maximum length of 2 pages. This counts against the 10 page maximum for the Optional Documents portion of the application.

Q: Will NEA/AC consider increasing the page limit for section A.2 Optional Documents? For example, will NEA/AC consider an additional 5 pages if bidding on two assistance objectives or an additional 10 pages if bidding on all three assistance objectives?

A: No. The page limit for the Optional Documents section of the proposal is 10 pages for all applicants. Pages submitted in excess of 10 will not be reviewed by the technical evaluation panel.

Q: Will NEA/AC please confirm the Logic Model of up to three pages referenced on NOFO page 16 refers to Appendix 2 Results Monitoring Plan?

A: Correct. The Logic Model/ Results Monitoring plan template can be found in Appendix 2.

Q: Could NEA/AC kindly confirm that CVs may be added in an annex?

A: Per the NOFO, applicants are required to submit biographical data/ CVs for proposed key personnel. Additional CVs may be attached as optional documents.

Q: Section VI, Logic Model, on page 16 requests that we develop a Logic Model/Results Monitoring Plan using Appendix 2 as a template. Because Appendix 2 is 3 pages long without content, would NEA consider increasing the allowable pages for this requirement so that we can adequately show indicators and project activities?

A: No. The Logic Model/ Results Monitoring Plan should be a concise summary of the project’s objectives and expected results which does not need to provide granular level detail on the proposed activities. Applicants should feel free to remove the instructions from the template to allow more space for applicant content.

Q: Section VI, Application Formatting Requirements, on page 17 states the required font is 12-point, Times New Roman. For ease of readability, please confirm that tables and figures can use a smaller font size or different font face (such as Arial), as long as content is easily readable.

and Q: Pg. 17, VI. Application and Submission Information, Application Formatting Requirements, “The required font is 12-point, Times New Roman. All application documents must be single spaced, with all margins of at least one inch each.” For tables, charts, and graphics, can NEA confirm the formatting requirements?

and Q: On page 17 of the NOFO, it states that the required font is 12-point, Times New Roman.

Can NEA confirm that a smaller, yet legible font size is acceptable for tables, charts, textboxes, and other graphics as is usually permitted in applications?

A: Yes, it is acceptable to present tables and figures in fonts and sizes other than Times New Roman 12-point so long as the content remains easily readable. The main body of text must remain in Times New Roman 12-point.