DOE-FOA-0002820 EM MSIPP FOA Q&A 9-11-23.pdf

DOE-EM MSIPP DE-FOA-0002820

September 11, 2023

DOE-EM MSIPP FOA Application Q&A’s

The Webinar was held as scheduled on September 6, 2023. Please use the below weblink to view.

https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/docs/video/DOE- EM%20MSIPP%20FOA%20Webinar-20230906_113515- Meeting%20Recording.mp4

Q1: Are an excel budget and Certs/Assurances required for each subaward as well?

A1: Certs/Assurances can be submitted for the prime recipient only. The budget can be a combined spreadsheet from the prime recipient that captures the cost of the sub awards, or it can be a separate spreadsheet from the sub award.

Q2: When submitting the proposal, should the university budget include the national lab’s costs, such as national lab staff labor and facility costs?

A2: No, the cost for national labs should not be included in the budget as these labs are already funded by the federal government. Costs required for the MSI, such as travel requirements for meetings with the national lab, can be included.

Q3: Does the title of the final proposal need to be the same as the concept paper?

A3: For tracking purposes, keeping the title the same would be desirable; however, you will not be evaluated negatively if you've adjusted the title.

Q4: We had a participating institute who could not participate due to their institutional restrictions.

Does this need to be addressed in the full proposal?

A4: Yes, it would be prudent to mention that in the scope since it is a change from what was planned in the concept paper; however, it is not necessary to dedicate a lot of your page limit towards that.

You may mention in a couple of sentences that you had planned participation and it didn't work out for a variety of reasons.

Q5: When we say students, can this include undergrads and grad students? Is there a preference for undergrads? For undergrads, is there a preference for freshman vs juniors/seniors?

A5: Both undergraduate and graduate students can be included. There is no preference either way.

Q6: Can you describe makeup of the DOE evaluation team?

A6: We have selected a variety of individuals. All the voting members of the evaluation team are federal employees with various experience in the different topic areas. We also have other advisors who will review the applications and weigh in based on their area of subject matter expertise.

https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/docs/video/DOE-EM%20MSIPP%20FOA%20Webinar-20230906_113515-Meeting%20Recording.mp4 https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/docs/video/DOE-EM%20MSIPP%20FOA%20Webinar-20230906_113515-Meeting%20Recording.mp4 https://www.emcbc.doe.gov/docs/video/DOE-EM%20MSIPP%20FOA%20Webinar-20230906_113515-Meeting%20Recording.mp4

Q7: Is there a page limitation for each section of the technical volume?

A7: No, there is no page limitation for each respective section of the technical volume. DOE will not be rigid on counting those pages as long as it is within the overall 50-page limit.

Q8: Is there a specific guidance for line spacing- single, double or 1.5 line spacing?

A8: Single spacing is required (see page 15 of the FOA).

Q9: Can we include experiential research component for undergraduate students to work on mentor-guided research as part of their curricula?

A9: Yes, so long as there is a good balance within your proposal of workforce development components as well as the experiential research. Experiential research should not be the main focus.

Q10: Are letters of support from various project stakeholders helpful to include?

A10: Yes, letters of support are helpful and do not go toward the overall page count. You are welcome to include them in the “Other” section of grants.gov.

Q11: Since the lab will not get any funding from the participation with universities, for the collaborative labs, what is the expectation regarding project participation? When we submit the proposal, is a support/collaboration letter from the national lab staff sufficient?

A11: The support or collaboration letter would be sufficient for us to have that expectation that the collaboration would occur.

Q12: Do students supported need to be under-represented minorities? Or just enrolled at the participating MSIs?

A12: Ideally, they would be unrepresentative minorities, but the FOA is a set-aside for minority serving institutions that are designated that by the Department of Education. Any students pursuing their education from that MSI would be acceptable.

Q13: Do student participants need to be US citizens?

A13: There is no requirement for participants to be a U.S. Citizen, but it is recommended. Having a non-U.S. Citizen on the effort may add additional steps and delays to allow DOE to complete the security review process.

Q14: What percentage of funds should be budgeted if necessary for a national lab collaborator?

A14: DOE does not have a preference for what percentage of the project is budgeted for collaboration with a national lab.

Q15: Is an overseas travel budget allowed as part of professional or workforce development, experiential learning, and research for students?

A15: Generally, overseas travel is an allowable charge if it directly relates to successfully completing the objectives of the effort; however, if such training or experiential learning could be gained domestically, that option should be explored first.

Q16: As an educational proposal (not R&D), can the research projects be proposed for REU (student training, etc.)?

A16: Yes, there may be some incidental research taking place through these awards, but the focus needs to be more on the training that these students are receiving that could help them out as a future workforce for DOE-EM.

Q17: Can we can present a budget for a subrecipient (a collaborating university) without a formal certification or agreement between the prime recipient and the subrecipient. In other words, the prime recipient can develop a subcontract with the subrecipient after an award is made?

A17: Yes, a budget can be included for a subrecipient without a formal agreement between the prime and recipient during application preparation, with the expectation that the subaward will be finalized after award.