eda rnta - metrics ffo-7-8-2015.pdf

ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDING OPPORTUNITY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Federal Agency Name: Economic Development Administration (EDA), U.S. Department of

Commerce (DOC)

Federal Funding Opportunity Title: Innovative Metrics for Economic Development –

Proof of Concept Study

Announcement Type and Date: Initial announcement of Federal Funding Opportunity

(FFO) publishing EDA’s application submission requirements and review procedures for applications received under EDA’s Research and Evaluation Program (R&E), as authorized by section 207 of the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended

(PWEDA) (42 U.S.C. § 3147). Effective date: Wednesday, July 8, 2015.

Funding Opportunity Number: EDA-HDQ-RNTA-2015-2004523

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 11.312, Economic

Development – Research and Evaluation.

Dates: To be considered timely a completed application must be transmitted and time-stamped at www.grants.gov (Grants.gov) no later than Friday, August 21, 2015 at 11:59 pm

Eastern Time. Any application received after Friday, August 21, 2015 at 11:59 pm Eastern

Time will be considered non-responsive and will not be considered for funding. This announcement solicits applications for a research project and it is anticipated that one or multiple awards may be made. EDA expects to notify the applicant selected under this FFO by September 30, 2015.

Applicant Submissions: Applicants are advised to carefully read the application and submission information provided in section IV of this announcement. Applicants must submit applications electronically at Grants.gov.

Eligible Applicants: Pursuant to section 3(4) of PWEDA (42 U.S.C. § 3122(4)) and 13 CFR

§ 300.3 (Eligible Recipient), eligible applicants for and recipients of EDA investment assistance include a District Organization; an Indian Tribe or a consortium of Indian Tribes; a

State; a city or other political subdivision of a State, including a special purpose unit of a

State or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions; an institution of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; or a public or private non-profit organization or association acting in cooperation with officials of a political subdivision of a State.

Federal Funding Opportunity Description: EDA seeks applications to develop and test measures, metrics, indicators, and methodologies to help the agency more effectively assess, evaluate, and report on the full impact of its economic development investments on regional http://www.grants.gov/ economies across the Nation. Proposals must discuss how robust indicators and metrics will be identified; establish appropriate program metrics for EDA investments and validate the statistical relationship between grant outputs and outcomes (capacity building) and realized

(economic growth, competitiveness and sustainability) outcomes. EDA is particularly interested in appropriate program metrics for non-construction, innovation-supporting programs. Models must include testing on EDA grantees, an impact analysis design and how a valid statistical methodology will corroborate that the proposed metric model works. All metrics should be consistent with EDA’s logic model. Deliverables will include an implementation toolkit accessible to EDA staff with operational recommendations in addition to reports establishing proven metrics, supporting analysis and statistical corroboration.

FULL ANNOUNCEMENT TEXT

Innovative Metrics for Economic Development – Proof of Concept Study

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

FULL ANNOUNCEMENT TEXT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Overview

B. Definitions

C. Desired Activities and Outcomes

D. What is the purpose of the Research and Evaluation Program?

E. Statutory authority for the Research and Evaluation Program

II. Award Information

A. What funding is available under this announcement?

B. What type of funding instrument will be used to make awards?

C. What is the anticipated project period and completion timeframe?

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

B. Cost Sharing or Matching

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. How to Obtain an Application Package

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

C. Unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

D. Deadlines for submission

E. How to submit an application

V. Application Review and Selection Process

A. Evaluation criteria

B. Review and Selection Process

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award notification

B. Administrative and national policy requirements

C. Reporting requirements

D. Regulations, administrative requirements, and cost principles

E. EDA’s Non-relocation Policy

F. OMB Uniform Guidance audit requirements

VII. Other Information

A. Freedom of Information Act Disclosure

B. Past Performance and Non-Compliance with Award Provisions

C. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System and Central Contractor Registration

D. Restrictions Governing Making Grants to Corporations Convicted of Felony Criminal

Violations and/or Unpaid Federal Tax Liabilities

E. Intergovernmental review

F. Implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

G. Requirements pertaining to publications and data

VIII. Agency Contact

IX. Instructions for Application Submission via Grants.gov

Appendix A. Representation by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent Tax

Liability or a Felony Conviction Under Any Federal Law

Appendix B. Logic Models for i6, JIAC and TAAF Programs

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Overview

High-quality performance measurement and program evaluation is imperative to ensuring effective economic development programming. Traditionally, EDA has evaluated the performance of its programs based on the extent to which they support job creation and leverage private investment, and improve a region’s capacity to do so. At the time of award, EDA gathers data on the impact that an investment is expected to yield (based on data provided by project beneficiaries) and collects and measures actual impact from project activities (using information submitted by grantees) three, six, and nine years after the initial award. This methodology is based on a study conducted by Rutgers University in 1996, which was updated by Grant

Thornton in 2008 in an independent evaluation of EDA’s programs. EDA also collects information annually from its various partner organizations such as District Organizations, University Centers, and Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers, on their respective project activities and the impacts they have had.

Since 2011, EDA has supported work to develop a new system of performance measurement and program evaluation based on the research of notable economists, past and present, incorporating the best principles, theories and models that are broadly applicable to economic development. In fact, the foundation of EDA’s new research model involved a fresh look at economic development, resulting in a new definition of economic development (See

Definitions below) that emphasizes the importance of local capacity-building to long term economic growth and prosperity. This important work has broad applicability to the field of economic development and is not restricted in its context to EDA, but rather to all economic development programs.

In 2011, EDA awarded a grant to a team that helped refine the critical definitions, build a logic model and identify data sources for potential metrics. These potential metrics were tested in 2013 via selected assessments which wrapped up in 2014. The results of the assessments provided EDA with a foundation for more robust longitudinal performance measurement to enable more targeted programming and policy analysis. These assessments provide field-based research to permit expanded and more robust measures of capacity building for innovation based firms, technical assistance providers and start-ups. The reports establish high-level relationships between the role of government investments in creating and enhancing worker and firm capabilities and firm growth and competitiveness. The new types of capacity-building measures appear to correlate with increased innovation, product sales, employee training and knowledge and other benefits. (These assessment reports are available on EDA’s website at:

http://www.eda.gov/tools/#research-reports.) EDA recognizes that more robust testing is needed to prove the concept of specific capacity-based metrics to expand the understanding of economic development and result in new tools that will enable practitioners to improve economic development programming.

With its new Regional Innovation Strategy program

, EDA will be collecting data from grantees on some new pilot metrics, including Technology Readiness Levels, which will let EDA better understand changes in innovation capacity in an eco-system. Under this competitive solicitation, EDA seeks applications to develop and test measures, metrics, indicators, and methodologies to help the agency more effectively assess, evaluate, and report on the full impact of its economic development investments on regional economies across the Nation. Proposals must discuss how robust indicators and metrics will be identified; establish appropriate program metrics for EDA investments and validate the statistical relationship between grant outputs and outcomes (capacity building) and realized (economic growth, competitiveness and sustainability) outcomes. EDA is particularly interested in appropriate program metrics for non-construction, innovation-supporting programs. (See Definitions section.) Models must include support for the connections between how EDA activities assessed by the metric link to and reflect economic development outcomes consistent with EDA’s logic model. In addition to proven metrics with supporting analysis and statistical corroboration, deliverables will include an implementation toolkit with operational recommendations.

B. Definitions

Economic Development is the expansion of capacities that contribute to the advancement of society through the realization of individual, firm and community potential. Economic development is measured by a sustained increase in prosperity and quality of life through innovation, lowered transaction costs, and the utilization of capabilities towards the responsible production and diffusion of goods and services. Economic development requires effective institutions grounded in norms of openness, tolerance for risk, appreciation for diversity, and confidence in the realization of mutual gain for the public and the private sector. Economic development is essential to creating the conditions for economic growth and ensuring our economic future.

EDA distinguishes economic development from economic growth which is a simple increase in aggregate output. American cities and regional economies are restructuring in light of dramatic global economic integration and increased competition. There is a need to not only lift less prosperous places but to also ensure that the full range of communities can actively achieve their

For more information about EDA’s Regional Innovation Strategy Program, view http://eda.gov/oie/files/2014-risp-overview.pdf http://www.eda.gov/tools/#research-reports http://eda.gov/oie/files/2014-risp-overview.pdf http://eda.gov/oie/files/2014-risp-overview.pdf potential. A modern view of economic development requires creating the preconditions or capacities that support creativity, collaborative problem solving and information sharing, and lowering the costs of engaging in innovation.

Logic Model: EDA’s general logic model is useful to visually depict (reading right to left) how outcomes may be traced to types of capacity increases stemming from activities and programs.

Government investment can build capacity that will translate into a set of realized outcomes fostering economic development. The logic is that government investment can build the resources and infrastructure that enable private sector activity to succeed. In EDA’s Logic

Model, there are two phases of Realized Outcomes, which are the results of private sector utilization of the capacity that is the result of government investment. EDA investment builds capacity in places and communities. The uptake by the private sector utilizing that capacity produces tangible outcomes, such as jobs, exports and additional investment. The ultimate policy objectives on the right-hand side are articulated as long-term Prosperity and Quality of Life. The left-hand side of the Logic Model provides the current set of EDA programmatic inputs: Public

Works, Economic Adjustment, Regional Innovation Strategies, Partnership Planning, Trade

Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF), Technical Assistance.

In addition to EDA’s general logic model, researchers developed programmatic level logic models for the i6, Jobs and Innovation Accelerator Challenge (JIAC) and TAAF programs.

These three programmatic logic models can be viewed in Appendix B of this FFO. The underlying logic and definition of economic development that EDA uses is discussed in more detail in a seminal work, produced as part of a grant supported by EDA.

Feldman, et al, “The Logic of Economic Development: A Definition and Model for Investment.” 2014; available at http://www.eda.gov/tools.

Ibid.

http://www.eda.gov/tools

C. Desired Activities and Outcomes

EDA seeks to accomplish the following activities and outcomes with this award:

a) Reports that validate indicators and metrics of changes in capabilities and aggregate capacity of EDA grantees and their beneficiaries to achieve development outcomes, demonstrating the linkages from a targeted set of resources, activities and outputs to intermediate (capacity) outcomes and realized (final) outcomes.

b) Proof of concept studies that use impact analysis models to demonstrate that a performance metric works as intended (e.g. is valid and reliable) and is consistent with

EDA's logic model. The proof of concept studies must be based on specific EDA programs and use valid statistical corroboration to prove that the proposed indicators and metrics provide statistically valid data and information that may be used to analyze and assess the effects and objectives of EDA grant programs.

c) An implementation toolkit that provides operational recommendations and includes the selected metric's definition, data collection process (including forms), how the metric will be used to assess progress, the means to continually collect and update the data, and clearly identify what represents a scale to understand the metric (i.e., what represents meaningful change across the metric).

D. What is the purpose of the Research and Evaluation Program?

Through the Research and Evaluation (R&E) program, EDA supports the development of tools, recommendations, and resources that shape Federal economic development policies and inform economic development decision-making at the local level. R&E program investments provide critical, cutting-edge research and best practices to regional, state, and local practitioners in the economic development field, thereby enhancing understanding and implementation of economic development concepts throughout the country. EDA also regularly evaluates the impacts and outcomes of its various programs as a means of identifying policy and program modifications that will increase the agency’s efficiency and effectiveness.

E. Statutory authority for the Research and Evaluation Program

The authority for the R&E program is listed in section 207 (42 U.S.C. § 3147) of

PWEDA, and 13 CFR part 306, subpart A. EDA’s regulations, which will govern an award made under this announcement, are codified at 13 CFR chapter III.

II. Award Information

A. What funding is available under this announcement?

EDA anticipates that the award made under this announcement will involve a fifteen (15) month project period and plans to allocate up to $300,000 in no-year funds appropriated under the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 113-235) (The

Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015 [division B of P.L.

113-235]) for this purpose through the R&E program.

However, this funding period and funding amount is subject to the availability of funds at the time of award, as well as to DOC and EDA priorities at the time of award. Neither DOC nor

EDA will be held responsible for application preparation costs. Publication of this FFO does not obligate DOC or EDA to award any specific cooperative agreement or to obligate all or any part of available funds.

B. What type of funding instrument will be used to make awards?

Subject to the availability of funds, EDA anticipates that an award made under this competitive solicitation will be in the form of a cooperative agreement. For a cooperative agreement, the nature of EDA’s “substantial involvement” (to be included in the terms and conditions of the award) will generally be collaboration between EDA and the recipient on the scope of work. However, other possible examples of EDA’s “substantial involvement” may include, but are not limited to: (i) authority to halt immediately an activity if detailed performance specifications are not met; (ii) stipulation that the recipient must meet or adhere to specific procedural requirements before subsequent stages of a project may continue; (iii) involvement in the selection of key recipient personnel; and (iv) operational involvement and monitoring during the project to ensure compliance with statutory requirements.

C. What is the anticipated project period and completion timeframe?

EDA anticipates a fifteen (15) month project period, subject to the availability of funds, EDA policy, and satisfactory performance under the award. Applicants should ensure that their proposal and budget clearly specify how they will complete the Scope of Work within this timeframe. A typical project period begins with an initial kickoff meeting between the recipient and EDA staff to discuss project scope and to ensure that all parties are in agreement as to project terms. After the initial meeting, the recipient generally submits a final work plan to EDA staff for review and approval. Progress and financial reports and project work will be submitted to EDA based on the dates agreed to during the initial meeting and as outlined in the award special terms and conditions.

The recipient will be expected to submit deliverables, including a report and implementation toolkit, at least 60 days before the end of the project period for EDA’s review.

Based on the agency’s review, EDA may request technical and substantive revisions to the deliverables. If these revisions are incorporated and the draft reports and implementation toolkit is ultimately approved, EDA will then approve publication of a final research report which the recipient may not sell and the recipient will brief EDA senior management on research methods and report results.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

Pursuant to section 3(4) of PWEDA (42 U.S.C. § 3122(4)) and 13 CFR § 300.3 (Eligible

Recipients), eligible applicants for and recipients of EDA investment assistance include a

District Organization; an Indian Tribe or a consortium of Indian Tribes; a State; a city or other political subdivision of a State, including a special purpose unit of a State or local government engaged in economic or infrastructure development activities, or a consortium of political subdivisions; an institution of higher education or a consortium of institutions of higher education; or a public or private non-profit organization or association acting in cooperation with officials of a political subdivision of a State.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching

Generally, the amount of the EDA cooperative agreement may not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the project. However, under this announcement, the Assistant Secretary of

Commerce for Economic Development (“Assistant Secretary”) has established a maximum EDA investment rate of up to 100 percent where the project (a) merits, and is not otherwise feasible without, such an increase to the EDA investment rate; or (b) will be of no or only incidental financial benefit to the recipient. See section 204(c)(3) of PWEDA (42 U.S.C. § 3144); 13 CFR §

301.4(b)(4).

EDA will consider the nature of the contribution (cash or in-kind), the amount of any matching share funds, and fairly assess any in-kind contributions in evaluating the cost to the

Federal government and the feasibility of the project budget (see section V. below). While cash contributions are preferred, in-kind contributions, fairly evaluated by EDA may provide the non-

Federal share of the total project costs. See section 204(b) of PWEDA (42 U.S.C. § 3144). In-kind contributions, which may include assumptions of debt and contributions of space, equipment, and services, are eligible to be included as part of the non-Federal share of eligible project costs if they meet applicable Federal cost principles and uniform administrative requirements.

Funds from other Federal assistance awards are considered matching share funds only if authorized by the statute, which may be determined by EDA’s reasonable interpretation of the statute. See the definition of “Local Share or Matching Share” at 13 CFR § 300.3. The applicant must show that the matching share is committed to the project for the entire project period, will be available as needed, and is not conditioned or encumbered in any way that precludes its use consistent with the requirements of EDA investment assistance. See 13 CFR §

301.5.

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. How to Obtain an Application Package

Applicants may access the application package for this FFO electronically at www.grants.gov (Grants.gov). Applicants may search for this funding opportunity on Grants.gov using Funding Opportunity Number “EDA-HDQ-RNTA-2015-2004523”. All components of the appropriate application package may be accessed and downloaded (in a screen-fillable format) at http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp. The preferred electronic file format for attachments is Adobe portable document format (PDF); however, EDA will accept electronic files in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or Microsoft Excel. Applicants are advised that they must complete the registration process prior to submitting an application through Grants.gov;

however, please note that registration is not required for an applicant to access, view, or download the application package. Even though an applicant may be able to view and download an application, if the applicant has not correctly completed the Grants.gov registration process, the applicant will not be able to submit the application for EDA’s review. Alternatively, an

See 2 CFR § 200.306.

applicant eligible for assistance under this announcement may request a paper application package by contacting RNTA@eda.gov.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

To be considered complete, an application package must consist of:

All required forms;

The Proposal, which includes the Executive Summary, Project Narrative, Organizational Capacity/Project Management Experience and Budget Description;

Major Milestones/Deliverables and

Addenda to the Proposal.

Applications that do not contain all required forms listed in each part, or that fail to adhere to the instructions in this FFO, may be considered incomplete and may not be considered for funding. Additional application materials not requested under this FFO will not be reviewed or evaluated.

Applicants are advised to carefully read the instructions contained in this FFO and in all forms contained in the application package. It is the sole responsibility of each applicant to ensure that a complete application package is received.

1. Required Forms

All applicants must include the following forms at the time of application submission. The forms should be uploaded as separate Adobe PDF files. All forms listed in this section will be available in the Grants.gov application package.

1. One Form ED-900 (Application for Investment Assistance) and accompanying supporting documentation. One complete form per project is required. Please read the information below carefully for important instructions on required topics that must be included in Form ED-900 and the related Project Narrative.

2. One Form SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) from each co-applicant.

3. One Form SF-424A (Budget Information – Non-Construction Programs) per project.

4. One Form SF-424B (Assurances-Non-Construction Programs) from each co-applicant.

5. One Form CD-511 (Certification Regarding Lobbying) from each co-applicant.

6. One Form SF-LLL (Disclosure of Lobbying Activities) from each co-applicant.

The Form ED-900 is divided into lettered sections that correspond to specific program components that address EDA’s statutory and regulatory requirements. The Form ED-900 details the sections and exhibits that must be completed based on program type. Because this announcement seeks Research and Evaluation Assistance applications only, an applicant needs to complete those sections of the Form ED-900 identified in the table below. Complete instructions are included in the Form ED-900.

EDA Program Required Form ED-900 Sections

Research and Evaluation Assistance Complete Sections A, C, and E and Exhibit B.

2. Proposal Content

The Proposal must clearly articulate the overall goals of the project, the specific and distinct

Scopes of Work and concrete activities that will be accomplished under it. The Proposal must also demonstrate each applicant’s capability to implement the proposed activities in accordance with the requirements of this FFO. Applications will be evaluated based on the Evaluation

Criteria outlined in section V. Applicants should carefully adhere to the page limits specified for each section of the proposal. Pages beyond the specified page limit for each section will not be read or considered.

a) Project Narrative

The Project Narrative should address all activities that will be undertaken using the funds requested under this FFO, a summary of how these activities support the overall project’s goals, and a clear vision for the final report. The Project Narrative may not exceed 20-single sided, 8.5x11-inch pages, with a minimum 12-point font and 1-inch margins. Within the Project

Narrative, applicants should address the following elements:

EDA solicits competitive applications from organizations or consortia that will expand on the agency’s existing body of research and experience related to performance measurement.

EDA seeks a research partner to build off of EDA’s current logic models to:

Identify robust indicators and measures.

Establish appropriate program metrics for EDA investments, particularly non-construction innovation-supporting programs.

Validate statistical relationships between grant outputs and outcomes (capacity building) and realized (economic growth, competitiveness and sustainability) outcomes, using EDA’s logic models as hypothetical guides for such potential relationships.

Develop an implementation toolkit for selected metrics with operational recommendations.

This work will require the applicant to identify, pilot, and refine appropriate performance and outcome measures, establish clear linkages of these metrics to EDA’s logic model, identify data collection processes, and provide statistical corroboration for validation methods. As any work proposal will build upon EDA’s logic model, applicants are strongly encouraged to examine the programmatic logic models located in Appendix B as well as review the white paper outlining the design and construction of EDA’s logic model.

EDA envisions that the results of this proposed study would include recommendations on multiple specific metrics EDA could use to measure its performance and better capture economic development activities in an eco-system. This data set could be collected and submitted by grantees (e.g., as a condition of awarding grant funds or as a post-approval condition under an award) to document the results of their own activities and the activities of beneficiaries, or could take the form of an easily accessible, independent data source(s) to help inform EDA’s measurement of its own activities.

Feldman, et al, “The Logic of Economic Development: A Definition and Model for Investment.” 2014; available at http://www.eda.gov/tools.

http://www.eda.gov/tools

In preparing applications, applicants should articulate which area of EDA’s logic model they will focus on and what type of activities funded by EDA they will examine.

EDA is particularly interested in metrics for non-construction innovation-supporting programs, such as commercialization centers and proof-of-concept centers.

Applicants must identify what metric or metrics they intend to develop and prove to advance performance measurement consonant with EDA’s logic model. The successful applicant will identify existing research reports and academic papers to buttress linkages between selected metric, funded activities, outputs and economic development outcomes.

To the greatest extent possible, performance and outcome measures should be based on third-party data that meet EDA’s Information Quality Guidelines, are easily produced, scalable to the resources available to grantees and to EDA’s regional offices, replicable and independently validated. The successful applicant will ensure that identified measures (i) are reasonable, feasible, and applicable for regional economic development evaluation purposes, and

(ii) facilitate subsequent comparisons of economic development investment impacts across time and geographical entities.

At a minimum, the following deliverables are required, and the applicant should identify how they plan to meet each of the requirements including quantity, level, and depth, and also identify any additional intermediate products and services:

1) Report(s) that include documentation supporting linkages across chosen metric or metrics and the movement from economic development activities to outputs and outcomes.

o Successful applicants will articulate how they will identify the connections that link the selected metric(s) across EDA’s logic model and with economic development, demonstrating how activities are linked to outputs and outputs to outcomes for the targeted set of activities and metric;

o Successful applicants will provide information on the following questions:

What is the rationale for the metric or metrics being selected?

What is the extent of the background that the applicant has in working with this metric or type of metrics?

How extensive is existing documentation proving the selected metric(s) connection to economic development?

2) Proof of concept studies that use impact analysis models consistent with EDA's logic model and based on specific EDA programs. The proof of concept studies must prove using valid statistical methodology that the proposed metric model works as intended.

In general, a proof of concept center may be physical or virtual and works with very early stage innovations, ideas, intellectual property, and research to provide documented evidence that a product or service can be successful.

Commercialization centers work with later stage innovations, ideas, intellectual property, and support research to complete and refine those innovation; to fine-tune market opportunity and support the steps toward a viable or expanded business.

To review the relevant Information Quality Guidelines, see http://ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/Information_Quality/index.htm EDA’s six regional offices are located in Atlanta, Austin, Chicago, Denver, Philadelphia and Seattle.

o Applicants should demonstrate how they will pilot metric(s). In this regard, applicants should propose statistically rigorous methods of evaluation. Successful applicants will provide information on the following:

What are the features of a successful metric?

How will the applicant demonstrate that the metric works as intended using statistical corroboration? What methodology does the applicant intend to use for its proof of concept study and statistical analysis?

What level of observation would be necessary to prove the metric(s)?

Applicants should consider various cases for average funding amounts and size of grants, but include a case with a small grant population, for example, if the active portfolio of an investment type consisted of 20 to 30 grants with an average funding amount of $500,000. What is the sample size necessary of EDA projects to test the proposed metric(s)? What existing information would the applicant need from existing EDA grantees to test the metric(s)?

o The successful applicant will propose a methodology for piloting proposed measures that will equitably gauge impacts across rural and urban areas, ensure geographic diversity of input, and solicit feedback on the various types of EDA’s investments. To the extent possible, this methodology should include measures for which data can easily be replicated and collected by third parties, EDA’s grantees and relevant regional office staff.

3) Documents that provide the selected metric(s)'s: definition, data collection process

(including forms), how the metric will be used to assess progress; the means to continually collect and update the data; and clearly identify what represents a scale to understand the metric (i.e. what represents meaningful change across the metric). Successful applicants will address the following:

o Are there multiple ways that EDA could collect information related to the selected area of economic development? Are there third party data sources which meet

EDA’s Information Quality Guidelines that could be used as an alternative to grantee-reported data? What are the strengths and weakness of each approach?

o If the metric relies on data collection from grantees or beneficiaries, what is the balance between feasibility and burdening the public with data collection?

o What are the distinctive elements for the implementation toolkit for selected metric(s) and what communication mechanisms will make this toolkit accessible to EDA staff?

o At a minimum, a successful applicant would provide a peer-review quality final report, which will include an explanation of the new measures and data collection and validation methods. The report should present project findings using easily accessible language and explanations of the findings of the study, the measures proposed, definitions of the data elements used, and the process at EDA and at the local level by which data should be collected, evaluated, and validated going forward.

b) Organizational Capacity and Project Management

A separate section on Organization Capacity, including Project Management experience should address all activities that will be undertaken using the funds requested under this FFO, a summary of how these activities support the overall project’s goals, and a clear vision for the final report. Organization Capacity and Project Management may not exceed 5-single sided, 8.5x11-inch pages, with a minimum 12-point font and 1-inch margins. Note: resumes for key personnel should be included under Addenda to the Proposal and will not count against the page limitations of this section. (See Addenda section below). Within the Organization Capacity and

Project Management section, applicants should address the following elements:

The ideal organization for this work will be able to work collaboratively with Federal partners and economic development organizations, and demonstrate:

Subject matter expertise in the various aspects of a regional ecosystem including, economic development, workforce development, and others.

Functional expertise in the major components of the work, including leadership and facilitation of projects related to evaluations, performance measurement and developing metrics.

Experience coordinating with Federal Project Managers and collaborating with various partners.

Expertise in using statistical methods to provide corroboration.

Experience in developing reports and presenting results, particular in generating a set of actionable recommendations for how selected metric(s) could be implemented to measure change.

Expertise in other activities that would result in feasible, proven metrics which will improve the ability to understand economic development.

c) Budget Description

A separate budget narrative must be created and submitted to describe the costs associated with each line item on the Form SF-424A. Supporting documentation listing the components of these categories must be included. The budget narrative should include a personnel plan listing all positions proposed to be charged to the project whether as Federal or non-Federal costs. The personnel plan must include the position titles, salaries, percentage of time dedicated to the project, and amount of salary charged to the project for each staff member assigned to the project. The sum of all salaries charged to the project must equal the amount on the “Personnel” budget line item on Form SF-424A. The personnel plan should provide a description of how the personnel will carry out the proposed plan, including the adequacy and previous performance of the proposed team to carry out project activities.

d) Schedule of Major Milestones and Deliverables

All Applicants must submit a schedule detailing the expected start and end date of all major milestones and deliverables described in the Project Narrative. The schedule should be outlined in months, so that it is easily discernable in how many months the applicant could start the project from the date of project award, in how many months each of the key project milestones and deliverables will be accomplished from the date of project award, and the anticipated number of months after the date of project award that the project will be completed, not to exceed the fifteen (15) month award period.

e) Addenda to the Proposal

Applicants must also submit the following Addenda to the Proposal in PDF format.

Applications that do not include the required Addenda may be considered incomplete and/or non-responsive and may not be reviewed.

1) Resumes of Key Personnel

Applicants must attach the resumes of key project staff, which should not exceed two pages in length (per resume). Resumes should be compiled and uploaded together as one PDF file.

2) Additional Requirements for Non-Profit

In addition to all applicable items listed above, EDA applicants that are non-profit organizations must submit the following:

A certificate of good standing from the State of its incorporation that is less than 12 months old;

A copy of the organization’s Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws;

A copy of the most recent (not older than 18 months) IRS Form 990 (Return of

Organization Exempt from Income Tax) (without attachments or schedules).

3) Copy of Current, Approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if

Applicable)

If facilities and administrative costs (sometimes referred to as indirect costs) are included in the budget, the applicant must include a copy of its current Facilities and Administrative Cost

Rate Agreement or documentation establishing that it has a pending application. An applicant that does not have a current Facilities and Administrative Cost Rate Agreement negotiated and approved by the Department of Commerce (or by the applicable cognizant Federal agency) may propose facilities and administrative costs in its budget. However, the applicant must prepare and submit a facilities and administrative cost allocation plan and rate proposal or a negotiated indirect cost rate as required by 2 CFR part 200 “Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost

Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.” The allocation plan and the rate proposal must be submitted to EDA’s Office of Regional Affairs (or applicable cognizant

Federal agency) within ninety days from the award start date. In addition, in accordance with 2

C.F.R. § 200.414(f), any non-Federal entity that has never received a negotiated indirect cost rate, except for those non-Federal entities described in Paragraph D.1.b of Appendix VII to 2

C.F.R. Part 200 (specifically, a governmental department or agency that receives more than $35 million in direct Federal funding), may elect to charge a de minimis rate of 10 percent of modified total direct costs.

The maximum dollar amount of allocable facilities and administrative costs for which

EDA will reimburse a recipient shall be the lesser of the: (i) line-item amount for the Federal share of facilities and administrative costs contained in the EDA-approved budget for the award, or (ii) Federal share of the total allocable facilities and administrative costs of the award based on the cost rate approved by EDA (or applicable cognizant Federal agency); provided that the cost rate is current at the time the costs were incurred and provided that the rate is approved on or before the award end date. The applicant should include a statement in its budget narrative if the applicant does not have, or has not applied for, a Facilities and Administrative Cost Rate

Agreement.

C. Unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

Applicants (unless the applicant is an individual or Federal awarding agency that is excepted from those requirements under 2 CFR §25.110(b) or (c), or has an exception approved by the Federal awarding agency under 2 CFR §25.110(d)) are required to: (i) Be registered in

SAM before submitting its application; (ii) provide a valid unique entity identifier in its application; and (iii) continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency. EDA may not make a Federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements and, if an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements by the time EDA is ready to make a Federal award, EDA may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a Federal award to another applicant.

D. Deadlines for submission

To be considered timely, a completed application, regardless of the format in which it is submitted, must be transmitted and time-stamped at www.grants.gov no later than Friday, August 21, 2015, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Any application transmitted or received, as the case may be, after Friday, August 21, 2015 at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time will be considered non-responsive and will not be considered for funding.

Applicants are advised that they are solely responsible for ensuring that EDA receives complete, timely, and accurate applications. EDA will not accept any changes, additions, revisions, or deletions to applications after the closing date and time have passed. EDA may contact an applicant for additional clarifications regarding its application after final evaluations by the review panel.

E. How to submit an application

Applicants are required to submit applications electronically in accordance with the instructions provided at www.grants.gov. EDA will not accept facsimile and paper (hard copy) transmissions of applications.

Applicants are strongly encouraged to start early and not to wait until the approaching deadline before logging on and reviewing the application instructions at www.grants.gov.

Applicants should save and print written proof of an electronic submission made at www.grants.gov. If problems occur, the applicant is advised to (a) print any error message received; and (b) call the www.grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 for assistance. The

Contact Center is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (except for Federal holidays). The following link is useful resources: http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp. If you do not find an answer to your question under “Applicant FAQ’s.” try consulting the “Applicant User Guide” or contacting www.grants.gov via email at support@grants.gov or telephone at 1-800-518-4726.

http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp mailto:support@grants.gov

V. Application Review and Selection Process

A. Evaluation criteria

To apply for an award under this announcement, an eligible applicant must submit a completed application package to EDA in accordance with section IV. of this FFO. Applications that do not meet all requirements or that exceed the page limitations set forth in section IV.B. of this announcement may be considered non-responsive and may not be considered by the review panel. A panel comprised of at least three Federal employees will be formed to review applications. The review panel will evaluate applications and rate and rank them using the evaluation criteria identified below, sub-criteria will be weighed equally towards the respective criteria’s point total.

1. Strategic Approach (50 points)

Documented approach to meeting the elements identified in the Scope of Work including:

o Reports that identify the connections that link the selected metric(s) across

EDA’s logic model and with economic development, demonstrating how activities are linked to outputs and outputs to outcomes for the targeted set of activities and metric;

o Proof of concept studies that use impact analysis models consistent with

EDA's logic model and based on specific EDA programs. The proof of concept studies must use a sound method for providing valid statistical corroboration that the proposed metric model works.

o Implementation tool kit that includes for the selected metric(s)'s: definition, data collection process (including forms), how the metric will be used to assess progress; the means to continually collect and update the data; and clearly identify what represents a scale to understand the metric, i.e. what represents meaningful change across the metric.

2. Organizational Capacity and Personnel (20 points)

Adequacy of the applicant’s team to carry out the proposed work and achieve success;

Qualified personnel that, as a group, demonstrate project management expertise, as well as demonstrated success in all aspects of the scope of work;

The education, experience, and professional accomplishments of each organization and all key personnel;

Adequacy of the applicant’s team in the various subject matter necessary to implement research on performance measurement, metrics and economic development and deliver practical, sound recommendations;

Previous performance of the organizations and key personnel making up the team, as applicable;

Strength of the proposed management plan to achieve the project goals and manage partner organizations and project staff.

3. Feasibility of Budget and Any Proposed Match (15 points)

Meet the proposed Scope of Work covering Budget including:

Completeness of a proposed budget, including the extent to which it adequately supports and covers complete project;

Strength of any proposed match including documented commitments;

Identification of how Federal funds will be used and how any cash match will be used;

Extent to which budgetary challenges and risks are identified and mitigation strategies are proposed.

4. Feasibility of Milestones and Deliverables (15 points)

Meet the proposed Scope of Work covering “Milestones and Deliverables” including:

Strength of the proposed management plan to achieve the project goals and manage partner organizations and project staff;

Completeness of a proposed schedule including the extent to which appropriate targets, metrics, and milestones are clearly defined;

Strength of the plan to achieve key milestones and timeline dates, measure progress toward targets and the likelihood that metrics and milestones will be met;

Extent to which challenges and risks to the timeline are identified and mitigation strategies are proposed.

B. Review and Selection Process

As set forth below, EDA staff will review all applications received to ensure that they are complete and eligible to receive funding.

1. Review for eligibility and completeness

EDA staff will conduct an eligibility and technical completeness review of all applications received by the application deadline. Applications received from ineligible entities will not be considered for funding. Additionally, applications that do not contain all forms and required documentation listed in section IV.B. of this FFO may be deemed non-responsive and excluded from further consideration. EDA expects all applicants to complete and include all required forms and documentation. However, EDA, in its sole discretion, may determine that an omission is a non-substantive technical deficiency if it can easily and quickly be rectified or cured, and therefore, may continue its consideration of the application despite the deficiency.

2. Merit Review Panels

Merit Review Panels, comprised of at least three Federal employees, will evaluate the applications against the evaluation criteria enumerated in section V.A. of this FFO and award up to 100 points to each application. Application scores will be determined by each panelist on an individual basis, and the average of the individual ratings will produce a panel score. For each competition, the Merit Review Panels will prepare a priority funding order for the applications— based on its consideration of the evaluation criteria—and recommend to the EDA Grants Officer, in such priority order, those applications that merit consideration for EDA funding.

3. Grants Officer’s Decision

The Merit Review Panel’s recommendations will be forwarded to EDA’s Deputy

Assistant Secretary for Regional Affairs (DAS/RA), who is the Grants Officer under this announcement. The DAS/RA has been delegated the authority to make the final decision on whether to fund an application and may select a project for funding that differs from the Merit

Review Panel’s priority recommendations based on any of the following four (4) Selection

Fa…