FINAL FY 19 DFSA RFA for Madagascar and Malawi.pdf

Issuance Date: March 29, 2019 Deadline for Questions: April 8, 2019 Closing Date and Time: May 6, 2019; 11:59 a.m. (Eastern Standard Time) CFDA Number: 98.007

Subject: Request for Applications for Development Food Security Activities in

Madagascar and Malawi

Title: Fiscal Year 2019 Development Food Security Activities in Madagascar and Malawi

Funding Opportunity Number: 72DFFP19RFA00002

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Office of Food for Peace (FFP) is seeking applications for funding for development food security activities.

Private voluntary organizations or cooperatives, including U.S. and non-U.S. nongovernmental organizations, may apply. Public international organizations are also eligible to apply.

Subject to the availability of funds, under this Request for Applications (RFA), FFP plans to enter into up to the number of awards as described in detail in the relevant Country Specific Information (CSI). Please refer to the CSI for a complete description of possible locations and activities.

USAID reserves the right to use any assistance mechanism available to this agency (e.g., grant, cooperative agreement, leader with associates award) and to adjust the number of awards, funding levels, sources of funding, and/or procedures. If Community Development Funds are not stipulated in the CSI, applicants may consider requesting Title II Section 202(e) funds. The applicant’s activity designs inform funding levels, but they are set by FFP for successful applicants. Successful applicants will be notified of any changes or updates, accordingly.

Issuance of this RFA does not constitute an award commitment on the part of USAID, nor does it commit the U.S. Government to pay for any costs incurred in the preparation or submission of the comments/suggestions or an application. Applications are submitted at the risk of the applicant. All preparation and submission costs are at the applicant’s expense. This includes the completion of all required documents for USAID awards.

Final awards cannot be made until funds have been fully appropriated, apportioned, allocated, and committed. While it is anticipated that these procedures will be successfully completed, potential applicants are hereby notified of these requirements and conditions for award.

For the purposes of this award, the RFA consists of this cover letter and the following:

SECTION I – PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

FY 2019 Development Food Security Activities for Madagascar and Malawi RFA

SECTION II – FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION

SECTION III – ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

SECTION IV – APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

SECTION V – APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

SECTION VI – FEDERAL AWARD AND ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

SECTION VII – FEDERAL AWARDING AGENCY CONTACTS

SECTION VIII – OTHER INFORMATION

APPENDIX I: Definitions and Program Areas and Elements APPENDIX II: Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

APPENDIX III: FY 19 Refine and Implement

To be eligible for the award, the applicant must provide all required information in the application, including the requirements found in any attachments to this opportunity on www.grants.gov. Any future amendments to this RFA can be downloaded from www.grants.gov.

This information may also be posted on the FFP website. It is the responsibility of the applicant to use the most up-to-date versions of all of the documents related to this RFA.

USAID may not award to an applicant unless the applicant has complied with all applicable unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM) requirements detailed in Section IV.6.f. The registration process may take many weeks to complete. Therefore, Applicants are encouraged to begin registration early in the process.

Please send any questions to the email address identified in Section IV. The deadline for questions is April 8, 2019.

The RFA does not contain significant technical information. Applicants should refer to additional resources on the FFP website, including Technical References and the FFP Policy and Guidance for M&E and Reporting, and relevant CSIs.

Per 2 CFR 200 and 2 CFR 700, USAID regulations do not award profit under assistance instruments. However, all reasonable, allocable, and allowable expenses, both direct and indirect, which are related to the agreement activity and which are in accordance with applicable cost standards, may be paid under the agreement.

USAID may (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept applications for reasons other than cost, or (c) accept more than one application (see Section V - Application Review Information). USAID intends to award predominantly cooperative agreements, but reserves the right to award any other form of assistance agreement. USAID may waive informalities and minor irregularities in applications received.

In the event of any inconsistency between this RFA and the documents referenced in the RFA, the RFA takes precedence over any referenced documents (including the Technical References), except statute, regulations, and the CSI. In the event of an inconsistency in the RFA documents or in the text of the RFA, it will be resolved at the discretion of the Agreement Officer (AO).

Thank you for your interest in USAID programs.

http://www.grants.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/bureaus/bureau-democracy-conflict-and-humanitarian-assistance/office-food https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAF103.pdf https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAF103.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/where-we-work

Sincerely, /S/

Clyde Hicks Director, Office of Food for Peace

Section I – Program Description

This RFA provides information on funding opportunities for development food security activities. Development activities are mandated in the Food for Peace Act and are aligned with the FFP 2016-2025 Food Assistance and Food Security Strategy. This funding opportunity is authorized under the Food for Peace Act, as amended. The resulting award will be subject to 2 CFR 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, and USAID’s supplement, 2 CFR 700, as well as the additional requirements found in Section F.

More specific information on the objectives, interventions, geographic locations targeted within the countries, and/or funding levels and types covered by this RFA may be found in the relevant CSI posted on the Country Fact Sheets page of the FFP website. In addition, market analyses, Climate Risk Profiles, and other related resources are also posted to the Country Fact Sheets page, as applicable. It is essential that applicants review the CSI carefully as details contained in the CSI take precedence over the generalities contained in this RFA. Please refer to the FFP Director’s introductory letter for order of precedence.

If conditions permit (determined by FFP), the application process will include two phases. The first phase is the submission and review of an initial application (technical application and cost application). Successful first-phase applicants may also receive letters of invitation to present their applications orally, and to address topline issues identified during the initial review of their applications. If they occur, oral presentations will constitute the second phase of the technical review process and will be a condition of the award. After discussions have concluded, the apparently successful applicant(s) will receive a final issues letter, if necessary, and will be required to submit final technical and cost applications.

1. FFP Development Food Security Activities

The Office of Food for Peace (FFP), in the U.S. Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s) Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA), is the U.S.

Government leader in international food assistance. FFP works to reduce hunger and malnutrition and assure that adequate, safe and nutritious food is available, accessible to, and well-utilized by all individuals at all times to support a healthy and productive life.

Through FFP, USAID supports multi-year development food security activities to improve and sustain the food and nutrition security of vulnerable populations. These activities work at the individual, household, community and institutional levels to address the underlying causes of food insecurity and strengthen transformative opportunities. This includes a focus on improving food access and incomes through agriculture and other livelihoods initiatives; enhancing natural resource and environmental management; combating under-nutrition, especially for children under two and pregnant and lactating women; and mitigating disaster impact through early warning and community preparedness activities. Development food security activities are intended to strengthen resilience in populations vulnerable to acute, chronic hunger and recurrent shocks, stresses and crises, and to reduce future need for ongoing or emergency food assistance.

https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/FFP-Strategy-FINAL%2010.5.16.pdf

These activities are increasingly integrated with other USAID efforts to promote resilience and reduce extreme poverty.

Since FY 2016, FFP has been awarding its development food security activities under a co-creation model known as Refine and Implement (R&I). Intended to improve activity design, fit to context and implementation planning, R&I includes two stages. In year one, during the ‘refinement period’ new awardees will carry out a number of tasks including: pre-implementation studies that address evidence and knowledge gaps and strengthen understanding of local context; preparation for implementation through hiring, training, procurement of goods and services; small scale operational research, and piloting of new approaches and implementation strategies; participatory stakeholder engagement and community consultation for strengthened local partnerships; and refining the activity Theory of Change (ToC).

Implementation of programmatic interventions begins at the onset of the second year pending consultation with FFP on the revised ToC and updated implementation planning. After an external evaluation in year four, this pilot will allow highly successful activities to be extended.

The R&I model creates the opportunity for FFP development food security activities to more closely align with FFP strategic and programmatic priorities (section 2, below). Any extension beyond the initial five-year award is subject to the Justification of Restricted Eligibility (JRE) approval process in USAID Automated Directives System (ADS) 303.

2. FFP Strategic Priorities

In FY 2017, FFP launched a new Food Assistance and Food Security Strategy 2016-2025 (FFP Strategy) which laid out new priorities for the future around sustainability, systems approaches and a new set of cross cutting areas of focus addressing gender equity and youth empowerment, social cohesion and social accountability. In seeking improved and more sustained food and nutrition security for vulnerable populations, the FFP Strategy works through two parallel objectives: to protect and enhance lives and livelihoods while strengthening and transforming communities and institutions.

The FFP Strategy’s Results Framework is a global framing of FFP’s work, outlining what is considered within FFP’s mandate, as well as what is expected to be within the skill sets and capacities of our implementing partners. At the field level, the exact contours of a program will depend on context, need, available resources and the skills, capacities and roles of other food and nutrition security actors working in that space.

● FFP Strategic Objectives

SO1: Lives and livelihoods protected and enhanced FFP works to protect and enhance the lives and livelihoods of those affected by crisis, and those vulnerable to crisis due to chronic poverty and hunger. In acute emergency situations, this may be by meeting immediate food and nutrition needs of those most vulnerable to food deficits through direct resource transfers accompanied by complementary programming that seeks to maximize the impact of those resources. In recovery and development settings, the emphasis may shift more strongly towards improving the lives of the most marginalized and protecting development investments through capacity building, knowledge transfer, household asset-https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/FFP-Strategy-FINAL%2010.5.16.pdf building, or other productive investments contributing to improved food and nutrition security outcomes across a range of sectors.

SO2: Communities and institutions transformed Even in the most acute crisis, work that avoids doing harm and succeeds in strengthening local systems - including both social dynamics and formal and informal institutions - can lay an important foundation for transformative change. Under SO2, FFP works to strengthen communities and institutions that then serve as catalysts for greater and more sustainable change in emergency response and long-term development settings alike. SO2 provides a pathway to address root causes and drivers of food insecurity, through efforts at the community level and, where appropriate, up to national policy and planning, in ways that strengthen the capacity of both formal and informal institutions, reduce risks, and provide engines of growth, opportunity and change.

● FFP Strategy Intermediate Results

The SOs in the FFP Results Framework (RF) are each supported by four Intermediate Results (IRs) that address social protection, nutrition, environmental management and increasing incomes and assets. The IRs under SO1 focus on the individual- and household-level capacities required for positive change, while those under SO2 address the community and institutional capacities required to promote, support and sustain those changes.

Across all IRs, FFP’s strategy calls for a broadened concept of risk management that, in addition to natural hazards such as drought and flooding, addresses risks posed by fragility, conflict, pandemic disease and climate change, as well as idiosyncratic shocks, such as the death of a household head. Working at multiple levels, protecting and enhancing the lives and livelihoods of individuals and households while also strengthening local systems, creates synergies between the two SOs and the IRs under them. It also increases the need for FFP and its partners to sequence, layer and integrate activities within FFP programs, as well as with other USAID, local government and donor-funded efforts.

● FFP Strategy Cross-cutting Intermediate Results

A set of cross-cutting IRs underpins the SOs and IRs, to support the empowerment of women and youth, enhance social cohesion and strengthen social accountability. They are intended to bring new focus and clarity to work to positively influence the local systems – including both social dynamics and formal and informal institutions - in which FFP emergency and multi-sectoral development food security activities are implemented.

● FFP Strategy Corporate Objectives

The FFP strategy also includes three Corporate Objectives relevant to FFP and partners alike.

These are designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of FFP’s work through strengthening partnership and influence, capacities of staff and institutions, and the evidence base underlying work in food and nutrition security.

● Other U.S. Government and USAID Strategic Priorities

The FFP Strategy and programming contribute to countries’ Journey to Self-Reliance, by improving capacity and commitment of government and local systems, and USAID’s mission to end extreme poverty and promote resilient democratic societies; and to the DCHA Bureau’s strategic objectives, notably “Supporting areas of recurrent crisis to become more resilient.”

The FFP Strategy also contributes to and reflects the USAID Multi-Sectoral Nutrition Strategy 2014-2025, USAID policy and program guidance “Building Resilience to Recurrent Crisis,” USAID’s policy on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment; USAID’s policy on Youth in Development, and USAID’s Democracy, Human Rights and Governance Strategy. Notably, through FFP’s development food security activities, the Strategy also contributes to the U.S.

Government Global Food Security Strategy, 2017-2021, launched in October 2016.

3. Programming Principles

● Design for People-centered Approaches https://selfreliance.usaid.gov/ https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/USAID_Nutrition_Strategy_5-09_508.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/USAID_Nutrition_Strategy_5-09_508.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/USAIDResiliencePolicyGuidanceDocument.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/USAID-DRG_fina-_6-24-31.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/Youth_in_Development_Policy_0.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/Youth_in_Development_Policy_0.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/democracy-human-rights-and-governance-strategy https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/USG-Global-Food-Security-Strategy-2016.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1867/USG-Global-Food-Security-Strategy-2016.pdf

FFP is committed to keeping the interests and the voice of the most vulnerable at the center of its work, and to crafting development responses based on the strengths, priorities, risks and needs of the target population. Creating opportunities for vulnerable populations suffering from extreme poverty and food insecurity requires working in partnership with them, understanding their resources and capacities, as well as the broader systems that support them through formal and informal institutions and social dynamics. People-centered approaches require addressing challenges, such as shocks and stressors, that may undermine opportunities for positive change and providing linkages to newly emerging or previously out of reach resources, services and catalysts for change.

● Prioritization and Focus

A highly complex set of determinants affects the availability, access and utilization of food. In low resource environments, the full sweep of context-specific needs and opportunities can easily exceed the capacity of any one activity to respond comprehensively and effectively. There are limits, in addition, to the level of change in knowledge, attitudes and practices around which individuals, households and communities can absorb change. Effective programming should identify leverage points that address key drivers of food insecurity, and seek to prioritize and sequence a limited number of interventions. This will ensure responses are feasible, catalytic in nature and tailored to the needs of each sub-population, while also ensuring they can be implemented with a high degree of quality and impact.

● Strive for Sustainability

In its goal statement, FFP has increased its commitment to investing in improved food security for vulnerable populations in a manner that supports long-term and self-perpetuating change, and the continued well-being of the vulnerable populations with which FFP works. Embodied in this commitment is the need to understand the operating environment and to strengthen local systems, both formal and informal, to increase the potential for sustained motivation, capacity, resources and linkages in support of continued food security impacts.

● Develop Context-specific and Tailored Responses

The drivers of food insecurity vary by level of vulnerability; household capacity; religious and cultural beliefs, practices, and taboos; livelihoods; access to natural and physical capital;

environmental change and shocks; and the governance of institutions and service providers that are entrusted to ensure equity. A thorough analysis of the drivers of food insecurity for each sub target population is critical to design a more tailored approach specific to each sub target population. Whether in design of activities or implementation of interventions, tailored responses, based on thorough contextual analysis and responsive to local needs and opportunities, provide greater potential for short-term impact and longer-term sustainability than the application of one size fits all approaches. Understanding local context should provide a window not only on drivers of food insecurity but also on opportunities for transformative change that can create growth, strengthen systems and improve wellbeing for the most vulnerable.

● Leverage and Link to Strengthen Collective Impact

FFP anticipates activities will strategically and operationally work in line with relevant national and local government policies and systems, and work to leverage and link with other actors working to address the drivers of food insecurity, and create opportunities for positive change.

This requires coordination, and joint planning with a broad set of stakeholders to ensure activity complementarity, impact and sustainability, and a focused understanding of the potential impact of layering, integrating and sequencing activities and interventions with other development actors.

● Anticipate and Manage Shocks and Stressors to Support Impact and Sustainability

FFP works with the most vulnerable and at-risk households and communities subject to recurrent crises and prolonged stressors. These bring negative impacts that can reduce well-being and food security and economic potential, ultimately leading to cycles of chronic poverty. Effective programming should plan for and anticipate context-specific shocks and stressors before they occur, and enable pivoting and/or mitigation of negative effects through response planning at the activity level and strengthening of relevant resilience capacities within the local system and relevant partners.

● Address Social Dynamics and Local governance to Strengthen Local Systems

Food insecurity, undernutrition, climate change impacts, and poverty are multidimensional challenges requiring a thorough understanding of contributing factors, potential drivers, potential change agents and existing bottlenecks down to the sub-population level. Social norms, power dynamics, levels of inclusion and nature of participation within local systems have the potential to undermine development impacts when left unaddressed, or conversely, to provide engines to positive change when enhanced in ways that increase motivation, equity, social cohesion and transparent socially accountable service delivery. FFP is committed to understanding and working within local systems, to strengthen human and institutional factors through understanding and addressing social dynamics and local governance.

● Use Evidence and Learning for Tailored and High Quality Responses

FFP programs should take a holistic and forward-looking approach that reflects the social, political, economic, and climatic factors that affect stability, resilience, and growth, and use evidence-based design drawing from best practice to develop appropriate responses. Adaptive management approaches can ensure that data and experiential learning be consistently applied throughout the activity life-cycle. These approaches will ensure more effective implementation, quick problem identification and timely course corrections through feedback loops from the field to the top that examine quality issues, unintended consequences and incremental change in strengthening resilience capacities. Using current evidence, program data and active learning will also enable better examination of the functions, role and nuance of formal and informal institutions social dynamics, as well as contingency planning around potential changes in the local context that can inform day-to-day implementation and thus impact future results. FFP encourages innovative approaches that actively and continually engage community members as well as evidence-based approaches that will move highly vulnerable communities on a path towards sustainable change and out of the existing poverty traps in the targeted areas

4. Authorizing Legislation

The Food for Peace Act, Section 201 (7 U.S.C. 1721) General Authority, authorizes the USAID Administrator to establish programs to:

● Provide agricultural commodities to foreign countries on behalf of the people of the United States to address famine and food crises; combat malnutrition, especially in children and mothers;

● Carry out actions that attempt to alleviate the causes of hunger, mortality and morbidity;

promote economic and community development;

● Promote food security and support sound environmental practices; carry out feeding interventions; and

● Build resilience to mitigate and prevent food crises and reduce the future need for emergency assistance.

The Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) authorizes USAID to provide development assistance. FFP receives certain funds appropriated for this purpose. These funds are referred to as Community Development Funds (CDF) and may be used to support FFP development activities, when signaled in the CSI.

For more information, particularly concerning eligible uses of Section 202(e), CDF, and Internal Transport, Storage and Handling (ITSH) funding, please refer to the current Food for Peace Information Bulletins (FFPIBs) on these funds.

5. Activity Eligibility Requirements

Unless required in the relevant CSI, applications that do not include the direct distribution of food commodities will be considered provided that applicants propose a sound, contextually appropriate, approach to address high levels of acute and chronic malnutrition and food insecurity. Any proposed direct distribution of Title II and/or locally and/or regionally procured (LRP) commodities and/or cash transfer/food voucher must clearly support interventions that sustainably1 reduce vulnerability to food insecurity. This includes increasing the availability of and access to nutritious food, building incomes/assets to increase year-long access to a diverse and adequate diet, and/or improving knowledge and behaviors to ensure that food consumption supports health and healthy growth.

6. Award Administration

Awards will be made and administered in accordance with the Food for Peace Act, FAA, as applicable, and U.S. Government regulations. As applicable, the award will be administered under 22 CFR 211, 22 CFR 216, 2 CFR 200, 2 CFR 700, USAID Standard Provisions, FFP Information Bulletins.

1 Sustainability: The degree to which services or processes continue once inputs (funding, materials, training, etc.) provided by the original source(s) decreases or discontinues.

https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/resources/food-peace-information-bulletins https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/resources/food-peace-information-bulletins https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/resources/food-peace-information-bulletins

Public international organizations (PIO) are subject to different requirements, so USAID reserves the right to make awards to such organizations on different terms and conditions than those made to private voluntary organizations (PVOs) and cooperatives.

Section II – Federal Award Information

1. Estimate of Funds Available

Subject to the availability of funds under this RFA, FFP plans to enter into a number of awards as specified in the CSI. A separate or amended RFA will be issued for any additional countries.

USAID reserves the right to adjust the number of awards, funding levels, and/or sources of funding. Note that not all funding is interchangeable and some budget adjustments may need to take place. Successful applicants will be notified of any changes or updates accordingly.

2. Anticipated Start Date and Performance Period

The anticipated start date of the new award(s) will be October 1, 2019. Unless otherwise noted in the CSI, the award(s) will be issued for a performance period of five years during which the applicant will refine the activity design in the first year and implement the activity in the following four years. FFP anticipates FY 2019 development food security activities to be implemented according to the R&I model (see Section 1.1).

3. Substantial Involvement

In accordance with the ADS 303.3.11, a cooperative agreement will require the following elements of substantial involvement by FFP, if applicable to the application:

● Approval of the Awardee's Implementation Plans

● Approval of Specified Key Personnel

● Agency and Awardee Collaboration or Joint Participation covering:

o selection of advisory committee members o assessments, analyses, and reviews of the ToC, activity design, and implementation o concurrence on the substantive provisions of sub-awards o approval of the awardee's performance management and/or monitoring and evaluation plans and evaluation team members o monitoring to authorize specified kinds of direction or redirection because of interrelationships with other activities

● Agency Authority to Immediately Halt a Construction Activity

For specifics and additional detail, please refer to ADS 303.3.11 - Substantial Involvement and Cooperative Agreements.

4. Authorized Geographic Code

The anticipated authorized geographic code for procurement of goods and services under the prospective award(s) is 935; USAID reserves the right to modify this.

5. Nature of the Relationship between USAID and the Awardee

The principal purpose of the relationship with the awardee under the subject award is to transfer funds to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation of the activities as described in the CSI, which is authorized by federal statute. The successful awardee will be responsible for ensuring the achievement of the award objectives and the efficient and effective administration of the award through the application of sound management practices. The awardee will assume responsibility for administering federal funds in a manner consistent with underlying agreements, award objectives, and the terms and conditions of the federal award.

6. Assistance Awards

USAID may (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept applications for reasons other than cost, or (c) accept more than one application. USAID intends to award predominantly cooperative agreements, but reserves the right to award any other form of assistance agreement. USAID may waive informalities and minor irregularities in applications received.

USAID may award the resulting assistance award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions, negotiations and/or oral presentations. Therefore, each initial application must contain the applicant's best terms from a technical and cost standpoint. However, as part of its evaluation process, USAID may elect to discuss technical, cost, or other pre-award issues with one or more applicants. Alternatively, USAID may proceed with award selection based on its evaluation of initial applications received, use an alternative process (e.g., keep or drop oral presentations), and/or commence negotiations solely with one applicant.

Section III – Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

To be considered for a Title II funded award, the applicant must be a Private Voluntary Organization (PVO) or consortium, or an organization designated by USAID as a Public International Organization (PIO). PVOs may include U.S. and non-U.S. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) as defined in the Food for Peace Act. Per the Food for Peace Act, universities are not eligible to apply as primes for any Title II funded activity. Universities can be sub-awardees or members of a consortium at the discretion of the prime applicant.

To be considered for a CDF-funded award, the applicant must be a U.S. or non-U.S. NGO, or an organization designated by USAID as a PIO.

In the case of a consortium, the applicant must be the consortium lead and must identify any other members of the consortium or individuals tied to the implementation of the activity as described in the application, along with all sub-awardees. The respective roles of any other members of the consortium or individuals, including all sub-awardees, must be described and separate detailed budgets must be attached for each. For more information, see Section IV.

Application and Submission Information, I. Application Format, d. Management and Staffing.

2. New Partners and Local Organizations

USAID encourages applications from potential new partners (i.e., those who have not received any USAID funding previously) and local organizations.

USAID supports applicants signing non-exclusive letters of commitment with local partners, if applicable.

3. Cost Share

Cost share is not required.

4. Limit on Number of Applications

Refer to relevant CSI for the acceptable number of applications. In addition, an applicant may also be a sub-awardee on applications submitted by other organizations.

Section IV – Application and Submission Information

1. Application Format

The application must be specific, complete, and concise. Applications that do not meet the requirements of this RFA will not be considered. The application is divided into the following sections, with the maximum number of pages given per section, excluding the table of contents, but including any endnotes and/or footnotes, as follows:

● Cover Page (1 page, see requirements in paragraph a)

● Executive Summary (2 pages maximum, see requirements in paragraph b)

● Activity Design (45 pages maximum, see requirements in paragraph c)

● Management and Staffing (12 pages maximum, see requirements in paragraph d)

● Cost Application (no page limit, see requirements in paragraph e)

● Environmental Compliance (see requirements in paragraph f)

● Annexes (see paragraph g)

If submissions exceed the page number maximum, only the pages up to the limit will be reviewed, and pages exceeding the maximum will not be considered.

a) Cover Page (1 page)

The cover page must include:

● Name of the applicant’s organization;

● Applicable CSI;

● Name and title of the organization’s representative who has signatory authority and authority to submit the application;

● Name, title, and contact information of the organization’s point of contact with whom USAID will coordinate on matters related to the application (if different from the organization’s representative with signatory authority and authority to submit the application). Contact information should include mailing address, e-mail, and telephone number;

● Title II food commodity(ies) request, if any, in metric tons (MT) (rounded to the nearest 10 MT), if applicable;

● Total funds requested (in U.S. dollars), including CDF, Section 202(e), and, if relevant, ITSH (please note ITSH is only associated with U.S. in-kind commodities) and cost share;

● Valid Dun and Bradstreet Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number;

● Activation date in System for Award Management (SAM) – note that successful applicants must maintain SAM registration; and

● Participant information as requested in the table below:

Number of Activity Participants

Total Direct Activity Participants Total Direct Activity Participating Households

a. Total Direct Activity Participants: The number of unique individuals who will directly participate in activity interventions during the period of performance (if someone participates in three interventions, only count them once).

b. Total Direct Activity Participating Households2: The number of unique households targeted by the project.

Direct Activity Participants by Program Element

Program Area or Element (These are illustrative examples; a full list of program areas and elements is in Appendix I.)

a. Participant Numbers

b. Number of Households

c. Proportion of total households in the target area

Maternal and Child Health Nutrition Agriculture Disaster Readiness

a. Participant Numbers: Unlike the total direct activity participants, participant numbers are not unique. The total number of participants for each program area or element during the period of performance should be counted, even if they participate in more than one.

2 A household is categorized by people who live in the same homestead (dwelling structures and adjoining land occupied by family members) and also share the same eating arrangements. If people live independently in separate homesteads and do not share the same eating arrangements they will be treated as separate households.

However, if a participant participates in multiple interventions under the same program area or element, they should still only be counted once on this table, under that program area or element.

b. Number of Households: The number of households within each program area or element during the period of performance is unique but can be double counted across program areas or elements. If two or more participants come from the same household, it will be counted as one. For example, if members from the same household participate in interventions related to maternal and child health, and agriculture, the household can be counted once under maternal and child health, and also once under agriculture.

c. Proportion of total households in the target area: Please divide the number of households targeted under each program area or element by the total number of households in the target area.

Program Area or Element: These definitions come from the U.S. Foreign Assistance Standardized Program Structure. The examples in this table are illustrative.

b) Executive Summary (2 pages maximum)

The executive summary must include:

● Problem Statement, including the underlying causes and major determinants of food insecurity and malnutrition to be addressed;

● Overarching ToC that describes the hypothesized series of changes to address the underlying causes of food insecurity and malnutrition; and

● The proposed set of interventions to achieve the activity’s food and nutrition security objectives.

c) Activity Design (45 pages maximum)

The activity design presents the vision for reaching the activity’s goals and targets and the strategy that will be taken to reach the described outcomes. In this section, applicants must demonstrate a tailored, focused, and integrated approach to reach the activity’s goals.

Applicants should present an integrated narrative that details:

(1) the context of the participants and intervention area;

(2) the conceptual framework that describes the theory of how the application will lead to the desired change;

(3) the methodology and strategy used for targeting;

(4) the technical approach that lays out the detail of why select interventions are being selected and how the interventions will be implemented; and

(5) the strategy for answering relevant knowledge gaps and refining the activity design during the refinement year

Please refer to the CSI for each country for FFP goals and priority outcomes.

1. Context Analysis https://www.state.gov/f/releases/other/255986.htm https://www.state.gov/f/releases/other/255986.htm

A context-appropriate and effective activity requires a deep understanding of targeted participants’ needs and their communities, and the constraints they face. A description of the context should demonstrate local, contextualized knowledge of the participants and the target area, as well as the larger enabling environment in the country. If only national level data and evidence are available, the Applicant should explain why the data can be generalized to the subnational level. Elements may include:

● A description of the geographic area of intervention and the profiles of the target participants.

● A map that illustrates proposed intervention areas and activity layering at the Administrative Level 2 (i.e., provincial level or local equivalent).

● A well referenced and data driven description of the current food security context, including chronic and acute malnutrition.

● A description of socio-economic, political, and climatic context; status of infrastructure, and market; and safety and security that may positively or negatively influence the implementation of the activity and anticipated outcomes.

● A thorough and clear analysis of the underlying causes of food insecurity and malnutrition.

● A description of the other development actors in the target area including their goals and specific interventions.

● A description of the capacity of the host government’s institutions and reach into the targeted areas.

● A description of the availability and quality of public and private extension services and health systems.

2. Conceptual Framework

● Theory of Change: A ToC is the conceptual foundation of an activity’s design. Before designing interventions, the applicant should develop a ToC that maps out the hypothesized series of changes expected to occur to a specific target population in a given context as the result of specific interventions. FFP requires a ToC diagram and an accompanied narrative. The narrative should provide evidence to support the hypothesized change, describe the contribution of other activities (outside of the proposed activity), the basis of the key assumptions, and describe the pathways to achieve sustainability of outcomes. The ToC should be developed based on evidence, independently confirmed and not strictly based on project reports. A few common research repositories include 3ie Impact Evaluation Repository and J-PAL’s library of randomized evaluations. Papers published in peer-reviewed journals could also be used as sources. For more information, please see the FFP Policy and Guidance on Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting and TOPS’ ToC Curriculum.

● Logical Framework: All applicants must submit a brief Logical Framework (LogFrame) in their application and a detailed LogFrame matrix as an annex. For more information, please see the FFP Policy and Guidance on Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting.

An applicant’s LogFrame will include indicators to monitor and evaluate the performance of the activity. Applicants should keep in mind that FFP has a list of required and required if applicable performance indicators. These should be reviewed carefully during the development of an http://www.3ieimpact.org/evidence-hub/impact-evaluation-repository http://www.3ieimpact.org/evidence-hub/impact-evaluation-repository https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluations https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluations https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluations http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAF103.pdf http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAF103.pdf http://www.fsnnetwork.org/theory-change-training-curriculum http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PBAAF103.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1866/ffp-indicators-list applicant’s LogFrame. In general, only outcome indicators are required for the LogFrame with the application; however, if an applicant chooses to include output indicators, the use of FFP output indicators is preferred. FFP requires the successful applicant to submit a comprehensive LogFrame with all relevant indicators as outlined in the FFP Policy and Guidance on Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting with the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan.

For target setting, applicants are only required to establish targets for higher level impacts -usually key baseline indicators. Note that FFFP uses population-based surveys to measure the performance of an activity. Therefore, the impact level indicator targets must be linked to the target population and not only to the activity participants, context, food security, nutritional status, and the applicant’s ToC. All life of award targets should be ambitious yet achievable.

Nutrition and poverty reduction targets should be linked to FFP’s targets: an average minimum of 2 to 2.5 percentage point annual reduction of prevalence of stunting3, an average minimum of 3 percentage point annual reduction of prevalence of underweight, and an average minimum of 4 percentage annual reduction of depth-of-poverty depending on the baseline. These conservative targets4 reflect the challenging environment in which FFP awards are implemented, but should be possible to achieve, and possibly exceed, with sustainability. Note: FFP does not require applicants to submit an Indicator Performance Tracking Table (IPTT) as part of their application;

successful applicants develop this tool during and after the M&E workshop. The M&E workshop typically takes place within three months of the start date of an award.

3. Targeting

To improve and sustain food and nutrition security of poor and vulnerable populations, it is important that FFP activities target populations who live in a state of food insecurity and malnutrition. FFP requests applicants to present a targeting strategy that ensures inclusion of the following:

● Extremely poor households (i.e., those who live below the $1.90 per person per day poverty line) that are chronically unable to meet their basic needs and have little chance of improving their circumstances without some form of assistance.

● Chronically vulnerable households (living at or above the poverty line) that are not extremely poor, but could slide down to abject poverty with either predictable or unpredictable shocks, such as extreme weather events, food price changes, etc.

● Households with adolescents, children, and women at risk of chronic and acute malnutrition to improve maternal and child health and nutrition, and infant and young child feeding practices; in particular, pregnant and lactating mothers and caretakers of infants and young children to minimize the risk of chronic malnutrition.

● Whole-of-community targeting for water and sanitation interventions.

Applicants must propose an appropriate wealth-ranking and targeting methodology that will ensure inclusion of extremely poor households. It is not FFP’s intention to categorically exclude moderately poor households from interventions, but rather to ensure that extremely poor

3 Based on an average of cumulative impact over the five years of the activity.

4 Compared to BFS funded Feed the Future activities households are included and their specific needs are addressed and included in sustainability plans.

In developing the targeting strategy, applicants should examine how gender dynamics influence each element of food security (food availability, access, and utilization). For example, applicants should consider gender equity in decision-making, access to and control of resources, livelihood options, and time burdens. Building equitable food secure futures requires attending to the different experiences and needs of women, men, boys and girls, and deliberately engaging these gender and age groups across all development interventions.

FFP also seeks to spotlight the contributions and importance that youth and young adults can make toward building a food secure future, and calls on applicants to incorporate youth in developing its targeting strategy. With more than 60 percent of the population in developing countries under the age of 255, young people now comprise a critical mass of the population in areas where FFP works to end hunger.

4. Technical Approach

Technical Sectors and Interventions: The technical interventions should be designed and prioritized to address the key drivers of food insecurity and malnutrition for each sub population targeted by the activity. The technical interventions should come directly from the conceptual framework. This section should include an explanatory narrative about what the interventions will be, the evidence about why those interventions are being prioritized, and how they will be integrated by sector, sequenced, and layered within the FFP activity and with other stakeholders’ (U.S. Government, other donors and stakeholders) investments to achieve the goal. Applicants must explain how the proposed technical interventions contribute directly to the ToC. In addition, a clear methodology/justification, supported by evidence, must be presented justifying how the Applicant prioritized and selected their approach/interventions to respond to the identified underlying causes of food insecurity.

FFP does not expect applicants to invest in each sector equally. Rather, investments should be targeted toward those sectors where the activity can realistically achieve transformational yet sustainable improvements in food security. Priority should be placed on those interventions that specifically target the factors that are most limiting to sustainably improving long-term food security for each targeted sub population, rather than targeting every single factor identically without regard to how limiting that factor is. Applicants must explain, in their review of the context and development of their ToC, how they have selectively prioritized which interventions are best suited to the applicant's strengths, and which will most effectively reach the activity’s intended outcomes as described in their ToC.

FFP requires that applicants submit proposed implementation plans for specific construction activities, including:

5 To consistently track and monitor youth programming under the USG Foreign Assistance “F” Framework, USAID defines youth as aged 10-29 years, which includes adolescents and young adults. USAID recognizes however that youth is a life stage, one that is not finite or linear and that views regarding the transition to adulthood vary by country and cultural context.

a. Explicit description of proposed construction activities within the technical narrative, including scope and type of infrastructure, and/or explicit plan for pre-feasibility analysis to determine type and scope of construction activities that will support project objectives;

b. Explicit construction section within the budget/budget narrative, detailing: the estimated cost of construction activities at each site; and the total estimated cost of construction activities under the award;

c. Geographic location of proposed construction site;

d. Explicit strategy for developing a plan to review each proposed structure’s operations and maintenance components, focusing on linkages to local systems for sustainability;

e. Inclusion of construction related staff in the organizational chart or staffing plan.

FFP requires that applicants submit a preliminary economic analysis to justify the…