Foa_Content_of_F25AS00226_revised1.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Notice of Funding Opportunity

F25AS00226 Endangered Species Conservation - Wolf Livestock Loss Compensation and Prevention Grants

Funding Opportunity Number

F25AS00226

Table of Contents

BASIC INFORMATION

ELIGIBILITY

Cost Sharing Requirement

GET READY TO APPLY

Required System Registrations

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Goals

Program Description

Legislative Authority

Type of Award

PREPARE YOUR APPLICATION

Application Content and Format

Application Documents

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES

Address to Request Application Package

Submission Dates and Times

Submission Instructions

APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

Eligibility Review

Merit Review

Review and Selection Process

Risk Review

AWARD NOTICES

POST AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION

Administration and National Policy Requirements

Reporting

BASIC INFORMATION

Announcement Type: Initial

Funding Opportunity Number: F25AS00226

Assistance Listing Number(s): 15.666

Estimated Total Program Funding: $900,000

Expected Number of Awards: 13

Award Ceiling: $0

Award Floor: $0

No Award Ceiling/Floor Explanation: Maximum period of performance is 2 years. There is no award floor. In FY 2024, the Service awarded $900,000 in Program funds to eight states. The Service awarded $450,000 through five depredation compensation grants ranging from $60,000 to $110,000, with an average award of $90,000. The Service also awarded $450,000 through six depredation prevention grants ranging from $5,000 to $114,900 with an average award of $75,000. Proposals may address new or ongoing work funded through State wolf-livestock interaction programs. However, all funds will be awarded as new grants. The maximum period of performance for a grant awarded through this Program is two years from the effective date established at the time of grant approval or the date of award obligation, whichever is earlier.

The Service intends to make award recommendations to the Assistant Director of Ecological Services within 90 days of the closing date of this announcement.

Cost Sharing Required?

Yes Closing Date Explanation

Electronically submitted applications must be submitted no later than 11:59 PM., ET, on the listed application due date.

This program requires the submission of applications online through GrantSolutions.gov as applicants will receive an acknowledgement of application receipt. GrantSolutions automatically generates an electronic date and time stamp in the system upon application receipt. Applicants are encouraged to verify the completeness of their application package before submission using the checklist provided above.

U.S. states and local governments may be required under Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs to submit their application to their State Single Point of Contact (SPOC) for review. For more information, see the Intergovernmental Review SPOC List.

OMB Control Number: 1018-0100

Have Questions?

For additional information about this funding opportunity, please contact the appropriate Service representative list below.

Regional Contacts based on Project Location

Region 1: Idaho, Oregon, Washington U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Eastside Federal Complex 911 N.E. 11th Avenue Portland, OR 97232-4181 https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/office-federal-financial-management/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/office-federal-financial-management/ https://www.fws.gov/media/required-notices-and-burden-statement-omb-control-no-1018-0100

Holly Huchko (971-469-9752) holly_huchko@fws.gov(ID and WA wolf grants)

Kaitlyn Glover (908-477-3542) kaitlyn_glover@fws.gov(OR wolf grants)

Region 2: Arizona, New Mexico U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 Gold Avenue SW., Room 8518 Albuquerque, NM 87103-1306 Casey Bruner (505-525-0031) casey_bruner@fws.gov

Region 3: Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services 5600 American Blvd. West Suite 990 Bloomington, Minnesota 55437-1458 Erik Olson (612-713-5488) erik_olson@fws.gov

Region 6: Colorado, Montana and Wyoming U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services 134 Union Blvd., Suite 645 Lakewood, CO 80228 Scott Becker (307-399-8445) scott_becker@fws.gov

Region 8 California and Nevada U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2606 Sacramento, CA 95825-1846 Elizabeth Willy (541-891-2174) elizabeth_willy@fws.gov

Grant Program Administrator:

Patrick McKenney (703-358-2341) Email: fws_es_grants@fws.gov

Executive Summary The Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Project Grant Program, authorized through Subtitle C of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009, provides federal financial assistance to states and tribes for two purposes:

Prevention - Provide funding to assist livestock producers in undertaking proactive, nonlethal activities to reduce the risk of livestock loss due to predation by wolves.

Compensation - Provide funding to reimburse livestock producers for livestock losses due to such predation.

Proactive, nonlethal preventive measures eligible for funding include, but are not limited to, fencing, livestock guard dogs, and range riders who patrol areas occupied by livestock susceptible to predation by wolves. Depredation Compensation funding may be used for the reimbursement of livestock losses due to confirmed wolf depredation. Qualifying livestock includes cattle, swine, horses, mules, sheep, goats and livestock guard animals.

States and tribes (hereafter, applicants) may apply for Depredation Compensation funding for the reimbursement of livestock losses and/or a Depredation Prevention funding for preventative management activities that occur on federal, state, or private land, or land owned by, or held in trust for the benefit of, a tribe.

ELIGIBILITY

Eligible Applicants State governments

Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized)

Additional Information on Eligibility To be eligible to receive a grant pursuant to P.L. 111-11, a state or tribe must:

(1) designate an appropriate agency of the state or tribal government to administer one or both aspects of the program funded by the grant;

(2) establish one or more accounts to receive grant funds;

(3) maintain files of all claims received under programs funded by the grant, including supporting documentation;

(4) submit to the appropriate Service Program Coordinator (see Section G)

(A) annual reports that include:

(i) a summary of claims and expenditures under the program during the year; and

(ii) a description of any action taken on the claims; and

(B) such other reports as the Secretary may be required to assist in determining the effectiveness of activities provided assistance under this program; and

(5) promulgate rules for reimbursing livestock producers under the program. In addition, to ensure funds are achieving immediate conservation benefit, applicants must have fully expended Program grant funds from FY 2021 and prior years.

Further, to be eligible to receive Depredation Compensation funding, a state or tribe must:

• Ensure proper documentation, retain receipts, and record matching funds expended.

• Have the ability to protect the evidence of depredation.

• Coordinate with local United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)-Wildlife Services field representatives, or other authorized official, who will coordinate an investigation.

• Document payments to ensure fair-market value.

Further, to be eligible to receive Depredation Prevention funding, a state or tribe must:

• Ensure proper documentation, retain receipts, and record matching funds expended.

• Ensure applicant demonstration of good faith effort to avoid conflicts.

• Demonstrate effectiveness of non-lethal measures.

Cost Sharing Requirement Cost Sharing Required?

Yes

Cost Sharing: 50 percent of the Total Project Cost

The cost share may be cash or in-kind contribution, including third party contribution, such as volunteer efforts and donations of goods or services. Applicants may attribute some or all of their allowable indirect costs as voluntary committed cost share. If a proposal includes both compensation and prevention activities, match will be calculated at the grant level, not by individual activity.

GET READY TO APPLY

Required System Registrations Unique Entity Identifier and SAM.gov Registration

Before applying, all applicants except individuals applying as a natural person must be registered in SAM.gov. During the SAM.gov registration the entity will obtain their Unique Entity Identifier (UEI).

The SAM.gov registration process can take several months. If your organization is not already registered in SAM.gov, begin the registration process as soon as possible.

To register in SAM.gov, go to the SAM.gov website and use the available resources to complete registration.

• Financial assistance registrants must review and certify compliance with the SAM.gov “Financial Assistance General Representations and Certifications”.

• Already registered? You already have a Unique Entity ID. Before applying, check that your “Financial Assistance General Representations and Certifications” on SAM.gov is complete. Remember to renew your registration every year to keep it active while you have an award or application in progress. You can update your registration whenever you need, including during renewal.

• Need help? For additional information and contact information on the SAM.gov Help page.

GRANTSOLUTIONS

This program accepts applications through GrantSolutions.gov. You must register with GrantSolutions. See Submission Instructions.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Program Goals

• Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Project Grant Program provides federal financial assistance to states and tribes to assist livestock producers in undertaking proactive, nonlethal activities to reduce the risk of livestock loss due to predation by wolves and to reimburse livestock producers for livestock losses due to such predation.

https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration https://sam.gov/content/help https://sam.gov/content/help

Program Description Subtitle C of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11) authorized the Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Project (Program) with two purposes:

1) Prevention - Provide funding to assist livestock producers in undertaking proactive, nonlethal activities to reduce the risk of livestock loss due to predation by wolves; and

2) Compensation - Provide funding to reimburse livestock producers for livestock losses due to such predation.

Federal financial assistance, provided in the form of grants, can be used to support the implementation of state and tribal programs designed to assist livestock producers in undertaking proactive, nonlethal activities to reduce the risk of livestock loss due to predation by wolves and to compensate livestock producers for livestock losses due to such predation. Included in the authorizing language is direction to award this Federal financial assistance through a competitive grant program and to expend funds equally between the program’s two purposes.

Proactive, nonlethal preventive measures eligible for funding include, but are not limited to, fencing, livestock guard dogs, and range riders who patrol areas occupied by livestock susceptible to predation by wolves. Depredation Compensation funding may be used for the reimbursement of livestock losses due to confirmed wolf depredation. Qualifying livestock includes cattle, swine, horses, mules, sheep, goats and livestock guard animals. States and tribes (hereafter, applicants) may apply for Depredation Compensation funding for the reimbursement of livestock losses and/or a Depredation Prevention funding for preventative management activities that occur on Federal, state, or private land, or land owned by, or held in trust for the benefit of, a tribe.

Grants are awarded directly to applicants. Applicants must establish their own procedures for accepting applications from private entities (including individual ranchers, for-profit corporations, and not-for-profit organizations) interested in obtaining Program funds. Those seeking funds will need to work through the procedures established by their state wildlife management/animal damage control agency.

Applicants are eligible to compete for either Depredation Compensation or Depredation Prevention funding, or both. Applicants may submit a proposal that includes both activities, but each activity will be ranked and considered separately.

General Program Funding Priorities

Funding priorities are determined pursuant to Section 6202 (d) of P.L. 111-11, as follows:

• the level of livestock predation in the state or on the land owned by or held in trust for the benefit of the tribe,

• whether the state or tribe is located in a geographical area that is at high risk for livestock predation and

• other factors that the Secretary determines appropriate.

Further, programs with high percentages of livestock producer participation and that support the utilization of a wide variety of deterrents and techniques will be prioritized for Depredation Prevention. Programs that are robust in terms of investigation management, record keeping and reporting, and public transparency will be prioritized for Depredation Compensation funding.

Finally, applicants that have a Depredation Prevention program will be prioritized for Depredation Compensation funding. Complete merit review criteria are provided in Application Review Information.

Buy America Preferences for Infrastructure Projects

This program has Federal funding for infrastructure projects. Buy America preferences apply to Federal awards for infrastructure projects in the United States. Reference 2 CFR Part 184 - Buy America Preferences for Infrastructure Project for further guidance.

Projects such as fencing may be subject to the requirements of 2 CFR Part 184.

Legislative Authority Section 6202(a) of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (7 U.S.C. §426 note [Transferred]. Recodified as §8351 note), Type of Award Projects will be funded through G (Grant).

PREPARE YOUR APPLICATION

Application Content and Format Application Documents Applicants must submit the following forms with their application as specified below.

Instructions for accessing and submitting application forms are provided in the Submission Instructions section of this document below. For instructions on completing form fields, see the form instructions on the Grants.gov Forms Repository.

Forms/Assurances/Certifications Submission Requirement SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance Note: For applicants requesting more than $100,000 in Federal funds, the Authorized Representative’s signature (or electronic equivalent) on the Application for Federal Assistance form also represents their certification of the statements in Appendix A to 43 CFR 18-Certification Regarding Lobbying

Required from all applicants

SF-424A, Budget Information – Non-Construction Programs

Required for non-construction projects

SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

Required if requesting more than $100,000 in Federal funds and the applicant has used or plans to use funds other than Federal appropriated funds for lobbying related to the proposed project.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-184 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-184 https://www.grants.gov/forms/forms-repository.html https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-43/subtitle-A/part-18#Appendix-A-to-Part-18 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-43/subtitle-A/part-18#Appendix-A-to-Part-18

Forms/Assurances/Certifications Submission Requirement Project Abstract Summary (OMB 4040-0019). Must include, in plain language:

• Award purpose,

• Activities to be performed,

• Expected deliverables or outcomes,

• Intended beneficiaries, Subrecipient activities (if known or specified at time of award)

Required from all applicants

Project Narrative

Provide a project narrative containing the elements listed below. A proposal may be disqualified if eligibility requirements are not met.

• Project title

• Description of entity(ies) undertaking the project

• Statement of Need - Describe why this project is being undertaken and how it advances program priorities as discussed in Section A. Provide evidence to demonstrate the need for Program grant funds, including the number of wolves and amount of livestock production present, the level of overlap between the two, and the extent of wolf depredation in the project area. Identify the negative results of taking no action to address wolf-livestock interactions in the project area.

• Purpose - Describe the desired future state this proposal will achieve.

• Objectives – State the desired outcome of the proposed project in terms that are specific and quantified. Objectives should be realistic targets designed to address the project need.

• Methods/Approach –

• For Prevention Program Activities – Describe the activities the requested funds will be used to support, such as range riders, guard dogs, fladry, and fencing. Describe your program’s procedures for maintaining records for reporting to the Service how the funds were expended.

Describe efforts to encourage participation in prevention activities and how grant funds will promote such participation.

• For Compensation Program Activities – Describe how the value of reimbursement is determined and the procedures that will be used to verify that available funds will be used to compensate for confirmed losses and/or injuries caused by wolves. Describe your program’s procedures for maintaining records for reporting to the Service how the funds were expended.

• Timetable or milestones - Describe the timetable for the project, including significant milestones for completion.

• Information to support environmental compliance review requirements - The Service has the responsibility for making the final determination regarding compliance with Federal laws. To facilitate review, provide any information that may be relevant to compliance with the

National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and required Federal permits.

• Description of stakeholder coordination or involvement - List key cooperators (e.g., USDA Wildlife Services, non-governmental organizations, etc.) and describe their respective roles in the program. Describe any public involvement in the administration of your program.

• Project monitoring and evaluation plan - Describe how you will assess the effectiveness of funded activities and report those results to the Service including description of assessment tools to be used.

• Relevant details on key project personnel

• Details on the project location, including maps if appropriate

• Responses to Merit Review Evaluation Criteria - Provide description with appropriate documentation of how the proposed project addresses each of the numeric ranking criteria described in Section E. Application Review Information. We recommend that you address each ranking criterion individually with a brief statement or table. Project narratives that clearly address the specific review criteria in an organized manner will facilitate efficient proposal review and scoring.

• It is recommended that each application address the following criteria using the headings listed below (please separate Compensation and Prevention criteria as listed below (see Section E for details)) o Ranking Criteria for Depredation Compensation:

• Rate of Wolf Depredation

• Livestock losses as calculated by animal unit equivalents

• Claim evaluation and record keeping

• Integration of prevention activities

• Coordination, transparency, and accessibility

• Listing Status of Wolf Populations in Project Area

• Project Costs o Ranking Criteria for Depredation Prevention

• Rate of Wolf Depredation

• Effectiveness of Preventative Techniques

• Outreach and Coordination

• Status of Wolf Populations in Project Area

• Project Costs

Budget Narrative Applicants must describe and justify items and costs listed in their budget. The budget narrative must identify the following cost items: total estimated costs, non-Federal cost share, third-party contributions, and any pre-award costs. Total project cost is the sum of all allowable costs, including required and voluntary cost share and third-party contributions.

Budget items must be:

• Reasonable, allowable, allocable, and necessary

• Compliant with 2 CFR §200 Subpart E cost principles

Indirect Costs: Applicants must indicate in their budget narrative how they will charge indirect costs, including the rate to be applied:

• De Minimis Rate: If eligible, state if your organization is opting to use the de minimis rate of up to 15% of total modified direct costs. Entities that do not have a current Federal negotiated indirect cost rate (including provisional rate) may propose to use the de minimis rate. For more information, refer to 2 CFR 200.414(f).

• Negotiated Rate: State if you will negotiate with your cognizant agency. If your organization has previously negotiated a rate, attach a copy of the most recently negotiated rate agreement (active or expired).

Data and Evaluation Costs: Applicant budgets may include costs related to data and evaluation as relevant per 2 CFR §200.455.

The costs related to data and evaluation are allowable. Data costs include (but are not limited

to) the expenditures needed to gather, store, track, manage, analyze, disaggregate, secure, share, publish, or otherwise use data to administer or improve the program, such as data systems, personnel, data dashboards, cybersecurity, and related items. Data costs may also include direct or indirect costs associated with building integrated data systems—data systems that link individual-level data from multiple State and local government agencies for purposes of management, research, and evaluation. Evaluation costs include (but are not limited to) evidence reviews, evaluation planning and feasibility assessment, conducting evaluations, sharing evaluation results, and other personnel or materials costs related to the effective building and use of evidence and evaluation for program design, administration, or improvement.

Conflict of Interest and Unresolved Matters Disclosures:

If any actual or potential conflict of interest exists related to this project at the time of application, the applicant must provide sufficient information to support a program determination of significance per 2 CFR 1402.112. Refer to 2 CFR 200.112 Conflict of Interest and 2 CFR 200.113.

Overlap or Duplication of Effort Statement:

Applicants must state in their application if the activities, costs, or time commitment of key personnel proposed in this application overlap with those in any other Federal proposal or award or not. If no overlap exists, include a statement to that effect. If any overlap exists, provide:

• Activities: Description any overlapping activities.

• Costs: Description of any overlapping costs.

• Time: Description of any overlapping key personnel time.

• A copy of any overlapping or duplicative proposal submitted to any other potential funding entity.

• Details on when any overlapping proposal was submitted, to whom, and the expected date of the funding decision.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/part-200/subpart-E https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFRd93f2a98b1f6455/section-200.414 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-B/chapter-XIV/part-1402#1402.112 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-B/section-200.112 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-B/section-200.113 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-B/section-200.113

Other Required Information Other Required Information: Proposals must include a budget that is sufficiently detailed to show that costs are both necessary and reasonable for accomplishing the purposes of the proposal. The budget narrative should provide sufficient detail for reviewers to understand how costs were estimated. Estimates should be supported by data, such as past depredation events.

Reviewers must be able to clearly see that costs are realistic and are commensurate with the project needs and timeframe. Applications will be disqualified if reviewers cannot determine that applications meet this threshold. If costs are for more than one year, the applicant should clearly state expenditure/cost breakdown requested for each year and list on the SF-424A and Budget Narrative.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES

Address to Request Application Package Applicants can request application packages through the appropriate contact listed above in the Basic Information section.

Submission Dates and Times Closing Date for Applications: 03/28/2025

Closing Date Explanation

Electronically submitted applications must be submitted no later than 11:59 PM., ET, on the listed application due date.

This program requires the submission of applications online through GrantSolutions.gov as applicants will receive an acknowledgement of application receipt. GrantSolutions automatically generates an electronic date and time stamp in the system upon application receipt. Applicants are encouraged to verify the completeness of their application package before submission using the checklist provided above.

Submission Instructions Apply Through GrantSolutions To apply through GrantSolutions, follow these steps:

1. Register your organization. Send an e-mail to help@grantsolutions.gov with:

• Subject: New Organization Request

• Entity name (organization or individual applying as a natural person)

• Entity type

• SAM.gov Unique Entity Identifier (not required for individuals)

• Employer Identification Number (individuals, do not include your SSN)

• Address

• Contact details (First and last name, e-mail, phone)

This information should be the same as entered on the entity’s SAM.gov profile.

2. Assign system user roles. Follow the GrantSolutions “Recipient user” registration instructions. Submit a separate Recipient User Account Request form for each official to https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/getting-started-request-a-user-account/ https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/getting-started-request-a-user-account/ https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/getting-started-request-a-user-account/ be assigned a system role. At minimum, the Authorizing Official (ADO) and Principal Investigator/Program Director (PI/PD) must be assigned.

3. Log in. GrantSolutions requires users to log in through Login.gov. Each user must create a Login.gov account. For instructions, see the GrantSolutions Training Resources web page.

4. Find and apply to this Funding Opportunity. After logging in, click on either the “Begin an application” link (first time applicants) or the “Funding Opportunity” link to go to the “Competing Announcements-Application Kits” list screen. Search the list for this Funding Opportunity’s title and number. Click on the associated “Apply” link.

Follow the prompts from there. Required applications forms are provided with the Funding Opportunity in GrantSolutions unless otherwise indicated on the Required Forms table above.

5. For detailed instructions, see the GrantSolutions Training Resources web page.

6. Need help? Find help topics and contact information on the GrantSolutions Contact Us page.

APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

Eligibility Review During the eligibility review, the application is checked for timely submission, completed packages (see Application Documents above) and alignment with the requirements of this announcement. The Federal agency may remove an application if it does not pass the eligibility review.

Application packages will be screened to ensure all required forms and application elements have been provided and both applicants and projects meet all basic eligibility criteria described above. The Service will review the SAM.gov Exclusion database, status of applicants’ administration of other grants, including Single Audit submissions, past performance, financial strength and management capabilities, and procedures and methods for monitoring subrecipients or vendors. Applicants in poor standing may not be considered for funding. If there are any questions about the ability of the project to be completed in compliance with Federal laws and regulations, additional information may be requested from the applicant. A project may be disqualified if Service staff determine the project cannot meet Federal requirements. Incomplete applications will be returned for corrections. Corrections must be submitted within two weeks of the returned application. Applicants that do not respond within two weeks with corrected materials will be disqualified. The Service, in its sole discretion, may continue the review process for applications with non-substantive issues that may be easily rectified or cured.

If an applicant selected for funding hasn't finished their SAM.gov registration (see 2 CFR 25.200 and 2 CFR 25.110) when the federal agency is ready to make an award, we may decide that the applicant is ineligible for the award and choose to grant it to someone else. Please refer 2 CFR

25.205 for more information.

Prior to making an award, the DOI checks the anticipated recipient and their key project personnel against the current list of prohibited or restricted persons or entities in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Exclusions database. We are prohibited from making an award if a recipient or any key personnel are found ineligible, prohibited, restricted, or otherwise https://login.gov/ https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/recipient-gmm-training-resources/?_sf_s=login&_sft_resource_cat=login-and-navigation https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/recipient-gmm-training-resources/?_sf_s=login&_sft_resource_cat=login-and-navigation https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/recipient-gmm-training-resources/?_sf_s=login&_sft_resource_cat=login-and-navigation https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/contact-us/ https://home.grantsolutions.gov/home/contact-us/ https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-25.200 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-25/subpart-A/section-25.110 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-25/subpart-B/section-25.205 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-I/part-25/subpart-B/section-25.205 excluded from receiving or participating in an award, as their ineligibility condition applies to this program.

If removed from consideration for ineligibility, the Federal agency will notify the applicant in writing.

Merit Review

Depredation Compensation Activities Maximum Points: 100

1. Rate of Wolf Depredation (20 points maximum) To receive points for this criterion, applicants must provide the number of confirmed wolf depredations per 100 wolves for each of the past 3 years in the area covered by the proposal.

These should be individual depredations, not events (i.e., 1 dead animal = 1 depredation). If 3 years of data are not available, applicants must provide information for as many of the last 5 years as possible. Best available wolf population estimates should be used. Applicants must only provide information on confirmed depredations and wolf population estimates within the range of the proposed project. For example, the number of confirmed depredations must only be provided for the area where the proposal will provide funding.

Numbers provided must not include probable depredations or include a multiplier to account for missing livestock. Applicants must only include confirmed events investigated by a USDA Wildlife Services field representative or other authorized investigator. Missing or unconfirmed livestock losses are not eligible for compensation and will not be considered under this criterion.

Applicants must show calculations to enable reviewers to assess the numbers provided. The following format is recommended:

Year Number of confirmed wolf depredations

Estimated wolf population

Number of confirmed depredations/100 wolves (= (Number of confirmed wolf depredations/estimated wolf population) * 100)

Average

Scoring: Information not provided – 0 points Average of <10/100 depredations per 100 wolves – 5 points Average of 10-15 depredations per 100 wolves – 10 points Average of 16-30 depredations per 100 wolves – 15 points Average of >30 depredations per 100 wolves – 20 points

2. Livestock losses as calculated by animal unit equivalents (20 points maximum) To help reviewers make a standardized comparison of the level of livestock predation in the project area, applicants must provide the annual confirmed losses of cows and sheep in the prior year converted to animal-value equivalents, as further described below, to receive points for this criterion. Although losses occurring in other categories of livestock are eligible for reimbursement and should be included in other descriptive sections of the narrative, only confirmed losses of the most commonly depredated types of livestock are requested for this element to minimize applicant burden.

The table below provides a suggested format, as well as animal-value equivalents to be used for each type of livestock:

Type of Livestock

Number of confirmed losses in the most recent full year

Animal- Value Equivalent*

Loss by Animal-Value Equivalent

Cattle Calf .68 (Multiply number of confirmed losses by animal-value equivalent provided)

Cow 1 Bull 1.5

Sheep Lamb .15 Ewe .18 Ram .25 Total

* Equivalents provided are the largest estimate for an individual animal in each class in: Lacey, J. 1991. Forage Consumption Estimated Animal Unit Conversion. Montana State University Cooperative Extension Service, Montana guide MT 9111 (AG)(available:

https://animalrangeextension.montana.edu/forage/documents/forage%20consumpiton%20estimat ed%20AUM%20conversion.pdf). Calf weight is an exception, and was calculated based on the average fall weight of a calf leaving the range to more accurately represent the lost value.

Scoring:

The range of losses over all applications received will be calculated after this Notice of Funding Opportunity closes. That range will be divided into 4 categories for scoring. Points will be assigned based on which category (quartile) the application falls into as follows: Information not provided – 0 points, first quartile (lowest category of losses) – 5 points, second quartile – 10 points, 3rd quartile – 15 points, 4th quartile – 20 points.

3. Claim evaluation and record keeping (5 points maximum)

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must describe their process for evaluating claims, including eligibility requirements, and provide detail that allows reviewers to assess the https://animalrangeextension.montana.edu/forage/documents/forage%20consumpiton%20estimated%20AUM%20conversion.pdf https://animalrangeextension.montana.edu/forage/documents/forage%20consumpiton%20estimated%20AUM%20conversion.pdf https://animalrangeextension.montana.edu/forage/documents/forage%20consumpiton%20estimated%20AUM%20conversion.pdf).%20 adequacy of the program’s record keeping.

Scoring: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 5 points using the following guidelines.

0 points = Information that will allow assessment of the rigor of the program’s procedures and record-keeping is not provided, or it is provided and the process for confirming depredations, the quality of investigators, or the record keeping is minimally adequate.

5 points = Detailed information on procedures for investigation management and record keeping is provided, and those procedures include highly trained investigators, very effective procedures for differentiating between confirmed and probable depredations to ensure only confirmed depredation is being compensated, and solid and effective record keeping systems.

4. Integration of prevention activities (10 points maximum)

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must provide details regarding prevention efforts in the proposed project area and any requirements their compensation program has in regard to implementation of prevention activities. Reviewers will consider the following questions:

1. Is a conflict avoidance or depredation prevention program in place in the area covered by the proposal?

Scoring: No (or information not provided) = 0 points; Yes = 5 points

2) To qualify for proposed compensation funding, are producers required to implement prevention measures at a minimum following the first confirmed depredation for which compensation from the program was sought? If yes, applicants must please provide evidence of the requirement.

Scoring: No (or information not provided) = 0 points; Yes = 5 points

5. Coordination, transparency, and accessibility (10 points maximum)

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must summarize the program’s coordination with partners, level of transparency to the public, and accessibility to producers. In addition, applicants must provide information on past activities and performance related to these activities, as well any plans in place for the upcoming year. Applicants must also describe activities such as any in-person outreach efforts at events, web presence, publications, meetings and so on.

Scoring: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 10 points using the following guidelines.

0 = Information that will allow assessment of the program’s coordination, transparency, and accessibility is not provided, or information provided indicates the program coordinates minimally with partners and others, lacks transparency, and is minimally accessible to producers.

10 = Detailed information on the program’s coordination, transparency, and accessibility is provided, and all are excellent. Information indicates that the program coordinates consistently with a wide array of partners, information on the program’s activities is readily accessible to the public, and the program’s outreach and processes make them very easily accessible to all eligible producers in the area covered.

6. Listing Status of Wolf Populations in Project Area (15 points maximum) At the time of this Notice of Funding Opportunity posting, is the wolf state or federally listed in the proposed project area?

Scoring: No (or information not provided) = 0 points; Listed in part of the project area but not all = 8 points; Listed in the whole project area = 15 points

7. Project Costs (20 points maximum) As described in the budget and budget narrative section of this Notice of Funding Opportunity, unconfirmed losses (missing livestock, dead livestock not confirmed to be killed by wolves, and “multipliers”) are not eligible for reimbursement under this program. As also described, all costs must be necessary and reasonable for a proposal to be eligible for funding. Requests must equate to losses described, or deviations must be explained.

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must provide information that allows the reviewers to assess the cost-effectiveness of their proposal as described below.

Scoring: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 20 points using the following guidelines.

0 points = The minimum level of budget planning appears to have been completed, costs are on the high end of reasonable or not justified, and the applicant provides minimal evidence that they will be able to expend funds in the time proposed.

20 points = Budget is highly detailed and all costs have been carefully considered and planned, request is strongly supported by prior spending record or recent trend information, evidence is provided that the activities will be completed in the most cost-effective manner possible, nonfederal funding sources are being maximally leveraged, and it is extremely likely that requested funding will be expended within the proposed project period.

Depredation Prevention Activities Maximum Points: 100

1. Rate of Wolf Depredation (25 points maximum)

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must provide the number of confirmed wolf depredations per 100 wolves for each of the past 3 years in the area covered by the proposal.

These should be individual depredations, not events (i.e., 1 dead animal = 1 depredation). If 3 years of data are not available, applicants must provide as many of the last 5 years as possible.

Best available wolf population estimates should be used. Applicants must only provide information on confirmed depredations and wolf population estimates within the range of the proposed project. For example, the number of confirmed depredations must only be provided for the area where the proposal will provide prevention funding.

Numbers provided must not include probable depredations or include a multiplier to account for missing livestock. Applicants must only include confirmed events investigated by a USDA Wildlife Services field representative or other authorized investigator. Missing or unconfirmed livestock losses will not be considered under this criterion. Applicants must show calculations to enable reviewers to assess the numbers provided. The following format is recommended:

Applicants must show calculations to enable reviewers to assess the numbers provided. The following format is recommended:

Year Number of confirmed wolf depredations

Estimated wolf population

Number of confirmed depredations/100 wolves (= (Number of confirmed wolf depredations/estimated wolf population) * 100)

Average

Scoring:

Information not provided – 0 points Average of <10/100 depredations per 100 wolves – 10 points Average of 10-15 depredations per 100 wolves – 15 points Average of 16-30 depredations per 100 wolves – 20 points Average of >30 depredations per 100 wolves – 25 points

2. Effectiveness of Preventative Techniques (25 points maximum) To receive points for this criterion, applicants must describe in detail the preventative, nonlethal activities being proposed for funding and why the techniques that are being proposed are likely to be successful. Applicants must describe how they make decisions about which techniques are used, including how the effectiveness of previous preventative and nonlethal measures were evaluated and how the results of previous evaluation has affected what activities are being proposed, if applicable. Applicants must also describe how any activities funded through this opportunity will be evaluated (i.e., how success will be measured).

Scoring: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 25 points using the following guidelines.

0 points: Information about why the techniques being proposed are likely to be successful (including how the effectiveness of previous preventative and nonlethal measure were evaluated and how results of that evaluation have affected what activities are being proposed, if applicable) and what methods will be used for evaluating prescribed activities is not provided. Or information provided indicates methods are likely to be minimally effective.

25 points: Applicant provides compelling evidence that the techniques being proposed are likely to be highly successful in the project area. If applicable, this evidence includes explaining how the effectiveness of previous preventative and nonlethal measure were evaluated and how results of that evaluation have affected what activities are being proposed. Detailed plans for evaluating the effectiveness of the techniques proposed are described, and those plans appear to have a high likelihood of being implemented during the project period and of providing valuable results.

3. Outreach and Coordination (15 points maximum)

To receive points for this criterion, applicants must describe the program’s demonstrated or planned efforts to reach out to potentially affected livestock producers and coordinate with partners. Applicants must also describe the program’s efforts to encourage adoption of prevention strategies.

Score: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 15 points using the following guidelines.

0 points: Information about the program’s demonstrated or planned efforts to reach potentially affected livestock producers, coordinate with partners, and encourage adoption of prevention strategies is not provided. Or information provided indicates efforts are minimally adequate or effective.

15 points: Detailed information about the program’s demonstrated or planned efforts to reach potentially affected livestock producers, coordinate with partners, and encourage adoption of prevention strategies is provided. Outreach and coordination efforts are well planned and the program has a high likelihood of successfully reaching a high percentage of affected producers, coordinating with all potential partners, and resulting in the widespread adoption of prevention

4. Status of Wolf Populations in Project Area (15 points maximum)

At the time of this Notice of Funding Opportunity posting, is the wolf state or federally listed in the proposed project area? No, or information not provided = 0 points, Listed in part of the project area but not all = 08 points; Listed in the whole project area = 15 points

5. Project Costs (20 points maximum)

As described in the budget narrative section of this Notice of Funding Opportunity, applicants must describe and justify requested costs. Requests must be supported by using past costs or projections based on current year’s data. To receive points for this criterion, applicants must provide information that allows the reviewers to assess the cost-effectiveness of their proposal as described below.

Scoring: Reviewers will assign between 0 and 20 points using the following guidelines.

0 points = The minimum level of budget planning appears to have been completed, costs are on the high end of reasonable, and the applicant provides minimal evidence that they will be able to expend funds in the time proposed.

20 points = Budget is highly detailed and all costs have been carefully considered and planned, request is strongly supported by prior spending record or recent trend information, evidence is provided that the activities will be completed in the most cost effective manner possible, nonfederal funding sources are being maximally leveraged, and it is extremely likely that requested funding will be expended within the proposed project period.

Review and Selection Process This program reviews proposed budgets to ensure:

• figures are correct

• estimated costs are necessary and reasonable and clearly linked to project narratives

• avoid obviously unallowable costs

• identify costs requiring prior approval

• ensure indirect cost rates are applied correctly

• confirm cost sharing requirements are reflected in the budget.

This program reviews applications for potential overlap or duplication between the proposed project and any other funded or proposed project. Depending on the circumstances, DOI may choose to not make an award.

The national merit review panel will develop and recommend a ranked project list to the Assistant Director of Ecological Services. Projects will be recommended for funding by rank order unless an application is justified by the Assistant Director to be selected out of rank order based upon the following considerations:

• Regional/ National priority

• Applicant’s ability to use partial funding

• Availability of funding

• Balance/distribution of funds geographically within a Service Region

• Balance/distribution of funds geographically across Service Regions

• Whether this project duplicates other projects funded by Service or other Department of the Interior agencies

• The applicant’s prior award performance

• Partnerships with and/or participation of targeted groups

The Assistant Director of Ecological Services will make the final award selections.

Risk Review Prior to making an award, the program assesses the risk posed by the applicant per 2 CFR

200.206. If an award will be made, the program may apply special conditions corresponding to the risk assessed. For awards over the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $250,000), the program reviews eligibility and financial integrity information in the applicant’s SAM.gov records per 2 CFR 200.206(a). The program also assesses financial management capabilities, project delivery experience, staffing resources, past performance, administration and reporting compliance records, and overall project complexity and potential challenges.

AWARD NOTICES

Notices of Federal Award are sent electronically via GrantSolutions or e-mail. These notices outline the terms, conditions, and payment instructions per 2 CFR 200.211. The Notice of Federal Award signed by an authorized Grants Officer is the legal instrument obligating financial assistance to a recipient. Any other prior notice is not an authorization to begin work. If the program allows pre-award costs per 2 CFR 200.458, beginning performance before receiving a Notice of Federal Award is at the applicant’s own risk.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-200.206 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-200.206 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/part-200#p-200.206(a) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-200.211 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-200.458

Anticipated Project Start Date: 10/01/2025

Anticipated Project End Date: 09/30/2027

The Service intends to make pre-award notifications by September 30, 2025, and obligate Program funds within 120 days. Applicants will assist the Service in meeting the 120-day target by providing the documents necessary for grant issuance as soon as possible following pre-award notification. Awarded funds must be expended in a timely manner or returned to the Service for reallocation through the next competitive grant cycle.

POST AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION

Administration and National Policy Requirements For award administration and national policy requirements, see the DOI General Terms and Conditions. Infrastructure projects require the use of American iron, steel, manufacture products, and construction materials per 2 CFR 184.

See the FWS General Award Terms and Conditions for national policy requirements for FWS awards.