FY_2018 CPPM_final.pdf

Crop Protection and Pest Management

Competitive Grants Program

FY 2018 Request for Applications (RFA)

APPLICATION DEADLINE: May 8, 2018

ELIGIBILITY: See Part III, A of RFA

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

AGRICULTURE

CROP PROTECTION AND PEST MANAGEMENT COMPETITIVE GRANTS

PROGRAM

INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE: This program is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under 10.329, Crop Protection and Pest Management

Competitive Grants Program.

DATES: Applications must be received by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 8, 2018. Applications received after this deadline will normally not be considered for funding (see Part IV, C of this

RFA). Comments regarding this request for applications (RFA) are requested within six months from the issuance of this notice. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

STAKEHOLDER INPUT: We at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) seek your comments about this RFA. We will consider your comments when we develop the next

RFA for the program, if applicable, and we’ll use them to meet the requirements of section

103(c)(2) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C.

7613(c)(2)). Submit your written stakeholder comments by the deadline set forth in the DATES portion of this notice via email to Policy@nifa.usda.gov. (This email address is only for receiving comments regarding this RFA and not for requesting information or forms.) In your comments, please state that you are responding to the Crop Protection and Pest Management

Competitive Grants Program RFA.

Visit the NIFA website to access a factsheet on the Center of Excellence (COE) designation process, including COE criteria, and a list of programs that offered COE opportunities in FY

2018. You may also review a recording of COE outreach webinars held in February and March of 2015 and COE implementation webinars held in August and September of 2015 from the site.

We will update COE webpages as appropriate.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: NIFA requests applications for the Crop Protection and Pest

Management (CPPM) Competitive Grants Program for fiscal year (FY) 2018 to address critical state, regional and national integrated pest management (IPM) needs to ensure food security and respond effectively to other major societal pest management challenges. The CPPM program supports projects that address these challenges with IPM approaches developed by coordinated state, regional, and national research and extension efforts. The impact of these research and extension efforts will be increased by the establishment of communication networks and stakeholder participation in setting priorities. In FY 2018, NIFA will only accept applications for funding in the Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP) and the Regional

Coordination Program Area (RCP) of the CPPM program.

mailto:Policy@nifa.usda.gov http://nifa.usda.gov/centers-excellence

The anticipated amount available for CPPM grants in FY 2108 is $18.1 million. Of this amount, approximately $10 million will be used to fund some Extension Implementation Program Area

(EIP) projects through continuation awards and the anticipated remaining amount of $8.1million, approximately $4.0 million will be used for ARDP and $4.1 million for RCP. This RFA is being released prior to the passage of an appropriations act for FY 2018; enactment of additional continuing resolutions or an appropriations act may affect the availability or level of funding available for the CPPM program.

The purpose of ARDP awards are to enhance the development, adoption, and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM, technologies, tactics and strategies that address regional and/or national IPM priorities. The purpose of RCP awards are to increase coordination and improve efficiency of IPM research and extension efforts; facilitate collaboration across states and disciplines; and promote further development and adoption of IPM through regional pest management information networks, collaborative team building and broad-based stakeholder participation.

This notice identifies the objectives for CPPM projects, deadline dates, funding information, eligibility criteria for projects and applicants, and application forms and associated instructions needed to apply for a CPPM award.

Table of Contents

PART I—FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Legislative Authority B. Purpose and Priorities C. Program Area Description

PART II—AWARD INFORMATION

A. Available Funding B. Types of Applications C. Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research

PART III—ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing or Matching C. Centers of Excellence

PART IV—APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Electronic Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

PART V—APPLICATION REVIEW REQUIREMENTS

A. General B. Evaluation Criteria C. Center of Excellence Status D. Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality E. Organizational Management Information F. Application Disposition

PART VI—AWARD ADMINISTRATION

A. General B. Award Notice C. Administrative and National Policy Requirements D. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements

PART VII—AGENCY CONTACT

PART VIII—OTHER INFORMATION

A. Use of Funds; Changes B. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards C. Regulatory Information D. Definitions E. Materials Available on the Internet

FIGURE 1: Schematic Representation of the CPPM Program’s Desired Outcomes and Goals .. 45 FIGURE 2: Crop Protection and Pest Management Program Logic Model

PART I—FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Legislative Authority

Section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998

(AREERA) (7 U.S.C. 7626), authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a competitive grants program that provides funding for integrated, multifunctional agricultural research, extension, and education activities. Subject to the availability of appropriations to carry out this program, the Secretary may award grants to colleges and universities (as defined by section 1404 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA)

(7 U.S.C. 3103)), as amended, on a competitive basis for projects that address priorities in United

States agriculture and involve integrated research, education, and extension activities, as determined by the Secretary in consultation with the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board (NAREEEAB), 7 U.S.C. 7626.

B. Purpose and Priorities

The purpose of the CPPM program is to address high priority issues related to pests including insects, nematodes, pathogens, weeds, and other pests and their management using integrated pest management (IPM) approaches at the state, regional and national levels. The CPPM program supports projects that will ensure food security and respond effectively to other major societal pest management challenges with comprehensive IPM approaches that are economically viable, ecologically prudent, and safe for human health. The CPPM program addresses IPM challenges for emerging issues and existing priority pest concerns that can be addressed more effectively with new and emerging technologies. The outcomes of the CPPM program are effective, affordable, and environmentally-sound IPM practices and strategies needed to maintain agricultural productivity and healthy communities.

The CPPM program provides support for research to develop new IPM approaches, extension to disseminate IPM knowledge and improve adoption of IPM practices, and coordination of IPM activities at the regional and national levels to increase the adoption and implementation of IPM practices on a broad scale. The CPPM program provides support for these functions with three linked program areas that emphasize research and development for discovery of IPM knowledge;

extension activities for IPM adoption and implementation; and enhanced coordination, collaboration and communications among related CPPM programs and awardees. Together the

Applied Research and Development Program Area (ARDP), the Extension Implementation

Program Area (EIP), and the Regional Coordination Program Area (RCP) represent a comprehensive approach for developing IPM practices and strategies and extending this new knowledge across many environments through a coordinated national network. It is anticipated that the application of this evidence-based science will have positive outcomes for society.

National IPM Roadmap

The CPPM program is aligned with the IPM goals identified in the National IPM Roadmap for

Integrated Pest Management (National IPM Roadmap). The National IPM Roadmap identifies strategic directions for IPM research, implementation, and measurement for pests in all settings throughout the nation (see National IPM Roadmap). In FY 2018, successful CPPM program applicants will develop knowledge and information and improved IPM practices needed for the http://nifa.usda.gov/sites/default/files/resources/National%20Road%20Map%20for%20Integrated%20Pest%20Management.pdf adoption and implementation of IPM methods that have the following National IPM Roadmap goals:

Improve cost-benefit analyses when adopting IPM practices;

Reduce potential human health risks and related management strategies;

Minimize adverse environmental effects from pests and related management strategies.

A schematic representation of the CPPM Program’s desired outcomes and goals is illustrated in

FIGURE 1. The three CPPM program areas at the center address IPM needs in the five focus areas described below, thereby contributing to the achievement of the five goals of the National

IPM Roadmap shown in the outer ring, resulting in outcomes for sustainable food security.

The CPPM program, through its three component program areas (ARDP, EIP, and RCP), addresses overall IPM needs in the five following focus areas as funding is available:

1) Plant Protection Tactics and Tools. Need for discovery, development, and introduction of new pest management tactics for use in IPM systems.

2) Diversified IPM Systems. Need for long-term sustainable solutions to pest management problems on a regional or national scale.

3) Enhancing Agricultural Biosecurity. To develop and maintain key information systems, networks, and decision support tools that provide the knowledge infrastructure needed for early detection and the application of science-based IPM systems for invasive, emerging and high-consequence pests that threaten U.S. agriculture (e.g., early warning and decision support systems such as the Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education

(ipmPIPE) have a direct effect on biosecurity).

4) IPM for Sustainable Communities. Direct application of IPM knowledge and expertise to address pest management challenges in non-traditional settings such as urban structures, landscapes and gardens, homes and schools.

5) Development of the Next Generation of IPM Scientists. To develop pre-doctoral and post-doctoral education programs to prepare the next generation of IPM scientists.

For more detailed descriptions of the focus areas see: CPPM focus areas.

In FY 2018, NIFA is soliciting new applications for two of the program areas supported by the CPPM program, ARDP and RCP. More specifically, the CPPM program will provide funding for Plant Protection Tactics and Tools (focus area one), Enhancing Agricultural

Biosecurity (focus area three), and IPM for Sustainable Communities (focus area four).

C. Program Area Description

The two program areas supported in FY 2018 are ARDP and RCP.

1. Applied Research and Development Program Area

Program Code: ARDP

Proposed Budget Requests:

May not exceed a total of $200,000 for applications with Project Directors (PD) from one state/U.S. territory. Exception to this maximum budget is for PD(s) who are http://nifa.usda.gov/sites/default/files/resources/Crop%20Protection%20Focus%20Areas.pdf studying a major crop/commodity of regional or national importance that is produced only or predominately in one state or U.S. territory and as a result multistate collaboration is not practical (e.g., Western Region where major crops/commodities are grown only or predominately in one state or U.S. territory). Contact the programmatic contact in Part VII to determine if your project is eligible for this exception and a higher total budget request up to $325,000. (See the paragraph on Multi-State/U.S.

territory and/or Regional/National Involvement located in this section).

May not exceed a total of $325,000 for applications with Project Directors (PDs) from more than one state/U.S. territory.

Project Period: Two to four years

Requested Project Type: The ARDP supports three project types:

Applied research (single-function) projects develop innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM technologies, tactics, strategies and systems that address regional and/or national IPM priorities.

Research-led projects enhance the adoption of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems.

Extension-led projects extend implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems by IPM practitioners and growers. Extension-led projects enhance outreach efforts and maximize opportunities to build strategic alliances with stakeholders to expand their active participation in increasing the implementation of IPM methods.

Program Area Priorities Per Project Type:

a. Applied Research (single-function) Projects

Research priorities include: 1) development of individual tools and tactics needed for pest management systems (e.g., biocontrol, cultural/physical/mechanical control, host plant resistance, and particularly novel uses of chemicals, monitoring methods or decision support) and 2) increased understanding of how interactions among tactics alter the effectiveness of pest management within agricultural, recreational, suburban, and urban ecosystems. Field-scale experiments over multiple seasons and/or locations are the desired experimental approach for ARDP proposals, where appropriate. The desired outcomes for new IPM practices include reducing initial pest populations, lowering the carrying capacity of the ecosystem for pests, increasing tolerance of hosts to pest injury, and/or providing tools for making management decisions, such as monitoring methods and action thresholds.

Long-term fundamental research is not appropriate for funding in this category. We encourage research on novel, cutting-edge methods, for which data exist to support the likelihood of successful IPM research and adoption. Research outcomes involving chemical pesticides include reducing the amount applied, the frequency of applications, increasing the selectivity, reducing the risks associated with their use, and/or developing novel resistance management strategies. Incorporate minimizing adverse impacts of pesticides on beneficial organisms and limiting buildup of resistant pest populations.

Clearly describe 1) how the tactic or IPM system, once developed, can be incorporated into an existing production or management system, and 2) the economic, social, and environmental benefits of the proposed IPM strategies, and identify ways to overcome constraints to greater adoption of IPM methods by users.

The following are examples of topic areas that could be addressed by Applied Research

(single-function) proposals. Identification of these topic areas is illustrative and is not intended to be exclusionary or a deterrent for submission of applications that address other appropriate topic areas.

Documenting (measuring) the impacts of IPM adoption;

Developing an effective strategy or tactic for a pest problem that currently limits production efficiency in a plant or animal production system, and is recognized by the user community as a key priority;

Addressing multiple cycles of pests (arthropods, nematodes, vertebrates, pathogens, or weeds) over seasons, and/or multiple species and complexes at the landscape or ecosystem level (agricultural production, urban, or natural systems) with consideration of the interactions of the entire system;

Promoting biological diversity in pest management systems and integration of multiple pest management tactics;

Identifying constraints to greater adoption of IPM strategies and developing approaches to overcome these constraints;

Promoting an interdisciplinary, IPM systems approach;

Developing effective pest management tactics for invasive pests (arthropods, nematodes, vertebrates, pathogens, or weeds) in cropping systems and natural and urban areas; and

Developing projects that enhance the development of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems for current and/or emerging pests of national importance.

b. Research-led Projects

Research-led projects are appropriate when the completion of the project’s research component will support the addition of an initial Extension component for IPM adoption by stakeholders. The research priorities for the research component are listed below. The extension component is directed toward the initial adoption of individual IPM tools, tactics, or systems developed through the research component of the project. At least 20 percent of project effort must be focused on the Extension priorities listed below. Include a description of how Extension personnel are involved at the beginning of project planning and how the Extension activities are conducted concurrently with research activities throughout the life of the project.

Research priorities include: 1) final development of individual tools and tactics needed for pest management systems (e.g., biocontrol, cultural/physical/mechanical control, host plant resistance, particularly novel uses of chemicals, monitoring methods or decision support) and 2) advanced understanding of how interactions among tactics alter the effectiveness of pest management within agricultural, recreational, suburban, and urban ecosystems.

Extension priorities include: 1) initial development of extension materials and information delivery systems for outreach efforts, 2) initial pilot implementation of field-scale or on-farm demonstrations, and 3) initial delivery of IPM extension outreach and training.

c. Extension-led Projects

Extension priorities include: 1) development of extension materials and information delivery systems for outreach efforts, 2) implementation of field-scale or on-farm demonstrations, and 3) delivery of IPM extension outreach and training. Document the existence of a research base relevant to the extension effort. ARDP funding is not intended to support ongoing extension programmatic efforts. At least 20 percent of project effort must be focused on the research priorities identified for Applied Research

(single-functions) projects or research-led projects (listed above).

Identification of these topic areas listed below is illustrative and is not intended to be exclusionary or a deterrent for submission of applications that address other topic areas appropriate for Extension-led priorities.

Providing IPM outreach and training to individuals involved with the production, processing, storage, transporting, and marketing of food and agricultural commodities;

Developing educational materials and information delivery systems that provide

IPM personnel in the public and private sectors with timely, state-of-the-art information about effective IPM strategies;

Providing outreach on endangered species protection related to IPM;

Developing IPM programs for urban and natural systems, and address human and environmental health issues when appropriate; and

Enhancing the development and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems for current and/or emerging pests of national importance.

The ARDP extension-led projects are separate from extension projects funded in the

Extension Implementation Program Area (EIP) and are generally not as mature, are more narrowly focused, and/or are outside the scope of EIP.

Program Area Requirements: All ARDP applications must address the following requirements:

a. Stakeholder-Identified IPM Needs: Include the citation of IPM needs identified by diverse regional and national stakeholders. Include at least one explicit citation that clearly documents the specific stakeholder-identified needs addressed by the proposed project. Clearly reference each identified need with corresponding citations. The citation of stakeholder-identified IPM needs is important because it demonstrates that a project is both important to stakeholders and that PDs are engaged with the stakeholder community. Sources of stakeholder-identified needs include, but are not limited to:

Needs identified by the regional IPM centers. See:

o www.ncipmc.org/grants/stakeholder_priorities.php http://www.ncipmc.org/grants/stakeholder_priorities.php o www.northeastipm.org/grant-programs/stakeholder-priorities o www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities, o westernipm.org/index.cfm/center-grants/priorities;

Needs identified in crop profiles. See https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org;

Needs identified in Pest Management Strategic Plans. See https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org;

Recommendations or reports from state IPM programs;

Recommendations from relevant IPM research and/or extension multi-state committees;

IPM needs from Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension (SARE) sub-regional conferences;

Recommendations from other IPM stakeholder groups; and

Other documented IPM needs assessment evaluations.

b. Multi-State/U.S. Territory and/or Regional/National Involvement: Clearly cite regional and/or national IPM priorities and describe multi-state, regional, and national collaborations for purposes of efficiency, economy, and synergy. All applications, including those with PDs from one state or U.S. territory, must clearly describe how the project will provide benefits to more than one state or U.S. territory. Describe the role of each individual on the project team in enough detail to convince peer reviewers of the application that the multi-state/U.S. territory collaboration is meaningful.

When a proposal involves a crop/commodity that is of regional or national importance and is produced predominately in one state or U.S. territory, include documentation that the crop/commodity is grown predominately in one state/U.S. territory and describe why multistate collaboration is impractical. See the Program Area Requirement, g.

Coordination, below for further information on participation in the appropriate regional

Hatch Multistate IPM Education/Extension and Research Activities, other relevant research multi-state projects, and the respective regional IPM center.

c. Multi-Disciplinary and Systems-Oriented: Describe how the project will promote cooperative efforts across appropriate disciplines, linkages between research and extension, and the improvement of existing or emerging integrated pest management systems. Describe the role of each member of the multi-disciplinary team and their responsibilities on the project.

d. Systems Approach: Describe how the proposal will enhance the development, adoption, and implementation of innovative, ecologically-based, sustainable IPM strategies and systems. ARDP seeks applications for developing IPM strategies: 1) with the potential to significantly enhance and protect environmental quality, reduce the risk of health problems and other problems associated with pest control practices, promote biological diversity in pest management systems, and integrate multiple pest management tactics, and 2) with the primary emphasis on enhancing productivity and profitability while addressing critical environmental quality and human health issues. Examples of areas that proposals may address include: major acreage agricultural production systems, high value crops such as key fruit and vegetable systems, animal production systems, urban systems, or other agro-ecosystems including natural areas. For ARDP applications http://www.northeastipm.org/grant-programs/stakeholder-priorities http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities http://westernipm.org/index.cfm/center-grants/priorities/ https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org/ https://ipmdata.ipmcenters.org/ submitted for projects in agricultural settings, IPM projects in both conventional and organic production systems are appropriate.

e. Implementation Plan: Describe, as appropriate, for each project type: 1) how the project will implement results generated by the project with stakeholders, and 2) how the project will measure and assess adoption, implementation, and potential impacts by stakeholders using cost-effective approaches and criteria.

f. Timeline: Include a detailed timeline with key milestones for the project’s objectives and other important project tasks.

g. Coordination: Describe the project team’s plans to participate in the appropriate regional Hatch Multistate IPM Education/Extension and Research Activities (e.g., NCERA222, NEERA1604, SERA3, and WERA1017), other relevant research multi-state projects, and the respective regional IPM center. See the National Information

Management and Support System (NIMSS) at www.nimss.org for information on these

Hatch Multistate projects. See contacts for the regional IPM centers and the regional programmatic efforts they coordinate at www.ipmcenters.org. The purpose of these coordination opportunities is to facilitate collaboration and cooperation on IPM projects, move research results to actual application through IPM adoption and implementation, and achieve CPPM program outcomes.

h. Partnerships: Describe plans to develop and enhance partnerships that include collaboration with small- or mid-sized, accredited colleges and universities; 1890 land-grant institutions; 1994 land-grant institutions; Hispanic-serving institutions; Hispanic-serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACUs); and/or other institutions that serve high-risk, under-served, or hard-to-reach audiences.

i. Logic Model: All applicants are required to submit a project-specific logic model (see

Other Project Information under Part IV, B,).

j. National IPM Roadmap: Address in the project narrative and the project-specific logic model chart applicable goals identified by the National IPM Roadmap for

Integrated Pest Management (see National IPM Roadmap).

2. Regional Coordination Program Area

Program Code: RCP

Proposed Budget Requests:

Budgets may not exceed $1,000,000 per year. NIFA anticipates making one RCP award for each of the agency’s four administrative regions: North Central, Northeastern, Southern, and Western. The RCP award in each region is to fund one regional IPM center.

NIFA anticipates providing additional funding to one regional IPM center for an optional project supplement to support the IPM information system; budgets may not exceed

$150,000 per year. Budgets for the optional project supplement to support the IPM information system may not exceed a total of $600,000 per project.

Project Length: Four years

Requested Project Type: Regional IPM Center

Program Area Priorities:

http://www.nimss.org/ http://www.ipmcenters.org/ http://nifa.usda.gov/sites/default/files/resources/National%20Road%20Map%20for%20Integrated%20Pest%20Management.pdf

a. Development and Adoption of IPM:

Enhance development and adoption of regional IPM solutions and strategically promote national outcomes for priority pest management issues.

Promote the overarching National IPM Roadmap goals: 1) improve cost benefit analyses when IPM practices are adopted, 2) reduce potential human health risks from pests and related management strategies, and 3) minimize adverse environmental impacts from pests and related management strategies as described in the National IPM Roadmap (2013) (National IPM Roadmap).

b. Intra-Regional IPM Collaboration and Cooperation

Enhance intra-regional IPM collaboration and cooperation to achieve IPM outcomes identified by the CPPM program.

Support the development and implementation of IPM on regional and national priorities by facilitating collaboration across states, disciplines, research and extension communities, commodities, and settings.

Increase coordination of IPM research, education and extension efforts and respond to critical, high-priority IPM needs by serving as regional focal points for core regional IPM support services, regional pest management information networks, collaborative team building, and broad-based stakeholder participation.

Maintain coordination with the respective Regional Association of State

Agricultural Experiment Station Director and the Regional Extension Association

Director.

Engage fully with the appropriate regional Hatch Multistate IPM

Education/Extension and Research Activities (currently labeled NCERA222, NEERA1604, SERA3, and WERA1017) and other appropriate IPM-related Hatch

Multistate Research Committees to facilitate and obtain regional priority IPM outcomes. See the National Information Management and Support System (NIMSS) at www.nimss.org.

Coordinate actively with and provide assistance to the Project Directors (PDs) within the region who receive awards from the other two CPPM program areas

(ARDP and EIP). NIFA intends to inform each funded regional IPM center of the awards made to PDs in their region under the CPPM program. NIFA expects these

PDs to collaborate and coordinate with their respective regional IPM center, and with the other regional IPM centers when appropriate, to more efficiently and effectively leverage regional resources needed to facilitate and reach significant regional and national IPM outcomes.

Engage with and support the respective regional Sustainable Agricultural Research and Extension (SARE) program and IR-4 program to further mutual IPM goals.

c. Inter-Regional IPM Collaboration and Cooperation

Enhance inter-regional collaboration and cooperation to ensure efficient use of resources, to take advantage of the unique strengths and priorities of each region and regional IPM center, and facilitate and obtain regional and national priority

IPM outcomes.

Participate in national coordination meetings with representatives from regional

IPM research and extension committees, IPM-related programs and government http://nifa.usda.gov/sites/default/files/resources/National%20Road%20Map%20for%20Integrated%20Pest%20Management.pdf http://www.nimss.org/ agencies to harmonize regional needs and activities into a comprehensive, nationally-coordinated program.

Support IPM projects that may require inter-regional collaboration. Examples are the development of national pest management strategic plans, crop profiles, national pest alerts, contributions to internet and database resources, evaluations of the impacts of IPM implementation on a regional and national scale, support of the Pest

Information Platform for Extension and Education (ipmPIPE), IPM signature food security programs of national scope (see 6a-c below), or IPM priorities that span regional boundaries.

d. IPM Information Networks

Establish and maintain multi-state information networks designed to provide pest managers, regulatory agencies, and policy makers with the information they need to make science-based decisions and to provide interactive communication and exchange of information among IPM practitioners, researchers and extension specialists, government agencies, and other program stakeholders.

Engage with Extension IPM programs and other IPM-related programs and experts operating at the national, regional, state and local levels.

Develop the capacity through the IPM information network to review science and regulatory documents related to IPM and to share current pest management information with pest managers and other stakeholders. Include links to applicable regional and national information on the center’s website.

e. IPM Partnerships

Build partnerships to address IPM challenges and opportunities.

Establish broad-based stakeholder advisory and steering committees to provide an opportunity for research and extension experts, IPM practitioners, and other stakeholders to identify and prioritize pest management needs, challenges, and opportunities in the respective region.

Maintain a website listing of current, regional IPM priorities obtained from IPM stakeholders and, as appropriate, engage stakeholders in a regional process to identify and prioritize IPM needs, focus center resources and programs on the identified priorities, and share regional IPM priorities with NIFA annually.

Use input from a wide variety of sources in the IPM needs prioritization process such as research and extension faculty including the state Extension IPM coordinators; multistate research and extension committees that address pest management issues; members of IPM-related eXtension Communities of Practice;

commodity associations and other groups representing end-users; and public interest groups.

Work in partnership with appropriate government agencies, private sector organizations, and academic institutions on opportunities for interagency cooperation and shared funding of priority projects.

f. IPM Signature Food Security Programs

Develop IPM signature food security programs and foster their sustainability through regional IPM center leadership. IPM signature food security programs promote collaboration across state and organizational boundaries to respond to high priority IPM challenges such as invasive species, endangered species, pest resistance, impacts resulting from regulatory actions affecting pest management practices, emerging pests or IPM issues, or other CPPM program priorities.

Provide support for key management tools that help foster food security including the Integrated Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education (iPIPE, see http://www.ipipe.org) and other high priorities for IPM programs relevant to food security by bringing together needed expertise and organizations, identifying resources, and communicating plans and priorities to appropriate audiences.

Directly respond, when appropriate, to high priority IPM challenges by methods such as organizing workshops and training programs, developing Pest Alerts, or facilitating further development of IPM tools to facilitate the IPM response to the

IPM challenge.

g. Evaluation of IPM Implementation

Incorporate assessment and evaluation into IPM center programs to document the impacts and outcomes of IPM research and extension efforts throughout its region, including the aggregation and synthesis of existing information and the generation of new information.

Review and evaluate impacts of IPM implementation.

Collaborate with the other regional IPM centers to standardize evaluation metrics.

Communicate outcomes and success stories to key stakeholders, funding organizations, and policy makers.

Program Area Requirements: RCP applications must address the following requirements:

Describe plans to serve as an intra-regional and inter-regional IPM focal point and facilitator including the ability to: 1) initiate and foster new collaborations among individuals and institutions and 2) provide coordination and direct support to the PDs who receive funding from CPPM through ARDP and EIP. NIFA expects the regional

IPM centers to assist NIFA by planning and hosting regional or national PD meetings or opportunities as forums for PDs to present their IPM research and extension work.

Describe plans to manage funding resources effectively by establishing processes for:

1) managing sub-awards supported by NIFA funding through the regional IPM center award; 2) identifying regional priorities; and ensuring that: 3) the center IPM needs identification and prioritization process is kept separate from the regional IPM centers funding process; 4) eligible applicants are notified of funding opportunities; and 5) funding is distributed in a fair and equitable fashion.

All applicants are required to submit a project-specific logic model (see Other Project

Information under Part IV, B,).

Develop and enhance collaboration with small- or mid-sized accredited colleges and universities, 1890 land-grant institutions, 1994 land-grant institutions, Hispanic-serving institutions, Hispanic-serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities, and/or other institutions that serve high-risk, underserved, or hard-to-reach audiences, or international partnerships that contribute to or support U.S. pest management issues;

Address the needs of underserved or hard-to-reach audiences; and http://www.ipipe.org/

Include support for at least one center team member to attend tri-annual leadership meetings and the International IPM Symposium to report on regional IPM center activities, outputs, outcomes, and impacts.

Build on the capacity of universities in the region to support IPM and the expanded responsiveness resulting from past regional IPM center programs.

RCP Optional Project Supplement for an IPM Information System: As part of a RCP proposal, you may include a request for funding to develop and maintain a national IPM information system to serve as a resource for IPM researchers, extension staff, educators, and practitioners. All RCP proposals will be reviewed together by the technical review panel. The technical review panel will first review the proposals for the primary RCP functions and then review the proposal that included an RCP Optional Project Supplement.

The following are requirements for an Optional Project Supplement:

Describe plans to deliver state of the art IPM information regionally and nationally to a wide variety of stakeholders and customers through an improved web presence. IPM information produced by NIFA-supported IPM programs should be included and highlighted, including information currently located at www.ipmcenters.org;

Provide logic model based reporting software for use in reporting outputs, outcomes and impacts of NIFA-supported IPM research, education, and extension projects. See https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/logic-model-planning-process for definitions of evaluation terms including outputs, outcomes, and changes in knowledge, behavior and condition;

Provide web-based networking tools for IPM research and extension personnel;

Collect and synthesize impact information from NIFA-supported projects for incorporation into the interagency IPM Project Database;

Serve as a key reference and information support tool for cataloging and setting IPM program priorities;

Demonstrate an ability to develop and maintain a cooperative working relationship with the wide range of IPM research and extension programs supported by NIFA listed in

Part I, C and listed in the CPPM programmatic logic model of this RFA;

Describe how the proposed objectives and approach for the proposed IPM information system will achieve IPM information objectives and goals as described in Part I, C, of this RFA;

Describe a plan to analyze web information at least quarterly, determine required actions, and delegate responsibilities to update information;

Describe a plan to provide for the continuity of current databases and preparation of a transition plan that documents the resources and steps needed to transfer key databases to alternate host sites if funding resources become unavailable for future maintenance of the IPM information system;

Submit a separate project-specific logic model chart (this one is in addition to the logic model for the regional IPM center) (see Other Project Information in Part IV, B, 3).

CPPM encourages (but does not require) projects that develop content suitable for delivery through eXtension (https://extension.org/).

http://www.ipmcenters.org/ https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/logic-model-planning-process https://extension.org/

PART II—AWARD INFORMATION

A. Available Funding

The anticipated amount available for CPPM awards in FY 2018 is approximately $4.0 million for ARDP and $4.1 million for RCP. This RFA is being released prior to the passage of an appropriations act for FY 2018. Enactment of additional continuing resolutions or an appropriations act may affect the availability or level of funding for this program.

All funds for ARDP awards will be provided in year one of the project. RCP awards will be administered as continuation projects (i.e., funding will be provided in one-year increments);

funding after year one will be dependent on availability of annual appropriations, satisfactory progress, and continued support is in the best interest of the Federal government and the public.

RCP awards made in FY 2018 will provide funds for the first eighteen months of the project to allow regional IPM centers time to make sub-awards.

There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular application or to make a specific number of ARDP awards. NIFA anticipates making four RCP awards, one for each of the agency’s four administrative regions: North Central, Northeastern, Southern, and Western.

The Automated Standard Applications for Payment System (ASAP), operated by the Department of Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service, is the designated payment system for awards resulting from this RFA. For more information see https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsservices/gov/pmt/asap/asap_home.htm.

B. Types of Applications

In FY 2018, you may submit applications to the CPPM program as one of the following types of requests:

New application. This is a project application that has not been previously submitted to the

CPPM program. We will review all new applications competitively using the screening for administrative requirements, review panel evaluation of proposals using evaluation criteria and selection process described in Part V—Application Review Requirements. NIFA may choose to issue a new award on a continuation basis. A continuation award is an award instrument by which NIFA agrees to support a specified level of effort for a predetermined period of time with a statement of intention to provide additional support at a future date, provided that performance has been satisfactory, appropriations are available for this purpose, and continued support would be in the best interest of the federal government and the public.

Resubmitted application. This is an application that had previously been submitted to the NIFA but not funded. Project Directors (PDs) must respond to the previous review panel summary (see

Response to Previous Review, Part IV). We must receive resubmitted applications by the relevant due dates. We will evaluate resubmitted applications in competition with other pending applications in the appropriate area to which they are assigned and review them according to the same evaluation criteria (Part V, B) as new applications. If you are submitting a resubmission https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsservices/gov/pmt/asap/asap_home.htm application, enter the NIFA-assigned proposal number of the previously-submitted application in the Federal field (Field 4 on the SF 424 (R&R) form).

C. Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research

In accordance with sections 2, 3, and 8 of 2 CFR Part 422, institutions that conduct USDA-funded extramural research must foster an atmosphere conducive to research integrity, bear primary responsibility for prevention and detection of research misconduct, and maintain and effectively communicate and train their staff regarding policies and procedures. In the event an application to NIFA results in an award, the Authorized Representative (AR) assures, through acceptance of the award that the institution will comply with the above requirements. Award recipients shall, upon request, make available to NIFA the policies, procedures, and documentation to support the conduct of the training. See http://nifa.usda.gov/responsible-and-ethical-conduct-research.

http://nifa.usda.gov/responsible-and-ethical-conduct-research http://nifa.usda.gov/responsible-and-ethical-conduct-research

PART III—ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants

Applications may only be submitted by colleges and universities (as defined in section 1404 of

NARETPA) (7 U.S.C. 3103) to the CPPM program. Section 1404 of NARETPA was amended by section 7101 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) to define Hispanic-serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACUs), and to include research foundations maintained by eligible colleges or universities. Section 406(b) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7626), was amended by section 7206 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 to add the

1994 Land-Grant Institutions as eligible to apply for grants under this authority.

Award recipients may subcontract to organizations not eligible to apply provided such organizations are necessary for the conduct of the project. Failure to meet an eligibility criterion by the application deadline may result in the application being excluded from consideration or, even though an application may be reviewed, will preclude NIFA from making an award.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching

In accordance with Section 1492 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching

Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3371), as added by section 7128 of the Agricultural Act of 2014

(Pub. L. 113-79), for grants awarded after Oct. 1, 2014, the recipient of an award from the CPPM program must provide funds, in-kind contributions, or a combination of both, from sources other than funds provided through such grant in an amount that is at least equal to the amount awarded by NIFA unless one of the exemptions described herein is applicable. Note that NIFA included information at http://www.nifa.usda.gov/business/awards/matching_require.html to further assist you in determining if you must meet the new matching requirement.

The matching funds requirement does not apply to grants awarded:

1. To a research agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); or

2. To an entity eligible to receive funds under a capacity and infrastructure program (as defined in section 251(f)(1)(C) of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of

1994, 7 U.S.C. 6971(f)(1)(C)), including a partner (see Part VIII, D, Definitions, for definition of partnership) of such an entity.

Entities eligible to receive funds under a capacity and infrastructure program and exempt from the matching funds requirement include:

a. 1862 land-grant institutions, including State Agricultural Experiment Stations receiving funding under the Hatch Act of 1887;

b. 1890 land-grant institutions;

c. 1994 land-grant institutions;

d. Entities eligible to receive funds under the of Continuing Animal Health and Disease, Food

Security, and Stewardship Research, Education, and Extension Program Funds — Capacity and Infrastructure Program (CIP);

e. Hispanic-Serving Agricultural Colleges and Universities (HSACU);

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/business/awards/matching_require.html

f. Insular area schools eligible to receive funds from the Distance Education/Resident

Instruction Grant Programs;

g. Entities eligible to receive funds under the of McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry

Program Funds;

h. Non-Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture (NLGCA) – (for exemption from the new matching requirement, these applications must include NLGCA certification, see instructions for requesting certifications at http://www.nifa.usda.gov/form/form.html and for attaching the certification, in Part IV, B of this RFA);

i. Entities eligible to receive funds under a program established under Section 1417(b) of the

National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C.

3152(b)), including: (1) 1890 Institution Teaching, Research, and Extension Capacity

Building Grants Program; (2) Higher Education Challenge Grants Program; (3) Higher

Education Multicultural Scholars Program; and (4) Food and Agricultural Sciences

National Needs Graduate and Postgraduate Fellowship Grants Program; and

j. Individual public or private, nonprofit Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving

Institutions of higher education (see 20 U.S.C. 1059d).

Proposal submissions to this RFA may indicate that multiple entities will complete work as a collaborative partnership. All partners must have a substantial involvement in the project throughout the life of the project. Proposals for partnerships among multiple entities must clearly identify the following:

1) A narrative that clearly establishes each entity’s role in the project;

2) How each project partner will contribute to execution of project objectives; determine experimental design; develop the project work plan and time table; and submit collaborative, timely reports; and

3) A comprehensive project budget that reflects each entity’s financial or third party in-kind contribution (see section 2 of 7 CFR 3430 or section 96 of 2 CFR part 200) to the total project budget costs.

If a proposal indicates that multiple entities, as partners, complete work on the project, and at least one entity is exempt from the matching requirement under #2 above, the entire project will be exempt from the matching requirement. Any partner entity may serve as the lead entity on the project. All partners must be significantly involved in the project.

NIFA will examine proposals recommended for award to determine if the proposed division of work reflects substantial involvement of all entities involved. If a proposal is recommended for award to a lead entity that is not otherwise exempt from the matching requirement, and the proposal does not reflect substantial involvement of at least one partner that is exempt under #2 above, then the matching requirement will apply. Exemption from the matching requirement for an entity not otherwise exempt is limited to the project for which it is a partner.

Waiver of Match: NIFA may waive the matching funds requirement for a recipient for one year for a competitive grant that involves research or extension activities that are consistent with the priorities established by the National Agricultural Research, Education, Extension and

Economics Advisory Board (NAREEEAB) for the year involved.