FY 2019 Methyl Bromide Transitions RFA-REVISED.pdf

Methyl Bromide Transition Program

3/12/2019: Modification on page 23 to correct indirect cost

FY 2019 Request for Applications (RFA)

APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 15, 2019

ELIGIBILITY: See Part III, A of RFA

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

AGRICULTURE

METHYL BROMIDE TRANSITION PROGRAM

INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT

CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE: This program is listed in the Assistance Listings under the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number 10.303, Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program.

DATES: Applications must be received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 15, 2019.

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 Methyl Bromide Transition 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 offering COE opportunities. You may also review a recording of COE outreach and COE implementation webinars on the site. We will update COE webpages as appropriate.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: NIFA requests applications for the Methyl Bromide Transition (MBT) program for fiscal year (FY) 2019 to support the discovery and implementation of practical pest management alternatives for commodities and uses affected by the methyl bromide phase-out.

The anticipated amount available for grants in FY 2019 is approximately $1.8 million.

In FY 2019, applications are sought for the following project types:

1. Integrated Projects

2. Extension-Only Projects

3. State of the Commodity Projects

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

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

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. Project and Grant Types D. 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. Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality D. Organizational Management Information E. 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

Table 1: Methyl Bromide Transition 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), as reauthorized by Section 7306 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) (Pub. L. 110-246) and by Section 7302 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (H.R. 2642; Pub. L. 113-79), authorized 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).

Section 7206 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 amended section 406(b) of AREERA to add the 1994 Land-Grant Institutions as eligible to apply for grants under this authority. Section 7129 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA) (Pub. L.110-

246) amended section 406(b) of AREERA (7 U.S.C. 7626(b)) adding Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and universities (HSACU) as eligible entities for competitive funds awarded under this authority (see Part III, A. for more information).

B. Purpose and Priorities

This RFA solicits applications for the Methyl Bromide Transition (MBT) program. Methyl bromide is an odorless, colorless gas that is used as an agricultural soil and structural fumigant to control a wide variety of pests. Methyl bromide depletes the stratospheric ozone layer and is classified as a Class 1 ozone-depleting substance. In accordance with the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and the Clean Air Act (www.epa.gov/air/caa), the United States government agreed to reduce methyl bromide production and net imports incrementally from the 1991 baseline until the complete phase-out in 2005. Since 2005, the only allowable exemptions are critical use exemptions (CUE), quarantine and pre-shipment exemptions

(QPS).

The primary goal of the MBT program is to support the discovery and implementation of practical pest management alternatives to methyl bromide. The MBT program seeks to solve pest problems in key agricultural production and post-harvest management systems, processing facilities, and transport systems for which methyl bromide has been withdrawn or withdrawal is imminent.

Proposals may integrate research and extension activities, or be extension-only, and be designed to provide transitional alternatives that address immediate needs resulting from the loss of availability of methyl bromide. In addition, State of the Commodity projects may address the economic and pest management outcomes resulting from the transition from methyl bromide for a given commodity or process. The pressure to completely phase-out methyl bromide has created an urgent need for new economical and effective pest control tactics to control soil-borne and postharvest pests, and pests that need to be controlled by the processing and shipping industries to meet http://www.epa.gov/air/caa regulatory standards. All proposals must include a description of the economic analysis of costs and efficacy of implementing the new replacement technology.

Applications submitted to the MBT program must incorporate appropriate integrated pest management (IPM) concepts of prevention, avoidance, monitoring, and suppression of pest populations. NIFA anticipates that funded projects will cover a broad range of new methodologies, technologies, systems, and strategies for controlling economically important pests for which methyl bromide has been the only effective management option. The MBT program solicits applications that address systems solutions or strategic (multi-tactic) approaches, rather than focusing on any single tactic to replace methyl bromide. Consider and evaluate non-fumigant management options where possible. Promising alternatives to methyl bromide must be evaluated under commercial or field-scale conditions for multiple years to ensure that positive results are not due, in part, to low pest pressure following many years of methyl bromide fumigation or variable environmental conditions. A goal of the MBT program is to demonstrate that performance of alternatives is consistent over several production cycles and is technically and economically feasible when scaled-up from research plots to commercial scale. A priority of integrated and extension-only projects is to enhance grower/industrial user knowledge and adoption/implementation of appropriate methyl bromide replacement strategies through extension outreach and demonstrations relevant to real-world systems. All applications must include an objective that describes an economic analysis of the costs and efficacy of implementing the new replacement technology, and a description of methods that will be used in the project to complete the economic analysis of the efficacy and affordability of the replacement strategy.

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

The MBT program directly aligns with the FY 2018-2022 USDA Strategic Plan and specifically addresses Strategic Goal 2: (Maximize the ability of American Agricultural Producers to Prosper by Feeding and Clothing the World): Objective 2.3 (Protect Agricultural Health by Preventing and Mitigating the Spread of Agricultural Pests and Disease)

C. Program Area Description

The MBT program supports three project types:

1. Integrated projects focus on research for new alternatives and extension to encourage adoption and implementation of methyl bromide alternatives.

2. Extension-Only projects increase levels of adoption and implementation of pest management strategies by producers and growers.

3. State of the Commodity projects provide in-depth scientific and economic system review of how commodities have been impacted by the loss of methyl bromide. These projects should address the economic and pest management outcomes resulting from the transition from methyl bromide for a given commodity or process identified as a “critical use” between 2006 and 2018. These projects should be integrated projects.

https://extension.org/ https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-strategic-plan-2018-2022.pdf

Program Area Priority

In FY 2019, the MBT program seeks applications for projects to ensure that economically viable and environmentally-sound alternatives to methyl bromide are in place and available as soon as possible for commodities that have been impacted by the phase-out of methyl bromide.

Applications also will be accepted to find alternatives for commodities that have current Quarantine and Pre-shipment (QPS) Exemptions. Applications must include an economic analysis of the alternative methodology, and describe the methods to evaluate the cost/benefit of making the transition to adoption of the new strategy and provide a clear economic analysis of all aspects of implementation of the new strategies.

Projects supporting the transition to an alternative type of cropping/storage/processing system that avoids the need for disinfestation with methyl bromide (e.g., transition to a covered system using soilless culture) will be considered if the alternative has the potential to serve as a viable short to medium-term solution for operations that are currently dependent on methyl bromide or have been impacted by the phase-out of methyl bromide.

Proposals that address integrated pest management issues in commodities not affected by the phase-out of methyl bromide and research-only proposals may be more appropriate for the Applied Research and Development program area of the Crop Protection and Pest Management program (https://nifa.usda.gov/funding-opportunity/crop-protection-and-pest-management).

Applications submitted to the MBT program must address one or more of the following questions:

1. How can non-fumigant management options be developed and/or improved as part of a systems-based integrated pest management strategy?

2. What integrated strategies could be used to improve soil health, resulting in improved pest management in crops impacted by the loss of methyl bromide in the pre-harvest environment?

a. Examples include altering the microbial community of the soil to favor beneficial microorganisms that could inhibit pests and pathogens; soil amendments to reduce pests;

and use of cover crops and rotations to reduce pest populations.

3. What strategies could be used in a systems-based integrated pest management approach to improve pest management in the post-harvest environments impacted by the loss of methyl bromide?

4. How can current methyl bromide alternatives be improved or combined to improve their effectiveness and economic viability?

1. Integrated Projects If you are submitting an application for an integrated project (see Part II/section C of this RFA for more information), incorporate, and identify, research and extension goals into the proposed project.

As a general guideline, no more than two thirds of the project’s budget should be devoted to either function. Extension efforts, such as field demonstrations, grower trials, workshops, and distributed information, should result in commercial awareness, understanding, and adoption of new technology and alternatives to methyl bromide fumigation. Economic analysis of the proposed new strategy must be an integral part of the project. Also, include in your proposal: (1) the requirements https://nifa.usda.gov/funding-opportunity/crop-protection-and-pest-management listed below for integrated and extension-only projects and (2) the requirements listed below for all projects.

2. Extension-Only Projects Extension-only projects facilitate the adoption and implementation of practices that will result in effective management of pests without the use of methyl bromide, and will lead to measurable behavior changes in the identified audience or stakeholder group. Project proposals may include development of extension materials and information delivery systems for outreach efforts, conducting field-scale or on-farm demonstrations, or delivery of IPM extension outreach, and training. Document the existence of a research base relevant to the extension effort. Include an economic analysis of the proposed new strategy as an integral part of the project. Analyses of target population risk perception and economic constraints to adoption are essential for all extension-only projects. Also, include in your proposal the: (1) requirements listed below for integrated and extension-only projects and (2) requirements listed below for all projects.

Requirements for Both Integrated and Extension-Only projects:

(1) Scalability. Research on alternatives must be at the commercial or field-scale over multiple season/cycles. Large-scale trials will be a key component of successful proposals, as they may identify variability, technical problems, and pest relationships pertinent to marketable yields that may not be evident in small plot trials. Extension-Only projects must be conducted at the commercial or field scale.

(2) Economic Analysis. Integrated and Extension-only projects must include an economic analysis with direct comparison of cost effectiveness of proposed alternatives in the absence of methyl bromide to no treatment. Additionally, an analysis of the overall transition cost to a new technology, from acquisition of materials and knowledge to efficacy metrics, is required:

(a) Analyses of profit margins including information on the cost calculation, the cost/amount of the new technology and the value of the labor used, and any equipment needed for the application.

(b) Changes in revenues (e.g., changes in the commodity price or more importantly, changes in quantity of the available commodity for marketing).

(c) The appropriate expertise of the team submitting the application to conduct the economic analysis.

3. State of the Commodity Projects NIFA solicits proposals for state of the commodity projects that evaluate current integrated pest management challenges and the economics of integrated pest management for commodities/processes where methyl bromide is no longer permitted. For the listing of commodities and industries that were registered for methyl bromide use, please see www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/cueinfo.html. State of the commodity proposals should document current conditions, successful coverage or gaps in pest management, yield changes and cost of management changes (positive, negative, or neutral) resulting from the phase-out of methyl bromide for any specific commodity or industry. The successful grants of this type must be as inclusive as necessary to address the overall situation in the United States or regionally. Also, http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/cueinfo.html include in your proposal: the (1) requirements listed below for state of the commodity projects and (2) requirements listed below for all projects.

Requirements for State of the Commodity projects:

(1) Create a report that is accessible by the public within one year of the project end date and present the report at an appropriate forum, such as the annual International Methyl Bromide Alternatives Outreach Conference.

(2) Describe: (1) how commodity stakeholders will be recruited into the study, (2) the methods of data collection and analysis, and (3) where the data will be presented and published.

Requirements for all projects:

(1) Justification. Provide a justification statement in the Project Narrative (see Part IV/Section B3/b3a for more information): (1) to explain the issues and economic losses faced by their commodity since the phase-out of methyl bromide and (2) on how the proposed project could result in economically feasible methyl bromide alternatives.

(2) Extension. Clearly identify Extension personnel involved in the project. Clearly delineate formal extension programs to expedite adoption and implementation of proposed alternatives in the proposal and clearly outline funding for these activities in the Budget Narrative.

(3) Timeline. Explicitly describe timelines for completion of the major objectives in the application for the entire project period, which may range from one to three years from the start date. NIFA expects experiments to be replicated in at least two separate trials and results to be presented to the relevant user community within the time period of the project.

(4) Logic model. All applicants are required to: (1) submit a project-specific logic model chart as part of each application and (2) explain how the proposed work supports the programmatic logic model chart provided in Table 1. Include in the logic model chart all of the following: inputs, outputs (activities and participants), outcomes, situation, assumptions, and external factors of the proposed project. See Program Area Description (Part I/section C) and Application and Submission Information (Part IV/section B3/b8) for specific requirements for the inclusion of the logic model within the application. More information and resources related to the logic model planning process are provided at:

www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/integrated/integrated_logic_model.html and www.ipm.gov/LogicModels.

Please note: The programmatic logic model chart for the MBT program (Table 1) incorporates stakeholder input, anticipated outcomes, and all appropriate elements. NIFA will use the programmatic logic model to guide the development of future funding priorities and to document the impact of investments made by the MBT program.

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/integrated/integrated_logic_model.html http://www.ipm.gov/LogicModels/

Table 1: Methyl Bromide Transition Program Logic Model

Inputs Outputs: Participants Outputs: Activities/Products Outcomes/Impacts:

Change in Knowledge

(Short Term)

Outcomes/Impacts:

Change in Actions/Behavior

(Medium Term)

Outcomes/Impacts:

Change in Condition

(Long Term) Annual appropriation

USDA coordination

USDA intra-agency coordination

U.S. government interagency coordination

Program Directors

Support Staff

Panel Managers

Review Panels members

Stakeholder and partner comments

Stakeholders

Producers and processors

Commodity groups

General public

Colleges and universities

Cooperative Extension

University scientists and Extension specialists

State agencies

Federal agencies

USDA NIFA

Respond to authorization and appropriation

Publish RFA

Recruit panel managers and peer review panelists

Conduct peer review panel meetings

Award funds to meritorious applications

Promote the development of alternatives to methyl bromide

Communicate positive outcomes to key stakeholders

Collect and communicate impact data

State of the commodity reports

Gap analysis reveals research needs

New options for management of commodity pests developed

Existing knowledge adapted to commodity systems

Current knowledge is applied to a strategic plan to eliminate methyl bromide between commodity producer and processors and researchers

Best management practices available for Extension to communicate to stakeholders.

New knowledge applied to an evolving strategic plan

New alternatives to methyl bromide both chemical and nonchemical, increasing in usage

Best management practices for integrated pest management adopted

New technologies and innovations for producers and processors being implemented

Economic feasibility and effective methyl bromide alternatives in use

Pests are controlled economically without the use of methyl bromide, complying with the Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act

No further Critical Use Nominations (CUNs) Critical Use Exemptions (CUE) are needed

Increased production due to reduced pest losses

Reduced environmental risks from environmentally damaging pest control methods

Continued production of safe, affordable, and high-quality commodities

U.S. production practices adopt and implement appropriate alternatives to methyl bromide, assuring U.S.

producers a competitive place in the global marketplace

Logic Model Chart Supporting Information:

Assumptions:

Proposals will address commodities and industries negatively impacted by the phase-out of methyl bromide Multidisciplinary teams include economic analysis of the tested alterative Integrated projects provide best management practices to producers and processors External Factors:

Congressional funding/appropriations EPA Pesticide Registration Montreal Protocol and Clean Air Act MBTOC decisions

• Project Director Meeting. For all funded projects, at least one member of the project team is required to attend the annual International Methyl Bromide Alternatives Outreach Conference (MBAO) (www.mbao.org) starting with the second year of funding, or another relevant conference if applicable. For the purposes of budget development, applicants are required to request funds to support participation in at least one MBAO conference or an alternative conference approved by NIFA. Show your requests for funds for project director meetings in the budget and budget narrative of the application.

http://www.mbao.org/

PART II—AWARD INFORMATION

A. Available Funding

The anticipated amount available for MBT grants in FY 2019 is approximately $1.8 million.

There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular application or to make a specific number of awards.

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 2019, you may submit applications to the MBT program as one of the following types of requests:

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

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 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. Project and Grant Types

1. Project Types

Three project types are solicited in this RFA:

• Integrated projects: not to exceed $500,000 total (including indirect costs) for a project period of up to three years.

• Extension-Only projects: not to exceed $250,000 total (including indirect costs) for a project period of up to three years.

• State of the Commodity projects: not to exceed $250,000 total (including indirect costs) for a project period of up to three years.

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsservices/gov/pmt/asap/asap_home.htm

Applicants may submit a proposal for each type; however, when applicants submit more than one application, the projects must be completely independent of one another and execution of the project must not rely on funding from another application. In accordance with Part III/Section 5 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide, duplicate, essentially duplicate or predominantly overlapping applications submitted to one of more NIFA programs in any one fiscal year will not be reviewed.

Include specifics about how the proposal will conduct economic analyses and how the project will be relevant to the needs of the commodities that are/have transitioned from methyl bromide.

D. 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 https://nifa.usda.gov/responsible-and-ethical-conduct-research for more information.

https://nifa.usda.gov/responsible-and-ethical-conduct-research https://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 the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 ( NARETPA)) (7 U.S.C. 3103) to the MBT Competitive Grants 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.

For those new to Federal financial assistance, a grants overview page is available on the NIFA website. This page includes information about free Grants 101 Training and other resources that are highly recommended for those seeking an understanding of Federal awards.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching

The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (HR 2) removed the matching requirements for some NIFA competitive grants imposed by the Agricultural Act of 2014. Therefore, there are changes to the matching requirements for some funds awarded in 2019.

For FY 2019, when a grant provides a particular benefit to a specific agricultural commodity, the grant recipient must match awarded USDA funds with cash and in-kind contributions on dollar-for-dollar basis from non-Federal sources (see Part IV, B, item 6 for details).

NIFA may waive the matching funds requirement for a grant if we determine that:

(a) The results of the project, while of particular benefit to a specific agricultural commodity, are likely to be applicable to agricultural commodities generally; or

(b) The project involves a minor commodity, the project deals with scientifically important research, and the grant recipient is unable to satisfy the matching funds requirement.

C. Centers of Excellence

Pursuant to Section 7214 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79), beginning in Fiscal Year 2015, for applicable competitive research and extension programs, NIFA will recognize and provide priority in the receipt of funding to applications from “centers of excellence” that carry out research, extension, and education activities that relate to the food and agricultural sciences. NIFA held listening sessions in July 2014 and accepted written comments from https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/grants-overview stakeholders to inform NIFA’s implementation of the COE provision. Information from the webinars and a summary of the input are available on NIFA’s website at:

https://nifa.usda.gov/centers-excellence.

A COE is composed of one or more of the following entities that provide financial or in-kind support to the COE.

A. State agricultural experiment stations;

B. Colleges and universities;

C. University research foundations;

D. Other research institutions and organizations;

E. Federal agencies;

F. National laboratories;

G. Private organizations, foundations, or corporations;

H. Individuals; or I. Any group consisting of two or more of the entities described in (A) through (H).

COE designation is available only to CAP and standard grant applicants. Part IV, B., 3. of this RFA contains additional requirements for COE consideration.

https://nifa.usda.gov/centers-excellence

PART IV—APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Electronic Application Package

Only electronic applications may be submitted via Grants.gov to NIFA in response to this RFA.

We urge you to submit early to the Grants.gov system. For information about the pre-award phase of the grant lifecycle, see https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/learn-grants/grants-101/pre-award-phase.html.

New Users of Grants.gov

Prior to preparing an application, we recommend that the Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) first contact an Authorized Representative (AR, also referred to as Authorized Organizational Representative, or AOR) to determine if the organization is prepared to submit electronic applications through Grants.gov. If not (e.g., the institution/organization is new to the electronic grant application process through Grants.gov), then the one-time registration process must be completed PRIOR to submitting an application. It can take as long as two weeks to complete the registration process so it is critical to begin as soon as possible. In such situations, the AR should go to “Register,” in the top right corner of the Grants.gov web page (or go to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html), for information on registering the institution/organization with Grants.gov. Part II,1 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide contains detailed information regarding the registration process. Refer to item 2, below, to locate the “NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide.”

Steps to Obtain Application Package Materials

To receive application materials:

1. You must download and install a version of Adobe Reader compatible with Grants.gov to access, complete, and submit applications. For basic system requirements and download instructions, see https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html. Grants.gov has a test package that will help you determine whether your current version of Adobe Reader is compatible.

2. To obtain the application package from Grants.gov, go to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/download-application-package.html and enter the funding opportunity number where appropriate.

Funding Opportunity Number: USDA-NIFA-ICGP-006690

Click “Search” on the displayed page; click the corresponding link to continue. A Grant Application Package is tied to a particular funding opportunity. You may move forms amongst different grant application packages, but you may only submit an application to the particular funding opportunity to which the Grant Application Package is associated.

Contained within the application package is the “NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide.”

This guide contains an introduction and general Grants.gov instructions, information https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/learn-grants/grants-101/pre-award-phase.html https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/learn-grants/grants-101/pre-award-phase.html https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html https://get.adobe.com/reader/ https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/download-application-package.html about how to use a Grant Application Package in Grants.gov, and instructions on how to complete the application forms.

If you require assistance to access the application package (e.g., downloading or navigating Adobe forms) or submitting the application, refer to resources available on the Grants.gov website (https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html). Grants.gov assistance is also available at:

Grants.gov customer support 800-518-4726 Toll-Free or 606-545-5035

Business Hours: 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Closed on federal holidays.

Email: support@grants.gov

Grants.gov iPortal (see https://grants-portal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Grants):

Top 10 requested help topics (FAQs), Searchable knowledge base, self-service ticketing and ticket status, and live web chat (available 7 a.m. - 9 p.m. ET).

Have the following information available when contacting Grants.gov:

1. Funding Opportunity Number (FON)

2. Name of agency you are applying to

3. Specific area of concern

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

Electronic applications are to be prepared following Parts V and VI of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide. This guide is part of the corresponding application package (see Section A of this part). The following is additional information you need to prepare an application in response to this RFA. If there is discrepancy between the two documents, the information contained in this RFA is overriding.

Note the attachment requirements (e.g., PDF) in Part III, Section 3 of the guide. ANY PROPOSALS THAT ARE NON-COMPLIANT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS (e.g., content format, PDF file format, file name restrictions, and no password-protected files) WILL BE AT RISK OF BEING EXCLUDED FROM NIFA REVIEW. Grants.gov does not check for NIFA required attachments or whether attachments are in PDF format; see Part III, Section 6.1 of the guide for how to check the manifest of submitted files. Partial applications will be excluded from NIFA review. We will accept subsequent submissions of an application until close of business on the closing date in the RFA (see Part V, 2.1 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide for further information).

Proposals that are non-compliant with the requirements for the project narrative content will be at risk of having those omissions considered in the evaluation of the proposal by the technical review panel.

For any questions related to the preparation of an application, review the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide and the applicable RFA. If assistance is still needed for preparing application forms content, contact:

• Email: electronic@nifa.usda.gov https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/ mailto:support@grants.gov https://grants-portal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Grants mailto:electronic@nifa.usda.gov

• Phone: 202-401-5048

• Business hours: Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. – 5 p.m. ET, excluding federal holidays.

1. SF 424 R&R Cover Sheet Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in detail in Part V, 2 of the

NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide. See Part V, Section 2.18 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide for the required certifications and assurances (e.g., Prohibition Against Entities Requiring Certain Internal Confidentiality Agreements).

Please note the start date for FY 2019 awards can be no later than September 1, 2019.

2. SF 424 R&R Project/Performance Site Location(s) Detailed information related to the questions on this form is available in Part V, 3 of the

NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide.

3. R&R Other Project Information Form Detailed information related to the questions on this form is available in Part V, 4 of the

NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide.

a. Field 7. Project Summary/Abstract.

The project summary must list the names and institutions of the PD and co-PDs. In the first line of the summary, state the type of project you are submitting; for example, “This is an Integrated project” or “This is an Extension-Only project” or “This is a State of the Commodity project.” Also, include in the summary the relevance of the project to the goals of MBT. See Part V. 4.7 of NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide for further instructions and a link to a suggested template.

b. Field 8. Project Narrative.

NOTE: The Project Narrative must not exceed 18 pages of written text, figures, and tables regardless of whether it is single- or double-spaced with font size no smaller than 12 point. We have established this maximum (18 pages) to ensure fair and equitable competition. The Project Narrative must include all of the following:

(1) Response to Previous Review (if applicable): This requirement only applies to

Resubmitted Applications as described in Part II, B. Respond to the previous review panel summary on no more than two (2) pages, titled “Response to Previous Review”. These two pages will not be counted against the page limit of the project narrative. Please provide the NIFA proposal number of the previous submission.

(2) Introduction:

(a) State the project type (Integrated, Extension-Only, State of the Commodity).

(b) Include a clear statement of the long-term goal(s) and list the objectives of the proposed project.

(c) Summarize the body of knowledge or past activities that substantiate the need for the proposed project including information about or reference to the specific https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/ critical issue pest management strategy or similar document with identifiable stakeholder input.

(d) Describe ongoing or recently completed activities significant to the proposed project including the work of key project personnel. Include preliminary data/information pertinent to the proposed project.

(e) Reference all works cited [see Bibliography & References Cited (Part IV, B., 3,c. Field 9)].

(3) Rationale and Significance:

(a) Concisely present the rationale behind the proposed project. Provide a justification statement: (1) to explain the issues and economic losses faced by their commodity since the phase-out of methyl bromide and (2) how the proposed project could result in economically feasible methyl bromide alternatives.

(b) Include the economic and yield losses faced by the commodity or industry due to the loss of methyl bromide.

(c) Present a clear, concise set of project objectives including cost/benefit analysis of new approaches. For Extension projects: What is the value of adopting the new technology? In this section, describe any novel ideas or contributions that the proposed project offers.

(4) Objectives:

(a) Provide clear, concise descriptions of the specific objectives of the proposed project. Clearly number the objectives.

(b) Include the description of the appropriate economic analysis for the respective project type. For Integrated and Extension-Only proposals, include the methodology and design for the economic analysis. For State of the Commodity proposals, include the description and design of the evaluation of the economics of the methyl bromide transition and replacement technology.

(5) Approach: Clearly state the activities proposed or problems addressed and clearly describe the approaches applied. Specifically include in this section:

(a) A description of the activities proposed and the sequence in which the activities are to be performed.

(b) Methods to be used in carrying out the proposed project, including the feasibility of the methods.

(c) Expected outcomes. Provide milestones and verifiable indicators to measure impact across a broad range of criteria (e.g., a timeline for grower adoption of techniques that lead to production, economic, and environmental benefits).

(d) Means by which results will be analyzed, assessed, or interpreted. Describe plans to evaluate the outreach component, including means by which data will be analyzed and interpreted, and details of plans to communicate results to stakeholders and the public.

(e) Describe pitfalls that may be encountered.

(f) Describe limitations to proposed procedures.

(g) Describe stakeholder involvement in identification of project priorities, their implementation, and adoption.

(6) Project Timeline: Provide a timeline for attainment of objectives and for production of deliverables that includes annual milestones with specific, measurable outcomes.

Outline all-important phases as a function of time, year by year, for the entire project, including periods beyond the grant-funding period. Proposals that are non-compliant with the requirement for a timeline will be at risk of being excluded from NIFA review.

(7) Cooperation and institutional involvement: Cooperative, multi-institutional and multidisciplinary applications are encouraged. Where applicable, identify each institutional unit contributing to the project and designate the lead institution or institutional unit. Clearly define the programmatic roles, responsibilities and budget for each institutional partner.

(8) Logic Model Chart: Required. Three-Page Limit. All applications require submission of a logic model chart. See the specific requirements for logic models in Part I, C. The project-specific logic model must provide details for the: inputs, outputs (activities and participants), and outcomes, situation, assumptions, and external factors of the proposed project. The logic model planning process may also be used to develop your project before writing your application. Format this information as a logic model chart. Refer to the logic model chart in your project description, evaluation plans, and elsewhere, as applicable. Title the attachment as ‘Logic Model’ and save file as ‘LogicModel’ and attach at Field 12. Other Attachments. The font for the logic model chart may be smaller than the 12-point font required for the project narrative. The pages for the logic model chart do not count toward the 18-page limit for the project narrative. Proposals that are non-compliant with the requirements for a logic model chart will be at risk of being excluded from NIFA review. For samples and templates see www.ipm.gov/LogicModels;

additional information is available on the NIFA and University of Wisconsin web sites: www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/integrated/integrated_logic_model.html;

https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/logic-model-planning-process; and https://fyi.uwex.edu/programdevelopment/.

(9) Summary of Previous Work on Methyl Bromide Alternatives: Provide a summary of your work on methyl bromide alternatives that was previously funded from all sources (if applicable), progress toward completion, general conclusions and remaining funds balances.

(10) Center of Excellence Justification:

For consideration as a COE, you must provide a brief justification statement, as part of your Project Narrative and within the page limits provided, which describes how you meet the standards of a COE, based on the following criteria:

(A) The ability of the COE to ensure coordination and cost effectiveness by reducing unnecessarily duplicative efforts in the research, teaching, and extension activities outlined in this application;

http://www.ipm.gov/LogicModels/ http://www.nifa.usda.gov/funding/integrated/integrated_logic_model.html https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/logic-model-planning-process https://fyi.uwex.edu/programdevelopment/

(B) In addition to any applicable matching requirements, the ability of the COE to leverage available resources by using public-private partnerships among agricultural industry groups, institutions of higher education, and the federal government in the proposed research and/or extension activities outlined in this application. Resources leveraged should be commensurate with the size of the award;

(C) The planned scope and capability of the COE to implement teaching initiatives that increase awareness and effectively disseminate solutions to target audiences through extension activities of the proposed research and/or extension activity outlined in this application; and

(D) The ability or capacity of the COE to increase the economic returns to rural communities by identifying, attracting, and directing funds to high-priority agricultural issues in support of and as a result of the implementation of the proposed research and/or extension activity outlined in this application.

Additionally, where practicable (not required), COE applicants should describe proposed efforts to improve teaching capacity and infrastructure at colleges and universities (including land-grant colleges and universities, cooperating forestry schools, certified Non-Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture (NLGCA) (list of certified NLGCA is available at;

https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/nlgca-list), and schools of veterinary medicine).

c. Field 9. Bibliography & References Cited.

Refer to Part V Section 4.9 of NIFAGrants.gov Application Guide for details.

d. Field 12. Add Other Attachments.

See Part V. Section 4.12 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide (Field 12 on the form) for instructions for this field.

Data Management Plan. A Data Management Plan (DMP) is required and is to clearly articulate how the project director (PD) and co-PDs plan to manage and disseminate the data generated by the project. The DMP will be considered during the merit review process (see Part V, B.). See Part III Section 3.1 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide for NIFA attachment specifications.

The requirements for preparation and inclusion of a DMP in your application is included on the following web page, https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/data-management-plan-nifa-funded-research-projects. Also included on the web page are FAQs and information about accessing examples of DMPs.

Logic Model. Refer to Program Area Description (Part I, C.) and Application and Submission Information (Part IV, B., 3., b., (8)) in this RFA.

https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/nlgca-list https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/data-management-plan-nifa-funded-research-projects https://nifa.usda.gov/resource/data-management-plan-nifa-funded-research-projects

4. R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Detailed information related to the questions on this form is available in Part V, 5 of the

NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide. This section of the guide includes instructions about senior/key person profile requirements, and details about the biographical sketch and the current and pending support, including a link to a suggested template for the current and pending support.

5. R&R Personal Data As noted in Part V, 6 of the NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide, the submission of this information is voluntary and is not a precondition of award. Part V.6 also notes the importance and use of the information.

6. R&R Budget Detailed information related to the questions on this form is available in Part V, 7 of the

NIFA Grants.gov Application Guide.

Matching.

If you conclude that matching funds are not required as specified under Part III, B. Cost-Sharing, or Matching, you must include an explanation for your conclusion in the Budget Justification.

We will consider this justification when determining final matching requirements or if required matching can be waived. NIFA retains the right to make final determinations regarding matching requirements.

For grants that require matching funds as specified under Part III, B, the Budget Justification must list matching sources along with the identification of the entity(ies) providing the match as well as the total dollar amount being pledged. NIFA is no longer requiring written verification of commitments of matching support (a pledge agreement). However, you are still subject to documentation, valuing and reporting requirements, etc.