FY 2026 Community Engagement Exchange NOFO.pdf

U.S. Department of State Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA)

Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) FY 2026 Community Engagement Exchange

Funding Opportunity Number: DFOP0018606 Application Deadline: July 9, 2026

A. Basic Information B. Eligibility C. Program Description D. Application Contents and Format E. Submission Requirements and Deadlines F. Application Review Information G. Award Notices H. Post-Award Requirements and Administration I. Other Information

A. Basic Information

1. Overview.

Funding Opportunity Title FY26 Community Engagement Exchange (CEE) Funding Opportunity Number

DFOP0018606

Announcement Type New Cooperative Agreement Deadline for Applications July 9, 2026 11:59pm Eastern (Washington DC time) Assistance Listing Number 19.415

Length of Performance Period

30 months

Number of Awards Anticipated

One award

Award Amount Approximately $1,000,000 Total Available Funding $1,000,000, pending availability of funds Type of Funding FY26 Educational and Cultural Exchange

Programs (ECE) Funds Funding Instrument Type Cooperative Agreement Anticipated Award Date September 4, 2026

This notice is subject to availability of funding. Issuance of the NOFO does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government.

ECA reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds.

Pending satisfactory implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA's intent to renew this award for two additional, consecutive fiscal years, before openly competing it again.

2. Executive Summary.

The Global Leaders Division in the Office of Citizen Exchanges at the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) seeks proposals for a cooperative agreement to design and implement the FY 2026 Community Engagement Exchange (CEE). CEE is a two-way exchange initiative for approximately 30-40 emerging civic leaders (ages 22-27), from Europe and Eurasia, that provides skill-based training, hands-on activities, and practical application of one of the First Amendment’s most fundamental rights: the freedom of speech. Grounded in the enduring principles of the U.S. Constitution, CEE equips participants with the skills to promote free speech, reduce conflict and strengthen community engagement. CEE participants will work alongside American counterparts in a substantive six- to eight-week exchange program, including a four-to five-week individually tailored professional placement in a U.S. organization, designed to cultivate practical First Amendment (1A) skills. Approximately 15–20 Americans will travel on reciprocal visits, co-designed with CEE participants, that showcase America’s leadership, promote free speech, and create opportunities for sustained collaboration. CEE advances U.S. foreign policy by strengthening the free speech and community engagement, promoting constructive public discourse, and fostering international partners equipped to address complex challenges in alignment with U.S. interests. CEE is supported by Pawel Adamowicz supplemental funding.

B. Eligibility

1. Eligible Applicants.

The following organizations are eligible to apply:

• U.S. not-for-profit organizations, including think tanks and civil society/non-governmental organizations

• U.S. not-for-profit public and private educational institutions

Please see the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for additional information.

2. Cost Sharing.

There is no minimum or maximum percentage of cost sharing required for this program.

3. Other Eligibility Requirements.

a. All organizations must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) issued via SAM.gov as well as a valid registration in SAM.gov. Please see Section E. Submission Requirements and Deadlines for more information.

b. ECA’s Grant Guidelines require that organizations demonstrate at least four years of experience in conducting international exchanges to be eligible for awards exceeding $130,000 in ECA funding. As noted in Section A. Basic Information, ECA anticipates issuing one award, for approximately $1,000,000.

Therefore, organizations must demonstrate four years of experience in conducting international exchanges in your proposal to be eligible to apply under this competition.

c. All proposals must comply with the requirements stated in the NOFO and the PSI; not doing so may result in your proposal being declared technically ineligible and given no further consideration in the review process.

d. All proposals must contain a SF-424, executive summary, proposal narrative, budget (SF-424A), detailed line-item budget, and budget narrative.

e. Only one proposal will be considered by ECA from each applicant organization. In cases where more than one submission from an applicant appears in grants.gov, ECA will only consider the submission made closest in time to the NOFO deadline; that submission would constitute the one and only proposal ECA would review from that applicant.

Please note: Applicant organizations are defined by their legal name, and EIN number as stated on their completed SF-424 and additional supporting documentation outlined in the PSI document.

f. Applicants who are current recipients of awards directly from ECA should make sure the application discusses one or more award that will be open with ECA at the start of the anticipated period of performance for this NOFO.

Applicants who do not have current awards directly with ECA, please review the information in the PSI, section D, with additional information that must be provided in your application for it to be eligible.

C. Program Description

1. Authority.

Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is "to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries...; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations...and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world."

The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation.

2. Purpose.

Since the founding of the United States Constitution, the First Amendment has distinguished America as a global leader in protecting individual liberty—ensuring the rights to freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, and petition. First Amendment rights, especially freedom of speech, created conditions for ideas to be tested, challenged, and refined. The enduring commitment to free speech has fueled innovation and progress in America. The FY 2026 CEE builds on America’s longstanding commitment to protected speech by preparing a new generation of leaders with the 1A skills and free-speech fluency to responsibly and effectively apply them in home organizations, communities, and institutions. CEE cultivates leaders with a deep understanding of and commitment to the responsible exercise and protection of free speech. Through a mix of applied leadership training, professional practicums, and collaborative projects, CEE participants in the United States and Europe and Eurasia, strengthen local capacity for constructive public discourse and civic engagement. CEE ensures that emerging leaders have the practical skills and knowledge to reduce community-level conflict, foster productive dialogue, promote knowledge sharing, and spark innovative thinking at home and abroad.

3. Program Specific Guidelines.

CEE participants from select countries in Europe and Eurasia will travel to the United States for a six- to eight-week exchange that includes applied leadership training, free speech literacy, hands-on practical application, and a four- to five-week individualized professional placement with a U.S. organization. Working alongside American counterparts, CEE participants will observe how American experts apply free speech principles in real-world settings, promote community dialogue efforts, and other initiatives that strengthen community engagement and participation.

Placements should be designed to immerse participants in U.S. organizations with strong models of 1A application in public discourse and participation. The U.S.-based exchange program, including professional placements, should prioritize applied leadership development, skills training, and community-based initiatives that deliver tangible benefits to American communities while equipping participants to advance free speech, community engagement, and constructive dialogue in their home countries.

Following the U.S.-based exchange, American counterparts from placement organizations will travel overseas to participate in reciprocal exchanges co-developed with CEE participants. Reciprocal exchanges should support locally driven 1A projects, while also showcasing American leadership and creating opportunities for sustained collaboration between U.S. host communities and program alumni.

The proposal should integrate CEE goals into all aspects of program design and implementation, with special attention to maximizing concrete, measure impact in participants’ home communities, both in the United States and in participants’ home countries.

3.a. Partner Countries.

To the fullest extent possible, program participants should be recruited and selected from selected countries in Europe and Eurasia. It is anticipated that approximately 8-10 countries will be selected, in partnership with the Department of State regional bureaus, for inclusion in the FY26 CEE award. A final list of countries will be provided to the award recipient following the issuance of the FY26 CEE award. No guarantee is made or implied that every country will have participants. ECA reserves the right to adjust and/or add eligible countries should conditions change in a country and/or if other countries are identified as viable alternatives and/or based on Department of State priorities.

3.b. Participant Recruitment.

Proposals should include a strategy to implement an open merit-based recruitment campaign designed to reach the targeted demographics in participating countries. Outreach efforts should be appropriately tailored to the country, account for applicant safety and well-being, and have the broadest possible reach. While participants’ backgrounds may vary, all successful candidates should have a demonstrated commitment to fostering free speech and constructive dialogue in home organizations, communities, or institutions. Proposals should include sample recruitment and selection materials that demonstrate capacity and organizational expertise in targeted outreach efforts.

Participant eligibility:

Competition for CEE is merit-based and open to emerging leaders who submit a completed application and meet the following criteria, at the time of application:

• Age 22-27;

• Living and working in their country;

• Has a minimum of two years of experience working on relevant 1A issues;

• Has a clear commitment to developing local 1A initiatives in his/her home country;

• Able to work in cross-cultural settings and contribute to U.S. communities;

• Able to begin the CEE in the United States in 2027;

• Able to receive a U.S. J-1 visa;

• Committed to returning to their home country for a minimum of two-years after completion of the program and implementing a community-based project; and,

• Proficient in spoken and written English.

Individuals in the following circumstances are NOT eligible to apply:

• U.S. citizens and/or permanent residents of the United States;

• Individuals who have applied for U.S. permanent residency in the past three years;

• Individuals residing or working outside their home countries at the time of application. This includes individuals participating in academic, training, or research programs in the United States or other countries at the time of application. In consultation with ECA, special consideration may be given to individuals completing school courses or non-USG programming outside of their home countries at the time of application but have returned home six months prior to the start of program; and,

• Individuals who have participated in an exchange visitor program sponsored or funded by the U.S. government (e.g., U.S. Department of State, Public Affairs Sections of U.S. embassies, or other U.S. government agencies) who have not fulfilled their two-year home residency requirement by the time of application.

• Employees of the award recipient or any sub-award recipients.

Other criteria may be determined in consultation with ECA, including public-health related status based on guidance from federal agencies and/or updated national security policies.

3.c. Participant Selection.

Proposals should address how participant applications will be screened for completeness and eligibility. Applicant organizations should convene a selection committee with expertise in relevant fields to read and evaluate each application using an evaluative form and scoring matrix reviewed and approved by ECA. A percentage of individuals receiving top scores on their applications (approximately three candidates for every placement available), should be invited for an English language interview, either in person or virtual. Each member of the interview team will complete an evaluation form designed by applicant, and approved by ECA, to evaluate and rank-order candidates based on the anticipated number of finalists and alternate candidates. The award recipient should administer English-language proficiency assessment to each semi-finalist who does not already possess a valid TOEFL score of 520 (or 213 on the computer-Based Test) or higher.

The recruitment and selection of candidates is the sole responsibility of the award recipient in consultation with ECA and participating U.S. embassies. Proposals should include plans for maintaining a close working relationship with ECA and embassy counterparts. The award recipient should maintain ongoing communication with the Public Diplomacy Sections (PDS) of relevant embassies and coordinate PDS’ involvement, as possible, during the recruitment, interview, selection, and pre-departure orientation phases of the program. PDSs should be invited to read applications, participate in interviews, and provide comments on semi-finalists. Based on the written applications, English-language interviews, language proficiency scores, and PDS’ comments, the award recipient will select a final slate of recommended finalists and alternates to ECA, and then PDS, for approval. The applicant must inform, in writing, all finalists, alternate candidates, and unsuccessful applicants of their status in the competition

3.d. Pre-Departure Orientation.

A pre-departure orientation (PDO), virtual, in-person or blended, should be conducted for finalists before they depart their home countries. The pre-departure orientation should be the entry point for participants’ exchange experience. Pre-departure orientations should:

• facilitate the safe passage of participants to the United States;

• introduce 1A issues and free-speech literacy;

• prepare them for the U.S. cultural and work environment;

• clarify program’s goals and regulations, including each participant’s mandatory compliance with the J-1 visa two-year physical home residency requirement;

• Review the program’s the Terms and Conditions document will be developed by the award recipient and approved by ECA.

Finalists must sign a copy of the Terms and Conditions document prior to their departure from their home country.

3.e. U.S.-based Orientation and Learning Lab.

The U.S.-based orientation acts as an introduction to the program design, goals, and activities. The proposal should exercise maximum creativity in designing a U.S.-based orientation that is skill-based, introduces 1A content, free-speech literacy, and advances program goals. At a minimum, the orientation should address U.S.

constitutional foundations, free speech protections—including controversial and dissenting viewpoints—and practical skills such as facilitating respectful dialogue and navigating public participation in community life. Orientation activities should provide participants an understanding of how First Amendment freedoms function as a foundation for local solving and progress. The proposal should include an agenda for a U.S.-based orientation.

3.f. Host Organization Orientation.

U.S. Host Organizations should also receive a thorough orientation and be provided with resources to successfully guide and collaborate with CEE participants. The host orientation should reinforce program goals and respective roles and responsibilities. Hosts should be informed of resources available to support CEE participants and hosting institutions. Proposals should include a draft agenda and related orientation materials that demonstrate organizational capacity and expertise.

3.g. U.S.-based Professional Placements.

Placement sites should be highly experiential and give participants hands-on experience with U.S. experts in free speech literacy and application. U.S.-based exchanges serve as learning labs where participants can:

• Apply leadership theory;

• Engage in substantive organizational initiatives and projects that address local needs;

• Explore American models for strengthening community engagement that can be adapted in their home countries;

• Develop skills in dialogue, facilitation, mediation, and group decision making; and,

• Serve as community contributors, assisting with dialogue and public participation in local issues.

Participants should work on organizational projects that demonstrate how American organizations address local community needs and, where possible, contribute to public-facing projects that allow for practical application of 1A issues.

Proposal should address how applicants will recruit, select, and secure host organizations that advance program goals. It is envisioned that hosting organizations could include local business councils, education and culture organizations, local governments, and non-for-profit organizations. Host institutions should be selected based on their demonstrated track record of success in strengthening free speech, constructive public discourse, and community engagement. Selection should prioritize an organization’s ability to actively support CEE participants and capacity to engage the local community in support of the program.

3.h. U.S. Fellow Reciprocal Exchange.

The proposal should include opportunities for Americans to participate in reciprocal exchanges—one- to two-week international exchanges—to support CEE participants’ follow-on projects and designed in collaboration with U.S. host representatives.

Reciprocal exchanges must be substantive, advance program program goals, and deliver clear benefits to both American and overseas communities. It is anticipated that U.S. participants will be selected from those who served as Host Supervisors, or other American colleagues who worked directly with the Fellow, during the U.S.-based exchange. Proposals should describe the participant selection process for the American reciprocal exchanges. Reciprocal visits should foster ongoing idea-sharing, resource exchange, and create opportunities for sustained collaboration that benefits local communities. The proposal should also outline how technology and social media will be used to support and amplify these collaborative projects.

3i. 1A Academy and Leadership Development.

Supplementary programing activities, in person or online, may be built into the four-to five-week fellowship placement period, such as group workshops or other enrichment activities. Every effort should be made for CEE participants to engage with a wide range of Americans working on 1A and related issues. Proposals should exercise creativity in developing enhancement activities that advance program goals and foster constructive discourse in local communities, organizations, and institutions. Applied leadership development—both virtual and in-person—should be central to the program, maximizing impact and strengthening community engagement in the United States and abroad. Proposals should include tentative dates and topics for enhancement activities, that enable participants to learn and apply real world free speech fluency in a variety of settings.

3.j. Program Capstone.

The proposal must include a capstone workshop in Washington, D.C. at the conclusion of the U.S.-based program. This final event should highlight the achievements of participants and host organizations, clearly demonstrate the program’s positive impact on American communities, and offer practical activities that help turn ideas into real-world results. Proposals should articulate the overarching goals and present a creative and compelling design for the capstone.

While the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) will arrange meetings with key Department stakeholders, the award recipient is responsible for planning and implementing all other aspects of the workshop. Award recipients are expected to work closely with ECA to ensure the capstone event is well-coordinated, impactful, and aligned with program goals.

3k. Program Monitoring.

In addition to reporting for Monitoring Data for ECA (MODE), see Section 6, Program Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), it is critical that the award recipient monitor CEE participants’ progress in achieving program goals and objectives while they are at their professional placement (e.g., through surveys, interviews, work plans, email, etc.) and after they return home. The proposal should also include a plan to monitor the safety and welfare of CEE and U.S. participants. The award recipient should be prepared to troubleshoot and resolve issues in real-time as they emerge. At a minimum, the proposal should:

• cite the intended frequency of communication with the participants and representatives of the U.S. host institutions;

• outline performance goals or benchmarks for the participants’ time in the United States, as well as U.S. participants time traveling on reciprocal visits.

• include a plan for monitoring U.S. participants while they are working on collaborative projects with the CEE participants.

The proposal should address how the quality of the participants’ experience, both in the United States and overseas, will be evaluated and impact to the American people measured.

3.l. Collaboration with the Public Diplomacy Section of the Respective Embassies:

Award recipients must work closely with the Public Diplomacy Section of the respective embassy (-ies) to develop plans for program implementation, including the recruitment and selection, pre-departure orientations (PDOs), and other in-country program activities. It is important that all proposed American outbound program schedules are reviewed and approved by ECA and PDS a minimum of two months prior to the start of any reciprocal exchange. Since many U.S. participants will be experts on issues pertinent to various U.S. foreign policy objectives in the respective country, award recipients should work with U.S. participant and CEE alumni to identify additional activities that complement in-country public diplomacy programs, thereby enhancing the impact of the exchange and 1A project to the U.S. embassy.

3.m. Post-Fellowship Engagement:

Proposals should describe how post-Fellowship engagement will be approached after the CEE participants return to their home country. Proposals should articulate how the award recipient will provide ECA with regular updates on the alumni individual projects as well as professional successes following their participation in CEE. Proposals should describe how new program alumni will be introduced to and connected with past program alumni, such as through web-based technology, social media, and alumni programming efforts.

4. Recipient Responsibilities.

The responsibilities of the recipient organization are as follows for the overseas administration of the program:

1. Coordinate with ECA on all aspects of recruitment and selection including development of review criteria, outreach strategies, and the final selection of applicants;

2. Develop a merit-based recruitment campaign for individuals meeting the eligibility criteria for the program;

3. Design, launch, and support a digital application platform that supports the real-time tracking and monitoring of application data;

4. Develop a transparent review process to evaluate applicants for CEE that provides opportunities to involve PDS at participating U.S. embassies.

5. Arrange English language interviews (virtual or in-person) for semi-finalists as part of the selection process;

6. Administer a language-based assessment to evaluate semi-finalists’ English language abilities;

7. Develop a digital platform to assist finalists in preparing for their U.S.-based exchange program, answer questions on programmatic issues, including but not limited to applied leadership and skill development, U.S. cultural norms, program responsibilities and expectations, travel, health and safety issues, accident and sickness benefits, housing, etc.; this platform should also provide resources and answer questions for U.S participants, or other leadership professionals traveling under this program;

8. Conduct pre-departure orientations (virtual or in-person) for CEE finalists and U.S. participants before they depart their home countries;

9. Facilitate communication between finalists and host organizations and communities prior to participants departing to the United States, including but not limited to communication about program and community resources, any pre-program leadership assignments, and leadership development activities;

10. Monitor and support U.S. participants’ activity overseas, including the implementation of follow-on and community-based projects;

11. Design and support alumni programming. Recipient organizations should collaborate with ECA’s Alumni Affairs Office to support alumni activities; and,

12. Track program impact on participants, institutions, and the areas they serve.

The responsibilities of the recipient organization are as follows for the U.S.

administration of CEE, the applicant should:

1. Recruit and maintain a cadre of U.S. public, private, and non-profit institutions and organizations able to support a professionally tailored placement for CEE participants;

2. Develop and communicate program guidelines, and other relevant materials, to U.S. host organization. Recipients should host a virtual orientation for U.S.

host organization representatives to review program goals, policies, available resources, and responsibilities;

3. Develop and maintain a digital platform to post resources and facilitate communication among host organizations and CEE participants;

4. Develop and support concrete strategies to facilitate host engagement in, and support for, the CEE and related activities;

5. Create opportunities for CEE participants, and American colleagues, to develop professional relationships in U.S. communities;

6. Conduct a comprehensive orientation in the United States for CEE participants prior to the start of their U.S.-based exchange program;

7. Develop and integrate a strong 1A focused leadership and skill-building component into CEE program activities;

8. Facilitate community-based activities and professional enrichment activities to support the program goals;

9. Monitor and support CEE participants and host organizations throughout the U.S.-based exchange;

10. Conduct a capstone program in Washington, D.C. for participants, and select hosts, following the completion of the U.S.-based practicum;

11. Promote and support projects in the U.S. communities and participants’ home communities;

12. Arrange and cover the cost of all appropriate program-related travel for CEE and U.S. Participants, and alumni participating in collaborative projects, including but not limited to transportation, lodging, and meals and incidental expenses;

13. Develop a merit-based recruitment campaign for Americans meeting the eligibility criteria for the program’s reciprocal component;

14. Conduct pre-departure orientations (virtual or in-person) and end-of-program debriefs for American participants before and after participating in reciprocal exchanges;

15. Develop program materials that amplifies CEE goals, supports host engagement, and highlights participant and alumni achievements, demonstrates impact, and showcases effective innovative community-led initiatives;

16. Develop resources to assist participants with the development and implementation of community-based in their home communities;

17. Evaluate the program and its impact on program participants, host organizations, host communities, and participants’ home communities;

18. Work in collaboration with ECA’s Alumni Affairs Office to support American alumni and domestic alumni activities;

20. Manage financial aspects of the program including timely disbursement of participant stipends, housing allowances, etc. and promptly report any irregularities in the budget or spending to ECA;

21. Enroll participants in the Bureau’s Accident and Sickness Program for Exchanges (ASPE) for the duration of the program, issue health benefits identifications cards, and provide instructions on submitting claim forms. More information on ASPE is available at www.usdos.sevencorners.com;

22. Issue and ship DS-2019 forms for international participants and alternates. All international participants will travel on a U.S. government designation for the J-1 Visa Exchange Visitor program;

23. Participate in regular program reviews with ECA (in person or by telephone) that provide general updates on program implementation and matters of concern, including but not limited to a review of the effectiveness of past activities, progress on anticipated programmatic activities, and issues that may impede the implementation of planned programming;

24. Respond fully and promptly to requests for program or statistical information from ECA; and,

25. Ensure compliance with the terms of the Cooperative Agreement with ECA, including but not limited to submitting timely financial and program reports and providing proper budget oversight.

5. Goals and Objectives.

The Community Engagement Exchange:

http://www.usdos.sevencorners.com/

• Enable participants to demonstrate measurable growth in collaborative leadership and the practical application of First Amendment principles, including assuming increased leadership roles in facilitating constructive public discourse within their organizations and communities.

• Provide participants with targeted training and practical resources to strengthen leadership and technical skills that support free speech literacy, community engagement, and the development of initiatives that advance constructive dialogue and community-based problem-solving.

• Facilitate the creation of lasting professional connections between participants, U.S. citizens, and American institutions to support ongoing collaboration in promoting free expression and community participation.

• Develop and sustain a multisector network of professionals and community leaders equipped to advance free speech literacy, foster respectful discourse, and support innovative, community-driven initiatives across local and international contexts.

6. Program Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).

Distinct from grants or cooperative agreement monitoring and participant monitoring, performance monitoring is designed to assess progress against a program’s goals and objectives. A performance monitoring framework is vital to tracking the direction, pace, and magnitude of change that result from ECA programs.

ECA created the Monitoring Data for ECA (MODE) Framework to measure the performance of ECA programs. The MODE Framework provides standard indicators and corresponding survey questions to ensure consistent measures across all ECA programs. More resources and guidance documents on the MODE Framework are available online at: https://www.state.gov/eca-monitoring-evaluation-learning-and-innovation-meli-unit/.

The proposal must include the MODE Framework objectives and indicators listed below (note that, because not all MODE objectives and indicators are relevant for a program, the numbering below will not be sequential). In addition to the ECA-required objectives and indicators, applicants may also select additional MODE Framework indicators (see the Indicator Book on the MODE Framework website), or design custom objectives and indicators that are specific to the proposed program and this proposal.

https://www.state.gov/eca-monitoring-evaluation-learning-and-innovation-meli-unit/

• Demographic Questions as outlined in the Indicator Book on page v and Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) (See the MODE Resource Guide -https://app.box.com/s/qjo8icwj46tc8h1i1qtg80zl7ibwgtua – found on our website https://www.state.gov/eca-monitoring-evaluation-learning-and-innovation-meli-unit/)

• Objective 1: Advance participant and beneficiary cross-cultural competence and global perspective o Sub-Objective 1.1: Promote cultural exchanges and enhance understanding between participants and their host communities E1.1.01: Percent of participants reporting that their program experience offered opportunities to engage with other cultures E1.1.04: Percent of foreign participants with more favorable opinions of the United States Government (core indicator) E1.1.09: Percent of participants who traveled abroad for the first time because of their program (core indicator) E1.1.10: Percent of foreign participants who traveled to the United States for the first time during their program (core indicator) E1.1.11: Percent of American participants indicating a change in their understanding of their host country's culture and values E1.1.12: Percent of foreign participants indicating a change in understanding of third-party countries’ cultures and values E1.1.17: Percent of foreign participants with more favorable opinions of the American people (core indicator) E1.1.18: Percent of foreign participants indicating an increase in understanding of United States culture and values (core indicator) E1.1.19: Percent of foreign participants agreeing with statements in support of democratic values (core indicator)

• Objective 2: Increase the impact that participants and alumni have on their communities / countries E2.0.01: Percent of foreign participants that volunteer in their host communities E2.0.04: Number of hours that foreign participants spend volunteering in their host communities o Sub-Objective 2.2: Foster participants’ belief that civic engagement benefits communities/countries E2.2.01: Percent of participants who have more confidence in their ability to have an impact in their home country (core indicator)

• Objective 3: Strengthen engagement among participants, alumni, beneficiaries, and institutions https://app.box.com/s/qjo8icwj46tc8h1i1qtg80zl7ibwgtua

E3.0.02: Percent of foreign participants who report increasing their network of Americans (core indicator)

E3.0.04: Percent of foreign participants who report increasing their network of third country nationals

E3.0.07: Percent of participants who identify as a Department of State program participant (core indicator)

• Objective 4: Strengthen personal, professional, and technical abilities and aptitudes of participants and beneficiaries E4.0.01: Percent of participants reporting increases in their job skills as a result of their program participation E4.0.03: Percent of participants reporting an increase in soft skills as a result of their program participation E4.0.05: Percent of participants who report an increase in technical skills as a result of their program participation E4.0.09: Percent of participants reporting an increase in language skills as a result of their program participation o Sub-Objective 4.1: Participants engage in language, academic, professional, and cultural exchange programs E4.1.01: Total number of participants (core indicator) E4.1.02: Total number of program cohorts (core indicator) E4.1.04: Number of professional placements E4.1.11: Number of American reciprocal exchange participants

• Objective 8: Enhance the quality and effectiveness of ECA programs by leveraging the Bureau’s resources, policy, and stakeholder relationships E8.0.03: Response rate for participant surveys (core indicator)

Performance Monitoring Plans (PMPs) ECA recommends the use of a PMP to serve as the primary reference document for performance monitoring for this award. If used, the PMP is an important part of any proposal, as it outlines how the applicant plans to track progress towards the proposed program’s goals and objectives through indicators and corresponding data collection questions. A PMP document that includes all MODE Framework indicators is a part of this solicitation’s attachments. Specific instructions on how to modify the PMP to be responsive to this solicitation are included in that document;

there is also a support video available for more information on how to fill out the PMP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBHC1oLNZvI. While ECA recommends the applicant use the PMP format provided, this is not a requirement. If a PMP is not included in the proposal, applicants should provide similar information to that found in the suggested PMP format, in a presentation of your choice. Successful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBHC1oLNZvI

PMPs (or similar documentation) should include the following:

• Objectives. Programmatic objectives are statements of the condition(s) that state what the program is designed to achieve. Objectives are therefore bound by the resources and timeframe of the program and must be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound (SMART). In addition to those outlined above, the applicant may propose other program objectives from the MODE Framework or other applicant-designed program-specific objectives.

• Indicators. Performance indicators are measures used to gauge progress toward programmatic objectives and sub-objectives. Indicators should be as specific as possible (following the SMART principles) and include any proposed disaggregations (meaning, breakdowns of the data by subgroups; the PMP lists the demographic questions required to obtain the information necessary to report the disaggregations). Each indicator should also include a target number to be achieved. A target is a planned level of result to be achieved within an explicit timeframe.

• If you do not use the PMP format provided, note that any performance monitoring reference document the applicant submits should include the information in the column headers (Indicator Name, Definition, Target, Survey Question, etc.) in the PMP attachment at a minimum.

• In addition to those indicators outlined in above, the applicant may propose additional custom, program-specific indicators in the PMP (ECA recommends the proposed PMPs include a minimum of one indicator for each custom programmatic objective).

• During the period of performance of the award, the ECA program office may further revise, add, or remove indicators. Therefore, the applicant’s PMP and data collection instruments should be flexible enough to incorporate those once established.

Award recipients are responsible for collecting indicator data only on participant outcomes during the period of performance of the award itself (see the PMP for guidelines as to when these data collection efforts should occur). ECA will measure outcomes of ECA participants at one, three, five, and 10 years after the exchange has ended to capture the long-term outcomes of ECA programming unless otherwise specified in the solicitation. In this instance, the recipient will be responsible for coordinating with ECA on any alumni surveys to de-duplicate questions and minimize potential survey fatigue.

Regardless of the survey platform used, all MODE Framework survey questions outlined above are required (i.e., should be forced response); please see the Consent Language in the MODE Framework Indicator Book for more information on how to convey this to participants/survey respondents.

Program Performance M&E Narrative Proposals should include information within the program narrative section(s) that outlines how the applicant intends to measure the indicators listed above. This will be separate from the PMP and should include but not be limited to:

• An overview of resources available to the applicant that outline the team structure and responsibilities surrounding performance monitoring.

• The mechanism(s) through which surveys and other data collection tools (if applicable) will be administered, including which platform will be used, and when and how surveys will be advertised to participants – detailing strategies to ensure adequate survey response rates (https://app.box.com/s/pn6tavyg7sh064i502fzap49ox63y38a), and to reduce selection and non-response bias.

• A brief explanation of data analysis and reporting procedures.

• An overview of a proposed learning plan and feedback loops to ensure that the Grant Officer (GO)/Grant Officer Representative (GOR) are informed on performance monitoring issues at regular intervals.

Nonmandatory Use of the Qualtrics MODE Survey Builder Data Collection System ECA has created a guided tool (the MODE Survey Builder) within the Qualtrics survey platform for ECA implementing partners to generate surveys to facilitate the seamless collection and reporting of MODE Framework data. The MODE Survey Builder offers implementing partners a guided workflow that will generate a ready-to-send MODE survey, allows the addition of custom survey questions, and offers a standard report template for a quick overview of survey results that can be submitted in MyGrants (see section below) to fulfill RPM Reporting Requirements.

Use of the Qualtrics survey platform can be utilized at no cost to implementing partners. Additional information about the MODE Survey Builder can be found here: https://app.box.com/s/jjr98hmx6deorxj3lwgaxjrwdfec2r91 and here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jus4fRqOTcM. You can propose use of an alternate survey tool or use the MODE Survey Builder, but if you are utilizing the MODE Survey Builder, you must indicate such in your proposal.

https://app.box.com/s/pn6tavyg7sh064i502fzap49ox63y38a https://app.box.com/s/jjr98hmx6deorxj3lwgaxjrwdfec2r91 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jus4fRqOTcM

MyGrants RPM Reporting Requirements MyGrants is a database solution that serves as the official system of record for all U.S. Department of State and ECA awards. The Results Performance Monitoring (RPM) module within MyGrants is an extension module that enables users to report performance monitoring data in the same system where they currently manage federal assistance actions. As part of ECA’s efforts to streamline data collection and management, the recipient(s) of this award will be required to input performance reporting data outlined in this solicitation into the MyGrants RPM. The data stored in the MyGrants RPM will provide ECA with a bureau-wide, uniform M&E reporting tool that is already linked with other elements of the awards familiar to existing awardees.

7. Allowable Costs.

The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase the proposal budget in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. A list of suggested program costs, eligible for funding consideration, are:

a. Travel. Please note that all international air travel must be in compliance with the Fly America Act. J-1 visas for non-U.S. participants are provided by the U.S. Department of State and should not be included in the budget. Proposals should include costs for any travel associated with procuring visas, including travel for interviews, delivering, or picking up passports, etc. A return travel allowance of $75 for each foreign participant may be included in the budget. The allowance may be used for incidental expenses incurred during international travel.

b. Per Diem. For U.S.-based programming, the applicant should use the published Federal per diem rates for individual U.S. cities. Domestic per diem rates may be accessed at: https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem. ECA requests applicants to budget realistic costs that reflect the local economy and do not exceed Federal per diem rates. Foreign per diem rates can be accessed at: https://aoprals.state.gov/web920/per_diem.asp

c. Book and Cultural Allowance. Foreign participants are entitled to a one-time cultural allowance of $250 per person, plus a book allowance of $100. U.S. program staff members are not eligible to receive these benefits.

d. Consultants. Consultants may be used to provide specialized expertise or to make presentations. Honoraria rates should not exceed $250 per session. Subaward and subcontracting organizations may also be employed, https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates?_gl=1*ctizut*_ga*NTE3MTUyMzc4LjE3MjU0NjgyNTM.*_ga_HBYXWFP794*MTc0MjgyNzYxOC4zLjEuMTc0MjgyNzY3Ny4wLjAuMA..

https://www.gsa.gov/travel/plan-book/per-diem-rates?_gl=1*ctizut*_ga*NTE3MTUyMzc4LjE3MjU0NjgyNTM.*_ga_HBYXWFP794*MTc0MjgyNzYxOC4zLjEuMTc0MjgyNzY3Ny4wLjAuMA..

https://aoprals.state.gov/web920/per_diem.asp in which case a letter of support between the prospective subawardee and subcontractor should be included in the proposal. Subawards should detail the division of responsibilities and proposed costs, and subcontracts should be itemized in the budget. Contractors/contracting organizations may also be employed, in which case a letter outlining the agreement between applicant and the contractors/contracting organizations should be included in the proposal.

e. Room Rental. Room rental may not exceed the going market rate for event space in the area of activity. Proposals citing market value must provide justification as to the amount requested. Without solid justification, room rentals may not exceed $250 per day per conference room or per activity.

f. Materials Development. The proposal may contain costs to purchase, develop, and translate materials for participants.

g. Supplies. The proposal may contain costs to purchase equipment for programming such as computers and fax machines. Costs for furniture are not allowed. Supply costs for the purchase of equipment must be kept to a minimum.

h. Working Meals. No more than two working meals may be provided for each program component. At least one working meal should be budgeted for the D.C. End of Program Workshop. The cost per person should not exceed $45 for the working meal. No charges may be made against U.S. government funds for alcoholic beverages. The number of invited guests should not exceed the number of funded program participants by more than a factor of two (i.e., no more than twenty invited guests for a working meal involving ten funded program participants).

i. Health Benefits. Foreign participants will be covered under the terms of a U.S. Department of State-sponsored ASPE. The premium is paid by the U.S.

Department of State directly to the insurance company. An additional line item for supplemental health insurance may be included for hosting organizations requiring specialized insurance coverage. Proposals may include costs for travel insurance for participants in the budget.

j. Reasonable Accommodations. Proposals should budget for the reasonable accommodations of individuals with disabilities. The proposal may allocate up to 5 - 7% of the total requested ECA award funds for this purpose and reflect plans to make the necessary program modifications, or modifications to participant numbers, in the event that participants need reasonable accommodation.

k. Wire Transfer Fees. When necessary, the applicant may include costs to transfer funds to partner organizations overseas. The applicant is urged to research applicable taxes that may be imposed on these transfers by host governments.

l. Alumni Activities. Reasonable costs related to alumni programming for both U.S. and foreign participants may be included. The proposal must include an outline of any proposed follow-on activities. Proposals can include small grants or a small grant competition that advance CEE goals and support 1A related activities.

m. Database Management. Reasonable costs for the purchase or development of a secure database management system to track applicant, participant, host organization, and alumni data may be included.

8. Cost Share.

ECA encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs which are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit.

The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget’s Guidance 2 CFR Parts 200 and 600, entitled the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution may be reduced in like proportion.

9. Freedom and Democracy Guidelines.

Public Law 104-319 provides that "in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy," the Bureau "shall take appropriate steps to provide…