FY24 ASCE- APEC Import MRL Guidelines Implementation NOFO.pdf

NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY

Assisting Specialty Crop Exports: APEC Import MRL Guidelines Implementation

Program

Application Submission Deadline: July 17, 2024

Summary The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Trade and Regulatory Capacity Building, announces this funding opportunity to support the Assisting Specialty Crop Exports (ASCE) Initiative by issuing new award(s). This opportunity is available to all eligible applicants and is intended to support initiatives described to promote the export of U.S. specialty crops to current and prospective foreign markets.

A. Program Description The Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS)/Trade and Regulatory Capacity Building Division (TRCBD) administers projects that increase U.S. trading partners´ understanding and implementation of science-based obligations under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS). Through technical assistance, regulatory reform, targeted short-term training, and strategic partnerships, TRCBD projects strengthen the rules-based trading system and reduce the risk that U.S. agricultural exports will be subject to arbitrary detention or denial of entry. TRCBD has a long-standing history of working with domestic and international regulatory authorities, research institutions, international standard-setting bodies, private sector, and regional economic communities.

TRCBD workstreams in the past have included, but are not limited to, adoption on new Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs), registration of crop protection tools, risk assessment methodologies, risk communication, and development of regional guidelines for pesticide registration and MRL deferral pathways.

U.S. specialty crop producers feed the United States and the world with nutritious fruits, nuts, herbs, and vegetables. Yet, U.S. specialty crop producers face many unique barriers to successfully exporting their high-value products to international markets. Specialty crops are disproportionately affected by pesticide MRL-related trade barriers. Differences among pesticide registration systems, monitoring and inspection programs, and hazard-based MRL standards pose a significant threat for U.S. trade of these products. Exporters are not able to sell their crops to markets where an MRL is set lower than their domestic market or where an MRL is absent for a specific pest and pesticide combination. Missing, restrictive, or hazard-based MRLs force farmers to either discontinue use of important pesticides or modify their use pattern in such a way as to make them ineffective against damaging pests and diseases. Missing MRLs are a particular problem for specialty crops as many do not have established Codex Alimentarius (Codex) MRLs and there are differences in registration assessments and data requirements across countries when establishing national MRLs. Furthermore, specialty crop producers face yet another barrier since, due to low production volumes, specialty crop farmers, cooperators, and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Foreign Agricultural Service https://www.ams.usda.gov/services/grants/scbgp/specialty-crop other affected stakeholders find it economically difficult or completely infeasible to finance the establishment of MRLs for their crops.

The Assisting Specialty Crop Exports (ASCE) Initiative goal is to expand specialty crop exports by helping U.S. exporters address non-tariff trade barriers. Through USDA’s extensive and ongoing consultations with industry groups, one of the priority issues that has been identified as a concern of U.S. producers is missing or misaligned MRLs. As such, this project will address existing and potential MRL trade barriers affecting U.S. specialty crops exports and promote foreign understanding and support of Codex and U.S. risk-based pesticide regulatory systems.

Ongoing industry engagement is critical to the success of the ASCE Initiative. Upon approval of funding, the recipient and USDA/FAS, together and individually, will solicit and receive feedback and information from U.S. specialty crop stakeholders intended to enhance the quality, focus and reach of the project. Specialty crops that are eligible for this project are those listed in the definition provided by USDA/Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The award recipient will be expected to coordinate with USDA/FAS on priorities and programming throughout the life of the agreement.

(Note: The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) defines a pesticide as:

“any substance or mixture of substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest, or intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant, or desiccant, or any nitrogen stabilizer.” Therefore, applicants may include, as situationally appropriate, work on conventional pesticides or biopesticides.)

NOFO Goal & Objectives The goal of this Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is to support the establishment of import MRLs through the adoption and implementation of the official “Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Import MRL Guideline for Pesticides” in APEC member economies.

APEC members are important trading partners for U.S. fresh fruits, berries, vegetables, nuts and other specialty crops. Priority should be given to establishing import MRLs for specialty crops that benefit U.S. specialty crop producers and exporters. Recipients will not be expected to work in all APEC member economies; rather, target markets and commodities will be prioritized based on consultations with U.S. specialty crop industry stakeholders and coordination with FAS.

Import MRLs (also referred to as import tolerances) enable trade when national MRLs, based on domestic uses, do not exist. This often occurs because an imported crop is not grown in the country (therefore no domestic use is needed) or the active substance is not yet registered in the country. Many nations do not have formalized regulatory procedures to establish import MRLs, and this can create costly barriers to trade. However, when nations do have mechanisms in place, they do not appear to have a consistent approach or requirements to secure import MRLs.

To promote the establishment and alignment of import MRLs in APEC economies, the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) led the development of the “APEC import MRL Guideline for Pesticides.” This voluntary, non-binding guideline provides advice to economies in setting import MRLs that are aligned with international standards where they exist, and to recommend assessment methodologies to facilitate the use of Codex or third market data to set https://fas.usda.gov/programs/assisting-specialty-crop-exports-asce-initiative https://www.ams.usda.gov/services/grants/scbgp/specialty-crop https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act-fifra-and-federal-facilities https://www.apec.org/Publications/2016/08/Import-MRL-Guideline-for-Pesticides https://www.apec.org/Publications/2016/08/Import-MRL-Guideline-for-Pesticides https://www.apec.org/about-us/about-apec/member-economies

MRLs. Third market data may come from the United States or another exporting economy that establishes its own MRLs. Recognizing trade partners’ national MRLs to address missing Codex MRLs in imports allows economies to minimize trade disruptions resulting from gaps. This option is best applied through the adoption of the least trade-restrictive MRL among a country’s trading partners.

The specific objectives of this NOFO are as follows:

1) Advance acceptance and use of the endorsed “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticides,” within APEC economies, utilizing a multifaceted approach that coordinates with national regulatory authorities, industry, producers, and the APEC Secretariat.

2) Establish and execute a plan to set import MRLs for a prioritized list of crop-chemical candidates based on U.S. producer and exporter feedback, in consultation with FAS.

Products may include, but are not limited to: almonds, pistachios, hops, blueberries, cherries, grapes, raspberries, sweet potatoes, ginseng, and strawberries, along with additional priority crops provided under U.S. industry guidance and in consultation with partner countries.

3) Advocate for the adoption of the “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticides” and obtain buy-in from priority member economies through engagement with high-level regulatory authorities, in coordination with FAS.

4) Build regulatory relationships and collaboration among APEC members in support of the “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticides”, in coordination with FAS.

5) Provide sustained bilateral technical collaboration and assistance on the application of the “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticides” to priority APEC economies for benefit of U.S. specialty crop exporters.

6) When appropriate, collaborate with ongoing capacity building and technical cooperation initiatives that align with the NOFO goal. This includes ongoing APEC work to align risk-based approaches and assessment for pesticide MRLs and efforts to implement “APEC Import MRL Guidelines for Pesticides” within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional economic community.

7) Through bilateral and regional technical cooperation activities, promote foreign understanding and support of Codex Alimentarius and risk-based approaches to setting import MRLs, collaborating closely with the U.S. EPA and ensuring their expert participation in events when needed.

Funding Opportunity Number

USDA-FAS-10621-0750-10.-24-0003

Assistance Listing Number

10.621 Assisting Specialty Crop Exports

Authorizing Legislation Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, as amended, 15 USC § 714c(f)

B. Federal Award Information

The initial funding amount will be up to $1,000,000. Subject to availability of funding, a cumulative total of up to $3,000,000, may be available throughout the period of performance of the award. See Section H, Other Information, for additional information on incremental funding.

None/Not Required

September 6, 2024

Total Available Federal Funding:

Anticipated Number of Awards:

Cost Share/Match Requirement:

Projected Period of Performance Start:

Projected Period of Performance End: September 6, 2027

Type of Assistance Instrument:

USDA/FAS anticipates that a Cooperative Agreement will be funded pursuant to this funding opportunity.

Cooperative agreements provide for substantial involvement between USDA/FAS and/or other USDA agencies, and the selected applicant in the performance of the project. This may include:

• Close monitoring of the successful applicant’s performance to verify the results proposed by the applicant;

• Collaboration during performance of the scope of work;

• Development of mutually agreed upon metrics for monitoring and evaluation and system of reporting;

• In accordance with 2 CFR 200.317 and 2 CFR 200.318, review of proposed procurement;

• Approving qualifications of key personnel (USDA will not select the recipient’s employees or contractors; but may disallow costs for specific individuals where required by statute or regulation); and

• Review and comment on reports prepared under the cooperative agreement (the final decision on the content of reports rests with the recipient).

Additional Awards USDA/FAS reserves the right to make additional awards under this solicitation, consistent with Agency policy and guidance, if additional funding becomes available after the original selections are made. Any additional selections for awards will be made no later than 6 months after the original selection decisions.

No Awards USDA/FAS reserves the right to make no awards under this competition.

C. Eligibility Information

Eligible Applicants: Colleges and universities in the United States, including State Cooperative Institutions as defined at 7 USC 3103; State governments; Nonprofits with or without 501(c)(3) status; international organizations; foreign entities; and any other entity.

All applicants must have an active registration in the U.S. Government System for Award Management (www.sam.gov) before the application submission deadline of the announcement;

applicants with inactive, expired, pending, or excluded listings will be deemed ineligible.

Exceptions, waivers, or extensions will not be considered. Please contact the program officer(s) listed in Section G, Federal Awarding Agency Contact, if you have questions about this requirement. Applicants with inactive, expired, pending, or excluded listings will be deemed ineligible. Exceptions, waivers, or extensions will not be considered. Please contact the program officer(s) listed in Section G, Federal Awarding Agency Contact, if you have questions about this requirement.

Threshold Criteria Cost Share/Match Requirement: None/Not Required

Ineligible activities: If an application is submitted that includes any ineligible tasks or activities, that portion of the application will be ineligible for funding and may, depending on the extent to which it affects the application, render the entire application ineligible for funding.

Multiple Applications/Awards An individual applicant may not submit more than one application in response to this NOFO.

Substantial Compliance All applications will be reviewed for eligibility and must meet the eligibility requirements described in Section C to be considered eligible. Applicants deemed ineligible for funding consideration as a result of the threshold eligibility review will be notified 15 calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

Applications must substantially comply with the application submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section D of this solicitation or else they will be rejected. However, where a page limit is expressed in Section D with respect to the application, or parts thereof, pages in excess of the page limitation will not be reviewed. Applicants are advised that readability is of paramount importance and should take precedence in application format, including selecting a legible font type and size for use in the application.

Evidence of Eligibility Applicants are responsible for including documentation, if necessary, establishing that they meet the stated eligibility requirements, when it is not immediately obvious. Applicants should not presume that USDA/FAS is sufficiently familiar with their organization that this is unnecessary, and USDA/FAS will not make assumptions as to the nature of the applicant’s organization.

D. Application and Submission Information http://www.sam.gov/

This announcement contains all information necessary to apply to this funding opportunity.

Deadline for Question Submission: June 28, 2024 Applicants may submit questions about this funding opportunity to the Section G contact.

Submission Dates and Times Application Submission Deadline: July 17, 2024 at 11:59pm EDT (UTC -04:00) Applications received after this time will not be accepted. Applicants are advised to make their submissions 1-2 days before this deadline in case of computer problems.

Anticipated Award Date: August 30, 2024

Content and Form of Application Submission

A complete application package must include:

• Standard Form SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance, showing the Unique Entity Identifier, and signed by the applicant

• Standard Form SF-424A, Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs, showing the budget categorization. Applicants are advised to consult 2 CFR 200 Subpart E for guidance on proper categorization of cost items. An improper categorization will not itself be grounds for a determination of ineligibility, but may delay approval and/or adversely impact the application’s evaluation scoring.

• A detailed budget and budget narrative, in which cost items are quantified and described in sufficient detail to enable USDA/FAS to independently determine that the proposed costs are reasonable and allowable for the project and consistent with applicable regulations. Applicants are expected to allocate budget to cover Monitoring and Evaluation tasks.

o Since this award will be incrementally funded, the detailed budget and project narrative should reflect a total of $3,000,000 for 3 years with a break down for every year, including $1,000,000 for the first year.

o If indirect costs are included in the budget, attach a copy of the latest indirect cost rate agreement negotiated with a cognizant federal agency. If a negotiated indirect cost agreement does not exist, please attach a description of the basis for the indirect cost calculation. If electing to utilize the de minimis rate, consistent with 2 CFR 200.414(f), please include a statement of election.

• A detailed project narrative or plan of operation no more than fifteen (15) pages in length, single spaced. Supplemental documents (CVs, etc.) are not subject to page limits, but should be submitted only if relevant. The project narrative should be clear and in plain language:

o A description of the activities to be undertaken, described in detail, with outputs and expected outcomes described qualitatively and quantitively, indicating locations, timelines, optimal staffing level and qualified personnel, and other factors that will demonstrate a well-designed activity in support of the objectives outlined in Section A. (Optimal staffing level refers to an adequate number of personnel in place to undertake the activities within the period of performance.

Qualified personnel are those with demonstrated, successful practical experience implementing similar projects). To the extent that the applicant will need to identify additional staff or partners to undertake the work within the period of performance, a clear and reasonable plan should demonstrate how technical capacity will be evaluated and how partnership will occur.

o The link between the proposed activities and the anticipated 1st-degree impacts, and higher-order impacts, that the activity will have. The logic of the project should follow a chain of cause-and-effect relationships with no significant causal gaps from one level in the causal hierarchy to the next.

o Trade impacts regarding ability to resolve or substantially advance the ASCE goal, NOFO goal and the issues described in the program description in Section A.

o Knowledge of the subject area at technical, governmental, and international levels, including: MRL-related trade challenges faced by U.S. specialty crop growers and exporters; the import MRL application process as outlined in the “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticide,” and political, regulatory, or other hurdles to adoption in APEC economies.

o Awareness of MRL-related trade barriers and policies faced by APEC economies, including whether APEC members currently have import tolerance mechanisms established and the extent of sophistication of these systems.

o Awareness of contextual factors for the target market(s) that may impact the type of activities reasonably expected to be successful or unsuccessful and a plan that adequately addresses these factors. Factors to consider may include, as appropriate, entrenched policy positions, cultural norms, past or ongoing initiatives, proposed/existing regulations and practices, and/or regional trade agreements.

o Geographic presence/office in target region and language proficiency (if applicable to target market).

o Prioritization of crop-chemical combinations important to U.S. specialty crop producers and exporters, based on challenges and opportunities for import MRL establishment.

o The manner and extent to which the activities and measured progress will be made known to the general public, U.S. specialty crop industry and policy-makers, and the anticipated effectiveness of such dissemination.

o A brief description of how the applicant may incorporate mid-course corrections to add or modify activities based on new or priority trade opportunities or barriers.

o A description of applicant’s experience with designing and implementing Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) functions. Include a proposed results framework, theory of change and performance indicator table that illustrates how the proposed activities will advance the ASCE goal, NOFO goal and objectives described in Section A; and how to recognize progress/success through direct, objective, adequate, and practical criteria.

• Standard Form SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, if applicable to the applicant

Specific application formats

While these guidelines establish the minimum type size requirements, applicants are advised that readability is of paramount importance and should take precedence in selection of an appropriate font for use in the application.

Programmatic Capability and Past Performance If applicable, submit a list of federally funded assistance agreements (assistance agreements include Federal grants and cooperative agreements but not Federal contracts) that your organization performed within the last three years (no more than 3 agreements, and preferably USDA or USDA/FAS agreements) and describe:

(i) whether, and how, you were able to successfully complete and manage those agreements; and

(ii) your history of meeting the reporting requirements under those agreements including whether you adequately and timely reported on your progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes of those agreements (and if not, explain why not) and whether you submitted acceptable final technical reports under the agreements; and

(iii) your organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project

In evaluating applicants under these factors in Section E, USDA/FAS will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources, including information from USDA/FAS files and from current/prior grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant). If you do not have any relevant or available past performance or past reporting information, please indicate this in the application and you will receive a neutral score for these factors (a neutral score is half of the total points available in a subset of possible points). If you do not provide any response for these items, you may receive a score of 0 for these factors. This information will not count toward the page count of the project narrative.

Unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM) Each applicant is required to:

(i) Have an active registration in SAM before submitting its application;

(ii) Have assented to the federal assistance certifications in the SAM platform;

(iii) Provide a valid Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) in its application; and

(iv) Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.

SAM.gov Registration Instructions Organizations applying to this funding opportunity must have an active SAM.gov registration. If you have never done business with the Federal Government, you will need to register your organization in SAM.gov. If you do not have a SAM.gov account, then you will create an account using login.gov1 to complete your SAM.gov registration. SAM.gov registration is FREE. The process for entity registrations includes obtaining Unique Entity ID (UEI), a 12-

1 Login.gov a secure sign in service used by the public to sign into Federal Agency systems including SAM.gov and Grants.gov. For help with login.gov accounts you should visit http://login.gov/help.

https://login.gov/ http://login.gov/help character alphanumeric ID assigned an entity by SAM.gov, and requires assertions, representations and certifications, and other information about your organization. Please review the Entity Registration Checklist for details on this process.

Entities outside the United States (defined at 2 CFR 200.1 as “foreign organizations” and “foreign public entities”) must obtain a NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) Code prior to SAM.gov registration An NCAGE is required for all foreign entities prior to registering in SAM.gov. You can complete the registration once you enter the NCAGE. You can submit your request for an NCAGE Code by going to the NATO Support Activity (NSPA) NCAGE Request Tool at CAGE/NCAGE Code Request which contains detailed instructions.

If you have done business with the Federal Government previously, you can check your entity status using your government issued UEI to determine if your registration is active. SAM.gov requires you renew your registration every 365 days to keep it active.

Please note that SAM.gov registration is different than obtaining a UEI only. Obtaining an UEI only validates your organization’s legal business name and address. Please review the Frequently Asked Question on the difference for additional details.

Organizations should ensure that their SAM.gov registration includes a current e-Business (EBiz) point of contact name and email address. The EBiz point of contact is critical for Grants.gov Registration and system functionality.

Contact the Federal Service Desk for help with your SAM.gov account, to resolve technical issues or chat with a help desk agent: (866) 606-8220. The Federal Service desk hours of operation are Monday – Friday 8am – 8pm ET.

Intergovernmental Review Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, may be applicable to awards resulting from this announcement. USDA implemented the Executive Order in 2 CFR

415.5. USDA/FAS may require applicants selected for funding to provide a copy of their application to their State Point of Contact (SPOC) for review. These reviews are not required before submitting an application. Only applicants that USDA/FAS selects for funding under this announcement are subject to the Intergovernmental Review requirement. For more information about USDA’s implementation for Intergovernmental Review, please visit https://www.usda.gov/ocfo/federal-financial-assistance-policy/intergovernmental-review

Funding Restrictions Generally, funds may not be used in any manner that is prohibited by applicable regulations, including 2 CFR Part 200 and 2 CFR Part 400. Awards issued pursuant to this notice of funding opportunity may only be used for the purpose set forth in the award, consistent with the statutory authority for the award. Capital expenses, such as the purchase of equipment, not entirely attributable to this award, must be pro-rated.

For example, agreement funds and other support may not be used for matching contributions for other federal grants or cooperative agreements, lobbying, or intervention in federal regulatory or https://www.fsd.gov/sys_attachment.do?sys_id=622e0a761b8fe114cc45ea04bc4bcb9a https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR2a6a0087862fd2c/section-200.1#p-200.1(Foreign%20organization) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR2a6a0087862fd2c/section-200.1#p-200.1(Foreign%20public%20entity) https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/CageTool/home https://www.fsd.gov/gsafsd_sp?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0051214&sys_kb_id=dd40f4ef1b9641d0937fa64ce54bcb7a&spa=1 https://www.fsd.gov/gsafsd_sp?id=kb_article_view&sysparm_article=KB0051214&sys_kb_id=dd40f4ef1b9641d0937fa64ce54bcb7a&spa=1 https://www.fsd.gov/gsafsd_sp https://www.usda.gov/ocfo/federal-financial-assistance-policy/intergovernmental-review adjudicatory proceedings. Federal employees are prohibited from acting as an agent of the applicant in any capacity (paid or unpaid) on any proposal submitted under this program. Also, federal funds may not be used to sue the Federal Government or any other government entity.

Compensation for personal services: Employees, consultants, or other personnel, including those of subrecipients, and regardless of the method of engagement, may not exceed the pro-rata equivalent of GS-15 on the General Schedule (for 2024, $159,950 per year, $612.84 per day, or $76.60 per hour). Non-monetizable fringe benefits, such as health insurance coverage, are not included to this ceiling. Funding may not be used to cover U.S. Government employees or their travel.

Indirect Costs: In general, costs incurred for a common or joint purpose benefitting more than one cost objective but not readily assignable to specific awards, without effort disproportionate to the results achieved, are considered indirect costs. These may include facilities not specific to individual projects, enterprise-wide services such as IT, and enterprise management. Pursuant to USDA Departmental Regulation DR2255-001, a Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA) with a cognizant U.S. Government agency will be honored, except where prohibited by statute.

Other Submission Information Applications should be submitted through the ezFedGrants system at https://grants.fms.usda.gov/ Applicants who require assistance with any USDA-managed computer system should reach out to the program officer(s) listed in Section G, Federal Awarding Agency Contact, at least 5 business days in advance of the application submission deadline. Applicants should provide as much detail as possible to facilitate resolution of the issue.

E. Application Review Information

Review and Selection Process In all cases, the agency will conduct an initial responsiveness review of all applications submitted to determine:

1) the application was submitted on time as specified in this announcement (See Section D. Application and Submission Information);

2) the applicant is eligible (see Section C. Eligibility Information);

3) all the required forms and documents are submitted no later than the Application

Submission Deadline specified in Section D. Application and Submission Information, Content and Form of Application Submission.

If an applicant is determined to be ineligible or an application is determined to be incomplete, the agency will notify the applicant prior to commencing with evaluation of applications, usually within 15 business days of the Application Submission Deadline. An applicant that feels such a determination is made in error may request reconsideration, highlighting evidence supporting their claim, by email to the program officer(s) listed in Section G, Federal Awarding Agency Contact, within 3 business days of notification.

The agency will convene a review panel, which may include both federal and non-federal reviewers, to review the eligible applications against the evaluation criteria described below. The reviewers will ensure that the applicant is capable of delivering the programs/activities as described in the announcement based on the applicant’s project narrative and assign a score and provide summary comments based on the evaluation criteria identified below. The review panel will make a recommendation list, to the selecting official, who is not a member of the panel.

The selecting official may select applications out of rank order in consideration of strategic program priorities, such as geographical distribution, incorporation of minority-serving institutions, or congressional directive. Selection determinations are final and cannot be appealed.

Prior to selection, the agency may hold interviews with the top scoring finalists and may contact the highest-ranking applicants to seek clarification and to negotiate technical and programmatic aspects of the application. If an application includes a subaward, FAS may request to speak with all parties included in the application to ensure sufficient planning and coordination has taken place prior to making an award.

Evaluation Criteria Applicants will be evaluated based on the extent and quality to which they demonstrate that they have the capabilities, staff, and resources to successfully perform the project as described in Section A. Applicants will be evaluated based on the extent to which they present a clear and convincing vision of the project reflective of the identified needs as described in Section A.

Factor 1: Technical approach and feasibility (30 Points) The applicant will be evaluated on the extent and quality to which they demonstrate the merit of the proposed activities, including applicability and connection to the NOFO goal in Section A;

the extent to which the proposed activities are germane to the issue/objectives described, and link to success in achieving objectives.

• The overall project plan and design is relevant to the specified objectives outlined in the program objectives of Section A of this NOFO. The logic of the project follows a chain of cause-and-effect relationships with no significant causal gaps from one level in the causal hierarchy to the next. (10 points)

• The applicant’s proposal describes a realistic, effective and sound approach, including a description of high-quality methods or analytical rigor for achieving the program objectives described in Section A. (10 points)

• The applicant’s proposal clearly states specific outputs, outcomes, and a proposed timeline. (5 points)

• The applicant’s proposal clearly addresses how they will approach logistical hurdles and mid-course corrections of planning and implementing activities. (5 points)

Factor 2: Applicant’s technical expertise, capacity and ability (30 Points) The applicant will be evaluated on the extent and quality to which they demonstrate that they – including subrecipients, if any – have the technical expertise and capacity to implement the project described in a credible, effective, and time-bound manner, including:

• The applicant´s proposal demonstrates knowledge of the subject area at technical, governmental, and international levels, including: MRL-related trade challenges faced by U.S. specialty crop growers and exporters; the import MRL application process as outlined in the “APEC Import MRL Guideline for Pesticide,” and political, regulatory, or other hurdles to adoption in APEC economies. (6 points)

• The applicant´s proposal demonstrates awareness of MRL-related trade barriers and policies faced by APEC economies, including whether APEC members currently have import tolerance mechanisms established and the extent of sophistication of these systems. (6 points)

• The applicant´s proposal demonstrates prioritization of crop-chemical combinations important to U.S. specialty crop producers and exporters, based on challenges and opportunities for import MRL establishment. (6 points)

• The applicant demonstrates geographic presence/office in target region and language proficiency (if applicable to target market). (3 points)

• The applicant demonstrates awareness of contextual factors for the target market(s) that may impact the type of activities reasonably expected to be successful or unsuccessful and a plan that adequately addresses these factors. Factors to consider may include, as appropriate, entrenched policy positions, cultural norms, past or ongoing initiatives, proposed/existing regulations and practices, and/or regional trade agreements. (3 points)

• The applicant´s proposal demonstrates optimal staffing level and qualified personnel to undertake the activities described in their application. Optimal staffing level refers to an adequate number of personnel in place to undertake the activities within the period of performance. Qualified personnel are those with demonstrated, successful practical experience implementing similar projects. To the extent that the applicant will need to identify additional staff, a clear and reasonable plan should demonstrate how technical capacity will be evaluated and how partnership will occur. (6 points)

Factor 3: Impact of the proposed activities (25 Points) The applicant will be evaluated on the extent and quality to which they explain the potential impacts resulting from the proposed activities including:

• Trade impacts are defined and detailed. Applicant’s explanation of the extent to which the proposal and associated activities will resolve or substantially advance the ASCE goal, the NOFO goal and the issues described in the program description in Section A.

(10 points)

• The applicant´s proposal clearly describes experience with designing and implementing a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan. A proposed results framework, theory of change and a proposed performance indicator table clearly illustrates how the proposed activities will advance the ASCE goal, the NOFO goal and objectives described in Section A; and how to recognize progress/success through direct, objective, adequate, and practical criteria. (10 points)

• Applicant’s explanation of the plan to disseminate information about the effort and measured progress to the general public and U.S. specialty crop industry, and the anticipated effectiveness of such dissemination. (5 points)

Factor 4: Cost-effectiveness (5 Points)

Applications will be evaluated on the reasonableness, cost-effectiveness, and adequacy of the proposed budget to accomplish the project. The budget will be evaluated on cost savings, where available, and the inclusion of a budget narrative for each line item. For cost effectiveness, the agency will consider “value for money” in its evaluation of the program.

This factor does not consider the cost alone, but rather the cost relative to the value for the work to be performed. Note that the agency’s available funding will not exceed the anticipated cumulative funding amount shown in Section B.

Factor 5: Professional formatting, spelling, and grammar (5 Points)

The applicant will be evaluated on the extent to which their scope of work and budget documents are detailed, organized, in-scope, and appropriate including demonstration of professional organization and formatting throughout the project narrative and supporting documents with limited spelling and grammatical errors.

Factor 6: Past Performance (if applicable) (5 Points) In line with Section D. (Past Performance) applicants who performed federally funded assistance agreements in the last 3 years, will also be evaluated based on their ability to successfully complete and manage the proposed project considering their:

• Past performance in successfully completing and managing the assistance agreements identified in response to Section D of the solicitation.

• History of meeting the reporting requirements under the assistance agreements identified in response to Section D of the solicitation including whether the applicant submitted acceptable final technical reports under those agreements and the extent to which the applicant adequately and timely reported on their progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes under those agreements and if such progress was not being made whether the applicant adequately reported why not.

• Organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project

• staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed project.

Note: In evaluating applicants under the first two items of this criteria, USDA/FAS will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). If you do not have any relevant or available past performance or past reporting information, please indicate this in the application and you will receive a neutral score for these subfactors (items in the first two items above- a neutral score is half of the total points available in a subset of possible points). If you do not provide any response for these items, you may receive a score of 0 for these factors.

Integrity in Performance Prior to making a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency is required by 31 USC 3321 and 41 USC 2313 to review information available through any OMB-designated repositories of government-wide eligibility qualification or financial integrity information. Therefore application evaluation criteria may include the following risk based considerations of the applicant: (1) financial stability; (2) quality of management systems and ability to meet management standards; (3) history of performance in managing federal award; (4) reports and https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/3321 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/41/2313 findings from audits; and (5) ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements.

Prior to making a Federal award with a total amount of Federal share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, currently $250,000, the federal agency is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov (currently FAPIIS).

• An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM.gov and comment on any information about itself that a Federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov.

• The Federal awarding agency will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant's integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2

CFR § 200.206

Conflict of Interest The Applicant’s Conflict of Interest (COI) Point of Contact as defined in USDA/FAS Conflict of Interest Policy must notify the USDA/FAS contact identified in Section G of this solicitation of any actual or potential conflict of interest that they are aware of that may provide the Applicant with an unfair competitive advantage in competing for USDA/FAS financial assistance awards within 10 calendar days of becoming aware of the conflict of interest. Examples of an unfair competitive advantage include but are not limited to situations in which an USDA/FAS employee reviewed and commented on or drafted all or part of an applicant’s application. Note that USDA/FAS does not generally consider receiving information from an USDA/FAS employee limited to whether the applicant or the applicant’s proposed project is eligible to compete for funding to confer an unfair competitive advantage. In addition, assistance agreements made under this solicitation will include a term and condition notifying recipients of their COI disclosure obligations and responsibilities under the award including the need to have systems in place to address, resolve and disclose COIs to USDA/FAS.

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices Successful applicants will be notified of the status of their application/award by email. This notification is not authorization to proceed, and such notification should be construed as provisional.

Administrative and National Policy Requirements All successful applicants for all grant and cooperative agreements are required to comply with the applicable General Administrative Terms and Conditions, which can be found at https://www.fas.usda.gov/grants/general_terms_and_conditions/default.asp. The applicant is presumed to have read, understood, and accepted these terms when accepting a USDA/FAS award. Applicants with questions about the applicable terms should contact the program officer(s) listed in Section G, Federal Awarding Agency Contact.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/2/200.206 https://www.fas.usda.gov/grants/general_terms_and_conditions/default.asp

The applicable Terms and Conditions will be for the last year specified at that URL.

Before accepting an award, the applicant should carefully read the award package for instructions on administering the award and the terms and conditions associated with responsibilities under Federal Awards. Recipients must accept all conditions in this NOFO as well as any Special Terms and Conditions in the Notice of Award to receive an award under this program.

Subaward and Executive Compensation Reporting If subawards are included, applicants must ensure that they have the necessary processes and systems in place to comply with the subaward and executive total compensation reporting requirements established at 2 CFR 170, unless they qualify for an exception from the requirements, should they be selected for funding.

Mandatory Disclosures As required by 2 CFR 200.113, non-federal entities or applicants for a Federal award must disclose, in a timely manner, in writing to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity all violations of Federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the Federal award. Failure to make required disclosures can result in any of the remedies described in 2 CFR 200.339 including suspension and debarment.

Performance Expectations ASCE award recipients will be expected to develop and execute a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan throughout the life of the award. A Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan may include but is not limited to data collection, analysis, and success stories. The M&E Plan will be designed in consultation with FAS upon approval of funding.

Ongoing industry engagement is critical to the success of the ASCE Initiative. Upon approval of funding, the recipient and USDA/FAS, together and individually, will solicit and receive feedback and information from U.S. specialty crop stakeholders intended to enhance the quality, focus and reach of the project. The award recipient will be expected to coordinate with USDA/FAS on priorities and programming throughout the life of the agreement.

Reporting Financial Reports, using form SF-425, Federal Financial Report (FFR), must be submitted quarterly, for the periods ending March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 30, within 30 days of the end of the reporting period. A final financial report must be submitted within 120 days of the end date of the agreement.

Performance Progress Reports must be submitted quarterly, within 30 days of the end of the reporting period. A final performance progress report must be submitted within 120 days of the end date of the agreement. The recipient may use any appropriate format for performance progress reports, provided the report includes:

a) A comparison of actual accomplishments to those projected for the period;

b) The reasons why established goals were not met, if appropriate; and https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/section-170.210 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-B/section-200.113 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR86b76dde0e1e9dc/section-200.339

c) Additional pertinent information including, when appropriate, analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs.

Recipients are encouraged to include photographs and other supplemental material in performance progress reports. For awards in which the total lifetime value exceeds $500,000, additional reporting may be required as described in Appendix XII to 2 CFR 200.

Monitoring USDA/FAS through its authorized representatives, has the right, at all reasonable times, to make site visits to review project accomplishments and management control systems and to provide such technical assistance as may be required. During site visits, USDA/FAS will review recipients’ files related to the program.

As part of any monitoring and program evaluation activities, grant recipients must permit USDA/FAS, upon reasonable notice, to review assistance agreement-related records and to interview the organization’s staff and clients regarding the program, and to respond in a timely and accurate manner to FAS requests for information relating to the program.

Closeout Within 120 days after the end of the period of performance, recipients must submit a final FFR and final progress report detailing all accomplishments and a qualitative summary of the impact of those accomplishments throughout the period of performance. After final reports have been reviewed and approved by the agency, and any residual amount due to the recipient or due to be returned to the agency, the award is subject to closeout. Acceptance of final reports by the agency constitutes a closeout of the award with no further notice or obligation to either party.

This acceptance will indicate the period of performance has expired, and any remaining funds will be de-obligated. Records must be retained for a minimum of three years after the final reports are submitted.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact For all inquiries, contact:

Name: Lindsay Malecha Email Address: lindsay.malecha@usda.gov Phone Number: 202-777-9054 Hours of Operation: 9:00am – 5:30pm Central European Time (CET)

H. Other Information

Incremental Funding This award will be incrementally funded. All incremental funding is subject to approval and will be based on funding availability, satisfactory performance, and other applicable considerations.

This award may be incrementally funded with a potential cumulative total of $3,000,000 over the 3-year period of performance. The first year of funding will be up to $1,000,000. Since this award will be incrementally funded, the detailed budget and project narrative should reflect a https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/2/appendix-XII_to_part_200 total of $3,000,000 for 3 years with a break down for every year, including $1,000,000 for the first year.

Budget Revisions Transfers of funds between direct cost categories in the approved budget when such cumulative transfers among those direct cost categories exceed ten percent of the total budget approved in the award require written approval from the agency. The total budget amount may not be increased without a bilaterally executed amendment to the award.

Post-award program income In the event…