FY24 ASCE- Regional alignment of pesticide reg systems and MRLs NOFO.pdf

NOTICE OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY

Assisting Specialty Crop Exports: Regional alignment of pesticide regulatory systems and trade facilitative MRLs

Application Submission Deadline: July 29, 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 maximum residue limit (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

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Foreign Agricultural Service https://www.ams.usda.gov/services/grants/scbgp/specialty-crop crop producers face yet another barrier since, due to low production volumes, specialty crop farmers, cooperators, and 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 seeks to expand specialty crop exports by helping U.S. exporters address non-tariff trade barriers. One of the barriers identified by U.S.

industry 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 development and implementation of risk-based pesticide regulatory systems and MRL policy consistent with Codex and/or the U.S. system and based on the WTO SPS Agreement.

This opportunity intends to support three (3) tracks. Applicants must clearly align their proposals with one of the tracks described below. An institution may submit applications to more than one track, provided they are submitted separately. Applicants must include activities that achieve cross-cutting objectives and region-specific objectives described below.

The following cross-cutting objectives apply to all three (3) tracks:

1) Advance the development and/or implementation of risk-based and trade facilitating policies, standards and procedures related to pesticide registration and MRL adoption pathways.

2) Identify and address existing and potential trade needs related to MRLs of U.S.

specialty crops entering regional markets, as agreed to by FAS.

3) Support regional efforts to align pesticide registration systems and MRL risk assessment and standard setting.

4) When appropriate, leverage and build upon previous and ongoing capacity building initiatives that align with the ASCE goal.

5) Promote science-based pesticide residue monitoring and risk-based inspection programs (where hazard-based processes currently exist).

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

6) Support the adoption of Codex crop groups as the foundation of pesticide regulatory systems, taking into consideration that some modifications may be needed to include crops not already in the Codex groups.

7) Promote mutual recognition of efficacy trial data globally, when appropriate.

Track 1: Alignment of Asian pesticide regulatory systems and trade facilitative MRLs This track will support harmonization of MRL systems in Asia with the adoption and implementation of risk-based pesticide regulatory systems and MRL setting consistent with Codex and/or the U.S. system, countering hazard-based policies and practices. This track provides bilateral and regional technical assistance to partner countries in Asian regional economic communities. Recipient(s) will not be expected to work in all countries and regional economic communities; rather, target markets/commodities will be prioritized based on consultations with FAS and U.S. specialty crop industry. Applicants will be expected to build on and coordinate with ongoing USDA/FAS bilateral programming in Vietnam, Philippines, and Thailand, but could include other priority countries, identified for potential benefit to U.S.

specialty crop exports. Track-specific objectives include:

1) Establish Import MRLs (IMRLs) and IMRL regulatory setting systems in Asia, including the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), for specialty crops.

Crops may include, but are not exclusive to, blueberries, cherries, grapes, hops, apples, almonds, dry beans, ginseng, pears, pistachios, raspberries, sweet potatoes, strawberries and others.

Track 2: Alignment of Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) pesticide regulatory systems and trade facilitative MRLs This track provides bilateral and/or regional technical assistance to partner countries in LAC’s regional economic communities (e.g., the Central American Regional Economic Community, the Andean Community (CAN), the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM)). Recipient(s) will not be expected to work in all countries and regional economic communities; rather, target markets/commodities will be prioritized based on consultations with FAS and U.S. specialty crop industry. Applicants will be expected to build on and coordinate with ongoing USDA/FAS programming on MRL alignment and risk-based pesticide regulatory systems in the region. Track-specific objectives include:

1) Continue support for the approval and implementation of Regional Technical Central American Regulations (RTCAs) for MRL Adoption Pathways, Chemical Pesticide Registration and Biopesticide Registration. These three RTCAs are in draft status and will require submission to the Central American Agricultural Council (CAC) and the Council of Ministers of Economy and Trade of Central America (COMIECO) for a formal negotiation process, approval, and future implementation.

2) Continue to promote the use of risk and scientific principles in the development and application of regional biopesticide registration regulations in the CAN and/or

CARICOM.

3) When appropriate, continue to promote the application of risk-based methodologies for pesticide residue monitoring and inspection activities in CAN economies (where hazard-based approaches currently exist).

https://asean.org/member-states/

Track 3: Alignment of pesticide regulatory systems and trade facilitative MRLs in Africa The track aims to build capacity on pesticide registration and MRL setting to support the development and implementation of risk-based pesticide regulatory systems and MRL policy consistent with Codex and/or the U.S. system and based on the WTO SPS Agreement. The work should build on and coordinate with ongoing USDA/FAS programming that supports the African Union Inter African Phytosanitary Council (AU-IAPSC), and sub-regional development efforts within Regional Economic Communities for mechanisms that facilitate the risk-based registration of pesticides across several countries. The sub-regional partners include, but are not limited to, the East African Community (EAC); the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS); and the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). Track-specific objectives include:

1) Support domestication and operationalization of harmonized guidelines related to pesticides in EAC and SADC and harmonized registration systems in ECOWAS.

2) Support African Union in the development of continental guidelines including for pesticides.

Funding Opportunity Number

USDA-FAS-10621-0750-10.-24-0004

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

Total Available Federal Funding:

Track 1: The initial funding amount will be up to $1,500,000. Subject to availability of funding, a cumulative total of up to $4,000,000, may be available throughout the period of performance of the award. See Section H, Other Information, for additional information on incremental funding.

Track 2: 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.

Track 3: 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.

Anticipated Number of Awards: 3 (one award per track)

Cost Share/Match Requirement: None/Not Required

Projected Period of Performance Start: September 6, 2024

Projected Period of Performance End: September 6, 2027

Type of Assistance Instrument:

USDA/FAS anticipates that Cooperative Agreements 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 This opportunity intends to support three (3) tracks with one award per track. An individual applicant may submit up to three (3) applications (one application per track). A single entity may be offered more than one award, provided that track-specific applications are submitted separately.

In cases where a single entity is selected for more than one award, USDA/FAS may request to combine the corresponding application(s) into a single award for ease of administration.

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 http://www.sam.gov/ 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

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

A virtual information session will be held for interested applicants on, May 30, 2024, at 10:00am EDT, Washington, DC time.

Join using the Zoom link below:

https://www.zoomgov.com/j/16111666787?pwd=OU9Dc09RK3JMaTgyTTdWZDVubmhjZz09

Deadline for Question Submission: July 16, 2024

Applicants may submit questions about this funding opportunity to the Section G contact.

Submission Dates and Times Application Submission Deadline: July 29, 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: September 6, 2024

Content and Form of Application Submission

Applicants must clearly align their proposals with one of the three tracks described in the Program Description above. An institution may submit applications to more than one track, provided they are submitted separately.

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 the following breakdowns:

Track 1 – Asia – A total of $4,000,000 for 3 years with a break down for every year, including $1,500,000 for the first year.

https://www.zoomgov.com/j/16111666787?pwd=OU9Dc09RK3JMaTgyTTdWZDVubmhjZz09

Track 2 – LAC - A total of $3,000,000 for 3 years with a break down for every year, including $1,000,000 for the first year.

Track 3 – Africa - 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 describe in plain language:

o Identification of the track(s) to which the applicant is applying.

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 both the cross-cutting and track-specific objectives described 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 issue identified in the track, 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 with regard to ability to resolve or substantially advance the ASCE goal and the issues described in the program description and tracks in Section A, including the market access or trade benefits expected for U.S. specialty crop exporters, as well as an explanation of short- and long-term impacts of international capacity building activities.

o Knowledge of MRL-related trade challenges, risk-based approaches, science-based pesticide policy, international capacity building approaches and regional harmonization.

o Awareness of contextual factors for the target market(s) that may impact the type of activities reasonably expected to be successful or unsuccessful, such as entrenched policy positions, cultural norms, language skills needed, past or ongoing initiatives, proposed/existing regulations, target region needs and priorities, applicant’s presence in the target region, and/or regional trade agreements.

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 policymakers in the target region(s), and the anticipated effectiveness of such dissemination.

o A brief description of how the applicant will approach logistical hurdles and 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 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, and your staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals 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-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

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/ 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 http://login.gov/help

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 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.

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 https://www.usda.gov/ocfo/federal-financial-assistance-policy/intergovernmental-review

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, separated by track, 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 presence in a specific region, 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 objectives identified 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 overall NOFO goal and specific track they are applying for, described in Section A; the extent to which the proposed activities are germane to the issue/objectives described in that track, and link to success in achieving objectives.

• The overall project plan and design is relevant to the specified objectives outlined in 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 cross-cutting and track-specific objectives in Section A. (10 points)

• The applicant’s proposal clearly states specific outputs, outcomes, personnel 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 and opportunities faced by U.S. specialty crop growers and exporters; risk-based approaches to pesticide regulatory systems and MRL setting consistent with Codex and/or the U.S.

system; science-based pesticide policy development and implementation; international capacity building approaches and regional harmonization. (10 points)

• The applicant´s proposal 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 should include, as appropriate: entrenched policy positions, cultural norms, language skills needed, past or ongoing initiatives, proposed/existing regulations, target region needs and priorities, applicant’s presence in the target region, and/or regional trade agreements. (10 points)

• The applicant´s proposal demonstrates the 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 or partners to undertake the work within the allotted time, a clear and reasonable plan should demonstrate how technical capacity will be evaluated and how partnership will occur. (10 points)

Factor 3: Impact of the proposed activities (30 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 and application track(s) in Section A, including market access or trade benefits expected for U.S.

specialty crop exporters, as well as an explanation of short- and long-term impacts of international capacity building activities. (15 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 performance indicator table clearly explain how the proposed activities will advance the ASCE goal and objectives described in Section A; and how to recognize progress/success through direct, objective, adequate, and practical criteria. (10 points)

• Applicant’s proposal describes a practical and effective approach for disseminating activities and measured progress to the general public, U.S. specialty crop industry and policy-makers in the target region(s), 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 per track.

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.

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 (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 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 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/3321 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/41/2313 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/2/200.206 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.

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 https://www.fas.usda.gov/grants/general_terms_and_conditions/default.asp 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 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

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.