MGD Q&A Responses 5.21-5.27.docx

McGovern-Dole FY2026 Notice of Funding Opportunity Questions and Answers 5/21/26-5/27/26

1. On page 11, section 4.1. Application Format, states "Use 12-point font (including in tables and graphs)" Can applicant use any type of font as long as it is 12-point?

A: The guidance does not specify any required font family therefore, applicants may use any standard, legible font of their choosing as long as the text is formatted in 12‑point size throughout the document. Please refer to Section 4.1.a on page 11 of the NOFO.

2. Can USDA/FAS please confirm whether offerors are permitted to use smaller font sizes (e.g., 9-point) in graphics and tables, provided the text remains legible, in order to adequately address all requirements within each application section?

A: The NOFO does not permit the use of smaller font sizes in graphics or tables. Section 4.1.a explicitly requires applicants to “Use 12‑point font (including in tables and graphs)”.

3. Section 3, page 10, states “Applicants may allocate an amount not exceeding ten percent of the total federal award amount to local or regional commodity procurement (LRP).” Does USDA MGD have a minimum percentage that applicants should allocate to LRP?

A: . The NOFO does not provide any minimum percentage that applicants must dedicate to LRP, meaning applicants may propose any amount from 0% up to the 10% ceiling, depending on their project design and justification.

4. Where should the sustainability focus be: local government, national government, or both? Section 4.2, page 13, states “A focus on graduation and sustainability: USDA/FAS expects Applicants to include advocacy, capacity building, policy, and system strengthening activities at all levels of government and within schools and communities to facilitate the transfer of responsibility for project interventions to the host country (graduation) and to sustain benefits after the project ends (sustainability)”. Can USDA please confirm if Applicants should emphasize sustainability equally at all levels of government, or more emphasis on one level over another (ie. higher emphasis at national level or higher emphasis at lower level)?

A: The NOFO does not indicate that applicants should prioritize national‑level sustainability efforts over subnational or local efforts—or vice versa. Instead, it emphasizes a multi‑level, whole‑system approach, requiring applicants to demonstrate how sustainability and the transfer of responsibility will occur across national, regional, district, local, school, and community levels.

5. Appendix D – Budget Narrative, page 59 states “Applicants must allocate a minimum of three percent of the project operating costs (not the project operating budget) towards monitoring and evaluation…Examples of items that count towards the three percent minimum investment are costs of designing a monitoring database, database licenses, infrastructure for data collection such as tablets, and external contracts for evaluations and special studies. For evaluation plans that include conducting impact evaluations, USDA/FAS expects costs to range between 5 and 10 percent of the project operating costs.” But Section 4.2.3. Monitoring and Evaluation, Monitoring and Evaluation Brief, pages 26-27, does not reference special studies. Can USDA please confirm that special studies are not expected as part of FY26 McGovern-Dole applications?

A: Please note that the Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Brief described on pgs. 26-27 of the NOFO, with a limit of 3 pages, only identifies two key sections that Applicants should cover in the brief and does not represent every aspect of the project’s M&E approach. However, the M&E budget should include all anticipated M&E costs for the project, and Appendix D identifies examples of M&E costs that can be included as part of the minimum 3% required investment. Special studies remain optional, not required, in the project. If an Applicant anticipates doing one or more special studies if their project is funded, they should include those estimated costs in the M&E budget, whether or not the anticipated special studies are mentioned in the M&E Brief.

6. Section 4.2.3 Monitoring and Evaluation, page 25, states “Graduation: Applicants must propose custom indicators to track steps towards graduation. Indicators should align with the graduation plan and timeline described in the Plan of Operation. Applicants may consider their identified milestones towards graduation to craft custom indicators and should take into account critical assumptions about graduation and key challenges in their targets.” Should all milestones in the Graduation Plan and Timeline be included as custom indicators, or should applicants propose key indicators only, linked to the Graduation Plan and Timeline?

A: Applicants should propose key custom indicators that correspond to the major, substantive milestones in the graduation plan.While it is not required to propose an indicator for each milestone, it is up to Applicants to propose indicators that will best track steps towards graduation.

7. Section 4.2.e Monitoring and Evaluation, page 27, states “Applicants should include M&E budget information in the Budget Narrative section of their application…” Can USDA please confirm that this means the M&E budget should be included only in the budget narrative, and that applicants are not expected to include the evaluation budget in the Monitoring and Evaluation Brief?

A: Yes, that is correct: the M&E budget should be included only in the Budget Narrative, not in the Monitoring and Evaluation Brief.

8. Commodities: Is the dry milk product available for programming? Are there any limitations to including this product in the US-donated commodities?

A: Dry milk is available as a U.S.-provided commodity under the McGovern‑Dole Program, as confirmed in Appendix H of the NOFO, which lists “Nonfat, non‑fortified Dry Milk” among the eligible food aid commodities. The NOFO does not identify any special restrictions or limitations on including dry milk beyond the standard requirements that apply to all U.S.‑provided commodities, such as meeting USDA food safety specifications and complying with import regulations in the target country.

9. Page 22, Section 4.2d Organizational Capacity and Staffing states that "the page limit for this section is 8 pages", with 6 pages for (i) Staffing Plan, 1 page for (ii) Organizational Chart, and 1 page for (iii) In-Country Registration. However, there is also language in this part of the NOFO requesting applicants describe organizational capacities, technical capabilities, and risk mitigation and management strategies (language following the 4.2d header and before the “i. Staffing Plan” sub-header.) Can USDA/FAS please clarify if this information must be included in the total 8-page limit for this section, or if this is in addition to the 6 pages for staffing, 1 page for organizational chart, and 1 page for in-country registration?

A: USDA/FAS intends for the entire Organizational Capacity and Staffing section—including the narrative describing organizational capabilities, technical experience, and risk‑mitigation strategies—to fall within the total 8‑page limit for Section 4.2.d. The NOFO states an 8-page limit for the section and then specifies subsection page limits. Therefore, USDA/FAS expects applicants to include all required narrative elements plus the three subsection components within the single, combined 8‑page limit for Section 4.2.d.

10. Are we allowed to apply as a consortium, or is it required to have a lead applicant who will subaward out any required activities?

A: While the FY 2026 McGovern‑Dole NOFO allows applicants to apply as a consortium (defined simply as a group of two or more entities that plan to pool their resources and expertise for a single-project, leveraging respective areas of expertise), USDA/FAS does require that the application be submitted by a lead applicant (prime recipient) who will enter into the cooperative agreement with USDA and who will be responsible for all subawards and subrecipient management to any other consortium members. Please refer to Section 4.2.d.i (Staffing Plan) and Section 4.2d (Organizational Capacity and Staffing) for further details.

11. The NOFO states the following under the Commodity Management section guidance: "Applicants are encouraged to consult with USDA/FAS Overseas Offices (Posts) regarding necessary import documentation and approval procedures, especially for products that are derived from genetically engineered crops." Does USDA/FAS request that bidders consult with posts while the FY26 McGovern-Dole NOFO is live?

A: The FY 2026 McGovern‑Dole NOFO does request that applicants consult with USDA/FAS Overseas Offices (“Posts”) while the NOFO is live. Please refer to page 27 of the NOFO.

12. Under McGovern-Dole indicator 30, “Number of individuals participating in USDA food security programs,” how should teachers and school administrators be classified under the “type of individual” disaggregation category?

A: Applicants should refer to the January 2026 McGovern‑Dole Standard Indicator Handbook here: Food for Progress and McGovern‑Dole Indicators and Definitions (January 2026). On p. 123, under the “types of individuals” disaggregate, teachers and administrators can be counted as “People in Civil Society”.

13. Given the significant reduction in page numbers of the M&E section could you please clarify the following:

a. What level of detail is expected regarding the evaluation plan (e.g., baseline, midterm, final, and methodologies)

b. How should the balance be prioritized between describing the routine monitoring system versus evaluation design?

c. Should detailed methodological elements (e.g., sampling, tools) be deferred to the post-award Evaluation Plan?

A: Please note that the FY 2026 NOFO requires only a concise M&E Brief (3 pages) at application—not a full evaluation plan. It is correct that this is a significant reduction in the content required at the application stage compared to previous NOFOs, and Applicants should only respond to what is specifically described in the FY26 NOFO for this brief. Within the 3-page limit, Applicants should determine the level of detail to provide and how to balance their response to the two key sections described in the NOFO: “Evaluation Approach and Methodologies” and “Project Monitoring System”.

14. Reading through the instructions, I'm not sure how to upload a proposal for a non-priority country without a code once registered in FAIS. Can you please point me in the right direction?

A: NOFO does confirm that USDA/FAS has created a specific Funding Opportunity Number for non‑priority country applications, listed as “USDA‑FAS‑10.608‑0700‑26‑(000) Non‑priority country applications.” Please refer to page 6 of the NOFO.

15. In Section 4.2, where “girls’ education” is identified as a priority area, does USDA expect applicants to propose single-sex activities explicitly targeting girls, or can this objective be addressed through broader interventions that improve equitable access and outcomes for all vulnerable students, including girls?

A: In Section 4.2 of the FY 2026 McGovern‑Dole NOFO, USDA identifies “girls’ education” as a required priority area that applicants must address, but the NOFO does not state or imply that applicants must design single‑sex or girls‑only activities. Instead, the NOFO instructs applicants, within the Strategy subsection of the Introduction and Strategic Analysis, to explain “how interventions will especially benefit girls’ education and contribute to child safeguarding for all children” (page 18).

16. Given that our actual indirect rates have changed significantly since our last approved provisional NICRA—and that approval for our current NICRA has been pending for nearly a year—are we permitted to use our audited actual rates in lieu of the approved NICRA? The new rates would allow us to shift funding from administration to programmatic activities. We intend to provide our current NICRA letter and audited proposed rate.

A: Please refer to page 8 and 31 of the NOFO. According to the FY 2026 McGovern‑Dole NOFO, applicants are not permitted to use their own audited actual indirect rates in place of an approved NICRA. USDA/FAS states that if an organization has a valid NICRA, that rate must be used, and applicants may only use the 15‑percent de minimis rate if they do not have a valid NICRA on file.