NOFO AH-TP2-23-001.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Office of Population Affairs

Notice of Funding Opportunity: Teen Pregnancy Prevention Tier 2 Rigorous Evaluation Cooperative Agreements

Opportunity Number: AH-TP2-23-001

Application Due Date:

05/17/2023 at 6:00 PM Eastern

OVERVIEW

FEDERAL AGENCY NAME

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of Population Affairs

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TITLE

Teen Pregnancy Prevention Tier 2 Rigorous Evaluation Cooperative Agreements

ACTION

Notice

ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE

Initial CA (Cooperative Agreement)

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY NUMBER

AH-TP2-23-001

ASSISTANCE LISTING NUMBER AND PROGRAM:

93.297 , Teen Pregnancy Prevention

DATES

Application Deadline: 05/17/2023 by 6:00 PM Eastern.

Technical Assistance Webinar: 03/20/2023 at 3:00 PM Eastern.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Office of Population Affairs announces the availability of funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 under the authority of Division H, Title II of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law No. 117-328).

This notice solicits applications for projects that will rigorously evaluate promising interventions for preventing unintended teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), behavioral risk factors underlying teen pregnancy, or other associated risk factors. Evaluating promising interventions includes developing, replicating, refining, and testing additional models and innovative strategies for preventing unintended teenage pregnancy. The goal of this initiative is to identify effective interventions for future replication by adolescent health practitioners and youth-serving professionals, and to disseminate the research findings and lessons learned to inform future studies. Applicants should propose rigorous impact evaluations that are either randomized control trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) with a comparison condition. To ensure health equity, OPA is particularly interested in evaluations of promising interventions in populations and settings with great need and with significant health disparities.

OPA anticipates funding a wide range of adolescent health innovations under this opportunity.

All interventions proposed for evaluation under this initiative should already have compelling, positive preliminary evidence from previous research and demonstrated support from previous participants and communities. OPA expects the intervention to fit the population and setting proposed for the application.

OPA intends to make available approximately $11.475 million for an estimated 11-15 awards.

The amount of funding an applicant may request ranges from $500,000 to $1,000,000 per year for a period of up to five years (five 12-month budget periods). Awards may have a period of performance of up to 5 years. Funding for budget periods after the first will be based on the availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the project, grants management compliance, and continued best interests of the government.

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) encourages all applicants to review all program requirements, eligibility information, application format and submission information, evaluation criteria, and other information in this funding announcement to ensure that their applications comply with all requirements and instructions.

Table of Contents

OVERVIEW

FEDERAL AGENCY NAME

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TITLE

ACTION

ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE

FUNDING OPPORTUNITY NUMBER

ASSISTANCE LISTING NUMBER AND PROGRAM:

DATES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A. Program Description

1. Background

2. Expectations for Funded Projects

3. Federal Agency Substantial Involvement

B. Federal Award Information

1. Legal Authority

2. Award Information

3. Federal Agency Substantial Involvement

C. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

2. Cost Sharing or Matching

3. Other - Application Responsiveness Criteria

4. Application Disqualification Criteria

D. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Address to Request Application Package

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

3. Application Content

4. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

5. Submission Dates and Times

6. Intergovernmental Review

7. Funding Restrictions

8. Other Submission Requirements

E. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

1. Criteria

2. Review and Selection Process

3. Review of Risk Posed by Applicant

4. Final Award Decisions, Anticipated Announcement, and Federal Award Dates

F. FEDERAL AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

1. Federal Award Notices

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

3. Program Specific Terms and Conditions

4. Closeout of Award

5. Lobbying Prohibitions

6. Non-Discrimination Requirements

7. Smoke- and Tobacco-free Workplace

8. Acknowledgement of Funding

9. HHS Rights to Materials and Data

10. Trafficking in Persons

11. Efficient Spending

12. Whistleblower Protection

13. Health Information Technology (IT) Interoperability

14. Prohibition on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment. 53

15. Human Subjects Protection

16. Research Integrity

17. Reporting

G. CONTACTS

1. Administrative and Budgetary Requirements

2. Program Requirements

3. Electronic Submission Requirements

H. OTHER INFORMATION

1. Awards under this Announcement

2. Application Elements

I. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS

1. Acronyms

2. Considerations in Recipient Plans for Oversight of Federal Funds

3. Financial Assistance General Certifications and Representations

4. Glossary of Selected Terms and Definitions

5. Select Resources for Applicants

6. TPP2020 Performance Measures (Draft- measures subject to change for the TPP2023 cohort)

7. References

A. Program Description The Office of Population Affairs announces the availability of funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 under the authority of Division H, Title II of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law No. 117-328).

The primary focus of OASH is leading America to healthier lives, especially for those who have suffered historic disparities. In support of this vision, OPA promotes health across the reproductive lifespan through innovative, evidence-based sexual and reproductive health and family planning programs, services, strategic partnerships, evaluation, and research. The Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) program is a national, evidence-based program that funds diverse organizations working to reach adolescents to improve sexual and reproductive health outcomes and promote positive youth development.

The TPP program supports medically accurate, age-appropriate, and complete programs to reduce unintended teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), behavioral risk factors underlying teen pregnancy, or other associated risk factors (such as, but not limited to, initiation of sexual activity, frequency of sexual activity, number of sexual partners, contraceptive use, substance use, intimate partner violence (IPV)). The TPP program supports numerous rigorous, independent evaluation studies that significantly contribute to the field’s knowledge of where, when, and with whom programs are most effective. To continue expanding the evidence base and addressing the changing needs of youth and communities, the TPP program replicates, refines, develops, tests, and evaluates promising interventions, additional models, and innovative strategies to advance adolescent health, by preventing unintended teen pregnancy and risk factors underlying or associated with teen pregnancy.

The purpose of this initiative is to fund rigorous impact and implementation evaluation of promising interventions for preventing unintended teen pregnancy, STIs, behavioral risk factors underlying teen pregnancy, or other associated risk factors. Through the awards, OPA aims to identify effective interventions for replication by adolescent health practitioners and youth-serving professionals, disseminate the research findings and lessons learned to inform future studies, and ultimately expand the knowledge base for TPP programming. This funding will support rigorous evaluations designed to answer important research question(s) about the impact and implementation of TPP interventions.

1. Background

In 2020, the U.S. teen birth rate (measured as births per 1000 females ages 15-19), was

15.4 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vital Statistics, 2020). The U.S. teen birth rate is higher than that found in most developed countries (Sedgh G., 2015). Persistent disparities in U.S. teen births exist by race and ethnicity. In the U.S., birth rates are higher among American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN), Black, Hispanic, and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) adolescents than among teens overall. In 2020, AI/AN adolescent females had the highest birth rate (25.7), followed by Black adolescents (24.4) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vital Statistics, 2020).

Beyond racial and ethnic disparities, some adolescents experience higher rates of unintended pregnancy and births than others. For example, young women living in foster care are more than twice as likely to become pregnant than young women not in foster care (James, 2009). Youth involved in the juvenile justice system experience higher rates of risky sexual behaviors compared to their non-system involved peers and are at higher risk for pregnancy and parenting (Sedlak, 2010). Adolescent lesbian and bisexual females are more likely to have ever been pregnant than their heterosexual peers (Saewyc, 2014).

In the U.S., teens and young adults, ages 15 to 24, account for nearly half of all new cases of sexually transmitted infections (STI) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention S., 2020). Persistent and noteworthy disparities exist by race, ethnicity, geography, and among those that have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty. Young gay and bisexual males have disproportionately high rates of HIV, syphilis, and other STIs (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention S., 2020).

We aim to equitably bolster adolescent health outcomes and advance health equity through the development, evaluation, and dissemination of new and innovative approaches. Health equity is:

“The attainment of the highest level of health for all people. Achieving health equity requires valuing everyone equally with focused and ongoing societal efforts to address avoidable inequalities, historical and contemporary injustices, and the elimination of health and health care disparities” (Healthy People, 2030; Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health/Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion., 2022). Advancing health equity in teen pregnancy prevention will require sustained, multi-pronged, multi-level interventions and strategies that are both innovative and evidence based. It also requires projects to be greatly attuned to the needs of their community and population to fully understand what inequities exist and the underlying causes contributing to them. Through this deep examination, projects can then work toward providing user-centered, high-quality programming and services that improve sexual and reproductive health outcomes and promote positive youth development.

To date, the HHS Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review (TPPER) has identified 48 programs with evidence of effectiveness; most of these effective programs are implemented in school-based settings and used with general populations in-person (Lugo-Gil, et al., 2018). To ensure health equity, we are particularly interested in rigorous evaluations of promising interventions in populations and settings with great need and with significant health disparities.

This may include, but is not limited to, interventions in juvenile justice or foster care/child welfare settings, with expectant and parenting youth, youth with disabilities, with youth experiencing homelessness, or male-identifying youth. We recognize that in-person, school-based programming for general populations may not fully reach the youth who experience disproportionate rates of unintended teen pregnancy; therefore, we also are interested in evaluating TPP interventions that are self-paced and self-delivered, such as technological interventions as well as short-duration programs. Additionally, we are interested in funding projects that potentially impact not only individuals but also the communities and systems within which individuals are situated.

We seek evaluations of interventions that address key adolescent health disparities and have the potential to make a significant contribution to preventing unintended teen pregnancy. We anticipate funding a wide range of adolescent health innovations under this funding announcement; the eligible interventions may include, but are not limited to, programs, curricula, clinical interventions, technological interventions, systems-level interventions, community-level approaches, and others. Interventions may work directly with adolescents, their caregivers, and/or with youth-serving professionals to address adolescent health behaviors relevant to teen pregnancy prevention. We expect any intervention proposed for evaluation under this initiative to already have compelling, positive preliminary evidence from previous formative evaluation and prior research, including documented effects on intended outcomes. We expect the intervention to have demonstrated support from previous participants and communities. The intervention should fit the population and setting proposed for the application. Interventions should have a clearly described theory of change and logic model (See Section 2.a.).

TPP Interventions rigorously evaluated previously under federal funding are not appropriate for this funding unless significant changes have been made to the intervention to address findings from the previous evaluation results. Interventions that are not appropriate for this funding unless significantly adapted include any interventions implemented and evaluated under the following awards:

Phase 2 Rigorous Evaluation of Promising TPP Interventions (TPP20 Tier 2 Phase 2) – (https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/current-tpp-grantees ), Rigorously Evaluating New TPP Approaches (Tier 2b) – 2015-2020 (https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/past-tpp-grantees-2015-2020), TPP FY2010 Tier 2 Research and Demonstration (https://opa.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/summary-researchdemonstration.pdf), and

Personal Responsibility Education Program Innovative Strategies (PREIS) funding (FY2010, FY2015, FY2019) (https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/grant-funding/personal-responsibility-education-innovative-strategies-preis-grantee-profiles)

Interventions identified as effective by the HHS Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review (TPPER) are also not appropriate for this funding (https://tppevidencereview.youth.gov/FindAProgram.aspx), unless significant adaptations are proposed to the intervention, ultimately creating a new intervention. Minor changes to an Evidence-Based Program (EBP) to improve its fit and relevancy are more appropriate within TPP Tier 1 replication initiative awards (AH-TP1-23-001). Major changes to an Evidence-Based Program (EBP) that substantially change the model's core components, logic model, or delivery mechanism in a manner that changes the intended outcomes are appropriate for rigorous evaluation under this NOFO. The NOFO supplemental materials (Section I) include a complete list of interventions that are not eligible without substantial modification.

2. Expectations for Funded Projects

Award recipients under this announcement should meet each of the below expectations in the execution of their funded project:

a. Implement Promising Interventions

We expect projects to evaluate interventions for the purpose of preventing unintended teen pregnancy, reduce STIs among adolescents, address behavioral risk factors underlying teen pregnancy, or address other associated risk factors for unintended teen pregnancy. We encourage recipients to target resources to populations disproportionately impacted by unintended teen pregnancy and STIs, to reduce health disparities and thereby achieve greater equity in adolescent health. In addition, we expect selection of interventions that fill gaps in the existing evidence base, including interventions that use different modalities for implementation (e.g., self-paced, technology, non-school settings) and interventions that impact not only individuals but also the communities and systems within which individuals are situated.

https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/current-tpp-grantees https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/current-tpp-grantees https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/past-tpp-grantees-2015-2020 https://opa.hhs.gov/grant-programs/teen-pregnancy-prevention-program-tpp/tpp-grantees/past-tpp-grantees-2015-2020 https://opa.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/summary-researchdemonstration.pdf https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/grant-funding/personal-responsibility-education-innovative-strategies-preis-grantee-profiles https://www.acf.hhs.gov/fysb/grant-funding/personal-responsibility-education-innovative-strategies-preis-grantee-profiles https://tppevidencereview.youth.gov/FindAProgram.aspx

We expect recipients to implement interventions that have compelling, positive preliminary evidence from previous formative evaluation and prior research, including documented effects on intended outcomes. The recipient’s chosen intervention(s) should have demonstrated support from previous participants and communities. The intervention should be a good fit for the population and setting proposed for the application. Interventions should have a clearly described theory of change and logic model. Projects should not duplicate interventions that have already been rigorously evaluated and published on the OPA website.

This opportunity is for research and demonstration projects, and not service delivery. Service delivery may be incidental or ancillary to the project but service delivery is not the primary purpose of this initiative. Other than piloting, we do not expect recipients to implement the intervention with participants who are not in the study sample.

b. Conduct Rigorous Evaluation of the Intervention

We expect all recipients to conduct a rigorous impact and implementation evaluation of their proposed intervention. We expect rigorous impact evaluations to have the most robust possible design that is feasible for the intervention in the setting and with the intended population. When feasible, we expect the evaluation design to meet the criteria for the quality of an evaluation study per the criteria in the HHS Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review (TPPER), version

6.0. (https://tppevidencereview.youth.gov/ReviewProtocol.aspx). TPPER is a systematic process for reviewing evaluation studies against a rigorous standard to identify programs with evidence of effectiveness in reducing teen pregnancy, STIs, or associated sexual risk behaviors. TPPER defines the criteria for the quality of an evaluation study and the strength of evidence for a particular intervention. HHS recently updated the evidence review standards in Fall 2022.

Recipients may collect additional outcomes beyond those recognized currently by the TPPER, as long as at least one of the study outcomes is a sexual risk behavior, and the other outcomes collected are “associated risk factors” clearly associated with unintended teen pregnancy.

We expect recipients to conduct either randomized control trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) with a comparison group.

RCTs are experiments that randomly assign participants into different, unique groups: the treatment group and the comparison. We expect all recipients conducting randomized evaluations to use the intent-to-treat (ITT) framework for primary analyses. In an ITT framework, evaluators compare the participant outcomes between the individuals assigned to receive the intervention and those not assigned to the intervention (ACF

OPRE, 2016).

QEDs form intervention and comparison groups through methods other than random assignment of participants. Researchers use QEDs for impact evaluations when random assignment is not feasible. QEDs include methods such as Propensity Score Matching (PSM), Regression Discontinuity Designs (RDD), and Interrupted Time Series (ITS)

(ACF OPRE, 2016).

Recipients may conduct either efficacy or effectiveness studies. Efficacy studies evaluate interventions under ideal conditions, often with the close involvement of the intervention https://tppevidencereview.youth.gov/ReviewProtocol.aspx developer, whereas effectiveness studies evaluate an intervention during routine or natural conditions (ACF OPRE, 2016).

Recipients may conduct supplementary analyses in addition to the rigorous impact and implementation evaluations. These additional analyses may include cost studies, qualitative data analyses, or core components analyses. We strongly encourage testing of the core components as part of the rigorous evaluation.

We expect recipients to have a detailed evaluation design finalized by the end of the planning period. We expect that all studies shall have a counterfactual, and there will be equivalency between the study groups at baseline. Additionally, we expect the programming received by the study groups to be different enough to allow for a meaningful test. We expect recipients to register their studies with an online registry such as clinicaltrials.gov.

We expect recipients to have a data collection plan finalized by the end of the planning period.

We expect recipients to collect and analyze outcomes that are relevant to the intervention’s logic model and proposed research questions. Recipients should include at least one sexual behavioral outcome. We expect recipients to collect all study data during the period of performance. We anticipate that recipients will collect survey data at baseline, at one short term follow-up (e.g., between 0 months-1-year post-intervention), and at one long-term follow-up (e.g., 9 months or more post-intervention). Recipients should justify any additional data points proposed beyond these three points and discuss feasibility and necessity with us after award, during the planning period. We expect recipients to submit an analysis plan to us for review and feedback during the third year of funding; we will provide templates during that year. We expect recipients to use the final 6-9 months of the award for data analysis and reporting. We expect recipients to submit a final evaluation report to us summarizing their evaluation findings and lessons learned. We will review and provide feedback on this report.

We expect recipients to monitor and report to us on their progress recruiting, consenting, and retaining study participants. We expect recipients to make steady and consistent progress toward enrolling their study sample during each year of their award. A general benchmark is to enroll at least 25% of the sample by the end of year 2, at least 50% of the sample by the end of year 3, at least 75% of the sample by the end of year 4, and reach 100% of the sample size during year 5.

We expect recipients to meet the TPPER standards for attrition (TPPER protocol, version 6.0, Section C.2 on pp. 5-7).

We expect recipients to address limitations, bias, and possible threats to internal and external validity within their studies. Recipients should conduct their studies through a credible and neutral process, which includes, at a minimum, evaluation staff who do not have perceived or actual conflict of interest and can remain independent of the intervention. We strongly encourage use of an independent, external evaluator.

As a condition of the award, we require recipients to participate in ongoing OPA-sponsored Evaluation Technical Assistance. Further, as a condition of the award, we expect recipients to participate in an OPA-directed Federal evaluation, if selected and funding for such an evaluation becomes available.

c. Participate in a planning and piloting period

During the first 6 - 12 months of the award, recipients will engage in a planning and piloting period. During the planning and piloting period, we expect recipients to work closely with us to refine, improve, and finalize the evaluation design and methods. We expect recipients to finalize the intervention materials and ensure that the intervention is a good fit for the participants using end-user feedback.

In addition, during the planning and pilot period, recipients should obtain any necessary Institutional Review Board (IRB) approvals for the evaluation. The duration of the planning period is contingent upon each recipient’s demonstrated readiness but should not exceed 12 months. By the end of Year 1, we expect that all recipients will be ready to begin the evaluation.

Failure of a recipient to receive OPA approval for their evaluation plan or make satisfactory progress toward completion of planning period milestones by the end of year one may impact funding for Year 2 (Section F.17.e).

Recipients should complete key milestones during the planning and piloting period to ensure readiness for full implementation of the study, such as:

training staff;

ensuring that the project implementation sites are not duplicative of other TPP-funded projects;

finalizing agreements with all key partners and subrecipients;

obtaining OPA approval of the evaluation design and instruments;

completing the OPA materials review process (see Section A.2.d.);

pilot-testing intervention materials to incorporate user-feedback, demonstrate desirability, and ensure fit and appropriateness;

pilot-testing evaluation instruments and procedures;

finalizing instruments and obtaining approval(s) from an Institutional Review Board

(IRB).

d. Complete OPA Material Review

Recipients must ensure that all materials delivered to study participants are medically accurate and age appropriate. We also expect recipients to ensure that all materials are complete, culturally and linguistically appropriate, trauma-informed, user-centered, and inclusive of all youth. Project materials include intervention and comparison group materials, such as but not limited to curricula, facilitator manuals, participant manuals, videos, podcasts, posters, scripts, participant booklets, pamphlets, and handouts. We expect recipients to demonstrate that subject-matter experts have reviewed materials in relevant areas (e.g., age appropriateness). Recipients must make any necessary changes to materials prior to implementation. We expect recipients to inform us of their review process, findings, and plans to address any issues identified during the planning period. We expect recipients to submit for review and approval prior to implementation any changes made to the intervention to address issues identified during materials reviews for medical accuracy, age appropriateness, completeness, cultural and linguistic appropriateness, trauma-informed approaches, user-centeredness, and inclusivity. We also expect recipients to submit all program materials for a medical accuracy review. Recipients may not begin implementation with the materials until after OPA has approved the use of the materials. We expect recipients to finalize all intervention materials prior to beginning the rigorous evaluation. Once the evaluation has begun, recipients should not make major changes to the intervention materials to avoid negatively impacting the evaluation.

e. Collaborate with Partners and Maintain Organizational Capacity

We expect recipients to use partnerships to fulfill capacity needs and successfully complete the project. Recipients and key partners should have the collective expertise necessary to successfully accomplish the goals and objectives for the overall project. We expect recipients will engage key partners in the project and maintain a collaborative environment. Each recipient is responsible for ensuring all partners meet the project expectations successfully and fulfill their roles. Recipients should assess the professional development needs of project staff on a regular basis and ensure that staff have the training needed to complete their roles in the project. We expect recipients to collaborate, coordinate, and share information with other OPA recipients, as appropriate, to prevent unnecessary duplication of activities, and ensure sharing and best use of available resources across funded projects.

f. Engage Participants in Ongoing Project Planning and Implementation

We expect recipients to engage the intended population in planning and implementing the project. Members of the intended population should provide ongoing input into the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the intervention to ensure that the project addresses their needs, fills existing gaps, does not duplicate programs or services already available, and is a good fit for the population, setting, or community(ies). Members of the intended population should also provide feedback to ensure that the intervention is relevant and likely to resonate with their peers. Finally, recipients should consult members of the intended population when developing messaging about project findings and branding or packaging intervention materials for dissemination.

g. Monitor and Improve the Project

We expect recipients to monitor the overall project and, make ongoing improvements to the project based on key findings. This could include improvements to either the evaluation or implementation procedures, for example.

We expect recipients to conduct an implementation evaluation designed to answer questions about intervention delivery during the study. At a minimum, we expect the implementation evaluation to address dosage, fidelity, quality, context, and counterfactual experience (Office of Adolescent Health, 2017). We expect recipients to conduct periodic monitoring of the programs and services offered within study sites and communities by other organizations to ensure that the project does not duplicate other services, and that the study clearly accounts for the experiences of the comparison group. In addition, recipients must monitor the progress of participant enrollment, consent, and retention within the study as described in the rigorous evaluation expectations (Section A.2.b).

The monitoring process must include performance measures specific for the awarded project. In addition, recipients must collect uniform performance measures and report to us on a semi-annual basis. Section I.6 includes a list of the draft measures (OMB #0990-0348 Expiration Date: August 2023, pending renewal). We will provide final measures for the TPP 2023 cohort during the first 6 months of the project. Recipients are required to obtain and document any necessary permissions to collect these data. Documentation may include formal agreements with partners (MOAs), consent forms from parent/guardians, copies of school district approvals, citation to state law, etc. to collect these data. Recipients may be required to provide the supporting documentation for review, on request. Recipients have the responsibility to ensure they have appropriate permissions to collect all required performance measure data prior to collecting the data. There are no exceptions or waivers for this requirement.

While implementing and evaluating some non-curricular approaches, such as technological innovations, systems-level, and community-level approaches, you may find that some OPA measures or constructs (e.g., such as dosage, fidelity, and quality) are not relevant to your intervention. If you identify a need to change a measure, you would need prior approval from OPA to use alternate or proxy measures for dosage, fidelity, and/or quality. We expect recipients to develop the measures that future implementors of the intervention could use to monitor fidelity, quality, and dosage, and include those in their final program package (Section A.2.h.).

There are no exceptions or waivers for this requirement.

We expect recipients to determine whether the intervention implementation occurred as originally intended in the approved project. We expect recipients to monitor the dosage of the intervention participants receive. We expect recipients to establish and implement a fidelity monitoring process for the intervention. The process should include, at a minimum, collection of data on fidelity and quality of implementation, reviewing and analyzing the data on a regular basis, and using the data to make continuous quality improvements to the implementation of the intervention. We expect recipients to collect qualitative contextual data relevant to the environment in which the intervention is being developed. Recipients should observe a minimum of 10% of all intervention sessions and 100% of intervention facilitators for fidelity and quality on an annual basis.

Recipients implementing and evaluating some non-curricular approaches, such as technological innovations, systems-level, and community-level approaches, may find that some OPA measures or constructs (such as dosage, fidelity, and quality) are not relevant to their intervention. If a recipient identifies a need to change a measure, we require prior approval to use alternate or proxy measures for dosage, fidelity, and/or quality. Recipients must develop the measures that future implementors of the intervention could use to monitor fidelity, quality, and dosage, and include those in their final program package (Section A.2.h.).

h. Document and Package the Intervention

By the end of Year 5, successful projects should have documented the evaluated intervention with sufficient detail so that other organizations may replicate the intervention to scale.

Recipients should provide us with a complete electronic package of the final implementation-ready intervention by the end of the project (see Section F.9 regarding intellectual property rights). Implementation-ready interventions must include all the necessary components that will allow someone other than the original developer to implement the intervention. To be implementation-ready, an intervention package must include clearly defined program materials and core components, define all necessary staff supports and training needed for implementors, and specify guidelines and tools for monitoring implementation fidelity and quality (see Section A.2.g). We will provide guidance to recipients during the first six months of the awards.

We expect recipients to articulate the core components of the intervention(s) they are evaluating.

Articulating the components of the intervention will help fill knowledge gaps about what makes an intervention effective and which components drive successful programming. We strongly encourage recipients to test the core components as part of the rigorous impact evaluation described previously (Section A.2.b). We will provide all recipients with a TPP components checklist and instructions during the first six months of the award, and recipients must use the checklist to describe the components of their interventions at the end of the planning period. To complete the components checklist, recipients will describe the intended content of the intervention, the delivery mechanism and format, the staff delivering the content, the dosage of the intervention, the location for implementation, and features of the group intended to receive the intervention. Additional information about the core components checklist and expectations may be found within the resources section of the NOFO (Section I, Resources, Core Components).

Recipients must update the checklist at the end of the project. We expect recipients and their partners to develop a plan for distributing the intervention to others who might be interested in replicating it in the future; this plan should account for any training needed.

i. Disseminate Project Results

We expect recipients to develop and implement a plan for widely disseminating the results of the evaluation, including implementation evaluation results, impact evaluation results, lessons learned, successes, and challenges. We expect recipients to write a final evaluation report summarizing the key findings and lessons learned from their projects. The final evaluation report should be in the format of a journal article for a journal of the recipient’s choice. We expect recipients to disseminate their evaluation findings and lessons learned through presentations at professional conferences.

In addition to the traditional methods of dissemination, we expect recipients to work with us to share findings broadly with key project partners, community members, youth-serving professionals, researchers, other OPA recipients, the public, and policymakers.

We expect the dissemination plan will include publication of at least one article in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at professional conferences. When published, the article should be freely, immediately, and equitably accessible to the public. In addition to disseminating information about the evaluation results, we expect recipients to develop a plan for disseminating information about the intervention to organizations who may want to replicate the intervention in the future.

3. Federal Agency Substantial Involvement

Recipients will receive funding under a cooperative agreement. A cooperative agreement is a form of assistance that allows for substantial involvement by federal agency. Additional details of the substantial involvement for awards made under this NOFO are described in Section B.3.

B. Federal Award Information

1. Legal Authority

Division H, Title II of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Public Law No. 117-328)

2. Award Information

We intend to make funds available for competing CA (Cooperative Agreement) awards.

We will fund awards in annual increments and generally for a period of performance up to 5 year(s), although we may approve shorter periods of performance. Budget periods may also vary from the estimate indicated below due to timing of award issuance or other administrative factors.

Recipients will be required to submit a non-competing continuation application for each budget period after the first. Funding for all approved budget periods beyond the first is generally level with the initial award amount and is contingent upon the availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the project, adequate stewardship of Federal funds, and the best interests of the Government.

We anticipate offering a competing continuation for an additional budget period for the purpose of providing funding to support selected recipients in transitioning successful projects to sustainability. Funding available for this addition budget period is not guaranteed at all nor expected to be at the same level of previous budget periods.

Award Information

Estimated Federal Funds Available $11,475,000

Anticipated Number of Awards 16

Award Ceiling (Federal Funds including indirect costs) $1,000,000 per budget period

Award Floor (Federal Funds including indirect costs) $500,000 per budget period

Anticipated Start Date 08/15/2023

Estimated Period of Performance Not to exceed 5 year(s)

Anticipated Initial Budget Period Length 12 months

Type of Award Cooperative Agreement

Type of Application Accepted Electronic via Grants.gov ONLY unless an exemption is granted.

3. Federal Agency Substantial Involvement

Awards made under this NOFO will be cooperative agreements. A cooperative agreement is a form of assistance that allows for substantial involvement by the program office. Substantial involvement is in addition to the usual monitoring and technical assistance provided under a grant (e.g., assistance from the assigned Federal project officer, monthly conference calls, occasional site visits, ongoing review of plans and progress, participation in relevant meetings, provision of training and technical assistance). Substantial programmatic involvement for cooperative agreements under this NOFO may include:

Approving key personnel changes, including the project director/principal investigator and lead evaluator, or others identified as essential in the proposal.

Reviewing and approving of program materials prior to use in the project to ensure the materials are medically accurate, age appropriate, complete, culturally and linguistically appropriate, trauma-informed, user-centered, and inclusive of all youth, Reviewing progress at planning period milestones and providing approval to move forward, Advising on the evaluation design plan and, survey instruments prior to initiating the evaluation, Advising on the evaluation analysis plans prior to implementation, Advising on and acceptance of final evaluation report.

C. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants

Any public or private (profit or nonprofit) entity located in a State (which includes one of the 50 United States, District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, Republic of Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands) is eligible to apply for an award under this announcement.

Faith-based organizations and American Indian/Alaskan Native/Native American (AI/AN/NA) organizations that are public or private entities are eligible to apply. Public or private community-based organizations are eligible to apply.

Examples of eligible Organizations include:

State governments

County governments

City or township governments

Special district governments

Independent school districts

Public and State controlled institutions of higher education

Native American tribal governments (Federally recognized)

Public housing authorities/Indian housing authorities

Native American tribal organizations (other than Federally recognized tribal governments)

Nonprofits having a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education

Nonprofits without 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education

Private institutions of higher education

For profit organizations other than small businesses

Small businesses

2. Cost Sharing or Matching

You are not required to provide cost sharing or matching in your proposed budget. If you voluntarily include cost sharing in your application, you must include in your budget narrative a non-federal sources justification as described in Section D.3.b.1.t or your application will be disqualified (Section C.4.k). Voluntary cost sharing is not expected for research applications. During the merit review of an application, cost sharing will only be considered in the overall review of the adequacy of the total proposed budget (Federal and non-Federal share) to support the project proposed.

Applications including cost sharing or matching, whether required or voluntary, that result in an award will include the cost sharing or matching commitment on the notice of award at the level proposed in the application. See Section D.3.b.1.s. Any change in the responsibility to provide cost sharing or matching at that level will require prior approval of the grants management officer.

Cost-Sharing or Matching may include any in-kind contributions necessary to the execution of the proposed project (45 C.F.R. § 75.306).

3. Other - Application Responsiveness Criteria

We will review your application to determine whether it meets the responsiveness criteria below.

If your application does not meet the responsiveness criteria, we will disqualify it from the competition; we will not review it beyond the initial screening. The responsiveness criteria are as follows

There are no Other - Application Responsiveness Criteria.

4. Application Disqualification Criteria

If you successfully submit an application, the OASH Grants and Acquisitions Management (GAM) Division will determine whether your application is eligible according to section C.1 Eligible Applicants. If we determine your application fails to meet the criteria described below, we will disqualify it, that is, we will not review it and will give it no further consideration.

a. You must submit your application electronically via https://grants.gov/ (unless an exemption was granted by the grants management officer 2 business days prior to the deadline) by the date and time indicated in Section D.5 of this announcement.

b. If you successfully submit multiple applications from the same organization for the same project, we will only review the last application received by the deadline.

c. You must complete the required forms in the application package: SF-424, SF-424A, SF-LLL, and Project Abstract Summary (Section D.2.a).

d. Your application must be submitted in the English language and must be in terms of U.S. dollars (45 C.F.R. § 75.111(a)).

e. Your Project Narrative section of the application must be double-spaced, on the equivalent of 8 ½ ” x 11” page size, with 1” margins on all sides (top, bottom, left and right) and font size not less than 12 points (Section D.2.a).

f. Your Project Narrative must not exceed 50 pages. The following items do not count toward the Project Narrative page limit: all required forms, including SF-424, SF-424A, SF-LLL, Project Abstract Summary, and Budget Narrative (including budget tables)(Section D.2.a).

g. Your total application (i.e., the Project Narrative plus Appendices) must not exceed 100 pages. The following items do not count toward the Project Narrative page limit: all required forms, including SF-424, SF-424A, SF- LLL, Project Abstract Summary, and Budget Narrative (including budget tables)(Section D.2.a).

h. Your Federal funds request including indirect costs must not be above the maximum indicated in Award Ceiling (Section B.2).

https://grants.gov/

i. Your Federal funds request including indirect costs must not be below the Minimum indicated in Award Floor, if any (Section B.2).

j. Your application must meet the Other - Application Responsiveness Criteria outlined above (Section C.3).

k. If your application includes cost sharing (voluntary or required, Section C.2), you must include in your budget narrative a non-federal sources justification.

D. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Address to Request Application Package

You may obtain an application package electronically by accessing Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/. You can find it by searching on the Assistance Listing (formerly CFDA) number shown on page 1 of this funding opportunity announcement. If you have problems accessing the application or difficulty downloading, contact:

OASH Grants and Acquisitions Management Division

Phone: 240-453-8822

Email: OASH_Grants@hhs.gov

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

a. Application Format

Your application must be prepared using the forms and information provided in the online application package. This includes but is not limited to:

SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance SF-424A Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Project Abstract Summary

We encourage individuals to use their full name (first, middle, last) on the Standard Forms and other documents such as résumés/curricula vitae/biographical sketches to distinguish them for verification in the System for Award Management exclusion records. Delays may result in award processing if full names are not provided.

Only one Project Director/Principal Investigator (PD/PI) will be named on any resulting award.

You should clearly identify the individual in that role in your application. This individual should be the person who will be responsible for the programmatic aspects of the project if an award is made. A placeholder PD/PI is strongly discouraged because this may not present a clear picture for the review. Furthermore, once an award is issued a request for a change in PD/PI requires prior approval of the grants management officer (45 C.F.R. § 75.308(c)(1)(ii-iii)).

The Project Narrative, and total application including appendices, must adhere to the page limit indicated in Application Disqualification Criteria listed in Section C.4. The page limit does not https://www.grants.gov/ mailto:OASH_Grants@hhs.gov include the Budget Narrative (including budget tables), required forms, assurances, and certifications as described in the Application Disqualification Criteria.

You must double-space the Project Narrative pages.

Your application must be submitted in the English language and must be in the terms of U.S.

dollars (45 C.F.R. § 75.111(a))

You should use an easily readable typeface, such as Times New Roman or Arial. You must use 12-point font. You may single-space tables or use alternate fonts but you must ensure the tables are easy to read.

Please do not number pages or include a table of contents. Our grants management system will generate page numbers once your application is complete. If your application exceeds the specified page limits for the Project Narrative or Project Narrative plus Appendices (Section C.4(f)-(g)) when printed on 8.5” X 11” paper as determined by OASH/GAM, the application will not be reviewed further. We recommend you print out your application before submitting electronically to ensure that it is within the page limits and is easy to read.

b. Appendices Format

Your appendices should include any specific documents outlined in Section D.3.c, under the heading “Appendices” in the Application Content section of this announcement. Your documents should be easy to read. You should use the same formatting specified for the Project Narrative.

However, documents such as résumés/curricula vitae, organizational charts, tables, or letters of commitment may use formatting common to those documents, but the pages must be easy to read. All of your appendices must be uploaded as a single, consolidated file in the Attachments section of your Grants.gov application.

c. Project Abstract Summary Format

You must complete the Project Abstract Summary form provided in…