Questions and Answers-OFOP0003184.pdf

Questions and Answers for Disrupting TCOs through Evidence Reform

OFOP0003184

Date: August 6, 2026

Question 1:

After reviewing the NOFO, we noted that Section C indicates that public international organizations are not eligible applicants.

INL Response:

PIOs are excluded from applying to INL’s funding opportunities as stated in the NOFO.

PIOs are excluded because INL utilizes the IO-LOA mechanism for PIOs.

Question 2:

Could you kindly confirm that bidders are able to use 10-point Times New Roman font for graphics, charts, graphs, and tables?

No. The NOFO requires all Microsoft Word documents to use 12-point Times New Roman font and does not provide an exception for graphics, charts, graphs, or tables. Applicants should therefore apply the 12-point requirement throughout the proposal. See Section D Application and Submission Information, pg. 14

Question 3:

The Proposal Narrative has a maximum of 20 pages but requires a cover page and TOC. Please confirm that the cover and TOC are excluded from this 20-page limit.

INL Response:

Pages excluded - Section D Application and Submission Information, pg. 10

Question 4:

Does INL expect the proposed evidence management solution to integrate with the Honduran National Automated Case Management Information System (or other existing OAG case management platforms), and if so, what level of integration is anticipated and what technical specifications can be provided for incorporation into a response?

The only integration to OAG's system and not to HNP system - Section A, Participants and Audiences, pg. 6

Question 5:

Beyond HNP, OAG, and INL personnel, are there any external partners, advisors, or technical assistance providers that applicants should anticipate coordinating with during project implementation, and what role are those entities expected to play?

INL Response:

The NOFO does not identify any mandatory external partners or technical assistance providers beyond INL, HNP, and OAG. Applicants may propose qualified partners, subrecipients, or technical experts as needed, with clearly defined roles. Any additional coordination will be determined through the stakeholder engagement process and in consultation with INL and institutional counterparts. - Section A, Participants and Audiences, pg. 6

Question 6:

Does INL anticipate any restrictions or requirements regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, or large language model (LLM) technologies within project-supported digital tools, evidence management systems, analytics platforms, or reporting solutions? If such technologies may be used, are there specific security, privacy, data governance, or approval requirements that applicants should consider in their proposed technical approach?

INL Response:

Any proposed AI-enabled solution will be subject to INL and partner-institution review and approval before implementation. - Section A, Project Activities and Deliverables, pp 5-6

Question 7:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, p. 10. Please confirm that the 20-page limit indicated for the Proposal Narrative does not include the Cover Page, Table of Contents, or the Executive Summary. Pages excluded

Question 8:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, p. 10. Would INL allow for an Acronym List to be included in the Proposal Narrative and that it be excluded from the 20-page limit? Yes, allowed.

Question 9:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, pp 10-11. Please confirm the Performance Monitoring Plan, Risk Analysis, and Timeline should be included as Annexes to the Proposal Narrative. Yes. It should be included.

Question 10:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, Performance Monitoring Plan, pp. 10-

11. The NOFO requires an “Illustrative Performance Indicator Reference Sheet.” Would INL please clarify what it means by illustrative in this instance? Illustrative, as in an example. It will serve as a guide to demonstrate the format, quality, and types of metrics the applicant will track.

Illustrative, as in an example.

INL Response:

It will serve as a guide to demonstrate the format, quality, and types of metrics the applicant will track.

Question 11:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, Organization, Staff, and Partners, p.

11. Please confirm that the List of Key Personnel is a maximum of 3 pages per person.

(Confirmed)

Question 12:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, Document Formatting, p. 14. The NOFO stipulates that “all Microsoft Word documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font…” For tables, textboxes, and graphics, would INL accept a smaller font as long as it is legible?

INL Response:

No. The NOFO requires all Microsoft Word documents to use 12-point Times New Roman font.

Question 13:

Section E. Application Review Information, Technical Evaluation Criteria, p. 19. The NOFO indicates as a review criterion “Applicant submits copies of organization-wide policies and procedures on Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA)/Do No Harm or explanations of how the applicant plans to develop such policies and procedures.” Please confirm such policies and procedures should be included as Annexes to the Biographical Information of Applicant Organization (see Section D. Application and Submission Information, page 11). If not, please confirm where the policies and procedures should be included.

Yes, include as Annexes to the Biographical Information of Applicant Organization.

Question 14:

Section F. Award Administration Information, 3. Program-Specific requirements, State Department Leahy Amendment Vetting Requirements, pp. 21-22. The NOFO states “The Department implements the Leahy requirement by vetting units or individuals proposed for training or other assistance to check for credible information of a gross violation of human rights by such units or individuals.” Understanding that individual training beneficiaries require Leahy Vetting, please confirm whether Leahy Vetting will be required for a unit leader to coordinate activities.

Yes, Leahy Vetting will be required for a unit leader to coordinate activities.

Question 15:

Does INL have a preliminary list of identified pilot sites (prosecutor's offices or police units), or is site selection entirely at the applicant's discretion?

INL Response:

Site selection entirely at the applicant's discretion. INL has not provided a preliminary list of pilot sites. Applicants should propose appropriate OAG based on their technical approach, assessment methodology, feasibility, and available resources. However, final site selection will be subject to INL approval.

Question 16:

Should the digital evidence inventory and tracking system be a solution developed from scratch under the project, or does INL anticipate the adaptation of an existing system already in use within the Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público) or the National Police (Policía Nacional)?

INL Response:

Adaptation to an existing System. INL anticipates the adaptation or configuration of an existing, proven system rather than the development of an entirely new platform from scratch. The NOFO does not identify a specific existing institutional platform that applicants must use. The proposed solution must be configurable to Honduran operational requirements and capable of integration with the OAG case management system.

Question 17:

Should the digital evidence inventory and tracking system be a solution developed from scratch under the project, or does INL anticipate the adaptation of an existing system already in use within the Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público) or the National Police (Policía Nacional)?

What commitments have the Public Prosecutor's Office and the National Police made regarding access to facilities and records, staff assignment, participation in assessments and inventories, and coverage of operating costs after the project ends? Will INL facilitate the formalization of agreements with these institutions, or will this be the awardee's responsibility?

INL Response:

Please note INL will facilitate the formalization of agreements with the OAG's and not to HNP system. The NOFO establishes the expectation that OAG and HNP leadership will facilitate access to facilities and relevant information, assign qualified personnel, participate in assessments and inventories, approve protocols, and support institutional ownership.

The awardee should plan to coordinate any HNP-specific agreements, with INL and Post engagement as appropriate. Sustainability planning must address the institutional resources, budget lines, staffing, system administration, and maintenance required after the award ends.

Question 18:

Does INL or the Government of Honduras have prior assessments, backlog estimates for evidence management, facility inventories, process maps, or other technical assistance products that will be made available to the selected awardee?

INL Response:

No, Applicants should plan to conduct the required baseline assessments, institutional mapping, facility reviews, quantified inventories, backlog analyses, and process mapping as part of the project.

Question 19:

Are there a recommended maximum number of sub-recipient organizations within a single consortium?

INL Response:

No, The NOFO does not establish a maximum number of subrecipients. Applicants should ensure that the consortium remains manageable and that each partner has a clearly defined, necessary, and non-duplicative role. The lead applicant remains responsible for overall performance and subrecipient oversight.

Question 20:

Is it possible to include more than one specialized foreign sub-recipient (for example, an international forensic laboratory) without this negatively affecting the "institutional capacity" evaluation criterion?

INL Response:

Yes. Including more than one specialized foreign subrecipient will not, by itself, negatively affect the evaluation. The proposal will be evaluated on whether the partners’ qualifications are appropriate, responsibilities are clearly delineated, management arrangements are credible, and the consortium structure is cost-effective.

Question 21:

Does the 15% indirect cost cap under the De Minimis rate apply independently to each sub-recipient, or only to the lead applicant's budget?

INL Response:

The rate is applied separately by each eligible organization; it is not a single consortium-wide cap. The lead applicant may apply its approved indirect-cost methodology to its own eligible cost base. Each subrecipient may separately use its approved NICRA or, if eligible under 2 CFR 200.414(f), elect the de minimis rate for its own MTDC base. Each organization’s indirect costs must be separately calculated, justified, and reflected in its respective detailed budget. Federal guidance expressly addresses the de minimis election by both recipients and subrecipients.

Question 22:

Regarding the first $50,000 of each subaward that is included within the Modified Total Direct Costs (MTDC), is this calculated per individual sub-recipient, or cumulatively across all sub-recipients in the consortium?

INL Response:

It is calculated separately for each individual subaward. The prime applicant may include up to the first $50,000 of each subaward in its MTDC base, regardless of the subaward’s period of performance. The portion of each individual subaward exceeding $50,000 is excluded from the prime applicant’s MTDC calculation.

Question 23:

Is there a specific mechanism or legal instrument (e.g., donation agreement, loan-for-use agreement, asset transfer) that INL expects to be used to formalize the handover of equipment to

Honduran institutions? Who retains title to the equipment during and after the project's period of performance?

INL Response:

The NOFO does not prescribe a specific transfer mechanism. Applicants should anticipate preparing formal equipment handover or asset-transfer records approved by INL and the receiving Honduran institution.

Under the general federal property rules, title to equipment normally vests conditionally in the recipient or subrecipient upon acquisition, subject to the award terms and federal interest. Final transfer, retention, or disposition will be governed by the signed award, the approved property-management arrangements, 2 CFR 200.313, and instructions from the INL Grants Officer.

Applicants should not assume that title automatically transfers to a Honduran institution upon purchase or project closeout.

Question 24:

How do the certifications under the PHFFA policy (2 CFR 602-604) apply when the project is implemented in Honduras, with Honduran staff and institutions, rather than on U.S. territory?

INL Response:

The PHFFA requirements apply because the project is financed with Department of State foreign-assistance funding. Their applicability is not limited to activities conducted within the United States and does not depend on the nationality of project personnel.

The applicable award terms will be incorporated into the award and must be implemented at the organizational level. The recipient will be responsible for reviewing the final award terms, training relevant personnel, maintaining appropriate records and controls, monitoring compliance, and incorporating the applicable requirements into subawards.

Question 25:

Which specific office of the U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa should receive the information required for Leahy vetting, and how far in advance should this process begin once National Police personnel participating in the project have been identified?

INL Response:

The NOFO does not identify a specific Embassy office or email address. The selected recipient should submit the information through the INL Section’s designated Leahy-vetting point of contact at U.S. Embassy Tegucigalpa. INL will provide the official submission channel and required format after award.

Complete participant information must be submitted at least 60 calendar days before the individual or unit receives training or other assistance under the award. Applicants should incorporate this lead time into participant selection and activity planning.

Question 26:

What is the estimated date by which INL will notify the selected applicant of the evaluation outcome?

INL Response:

INL does not have a confirmed notification date at this time. Successful applicants will be notified after completion of the technical review, management approval, risk review, and Grants Officer approval. Unsuccessful applicants will generally be notified after the award has been issued to the successful applicant, and the overall process may take several months.

Question 27:

Taking that notification date into account, is October 2026 still a realistic project start date, or should the selected applicant plan for a later start?

INL Response:

October 2026 may remain possible, but it should be treated as an estimated target rather than a guaranteed start date. Applicants should maintain sufficient flexibility to accommodate a later start based on the completion of the review, negotiation, and award process.

The recipient may not incur project expenses until the effective start date contained in the award document signed by the Grants Officer.

Question 28:

Does INL expect or require the recipient to have a Honduran partner organization or subrecipient? If so, must that organization be formally identified at the time of proposal submission?

INL Response:

No. A Honduran partner or subrecipient is not an eligibility requirement. If the applicant proposes a Honduran partner or any other subrecipient, the organization should be identified in the application, and its qualifications, responsibilities, division of labor, and proposed budget should be clearly described. A proposed subrecipient does not need a UEI at the time of application, but it must obtain one before receiving subaward funding.

Question 29:

Is a Honduran legal entity or business registration required for either the prime applicant or any proposed subrecipient at the time of award or during project implementation?

The NOFO does not establish Honduran business registration as a condition of eligibility or award. However, the applicant must disclose whether it is registered as a business entity in Honduras or the target region.

Question 30:

The recipient and its subrecipients will remain responsible for complying with applicable Honduran legal, tax, labor, immigration, licensing, and operational requirements during implementation. The prime applicant must also maintain the federal registrations required by the

NOFO.

INL Response:

The recipient and its subrecipients will remain responsible for complying with applicable Honduran legal, tax, labor, immigration, licensing, and operational requirements during implementation. The prime applicant must also maintain the federal registrations required by the

NOFO.

Question 31:

What digital case management and evidence management systems are currently used by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) and Honduran National Police (HNP), and what interfaces or interoperability requirements should applicants anticipate?

INL Response:

The NOFO does not identify the names, vendors, technical architecture, APIs, data standards, or other specifications of the systems currently used by the OAG. Applicants should propose a technical discovery and institutional-assessment process to document existing systems and workflows. Integration with the OAG case management system is required.

Question 32:

Does INL encourage the use of commercially available evidence management platforms, provided they can be configured to meet Honduran operational requirements, or is custom software development anticipated?

Applicants may propose a commercially available or otherwise existing evidence-management platform, provided it can be securely configured and adapted to Honduran operational, legal, language, chain-of-custody, reporting, and sustainability.

Question 33:

Approximately how many OAG and HNP pilot sites are anticipated under the initial award?

INL Response:

Final pilot-site selection and the number of sites will be coordinated with the relevant institutions and will be subject to INL approval.

The NOFO does not specify a minimum, maximum, or estimated number of pilot sites.

Applicants should propose a realistic number based on the available budget, implementation period, institutional readiness, geographic considerations, system-deployment costs, and the need to demonstrate a replicable model.

Question 34:

Is integration with the existing OAG case management system required during the base period, or is a phased integration acceptable?

INL Response:

Integration with the existing OAG case-management system is a required project deliverable. A phased approach is acceptable, provided the proposal presents clear milestones for technical assessment, system configuration, interoperability design, testing, deployment, user acceptance, and completion of the required integration during the period of performance.

The proposed sequencing will be subject to review and approval through the project work plan and digital implementation plan.