Questions_and_Answers-OFOP0003602.pdf

Questions and Answers for Logistical Support for Citizen Security, counternarcotics, border security, criminal deterrence and Law Enforcement Projects in Honduras

OFOP0003602

Date: September 22, 2026

Question 1:

Per page 15, Proposal Narrative, would INL please consider the maximum 20 page limit to not include the Cover Page and Table of Contents?

INL Response:

Pages excluded - Section D Application and Submission Information, pg. 15

Question 2:

Section E.1 (Technical Evaluation Criteria), Page 23, states that “where technical applications are considered essentially equal, cost may be the determining factor.” Would INL kindly clarify whether this determination is based on the proposal demonstrating the greatest cost-effectiveness, the lowest overall proposed budget, or some other cost criteria?

INL Response:

Per the NOFO - Where technical applications are considered essentially equal, cost may be the determining factor. Applicants should note that these criteria serve as the standard against which all applications will be evaluated and serve to identify the significant matters which applicants should address in their applications. Please carefully read section E.

Question 3:

Section A. Project Description, p. 6. The NOFO states "Project activities and deliverables: Under this project, the grantee will provide comprehensive travel, training, and logistical support to facilitate INL-sponsored activities in Honduras and abroad. Core activities include managing and processing training and travel requests; arranging transportation, lodging, and meals for participants; coordinating venue rentals and event logistics; paying conference or training fees;

and procuring a wide range of goods and services, including materials, supplies, equipment, technology, and other mission-essential resources required to effectively support training, hands-on learning, and operational activities." To assist applicants in developing realistic staffing and cost assumptions, can INL provide historical annual volumes or estimated annual quantities under this requirement, to the extent available, including: (a) training/travel requests and participants; (b) domestic and international trips; (c) operational support requests; (d) training/events; (e) procurement requests; (f) vehicles/motorcycles requiring maintenance; and (g) translation/interpretation requirements? If historical expenditure by major activity category is available, please also provide it.

INL Response:

INL is unable to provide historical volume data or expenditure breakdowns by activity category at this time. Applicants are expected to develop their staffing models, cost assumptions, and operational plans based on their own organizational experience managing similar logistics, travel, and procurement programs in complex international environments. Proposals should demonstrate a realistic and well-justified approach to managing the full scope of activities described in Section A of the NOFO. INL encourages applicants to draw on their prior experience with comparable programs to develop reasonable cost and staffing estimates.

Question 4:

Section A. Project Description, p. 5. In its description of Objective 2, INL states that "The grantee shall support host government operations in areas such as rescues; countering money laundering;

drug, arms, and contraband interdictions; human smuggling investigations; and arrest related to organized transnational crime..." Could INL please confirm that grantee staff members' involvement in law enforcement operations will be limited to pre/post-operation logistics (transport, per diem, equipment staging, etc.)?

INL Response:

Yes. The grantee's role under Objective 2 is strictly limited to logistical, administrative, and operational support functions, such as coordinating transportation, distributing travel advances, arranging lodging, procuring supplies, and managing operational closeouts. Grantee staff are not expected to participate directly in law enforcement operations, tactical activities, or any activities that would place them in a law enforcement role. The grantee's involvement is limited to pre- and post-operation logistics and support coordination, as described in Activities 2.1 through 2.6 of the

NOFO.

Question 5:

Section A. Project Description, Activity 1.1, p. 6. The NOFO requires use of an “established system or software tools” to process and manage requests. Does INL currently use or prefer a particular platform with which the recipient will be expected to integrate, or should applicants propose their own existing request-management solution? Are there specific hosting, cybersecurity, data-storage, or access requirements applicants should account for in their technical and cost proposals?

INL Response:

INL does not mandate a specific platform or software tool for managing training, travel, and procurement requests. Applicants are encouraged to propose their own established system or software solution that best meets the requirements described in Activities 1.1 and 2.1 of the NOFO.

The proposed system must be capable of processing and managing all requests efficiently and must provide the necessary training and technical support to INL users. Applicants should describe their proposed system in their proposal narrative and account for any associated costs in their budget.

Any system used must comply with applicable U.S. Government cybersecurity and data protection requirements.

Question 6:

Section A. Project Description, pp. 6-8 and pp. 8-11. INL supports its description of Objectives 1 and 2 with a detailed set of numbered activities. By contrast, the NOFO provides no corresponding set of activities for Objective 3. Can INL confirm that it did not intend to outline a set of activities under Objective 3?

INL Response:

INL confirms that Objective 3 does not include a corresponding set of numbered sub-activities in the NOFO. The scope of Objective 3, sustaining vehicle and motorcycle maintenance for host government units, is described at the objective level. Applicants should propose their own approach and activities for achieving Objective 3 within their proposal narrative, consistent with the objective description provided in Section A of the NOFO. INL will evaluate proposed approaches under the relevant Technical Evaluation Criteria in Section E.

Question 7:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, p. 15. Please confirm that the 20-page limit indicated for the Proposal Narrative does not include the Cover Page, Table of Contents, Acronym List, or the Executive Summary.

INL Response:

Pages excluded - Section D Application and Submission Information, pg. 15

Question 8:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, pp 15-16. Please confirm the Performance Monitoring Plan, Risk Analysis, and Timeline, following the Templates provided, should be included as Annexes to the Proposal Narrative.

INL Response:

Yes. The Performance Monitoring Plan (Change Map and Illustrative PIRS), Project Risk Analysis, and Timeline are required application documents that should be submitted as separate annexes or attachments to the proposal package.

Question 9:

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.

No. The 3-page limit for the List of Key Personnel applies to the entire document, not per individual. Applicants should include the names, titles, responsibilities, and relevant experience or qualifications of all key personnel involved in the management of the project within a single document not exceeding 3 pages in total.

Question 10:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, Document Formatting, p. 19. The NOFO stipulates that “all Microsoft Word documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font…” For footnotes, 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 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 11:

Section D. Application and Submission Information, Required Application Documents, p.

16; and Section E. Application Review Information, Technical Evaluation Criteria, p. 23.

Section E awards points for a “comprehensive quarterly work plan,” while Section D requires a separate Timeline. Please confirm whether the required Timeline may serve as the quarterly work plan for purposes of the evaluation criteria, or whether applicants should include a separate quarterly work plan within the 20-page Proposal Narrative.

INL Response:

The Timeline and the quarterly work plan serve related but distinct purposes. The Timeline (required under Section D) should outline key milestones, project start-up and closeout, programmatic activities, and monitoring and evaluation activities, and may be presented as a written schedule or GANTT chart. The quarterly work plan referenced in the Technical Evaluation Criteria (Section E) should demonstrate substantive programmatic undertakings within the logistical capacity of the organization on a quarter-by-quarter basis. Applicants may incorporate the quarterly work plan into their Timeline document or include it within the Proposal Narrative.

If combined, applicants should ensure the document clearly addresses both requirements. The Timeline annex does not count toward the 20-page Proposal Narrative limit.

Question 12:

Section E. Application Review Information, Technical Evaluation Criteria, p. 23-24.

The NOFO indicates it will review the Program Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) Plan by the following criteria:

• Narrative explaining how monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for monitoring and evaluation activities (5)

• Table listing by program objectives the output- and outcome-based performance indicators with baselines and (yearly and cumulative) targets; data collection tools; data sources; types of data disaggregation, if applicable; and frequency of monitoring and evaluation (7)

• Includes an external midterm and/or final evaluation or justification for why one is not included (3)

May the applicant include the requested narrative on how M&E will be carried out and by whom, and the information on the external evaluations in the Performance Monitoring Plan Annex (excluded from the 20-page Proposal Narrative page limit) that also includes the Change Map and Illustrative Performance Indicators Reference Sheet?

Please confirm that the table listing the output- and outcome-based performance indicators refers to information that will be included in the Change Map and the Illustrative Performance Indicator Reference Sheet.

INL Response:

Yes. The following M&E content may be included in the Performance Monitoring Plan Annex, which is not subject to the 20-page Proposal Narrative limit:

• Narrative explaining how M&E will be carried out and who is responsible;

• External midterm and/or final evaluation information, or justification for its exclusion;

and

• Indicator table with baselines, targets, data collection tools, sources, disaggregation types, and monitoring frequency.

INL's evaluation committee will review the complete application package, including all annexes, when scoring the M&E criterion.

Yes. The indicator table corresponds directly to the Change Map and Illustrative PIRS. These documents must collectively address all required elements: output- and outcome-based indicators by program objective, baselines, yearly and cumulative targets, data collection tools and sources, disaggregation types, and monitoring frequency.

Question 13:

Section E. Application Review Information, Technical Evaluation Criteria, p. 24. 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 16). If not, please confirm where the policies and procedures should be included, and excluded from the 20-page technical.

INL Response:

PSEA/Do No Harm policies and procedures should be submitted as a separate annex to the application package. They may be attached alongside the Biographical Information of the Applicant Organization or submitted as a standalone annex; either approach is acceptable. These documents are not subject to the 20-page Proposal Narrative limit. Applicants that do not currently have such policies should include an explanation of how they plan to develop them, as noted in the Technical Evaluation Criteria

Question 14:

Section F. Award Administration Information, 3. Program-Specific requirements, State Department Leahy Amendment Vetting Requirements, p. 27. 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 any security-force member or prosecutors who carry weapons who is only coordinating or administering an activity and is not a participant or a recipient of assistance.

INL Response:

Leahy vetting is required for any unit or individual member of a foreign country's security forces who will receive a direct benefit under this award, including training, assistance, or other support.

Individuals who are solely coordinating or administering an activity and are not participants or recipients of assistance under this award are generally not subject to Leahy vetting requirements.

However, the determination of who requires Leahy vetting is made on a case-by-case basis in coordination with the U.S. Embassy and INL program staff. The grantee will be required to work closely with INL/Honduras to verify vetting requirements for all applicable participants prior to their involvement in any project-supported activities, as described in Activity 1.2 of the NOFO.

Question 15:

Appendix C: Applicable Cost Principles, Budget, and Budget Narrative, Section D. Budget Narrative, Category C. Travel and Category H. Other Direct Costs, p. 33 and p. 35. The NOFO states "Participant support costs including stipends, subsistence allowances, travel allowances, registration fees, per diem" should be listed in Category H. Please confirm if participant travel costs, including airfare and ground transportation, should be included in Category H, and please confirm if the same provisions detailed in Category C for direct employee travel also apply to participant travel. If not, please confirm where participant travel costs should be included and which provisions apply to participant travel.

INL Response:

Participant travel costs, including airfare, ground transportation, lodging, and per diem for program participants (i.e., beneficiaries who are not direct employees of the applicant organization) should be included under Category H: Other Direct Costs, as participant support costs. The provisions in Category C (Travel) apply specifically to direct employees of the applicant organization who are in travel status on official business. While the general principles of cost-effectiveness, compliance with the Fly America Act, and adherence to U.S. Department of State per diem rates apply to all travel funded under this award, the specific budget categorization for participant travel is Category H. Applicants should clearly distinguish between staff travel (Category C) and participant travel (Category H) in both their budget and budget narrative.

Question 16:

Appendix C: Applicable Cost Principles, Budget, and Budget Narrative, Section D. Budget Narrative, Category D. Equipment, Category E. Supplies, and Category H. Other Direct Costs, pp. 33-35. The NOFO states "Participant support costs including stipends, subsistence allowances, travel allowances, registration fees, per diem" should be listed in Category H. Please confirm if participant equipment, supplies, and other goods provided for beneficiary costs should be included in Category H. If not, please confirm where participant equipment and supplies costs should be included.

INL Response:

Goods, supplies, and equipment procured specifically for program participants or beneficiaries, rather than for the applicant organization's own operational use, should generally be included under Category H: Other Direct Costs as participant support costs, consistent with 2 CFR 200.

Items procured for the applicant organization's own use to manage and deliver the program should be categorized under Category D (Equipment, for items ≥$10,000 per unit) or Category E (Supplies, for items <$10,000 per unit), as appropriate. Applicants should clearly justify the categorization of all items in their budget narrative and ensure that the categorization is consistent with 2 CFR 200 and the applicable cost principles for their organization type.

Question 17:

Section D, Application and Submission Information (Proposal Narrative: Evidence, pages 15- 16): The NOFO requests applicants to reference evidence from sources such as the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and notes that applicants should consider incorporating research or evaluation components into their proposed approach. Given that the scope of this opportunity is primarily focused on travel coordination, logistics, procurement, operational support, and vehicle maintenance services, can INL please confirm that these evidence and research-related requirements remain applicable and should be addressed in applicants' proposals?

Yes, the evidence and research-related requirements outlined in the Proposal Narrative section of the NOFO remain applicable to this funding opportunity. Applicants should address these requirements to the extent relevant to the proposed scope of work. INL recognizes that this award is primarily focused on logistics, travel coordination, procurement, and operational support;

therefore, applicants should interpret the evidence requirement in the context of demonstrating that their proposed approach is grounded in best practices, lessons learned from similar programs, and evidence of what has worked in comparable operational environments. Applicants are not expected to conduct academic research but should demonstrate an evidence-informed approach to program design and implementation.

Question 18:

Can the Department clarify the expected size, composition, and geographic distribution of the existing INL-donated vehicle and motorcycle fleet that the recipient will support under Objective 3?

INL Response:

Providing information on size and composition of the INL-donated fleet could be considered sensitive information not to be shared with the public at large.

Question 19:

Under Objective 3, the NOFO states that the INL-donated fleet requires ongoing “maintenance, tracking and oversight,” and that the recipient will coordinate vehicle repairs and maintenance.

Please clarify what specific functions “maintenance, tracking and oversight” include (for example preventive maintenance schedules, maintenance records, repair authorization, vendor management, dispatch or availability tracking, and readiness reporting), beyond arranging third-party repairs.

INL Response:

Under Objective 3, the grantee's responsibilities for vehicle and motorcycle maintenance, tracking, and oversight include, but are not limited to: coordinating and scheduling preventive and corrective maintenance with third-party vendors; maintaining accurate maintenance records for all vehicles in the supported fleet; tracking vehicle availability and operational readiness; managing vendor relationships and ensuring quality of repair services; and providing regular reporting to INL on fleet status. The grantee is not expected to perform mechanical repairs directly but is responsible for ensuring that maintenance is coordinated efficiently, documented properly, and that the fleet remains operationally ready in support of INL-funded activities.

Question 20:

Does INL anticipate a dedicated in-country program management structure for this award? If so, please identify any expected core functions or positions (for example Program Manager, Compliance/Grants, Travel/Logistics Manager, Fleet Manager, Procurement, Finance).

INL Response:

INL does not prescribe a specific in-country program management structure for this award.

Applicants are expected to propose a staffing and management structure that is appropriate to the scope, scale, and complexity of the activities described in the NOFO. Proposals should clearly describe the roles, responsibilities, and qualifications of key personnel, including any in-country staff, and demonstrate that the proposed structure is sufficient to effectively manage all activities under Objectives 1, 2, and 3. INL will evaluate the adequacy of the proposed staffing structure under the "Institution's Record and Capacity Rating" and "Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives" criteria in Section E.

Question 21:

For eligibility, please clarify how “demonstrated experience in justice sector reform, law enforcement support, and program management in international or complex operational environments” is applied to this logistics support award. Are these three separate experience requirements, or may relevant INL/USG logistics and law-enforcement support experience satisfy the criterion?

INL Response:

We cannot advise on how to respond to this question. Please rely on the eligibility language included in the NOFO.