Questions for Supporting U.S. Cybersecurity Capacity-Building for ASEAN Countries NOFO Pt 2.docx

Questions for Supporting U.S. Cybersecurity Capacity-Building for ASEAN Countries NOFO Part 2

1. In Section A2 (“Program Goals”) of the NOFO, Objective 2.3 states, “Outline and execute the strategic plan to assist the United States in organizing and implementing expanded U.S.-Singapore collaborative cybersecurity capacity-building efforts…”. The NOFO captures the activities required to outline the strategic plan, but can you elaborate on the scope of work involved to execute the strategic plan?

The applicant is free to propose the execution of the strategic plan in the manner that best accomplishes the goals laid out in the plan. The SOW will be finalized in the negotiation phase of the award, but it is up to the applicant to propose that execution.

2. For costing purposes, can you please provide the estimated number of ad hoc programs and the estimated number of countries with CERTs that the awardee is expected to evaluate?

Per the NOFO: “…[C]onduct a robust evaluation for each training and the cooperative agreement overall, ensuring that the findings from each training can be incorporated into future trainings, to improve the success of following iterations.” Each training and the overall CA will need to be evaluated, but it is up to the applicant to specify the number and form thereof.

3. Can you provide further clarity on the type of support the implementing partner is supposed to provide to satisfy what is expected in Part 1 of the NOFO?

a. Does providing “logistical and event support for the delivery of a series of trainings designed to provide a holistic and rigorous program to raise cybersecurity capability and maturity levels for Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states” imply that the awardee provides strategic engagement and logistical support to other existing trainings funded under the CTAP, TCTP, and ASCCEE?

b. Or rather, does this mean the implementing partner will be responsible for designing and administering trainings on behalf of CTAP, TCTP, and ASCCEE, meaning there are no additional trainings underway?

The applicant is responsible for the logistical support only for those projects and events proposed as part of Part 1 of the cooperative agreement.

4. Can the training be online without any in-person meetings? That Is without any travel?

The applicant is free to propose whatever format they see fit and think would best serve the participants and accomplish program goals.

5. For in-person training -- is there any preference which countries/cities to hold the training?

The grantor does not have any preference. The applicant is free to propose whatever locations they think best.

6. Which are the ESF-eligible Southeast Asian countries to include new training under the umbrella of the ASCCE.?

· Cambodia

· Indonesia

· Laos

· Malaysia

· Myanmar (May require further review)

· The Philippines

· Thailand

· Vietnam

7. Are we required to meet in person in Singapore (with the U.S. Embassy Singapore personnel and other partners)?

The applicant is free to propose whatever format they see fit.

8. Are we required to meet in person with the Department of State? If yes, in Washington, D.C.?

The applicant is free to propose whatever format they see fit.

9. May we suggest in-person meetings in the USA (with the Singapore Partners)?

The applicant may propose whatever format they see fit. However, if proposing in-person meetings, applicants should be cognizant that some invitees may not be able to travel for proposed meetings.

10. May I assume that the 8 ASEAN member-countries with at least one participant represented in training are the following: Brunei, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Only the ESF-eligible countries may benefit from this funding. Please refer to question 6.

11. May I exclude Cambodia and Myanmar as participants for this project?

The applicant may choose to include whichever ESF-eligible countries they see fit.