TPP23 Tier1 QA_All - Updated 03092023-FINAL.pdf

Updated March 20, 2023

HHS Office of Population Affairs Web: opa.hhs.gov | Email: opa@hhs.gov Twitter: @HHSPopAffairs | YouTube: HHSOfficeofPopulationAffairs

Advancing Equity in Adolescent Health through Replication of Evidence-based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs and Services

AH-TP1-23-001

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

file://ct-files/g-drive/Fertility%20and%20Family%20Structure/OPA%20Communications/Option%20Year%202/1-%20Strategic%20Communications/1.8%20Graphic%20Design/opa.hhs.gov

Contents Questions & Answers Issued March 9, 2023

General Programmatic

Questions & Answers Issued March 2, 2023 General Programmatic Budget

Questions & Answers Updated February 23, 2023 General Programmatic Budget

Questions & Answers | NOFO TA Webinar held February 21, 2023 General Programmatic Budget

Questions & Answers | Updated February 14, 2023 General Programmatic Budget

Questions & Answers Issued March 9, 2023

General

1. Per NOFO page 21, I would like to confirm that the resumes can have a .50 margin? All resumes provided by staff are coming in at .40 to .60 margins, and font is typically 10 pt. Similarly, the accountant uses a budget detail document with .50 margins and 10 pt font. Here is what I found on page 22 of the NOFO:

Budget tables may be single-spaced but should be laid out in an easily-readable format and within the printable margins of the page.

Correct, while the project narrative must have 1” margins and font size not less than 12 points (p. 20), these same requirements do not apply to resumes and budget tables.”

Please note that on page 21 under Section D.2.b. - Appendices Format, the NOFO states appendix items “should be easy to read. You should use the same formatting specified for the Project Narrative. However, documents such as resumes/curricula vitae, organizational charts, tables, or letters of commitment may use formatting common to those documents, but the pages must be easy to read.” Also, on page 22 of the NOFO under Section D.2.d. - Budget Narrative Format, the NOFO states that the budget narrative should follow the same formatting required of the Project Narrative for the explanatory text. However, “budget tables may be single-spaced but should be laid out in an easily-readable format and within the printable margins of the page.”

2. I am a student of a higher institution in Brunei Darussalam and I am not living in

America, is it possible for me to apply for this grant?

Grants are awarded to organizations rather than individuals. An application may be submitted by an individual authorized to act/sign for an organization and to assume the obligations imposed by the grant and any additional conditions of the grant. However, the award will not go directly to an individual but to the organization which the individual represents.

In addition, entities not 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) are not eligible to apply.

Please refer to page 18 of the NOFO for a listing of eligible applicants.

Programmatic

1. The link to the CDC Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2019 on p. 23 does not function. We have found various STI data on CDC's website, but none of that data is by age or gender. We would appreciate being directed to where we can find the data necessary to complete the STI table on p. 23 to demonstrate that the rate of at least one STI in our service area (or state) exceeds the threshold.

We apologize for the faulty link on page 23 for the CDC’s STD Surveillance data.

Please reference this link instead: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf

2. How does this grant distinguish a settlement center from a community-based organization for the purposes of determining types of settings served?

The NOFO does not make the distinction between a settlement center from a community-based organization. However, per the NOFO on page 9, “Recipients may include other settings if you demonstrate that such settings serve youth with the greatest disparities in the identified community(ies).”

On page 24, the NOFO instructs applicants to clearly, “Describe plans to implement in three or more settings, including specifying where you will implement EBPs, clearly demonstrating implementing in at least 3 unique settings. Demonstrate how the settings clearly align with the need of the focus population and the various physical and social environments where youth live, learn, work, play, and worship.”

As a reminder, applicants are encouraged to carefully review the NOFO and should put forward the best proposal the organization can create based on application and evaluation criteria published in the announcement.

3. I have a client that is interested in utilizing an evidence-informed curricula that was developed with tribal participation for the work they plan to do in tribal https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf communities—but we are not seeing it on the list of EBPs referenced in the Tier 1 TPP NOFO. Before proceeding, can you clarify whether awardees will be allowed to use TPP interventions that are not on the list of EBPs (i.e. TPPER)? If yes, can you clarify whether that would only be allowed if one or more of the approved EBPs also are employed?

Recipients are not required to solely implement EBPs identified by HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER). EBPs eligible for replication are those that meet the criteria listed on page 10 of the NOFO. Selected EBPs must meet the first two bullets. However, as the 3rd bullet notes, “recipients may also implement EBPs that demonstrate impact on non-sexual behavioral risk factors underlying teenage pregnancy. If replicating such a program, the recipient must clearly demonstrate how the outcomes are related to preventing teen pregnancy and address the needs of the community and population of focus.” Finally, as a reminder, you are not required to have finalized selection of EBPs in your application. (p. 24)

Questions & Answers Issued March 2, 2023

1. On page 20 of the solicitation, it states:

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).

I’m wondering if the repeated language in “g” is in error. Does it really mean that the following items do not count toward the Appendices (instead of Narrative) page limit, all required forms…. I’m asking because later we read that Budget Narrative is a separate file for submission, and not included with the Appendices. And the SF forms are never in the Appendices in grants.gov. Is this the case? If this is the case, and the Narrative has to be less than 50 pages and the Appendices (local model, map, work plan, MOAs, etc.) have to be less than 50 pages, is there a page limit for the budget narrative?

No, it is not an error. The NOFO is stating that your project narrative must not exceed 50 pages and the total application must not exceed 100 pages. For additional clarification, page 21 states, “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 include the Budget Narrative (including budget tables), required forms, assurances, and certifications as described in the Application Disqualification Criteria… 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.” Page 58 also provides a list of application elements required for this funding opportunity. You will see that the required forms, including SF-424, SF-424A, SF-LLL, and Budget Narrative are listed separately from the appendices.

As for a page limit for the budget narrative, none has been specified. Page 29-35 does provide however detailed guidance regarding the budget narrative content.

2. What is the anticipated start date for the NOFO, Advancing Equity in Adolescent Health through Evidence-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs and Services?

Page 17 of the NOFO indicates that the anticipated start date is July 1, 2023.

3. Particularly, I am wondering if this is a single submission opportunity. Can we submit more than one application for this grant if the applications are for two separate projects? I am seeking to clarify the language on page 19 of the application that reads as follows: 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.

Page 19 of the NOFO states, “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.” You may submit more than one application if each is for a different project.

4. On page 36 it states that the work plan should cover all years of the period of performance. Can you clarify if the period of performance should just cover 1 year or if we should include plans for the anticipated 5 years?

As you noted, page 36 of the NOFO state, “Include a detailed work plan that reflects, and is consistent with, the Project Narrative and Budget Narrative, and covers all years of the period of performance.” Page 17 of the NOFO clarifies that the estimated period of performance is not to exceed five years, therefore the detailed work plan should cover all 5 years of the period of performance. Consider the following from the NOFO (p. 29):

For awards with an anticipated period of performance of one year or less, this will be the budget request for the entire project. Provide a budget justification, which includes explanatory text and line-item detail, for the entire first year of the proposed project. . . . For subsequent budget years in an anticipated multi-year project, provide a summary narrative and line-item budget for each year beyond the first. For categories or items that differ significantly from the first budget year, provide a detailed justification explaining these changes. Do not include costs beyond the first budget period in the object class budget in box 6 of the SF424A or box 18 of the SF-424; the amounts entered in these sections should only reflect the first budget period.

5. I am attempting to apply to the NOFO (AH-TP1-23-001) - on Grants.gov. However, when I log into my account - the "Apply" button is not enabled. I will also need access to create a Workspace - as I am the Executive Director for the 501c3 agency applying.

Please contact Grants.gov directly for any issues with their system. Below is the contact information for Grants.gov:

• Email: support@grants.gov

• Telephone: 800-518-4726

6. What is the minimum and maximum amount of effort required of the Project

Manager?

The NOFO does not have a requirement for level of effort for any staff position including a Project Manager. An applicant should, “describe the composition of the project team, to include the roles and responsibilities of all staff and how they will contribute to achieving the project’s objectives and activities. Describe who will have day-to-day responsibility for key tasks including, but not limited to, leadership of the overall program and of specific tasks, monitoring the program’s progress, monitoring implementation partners, collection of performance measures, and preparation of reports” (p. 28).

Section D.3.b - Budget Narrative Content (p.29-35) also provides guidance on what information to include as it relates to personnel and staffing.

6. To clarify, when you say that we can use “alternate fonts” in tables, is it correct to assume that alternate fonts refers to both (smaller) font size (as long as the table is easy to read) in addition to font type?

Yes. As noted on page 21, “You may single-space tables or use alternate fonts but you must ensure the tables are easy to read.”

Programmatic

1. Are communities required to have teen birth rates (TBR) and STI rates that are higher than the national average? Our region meets TBR requirements, but not STI. Are there exceptions for needing both TBR AND STI rates to be eligible to apply?

Successful applications will provide current data on the community and population of focus within the defined geographic area(s) through various means that will clearly demonstrate your understanding of where the greatest need is, what the specific needs and resources are, who the key stakeholders are, and the relationship between all these components that may be driving disparities within the community(ies) (p.22). Applicants also need to “Demonstrate the need of the population related to sexual and reproductive health and positive youth development. Include any community context and/or historical factors and illustrate gaps in services that may help understand existing disparities. Also include data that supports the rationale for focusing on this community(ies) and population(s), specifically documenting a teen birth rate that is at least above the current national average (15.4 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 15-19 and 0.2 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 10-14, 2020) and at least one STI rate above the current national average (see CDC Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2019 and table below – Table 1 on page 23) for the population(s) served within the community” (p.23). See Section D.3.a.1 -mailto:support@grants.gov

Focus on Areas of Greatest Need and Disparities (p.22-23) for more information on what should be submitted in your application to address this component.

Federal staff and an independent review panel will assess all eligible applications according to Section E.1 – Criteria (beginning on p.43). Of note related to your question is Section E.1.a - Focus on Areas of Greatest Need and Disparities which outlines the specific review criteria that will be used by Federal staff and an independent review panel to assess your application related to this component.

Since this is a competitive funding announcement, OPA cannot provide input regarding the content of individual grant applications and is therefore unable to answer questions specific to the content of an application. Applicants are encouraged to carefully review the NOFO and should put forward the best proposal the organization can create based on application and evaluation criteria published in the announcement.

2. We have been developing a program to be used to deliver sex education and positive youth development to youth. We have been using a variety of sources to build the program and do not use the lesson as created exactly for each session. We are wondering if we would even be considered for this grant or if we are straying too far from the evidence-based preference and nature of the TPP grant?

Pages 2 and 8 of the NOFO define evidence-based programs as “programs that have been proven effective through rigorous evaluation to reduce teenage pregnancy, behavioral risk factors underlying teenage pregnancy, or other associated risk factors.” EBPs eligible for replication are those that meet the following criteria:

• Study Quality - Meets the criteria for the quality of an evaluation study per the criteria established in the HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER) protocol, version 6.0.

• Evidence of Effectiveness on Sexual Risk Behaviors - At a minimum, one of the identified EBPs to be implemented must demonstrate impact on sexual risk behaviors using the evidence of effectiveness as outlined in the HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER) protocol, version 6.0.

• Evidence of Effectiveness on Behavioral Risk Factors Underlying Teenage Pregnancy or Other Associated Risk Factors - In addition to implementing at least one EBP with evidence of effectiveness on sexual risk behaviors, recipients may also implement EBPs that demonstrate impact on non-sexual behavioral risk factors underlying teenage pregnancy. If replicating such a program, the recipient must clearly demonstrate how the outcomes are related to preventing teen pregnancy and address the needs of the community and population of focus.

Please see Section A.2.c.2 - Eligibility of Programs to be Replicated and Implemented to Scale (p. 10-11) for more information.

As a reminder, as noted on page 24, you are not required to have finalized selection of EBPs in your application but do need to describe the process that you will use to identify and select evidence-based programs (EBPs) that are a good fit for the needs of the community and population of focus you will serve.

Since this is a competitive funding announcement, OPA cannot provide input regarding the content of individual grant applications and is therefore unable to answer questions specific to the content of an application. Applicants are encouraged to carefully review the NOFO and should put forward the best proposal the organization can create based on application and evaluation criteria published in the announcement.

Finally, please see OPA’s two other NOFOs, forecasted to be released this fiscal year, to determine if your proposed project may be better aligned with the goals of either NOFO:

• Teen Pregnancy Prevention Tier 2 Rigorous Evaluation Cooperative Agreements (AH-TP2-23-001) https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=342732

• Adolescent Sexual Health Innovation Hubs (AH-TP2-23-002) https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=342733

3. The NOFO table shows that we need at least 500 youth per year. For one project we are looking at working with system involved youth, especially youth involved in foster care, LGBTQ+ youth, and youth in dyads with parents. Understandably, these youth will be harder to reach and retain. Is there any wiggle room on this number or is it a hard expectation? It seems hard to produce these numbers without using schools which isn’t as strong of a help for advancing equity.

The table included on p.2 and 24 presents the historical annual reach per funding range based on prior TPP awards. The table is provided only as background information. Costs may differ based on various factors such as geographic region, specific focus population of participants, available resources, etc. The information also does not reflect inflation or cost-of-living adjustments that have been made over time. We do not use the information in the Table as the basis for determining funding levels. As a reminder though, OPA also expects that recipients replicate EBPs to scale in 3 or more settings, reaching communities, and youth within those communities, with the greatest need. For this NOFO, settings include, but are not limited to, schools, clinics, community-based organizations, houses of worship, detention centers, and group and residential care programs. We will count each setting listed above separately, considering each as one individual setting (p.9).

4. When we talk about settings, is that total for the project or total for the community?

For instance, we are looking at working in four states. Does each of those states need to use three settings (i.e., all states have programs in schools, CBOs, and health centers) or do we need three settings in total across the states (i.e., CBOs in one community, health centers in another, and schools in the other)?

Recipients are expected to replicate EBPs to scale in 3 or more settings in each defined community. Recipients may serve a single community or multiple communities within their project. Multiple communities could include communities within the same state, communities across states, etc. Recipients should have a defined community(ies), with clear geographic boundaries, in order to ensure that they identify the number of youth that they will serve.

Within the community(ies), recipients should have a clearly identified population of focus (p.6-7).

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=342732 https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=342732 https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=342733

5. Can we please have a specific definition of geography requirements?

The responsibility is on the applicant to describe the community or communities and population(s) of focus including the geographic boundaries used to define each (p.22). Your application will also be assessed on the extent to which you clearly define the geographic boundaries and describe the community or communities and population(s) of focus (p.43).

You should also include, in the appendices, a map of your defined geographic area(s) that you will serve, to include location of the proposed settings where EBP implementation will occur (p.36).

6. Per page 23 of the NOFO, applicants are required to provide birth rates and STI rates for 15–19-year-olds and 10–14-year-olds. The applicants who are our clients define their communities by zip code. The problem with getting birth and STI rates for 10–14-year-olds is that, at the zip code-level, and sometimes even at the city level, the numbers are so small that either there were no births/cases or the state suppresses the numbers, which means there were between 1 and 5 births/cases. That said, do you have any suggestions about how we should respond to the requirement to provide thus data for 10–14-year-olds?

Successful applications will provide current data on the community and population of focus within the defined geographic area(s) through various means that will clearly demonstrate your understanding of where the greatest need is, what the specific needs and resources are, who the key stakeholders are, and the relationship between all these components that may be driving disparities within the community(ies) (p.22). Applicants also need to “Demonstrate the need of the population related to sexual and reproductive health and positive youth development. Include any community context and/or historical factors and illustrate gaps in services that may help understand existing disparities. Also include data that supports the rationale for focusing on this community(ies) and population(s), specifically documenting a teen birth rate that is at least above the current national average (15.4 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 15-19 and 0.2 births for every 1,000 adolescent females ages 10-14, 2020) and at least one STI rate above the current national average (see CDC Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2019 and table below – Table 1 on page 23) for the population(s) served within the community” (p.23) See Section D.3.a.1 - Focus on Areas of Greatest Need and Disparities (p.22-23) for more information on what should be submitted in your application to address this component.

Federal staff and an independent review panel will assess all eligible applications according to Section E.1 – Criteria (beginning on p.43). Of note related to your question is Section E.1.a - Focus on Areas of Greatest Need and Disparities which outlines the specific review criteria that will be used by Federal staff and an independent review panel to assess your application related to this component.

Since this is a competitive funding announcement, OPA cannot provide input regarding the content of individual grant applications and is therefore unable to answer questions specific to the content of an application. Applicants are encouraged to carefully review the NOFO and should put forward the best proposal the organization can create based on application and evaluation criteria published in the announcement.

7. On page 22 of the RFA, applicants are directed to links for determining urban or rural status. The urban link brings us to a page where all of the 2020 designated “urban” municipalities are listed in a spreadsheet. We are asked to provide proof of designation; since it is just a line in an untitled spreadsheet, what should we submit as “proof?”

For the purposes of “urban” designation documentation, you may (for example):

• Cite where the location is available on the document provided by the U.S. Census Bureau (e.g., Row 34 of “A list of all 2020 Census Urban Areas for the U.S., Puerto Rico, and Island Areas sorted by Urban Area Census (UACE) code”.

• Reference your Urban Area Census (UACE) code as provided by the U.S. Census Bureau.

• Provide a screen shot demonstrating the proof

• Other documentation that clearly links your geographic region to the designation identified by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Please be sure any information provided follows the formatting guidance included in the NOFO on Section D.2 - Content and Form of Application Submission (p. 20-22).

8. What does replication mean, exactly?

We refer to implementation of an EBP as “replication” (p.8).

9. Is college or community college considered a setting that is different from the school category? Page 9 of the NOFO defines “school setting” as one setting that encompasses elementary, middle, high schools, charter schools, and alternative schools.

Yes, college and community colleges are considered a different setting from the “school setting.” Applicants should clearly:

• Describe plans to implement in three or more settings, including specifying where you will implement EBPs, clearly demonstrating implementing in at least 3 unique settings. Demonstrate how the settings clearly align with the need of the focus population and the various physical and social environments where youth live, learn, work, play, and worship. (p.24)

As a reminder, applicants are encouraged to carefully review the NOFO and should put forward the best proposal the organization can create based on application and evaluation criteria published in the announcement.

10. Based on pages 8 and 24, is it safe to assume that staff of a youth-serving agency could complete an EBP and be counted in the anticipated count of EBP participant reach? Similarly, if we serve youth ages 16-19 in a justice facility and there are peers in their housing pod who are ages 20-23, could they be counted as other individuals or trusted adults (maybe not trusted adults, but peers who influence their decisions)?

Applicants should describe the community or communities and population(s) of focus including the geographic boundaries used to define each (p. 22). Primary participants to receive programming under an award should be adolescents and youth and, more specifically, projects should focus on serving youth who are at disproportionally affected by unintended teen pregnancies (including rapid repeat pregnancy) and STIs (p. 7). For purposes of this NOFO, OPA is defining adolescents and youth to be individuals between the ages of 10-24. However, applicants may propose also serving parents/caregivers and/or other individuals (e.g., youth-serving professionals) with EBPs. Applicants should describe in their application the following (p.24):

• Anticipated number of youths you will reach each year specifically through implementation of EBPs.

• Anticipated number of parent/caregivers and/or other individuals (e.g., youth-serving professionals) that will receive EBPs each year specifically through the implementation.

• Specific details on how you obtained the estimates for youth, parent/caregivers and other individuals receiving EBPs.

• How those that will receive EBPs aligns with the needs identified in the community.

We also recommend you review Section E.1 - Criteria. There you will find the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications (p.43-46).

11. If an applicant wishes to use the planning period to attempt to reach parents with an EBP, but that plan ends up not coming to fruition, could the planned parent numbers be converted to the grantee serving pregnant or parenting teens or a similar population of focus?

There is no requirement within the NOFO to serve parents/caregivers with evidence-based programs (EBPs). Federal staff and an independent review panel will assess all eligible applications on the “Extent to which the applicant clearly and separately describes the number of youth, parent/caregivers, and/or other individuals that they will reach each year with evidence-based programs in each of the 3 (or more) settings. The applicant includes specific details on how they obtained the estimates. The demographics of the community(ies) selected supports the estimates. Estimates also appear accurate and reasonable to achieve (p. 43).” Please review Section E.1 – Criteria (p.43-46) which outlines all of the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications.

We also expect recipients to engage in activities during the planning period that result in their ability to begin fully executing all expectations of the award. Failure of a recipient to make satisfactory progress toward completion of planning period milestones by the end of the six-month planning period may be deemed poor performance and affect future funding decisions (p.8). Each year of the approved period of performance, you will be required to submit a noncompeting application which includes a progress report for the current budget year, and work plan, budget, and budget justification for the upcoming year. OASH will award continuation funding based on availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the project, grants management compliance, including timely reporting, and continued best interests of the government. Progress is assessed relative to meeting the goals, objectives, and outcomes in the approved, funded project as described in the approved work plan and other supporting documents (p.56).

12. We are using our current data to estimate numbers of youth, parents/caregivers, and community staff with whom we’ll replicate EBPs. Due to the intensity of community involvement during the Planning Period, there may be shift up or down on these numbers. Is it known whether there will be flexibility based on what occurs in the Planning Period in terms of numbers?

You do not have to have the same reach goal each year and we expect that recipient may have a different reach goal in Year 1 due to the up to six-month planning period. We do expect recipients to begin implementing selected EBPs in all identified settings by the end of the planning period (p.7). Failure of a recipient to make satisfactory progress toward completion of planning period milestones by the end of the six-month planning period may be deemed poor performance and affect future funding decisions (p.8).

Applicants should describe in their application the following (p.24):

• Anticipated number of parent/caregivers and/or other individuals (e.g., youth-serving professionals) that will receive EBPs each year specifically through the implementation.

• Specific details on how you obtained the estimates for youth, parent/caregivers and other individuals receiving EBPs.

• How those that will receive EBPs aligns with the needs identified in the community.

Federal staff and an independent review panel will assess all eligible applications on the “Extent to which the applicant clearly and separately describes the number of youth, parent/caregivers, and/or other individuals that they will reach each year with evidence-based programs in each of the 3 (or more) settings. The applicant includes specific details on how they obtained the estimates. The demographics of the community(ies) selected supports the estimates. Estimates also appear accurate and reasonable to achieve (p. 43).”

Please review Section E.1 – Criteria (p.43-46) which outlines all of the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications.

Please be sure to review Section E.1 - Criteria. There you will find the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications (p.43-46).

13. The NOFO states in multiple instances that recipients will be expected to replicate EBPs with “fidelity and quality.” What is the definition of “Quality?”

OPA uses this program observation form to measure the fidelity and quality of implementation of program delivery with current TPP grantees. This form is subject to change and will be provided to grantees with the final performance measures within the first six months of funding.

Budget

1. I am interested in the grant for reproductive prevention and health. Would this grant be able to cover the cost of condoms?

You are not allowed to provide birth control with TPP grant funds. We do expect you to identify, actively engage, collaborate with, and maintain a network of diverse, multisector partners to address the various needs of the community and population of focus while also complementing the implementation of EBPs. Such multi-sector partnerships can offer a continuum of supports to meet the physical, social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs of youth. We expect the partnerships to address the various needs of the community and population of focus while also complementing the implementation of EBPs. We expect this to include, but not be limited to, sexual and reproductive health services and mental health services (p.13-14)

Please be sure to carefully review Section D.7 Funding Restrictions (p.40-41) for specific information regarding allowable, unallowable, and restricted costs. You can also look under the guidance within GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR SELECTED ITEMS OF COST and through the following link: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part- 75/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFR5d90ba314caea08

2. Are indirect costs limited to 8% of MTDC for all applicants even if the applicant’s organization has an approved rate that is higher?

Page 33 of the NOFO indicates that the indirect cost category has one of two methods that you may select. You may only select one and must clearly identify that selection in your submitted budget. These methods are as follows:

• Your organization currently has an indirect cost rate approved by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or another cognizant federal agency. You should enclose a copy of the current approved rate agreement in your Budget Narrative file.

If you request a rate that is less than allowed, your authorized representative must submit a signed acknowledgement that the organization is accepting a lower rate than allowed.

• Per 45 C.F.R. § 75.414 (f) Indirect (F&A) costs, “any non-Federal entity [i.e., applicant] that has never received a negotiated indirect cost rate, … may elect to charge a de minimis rate of 10% of modified total direct costs (MTDC) which may be used indefinitely. As described in § 75.403, costs must be consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs but may not be double charged or inconsistently charged as both. If chosen, this methodology once elected must be used consistently https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frhntc.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fresources%2Fopa_fidelity_program_observ_form_3-17-2022.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CAmanda.Leeson%40hhs.gov%7Ce6e7910c6feb48cfdd0008db1a7b1de1%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638132888303172601%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=JBF0mRRJaI03uhzzfPvRVyaUNbGYLe7WP0g5fuT2YIQ%3D&reserved=0 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFR5d90ba314caea08 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-E/subject-group-ECFR5d90ba314caea08 for all Federal awards until such time as a non-Federal entity chooses to negotiate for a rate, which the non-Federal entity may apply to do at any time.”

Note that the de minimis rate method only applies if you have never received an approved negotiated indirect cost rate from HHS or another cognizant federal agency. If you are waiting for approval of an indirect cost rate, you may request the 10% de minimis rate. If you choose this method, costs included in the indirect cost pool must not be charged as direct costs to the award. Indirect costs on Federal awards for training are limited to a fixed rate of eight percent of MTDC exclusive of tuition and related fees, direct expenditures for equipment, and subawards in excess of $25,000 (45 C.F.R. § 75.414 (c)(1)(i)).

Page 33 also explains how applicants should provide justification for and the calculation of their indirect costs total.

Questions & Answers Updated February 23, 2023

General

1. We are currently in the process of planning to build a very large equestrian center and camp facility with hopes of helping these girls! Would we qualify for the grant you all are offering to assist with teen pregnancy prevention?

Applicants eligible to apply for this notice of funding opportunity are 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).

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.

Please reference the Eligibility Information in the NOFO beginning on page 18 for additional examples of eligible Organizations.

2. Can a co-ed or all-boys middle or high school qualify as our partners?

The NOFO does not detail what types of organizations may qualify as partners. Information regarding eligibility pertains only to applicants. For information on partnerships, please review Section D.3.a.5 - Collaboration and Partnerships (p.27-28) for information on what should be included in your application to describe your partnership efforts and those with whom you may want to partner. We recommend you also review Section E.1 - Criteria.

There you will find the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications (p.43-46).

1. Does the number per year served include only adolescents/students, or does it also include their parents and/or family members that would be engaged in the community programming we would conduct?

Applicants should describe the community or communities and population(s) of focus including the geographic boundaries used to define each (p. 22). Primary participants to receive programming under an award should be adolescents and youth and, more specifically, projects should focus on serving youth who are disproportionally affected by unintended teen pregnancies (including rapid repeat pregnancy) and STIs (p. 7). However, applicants may propose also serving parents/caregivers and/or other individuals (e.g., youth-serving professionals) with EBPs. Applicants should describe in their application the following (p.24):

• Anticipated number of youths you will reach each year specifically through implementation of EBPs.

• Anticipated number of parent/caregivers and/or other individuals (e.g., youth-serving professionals) that will receive EBPs each year specifically through the implementation.

• Specific details on how you obtained the estimates for youth, parent/caregivers and other individuals receiving EBPs.

• How those that will receive EBPs aligns with the needs identified in the community.

We also recommend you review Section E.1 - Criteria. There you will find the criteria that will be used by federal staff and an independent review panel to assess all eligible applications (p.43-46).

Finally, your proposed estimate of number of participants to receive EBP implementation over the duration of the project should clearly align and be adequately supported by the budget narrative submitted (Section D.3.b – p.29-35). The table included on page 24 is the historical annual reach with an evidence-based program (EBP) of prior successful TPP awards with a typical funding range and is provided only as background information. OPA does not use the information in the Table as the basis for determining funding levels.

2. In the opportunity, does "three settings" constitute "three partners"?

The number of partners does not have to equal the number of settings. In the NOFO, Section A.2.c - Replicate to Scale Evidence-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs with Fidelity and Quality (p.8-9), settings include, but are not limited to, schools, clinics, community-based organizations, houses of worship, detention centers, and group and residential care programs. Recipients may include other settings if you demonstrate that such settings serve youth with the greatest disparities in the identified community(ies). OPA will count each setting listed above separately, considering each as one individual setting (p.9). You should demonstrate how the settings clearly align with the need of the focus population and the various physical and social environments where youth live, learn, work, play, and worship (p.24). Please reference pages 24, 43, and 44 for more information on what to include in your application and the criteria that will be used by federal staff and the independent review panel to assess your application as it relates to “settings.”

3. Is it possible to obtain a summary of curriculum adaptations already approved by

OPA/curriculum developers in previous grant cycles?

OPA does not manage the adaptation process of, or decisions made by, curriculum developers/publishers regarding adaptations. Applicants are encouraged to reach out to EBP developers/publishers to obtain more information about individual programs. As a reminder, recipients may not significantly change the program’s core components or compromise program fidelity (i.e., compromise the underlying elements/components of the program). Recipients may make minor adaptations to EBPs. Minor adaptations are allowable if they improve the fit and relevancy of the program to the community and population of focus. Upon award, and as part of recipient orientation and onboarding, OPA will share guidance with grantees regarding OPA’s process for making decisions on proposed adaptations (see p. 17-18 for information on what OPA substantial involvement may entail). In the meantime, the Reproductive Health National Training Center does have a helpful resource to better understand adaptations https://rhntc.org/resources/introduction-adaptations-elearning.

4. Do you have more details on when you expect the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review to be updated (hopefully prior to the submission deadline)?

We do not have any further updates other than what has already been shared - that we do anticipate the new update to be publicly available on the HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER) website in early 2023. As the TPPER is simply a tool that can be used by recipients to assist in the selection of EBPs, we are directing your attention to pages 10-11 for more information on EBPs eligible for replication. Eligible EBPs for replication are those that meet the criteria listed below.

• Study Quality - Meets the criteria for the quality of an evaluation study per the criteria established in the HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER) protocol, version 6.0.

• Evidence of Effectiveness on Sexual Risk Behaviors - At a minimum, one of the identified EBPs to be implemented must demonstrate impact on sexual risk behaviors using the evidence of effectiveness as outlined in the HHS TPP Evidence Review (TPPER) protocol, version 6.0.

• Evidence of Effectiveness on Behavioral Risk Factors Underlying Teenage Pregnancy or Other Associated Risk Factors - In addition to implementing at least one EBP with evidence of effectiveness on sexual risk behaviors, recipients may also implement EBPs that demonstrate impact on non-sexual behavioral risk factors underlying teenage pregnancy. If replicating such a program, the recipient must clearly demonstrate how the outcomes are related to preventing teen pregnancy and address the needs of the community and population of focus.

5. Does OPA conduct a separate medical accuracy review in addition to the grantee-led review by subject-matter experts?

Yes, as we expect recipients to clearly understand the content that they disseminate through their project and to ensure that the content is responsive to the needs of and appropriate for the community and population of focus, recipients are expected to make all materials used and information disseminated within the funded project age appropriate, medically accurate, https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frhntc.org%2Fresources%2Fintroduction-adaptations-elearning&data=05%7C01%7CTPP23Tier1NOFO%40hhs.gov%7Cdc96eb8c625e4d98e64708db152775ad%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638127031449874723%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9TQ0bGCZ0kkCqtlTLZhUFRnABp7gtW6hLeIoigT9F%2Fw%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frhntc.org%2Fresources%2Fintroduction-adaptations-elearning&data=05%7C01%7CTPP23Tier1NOFO%40hhs.gov%7Cdc96eb8c625e4d98e64708db152775ad%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638127031449874723%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9TQ0bGCZ0kkCqtlTLZhUFRnABp7gtW6hLeIoigT9F%2Fw%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftppevidencereview.youth.gov%2Fpdfs%2FTPPER-Review-Protocol-Version-6.0.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CTPP23Tier1NOFO%40hhs.gov%7Cdc96eb8c625e4d98e64708db152775ad%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638127031449874723%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=657Tx4Xts1H1lOAxb780ldxTyBDRmbe%2Be2Ng8%2BMjpNY%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftppevidencereview.youth.gov%2Fpdfs%2FTPPER-Review-Protocol-Version-6.0.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CTPP23Tier1NOFO%40hhs.gov%7Cdc96eb8c625e4d98e64708db152775ad%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638127031449874723%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=657Tx4Xts1H1lOAxb780ldxTyBDRmbe%2Be2Ng8%2BMjpNY%3D&reserved=0 https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftppevidencereview.youth.gov%2Fpdfs%2FTPPER-Review-Protocol-Version-6.0.pdf&data=05%7C01%7CTPP23Tier1NOFO%40hhs.gov%7Cdc96eb8c625e4d98e64708db152775ad%7Cd58addea50534a808499ba4d944910df%7C0%7C0%7C638127031449874723%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=657Tx4Xts1H1lOAxb780ldxTyBDRmbe%2Be2Ng8%2BMjpNY%3D&reserved=0 culturally, and linguistically appropriate, trauma-informed, and inclusive of all youth.

Recipients will also be required to submit all program materials to OPA for a medical accuracy review. See Section A.2.d - Review Materials Prior to Implementation (p. 11) for more information.

6. Does OPA have a list of approved parent-based education curricula that grantees should prioritize when engaging parents and trusted adults in the community, or are these supplemental programs more flexible and not required to be EBPs?

There is no requirement within the NOFO to serve parents/caregivers with evidence-based programs (EBPs). The NOFO does expect recipients to engage caregivers throughout the project (see Section A.2.e. Engage Youth, Caregivers, and the Community Throughout the Project (starting on p. 11) for more information on this expectation). If you choose to implement an EBP with parents/caregivers or other trusted adults, the EBP must meet the criteria listed in Section A.2.c.2 - Eligibility of Programs to be Replicated and Implemented to Scale (p.10).

7. [UPDATED] When calculating the 5 percent goal, does one “session” translate to an entire program per cohort, or one lesson/module/class period?

OPA requires recipients to submit performance measures each year on a semi-annual basis. Included in the performance measures is a measure to assess fidelity where grantees report data on implementation by section and session. Final performance measures, along with supporting guidance, will be provided to recipients during the first six months of funding which will include how to assess fidelity and quality of EBP implementation. Within OPA’s current performance measures, a session is defined as each meeting of the TPP programming within a section. A section is a group of participants receiving the TPP program together at the same time. Please note that final performance measures and accompanying guidance will be provided to recipients during the first six months of funding.

8. When designing survey tools to monitor “the quality and fit of project activities”

(page 16), does this mean that surveys would primarily assess participant satisfaction with the program? Or are questions pertaining to “knowledge, attitudes, and intentions on sex” (page 26) still acceptable if grantees obtain IRB approval?

To protect the rights and welfare of program participants, we expect those recipients that decide to ask survey questions such as those that assess knowledge, attitudes, and intentions on sex to consult with an IRB to…