Ukraine Vets NOFO Questions from Potential Implementers.docx

CSO Veteran Reintegration Program Applicant Questions & Answers

1. NOFO p. 1 - Discrepancy in Title of program – Is the official title of this opportunity “Veterans Reintegration in Ukraine” (as in Grants.gov notice) or “Veterans’ Reintegration Program” (as on the NOFO page 1)?

Applicants are free to propose alternate program titles as part of their submissions, though titles should include reference to “Veteran Reintegration Program.”

2. NOFO p. 6 – Clarification on # of Parts to Which a Bidder may apply – The paragraph at the top of this page states “Applicants may apply only to Part I…or Part II…., or any combination of the above.” So can bidders apply to both parts? If so, must they be submitted as two separate applications?

Yes, applicants may apply to one or both parts. If applicants choose to submit to both parts, CSO will accept one application submission. Please ensure all aspects of both parts are thoroughly addressed.

3. Can bidders have access to the CSO Assessment from October 2018 referenced in the NOFO? Since this assessment is the basis for the targeting of the activities towards “veterans … at risk for recruitment by destabilizing criminal and socio-political organizations,” it would be good to better understand these risk factors and the categorization of criminal and socio-political organizations.

Some portions of this assessment are internal to CSO. Other portions come from open source reporting and academic articles. CSO will scrub the assessment and post publically available information online.

4. Related to the above: Can family members of veterans also be targeted by activities, provided they fall under the criteria of at-risk/vulnerable as outlined in the NOFO? Other veteran support programs sometimes include family members, which increases resilience at the family level and also helps achieve gender balance.

The primary beneficiaries of the program should be Donbas veterans (ATO & JFO veterans). If an activity has additional benefits to family members, please state the justification and how that activity ties into the overall goal of the program. CSO is interested in seeing all ideas and activities, but please remember the ultimate goal is to benefit veterans.

5. NOFO p. 1 – Please clarify the “up-to- $5,000,000 (Not to exceed)” funding amount. Is this a total funding ceiling for all awardees or is it total funding for each awardee, should more than one award be issued?

This is the total funding for all awards. CSO expects to award one or multiple grants or cooperative agreements in an amount not to exceed the total ceiling amount of $5,000,000.

6. Can CSO please clarify the narrative structure and page limits for organizations submitting an application in response to both Part 1 and Part 2?

The proposal narrative for Part 2 is not to exceed 10 pages. For Part 1, CSO recommends keeping the narrative to 10 pages, but there is no set limit.

7. Can CSO please also clarify if costs for both Parts should be integrated into a single budget and budget narrative?

Yes, if applicants are submitting proposals for both parts, only one itemized budget and one budget narrative should be submitted. Please ensure all aspects of both parts are clearly addressed.

8. Page 6 of the solicitation states that all activities under Objective 1 are anticipated to require approximately 30 days. Could CSO please clarify if this is inclusive of all focus group and survey deliverables?

Our priority for Part 1 is a quick data collection process on which to base the programming in Part 2. Upon further consultation, we recognize that the requested method of data collection (focus groups and a survey) are not possible to complete within the 30-day timeframe. We ask that proposals for Part I focus instead on proposing research strategies that could be accomplished in roughly 30 days—either by collecting new data (which does not need to be survey data), drawing from previous work, or some combination of the two. The research strategy should result in systematic, quantitative findings that address the key elements of the programs laid out in Part 2, namely the location of veterans, the services and benefits they do and do not have access to (which could vary across space), and the risks of recruitment to extremist groups.

9. The NOFO provides an estimated start date of September 1, 2019, but on page 14, it states: “CSO anticipates conducting focus groups in July 2019 and collecting survey data in August or September 2019.”

a. First, are the specified dates for completing focus groups and surveys as reported correct?

i. If not, what is the revised schedule for completing focus groups and surveys, and can this schedule be negotiated with CSO?

The focus group and survey data dates originally uploaded were an error. The new estimated timeline is starting after October 1, 2019, but the exact dates will be negotiated after a proposal is selected.

10. The NOFO also states on page 6 that “CSO anticipates these activities to require approximately 30 days.”

a. How firm is CSO’s requirement to have surveys/focus groups completed within a month’s time? Submitting and receiving clearance from Institutional IRB boards often takes a minimum of several weeks. Surveys would in and of themselves likely take more than a month given the need for survey design, pre-testing, training of surveyors, and fielding.

b. Is the one-month time-frame inclusive of the analytic deliverable (e.g., written reports on the focus groups and surveys?)

Please see the answer to question 8.

11. The reference to deliverables for the focus groups stipulate a write-up of results and findings. Is the survey deliverable to also include analyses and final results of survey data (in addition to the “Methods” report)?

Please see the answer to question 8.

12. The NOFO notes that the focus group deliverable will include “Participant lists prior to the start of the groups.” We assume that CSO is interested in demographic and background characteristics of the focus group rather than the names of participants. Institutional Review Boards may object to providing identifiable data to an outside entity.

Please see the answer to question 8. We anticipate that the 30-day research strategy will not include methods that require IRB approval.

13. The NOFO notes that CSO will provide a focus group discussion guide to the research institution. We assume that the specific contents of this discussion guide can be negotiated between the implementer and the sponsor, is this correct?

Please see the answer to question 8. If focus groups are still proposed as part of the 30-day research strategy, then CSO and the selected implementer(s) will discuss and finalize details regarding research standards and specific contents for the focus group discussion during the negotiation phase.

14. Would CSO consider any variation on the methodology outlined in the NOFO (e.g., number of focus groups, content of focus group protocol, number of survey respondents, procedure for survey)?

Yes, CSO is open to all ideas and methodologies. In fact, we encourage fresh ideas since the public opinion research methodology is unlikely to be feasible given our timeline. Please include justification and compelling arguments for proposed methodologies in the submission.

15. Per p. 8 of the NOFO, “Burden sharing with non-USG funding sources – and building and maintaining partnerships with all appropriate stakeholders – are critical components of successful implementation of these programs.” Does CSO have a working relationship already with the potential funding partners on which applicants may be able to capitalize? Does CSO anticipate playing a faciliatory role – where appropriate – in creating relationships with additional funders, such as Ukrainian government agencies other than MoVA?

While CSO and the U.S. government writ large have contacts with the Ukrainian government, the burden to build contacts and relationships falls to the implementer. The implementer will be responsible for day-to-day management of the program, and CSO will provide close oversight and guidance, as well as facilitate some partnerships, if appropriate and/or relevant. As such, some natural crossover of contacts may occur, but the implementer should plan to manage their own relationships. CSO does not expect applicants to have identified all potential partners in advance.

16. What is CSO’s definition of “socio-political organizations”?

In the simplest terms, socio-political organizations can be any association or community group. CSO uses this ambiguity to encourage implementers to look at a broad spectrum of potentially destabilizing organizations rather than focusing on mitigating recruitment into one or two primary groups.

Note that involvement in associations, community groups, and/or political action groups is not in itself an issue; the project focuses on groups that seek to address their perceived grievances through violence (or threat thereof) and/or fund their activities through illicit means.

17. For program objectives in P2, are the implementers expected to actually create physical product (e.g., online portal or e-registry) or just design/conceptualize the model for what it should include? Similarly, when an objective states: “Offer a comprehensive approach to psychosocial support services by providing accessible counseling services in rural regions, destigmatizing mental health care and support systems, increasing peer support programs, and offering evidence-based health care provider training, etc.” – does it mean that – if awarded this work – the applicant will be expected to identify, invest in, bolster, or create psychosocial support services in the areas of focus? Also: “Develop an outreach campaign to raise awareness of services and reduce stigma of counseling.”

The NOFO contains illustrative examples of objectives and activities to provide insight into key areas of need, but these are not necessarily prescriptive and are not intended to restrict potential applicants’ plans to meet the program goals. CSO is open to all creative and compelling ideas, objectives, and activities, provided they work toward achieving the overall program goals and specifications. If the applicant believes other ideas, objectives, and/or activities are more appropriate or better achieve the goal, applicants may propose alternatives and should include compelling justifications for chosen objectives and activities.

18. Is there a target page length for the Technical Narrative in Part 1? [Part 2 specifies a 10-page limit.]

For Part 1, CSO recommends keeping the narrative to 10 pages, but there is no set limit.

19. Can the applicant suggest modifications to the research methods suggested in the NOFO under Part 1, or must the prescribed methods be respected in any event?

Please see the answer to question 14.

20. At the moment, application through grants.gov is not possible. Will this option be restored, or should all applications go through SAMS Domestic?

This problem was addressed and you may now apply via grants.gov or SAMS Domestic.

From Conference Call

21. Is there a page limit for supporting documentation? Can organizations combine past performance, references, etc.?

The proposal narrative is the only document with a set page limit. Applicants need not confine other supporting documentation to a set page limit.

22. What is the total time of the program and how much money is the award?

CSO expects to award one or multiple grants or cooperative agreements in an amount not to exceed the total ceiling amount of $5,000,000. The period of performance will be between 24 to 36 months. Please see the NOFO for additional information.

23. How long will Part 2 take?

Part 2 will be dependent on Part 1’s length and conclusions. Applicants for only one part may propose specific timelines; however, please keep in mind the overall length of the full program when proposing specific timelines. Applicants for only Part 2 should use their best judgement to estimate the amount of time necessary to sufficiently achieve intended program goals.

24. Do we need to have a relationship with the Ministry of Veterans Affairs?

While it may be helpful to have a relationship with MoVA or any other Ukrainian government ministry, it is not a required element nor is it necessarily required for program success. CSO is open to a variety of proposals and activities with a variety of partners. MoVA is aware of the program and is supportive.

25. What type of veterans are targeted in this program? There are many kinds of veterans in Ukraine.

For this program, CSO is specifically looking to target Donbas veterans of the ATO/JFO from 2014-present. In this NOFO, CSO is not looking at veterans from other ministries or government offices (MOI, police, fire, civil servants, etc.) or veterans of previous wars (Afghanistan). For the purposes of this program, CSO does not distinguishing between “combat veterans” and “noncombat veterans.”

26. Is there flexibility on the negotiation of proposals?

The deadline to submit proposals is July 15. CSO regrets that it cannot accept any proposals past this deadline and any proposals with missing required elements will be considered incomplete and technically ineligible. Once CSO chooses an implementer (or implementers), CSO will enter a negotiation period with the implementer(s) to ensure all parties are in agreement on terms of the cooperative agreement. As highlighted in the NOFO, the cooperative agreement will involve substantial involvement by CSO. Selected implementer(s) should expect to work in partnership with CSO throughout the life of the program to refine and adjust as necessary.

27. Do we need to develop a separate theory of change for each objective in the logic model?

Yes, applicants should follow the logic model template, which indicates there should be a ToC that relates to each objective (in addition to the overall ToC).