Bison Production and Marketing Grant Program

To develop projects that strengthen and enhance the production and marketing of Bison and Bison products in the United States, including through the improvement of infrastructure, business, resource development, and through the development of innovat

The Bison Production and Marketing Grant (BPMGP) program will support the development of projects that strengthen and enhance the production and marketing of Bison and Bison products in the United States. The program seeks to address the needs of the entire Bison industry while focusing on the measurable benefits for Bison producers, encouraging partnerships among other Bison industry organizations, and reducing duplication of efforts among participating organizations.

Eligible entities are described in the program's request for applications. Eligible applicants include national entities with a mission consistent with the BPMGP's purpose and must be located in the 50 States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands.

U.S. bison producers

Funds must be used to support one or more of the project types as identified in the Request for Applications. Funds must be used in accordance with the requirements of the Request for Applications and 2 CFR 200.

As specified in the grant agreement.

AMS only accepts electronic applications which are submitted via Grants.gov in response to specific Request for Applications (RFA). Please refer to the RFA for further details for submitting applications. The most current RFAs are available at www.ams.usda.gov/grants. Any specific instructions in the RFA's supersede the general information provided in the assistance listing database.

Criteria for selecting proposals are within guidelines established for the program as described in the RFA. The most current RFA is available via Grants.gov or www.ams.usda.gov/grants. AMS outlines the application requirements and merit review process in each grant program's RFA. Applicants are required to use the RFA to apply for grant funds. After the application deadline has passed, AMS begins a three-step process to evaluate each application submitted to the grant program and select applications for funding. Grant agreements are established with applicants based on the results of this three-step process to ensure compliance with requirement that Federal awarding agencies maintain a fair, unbiased merit review process in selecting competitively awarded grants. The Initial Qualification Screening is Step 1. In this step, the application is reviewed to ensure that they met the RFA's basic requirements. Applications that met these basic requirements moved forward to Step 2. Step 2 is the Competitive Review. Applications are evaluated by panels of external peer reviewers. Selected reviewers have diverse expertise representing various entities with programmatic knowledge. To eliminate bias, AMS assigns applications to reviewers outside of their own geographic areas and avoid project assignments associated with reviewer businesses. Each reviewer also signs a conflict of interest and confidentiality agreement. Reviewers that indicate a real or perceived conflict do not review the affected application(s) and are removed from those application discussions. The panels analyze each application using the RFA's evaluation criteria and instructions prepared by AMS. The peer review panels evaluate their assigned applications using instructions prepared by AMS officials. Individual reviewers score applications and then confer with other panel members. The scoring and discussion serve as the basis for awarding and allocating grant funds and focuses on strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. The third step is the Administrative Review (Step 3). AMS conducts a final administrative evaluation of each application in the review panels' top rankings and recommendations. In addition to the applications' scores, each award is reviewed to ensure that the recommended applications align with the grant program's statutory purpose and that the budget items were allowable and necessary. AMS also assesses the applicants' ability to account for the use of Federal funds and monitor the performance associated with these monies. Non-competitive grant programs implemented by AMS are limited to Step 3 in the application review process.

AMS uses a three-step process to evaluate each application submitted to the grant program and select applications for funding. Grant agreements are established with applicants based on the results of this three-step process to ensure compliance with requirement that Federal awarding agencies maintain a fair, unbiased merit review process in selecting competitively awarded grants. The Initial Qualification Screening is Step 1. In this step, the application is reviewed to ensure that they met the RFA's basic requirements. Applications that met these basic requirements moved forward to Step 2. Step 2 is the Competitive Review. Applications are evaluated by panels of external peer reviewers. Selected reviewers have diverse expertise representing various entities with programmatic knowledge. To eliminate bias, AMS assigns applications to reviewers outside of their own geographic areas and avoid project assignments associated with reviewer businesses. Each reviewer also signs a conflict of interest and confidentiality agreement. Reviewers that indicate a real or perceived conflict do not review the affected application(s) and are removed from those application discussions. The panels analyze each application using the RFA's evaluation criteria and instructions prepared by AMS. The peer review panels evaluate their assigned applications using instructions prepared by AMS officials. Individual reviewers score applications and then confer with other panel members. The scoring and discussion serve as the basis for awarding and allocating grant funds and focuses on strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. The third step is the Administrative Review (Step 3). AMS conducts a final administrative evaluation of each application in the review panels' top rankings and recommendations. In addition to the applications' scores, each award is reviewed to ensure that the recommended applications align with the grant program's statutory purpose.

Preapplication coordination is not applicable. Environmental impact information is not required for this program. This program is excluded from coverage under E.O. 12372.

Eligible applicants should contact the headquarters office for application deadlines. Annual application deadlines are posted in Grants.gov. More information can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/grants.

Please see: https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/AMSPolicyonConsiderationofLateNonresponsiveApplications.pdf