[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 44 (Monday, March 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11838-11857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-5349]



[[Page 11837]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Department of Agriculture





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service



Request for Proposals (RFP): Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food 
Systems, FY 2000; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 44 / Monday, March 6, 2000 / 
Notices  

[[Page 11838]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service


Request for Proposals (RFP): Initiative for Future Agriculture 
and Food Systems, FY 2000

AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service

ACTION: Notice of Request for Proposals and Request for Input

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service (CSREES) announces the availability of grant funds and requests 
proposals for the Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems 
Program (IFAFS) for fiscal year (FY) 2000 to support competitively 
awarded research, extension and education grants addressing key issues 
of national and regional importance to agriculture, forestry, and 
related topics. The amount available for support of this program in FY 
2000 is approximately $113,400,000.
    This notice sets out the objectives for these projects, the 
eligibility criteria for projects and applicants, the application 
procedures, and the set of instructions needed to apply for an IFAFS 
grant under this authority.
    By this notice, CSREES additionally solicits stakeholder input from 
any interested party regarding the FY 2000 IFAFS for use in development 
of any future requests for proposals for this program.

DATES: Proposals must be transmitted by May 8, 2000, as indicated by 
postmark or date on courier bill of lading. Proposals transmitted after 
this date will not be considered for funding. Comments regarding this 
request for proposals are requested within six months from the issuance 
of this notice. Comments received after that date will be considered to 
the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: The address for hand-delivered proposals or proposals 
submitted using an express mail or overnight courier service is: 
Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems; c/o Proposal 
Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Room 303, Aerospace Center; 
901 D Street, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20024.
    Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the 
following address: Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems; 
c/o Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; STOP 2245; 1400 
Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-2245.
    Written user comments should be submitted by first-class mail to: 
Policy and Program Liaison Staff; Office of Extramural Programs; USDA-
CSREES; STOP 2299; 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 
20250-2299; or via e-mail to: [email protected]. In your comments, 
please include the name of the program and the fiscal year of the RFP 
to which you are responding.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Applicants and other interested parties are 
encouraged to contact the Program Director listed in the program areas 
found in the Program Area Description section below; or Dr. Rodney 
Foil, Director IFAFS, Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; STOP 2242; 1400 
Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20250-2242; telephone: (202) 
401-5022; email: [email protected]; or Dr. Cynthia Huebner, Assistant 
Director IFAFS, at the same address; telephone: (202) 401-4114; email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:   

Table of Contents

Stakeholder Input
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Part I--General Information
A. Legislative Authority and Background
B. Purpose, Priorities and Fund Availability
C. Definitions
D. Eligibility
E. Matching
F. Funding Restrictions
Part II--Program Description
A. Project Types
B. Program Area Description
Part III--Preparation of a Proposal
A. Program Application Material
B. Content of Proposals
C. Submission of Proposals
D. Acknowledgment of Proposals
Part IV--Review Process
A. General
B. Evaluation Factors
C. Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality
Part V--Additional Information
A. Access to Peer Review Information
B. Grant Awards
C. Use of Funds; Changes
D. Applicable Federal Statues and Regulations
E. Confidential Aspects of Proposals and Awards
F. Regulatory Information

Stakeholder Input

    CSREES is soliciting comments regarding this solicitation of 
applications from any interested party. These comments will be 
considered in the development of any future RFP for the program. Such 
comments will be forwarded to the Secretary or his designee for use in 
meeting the requirements of section 103(c)(2) of the Agricultural 
Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 
7613(c)(2). This section requires the Secretary to solicit and consider 
input on a current RFP from persons who conduct or use agricultural 
research, education and extension for use in formulating future RFPs 
for competitive programs. Comments should be submitted as provided for 
in the Addresses and Dates portions of this Notice.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under 10.302, Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food 
Systems.

Part I--General Information

A. Legislative Authority and Background

    Section 401 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education 
Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA) (7 U.S.C. 7621) established in the Treasury 
of the United States an IFAFS account and authorized the Secretary of 
Agriculture to establish a research, extension, and education 
competitive grants program to address critical emerging agricultural 
issues related to (1) future food production, (2) environmental quality 
and natural resource management, or (3) farm income. Grants are to be 
awarded that shall address priority mission areas related (a) 
Agricultural genome, (b) Food safety, food technology and human 
nutrition, (c) New and alternative uses and production of agricultural 
commodities and products, (d) Agricultural biotechnology, (e) Natural 
resource management, including precision agriculture, and (f) Farm 
efficiency and profitability, including the viability and 
competitiveness of small- and medium-sized dairy, livestock, crop, and 
other commodity operations. Priority is to be given to projects that 
are multistate, multi-institutional, or multidisciplinary or projects 
that integrate agricultural research, extension and education.
    Subject to the availability of funds to carry out this program, the 
Secretary may award grants to Federal research agencies, national 
laboratories, colleges and universities or research foundations 
maintained by a college or university, or a private research 
organization with an established and demonstrated capacity to perform 
research or technology transfer. Grants also may be awarded to ensure 
that faculty of small and mid-sized institutions that have not

[[Page 11839]]

previously been successful in obtaining competitive grants under 
subsection (b) of the Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research 
Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)) (i.e., the CSREES National Research 
Initiative Competitive Grants Program) receive a portion of the IFAFS 
grants. Grants are to be awarded to address priorities in United States 
agriculture that involve research, extension, and education activities 
as determined by the Secretary in consultation with the National 
Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory 
Board; and stakeholders through a public meeting held in July of 1998.

B. Purpose, Priorities and Fund Availability

    The purpose of the IFAFS is to support research, education and 
extension grants that address critical emerging agricultural issues 
related to (1) future food production, (2) environmental quality and 
natural resource management, or (3) farm income.
    In awarding IFAFS grants, priority will be given to projects that 
are multistate, multi-institutional, or multidisciplinary or projects 
that integrate agricultural research, extension and education. 
Integrated projects hold the greatest potential to produce and transfer 
knowledge directly to end users, while providing for educational 
opportunities to assure agricultural expertise in future generations. 
The IFAFS also holds great opportunity to bring the agricultural 
knowledge system to bear on issues impacting small and mid-sized 
producers and land managers, thus enabling improvements in quality of 
life and community. In support of the agency's goal to enhance the 
competitiveness of U.S. agriculture, consideration will also be given 
to projects (with U.S. institutions as the lead) that incorporate an 
international dimension with demonstrable domestic benefits.
    IFAFS is distinct from other CSREES programs because of its 
priority on integration of research, extension, and education; its 
consideration of the concerns of small and mid-sized operations; its 
emphasis of agricultural production issues; and its goal to support 
relatively large projects that provide more intensive support to the 
research, extension, and education system.
    There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular proposal or 
to make a specific number of awards. Approximately $113,400,000 is 
available in FY 2000 for programs within the IFAFS for the following 
priority areas: Agriculture Genome and Agricultural Biotechnology 
($32,800,000); Food Safety, Food Technology, and Human Nutrition 
($23,600,000); New and Alternative Uses and Production of Agricultural 
Commodities and Products ($9,400,000); Natural Resource Management, 
including Precision Agriculture ($28,400,000); and Farm Efficiency and 
Profitability, Including the Viability and Competitiveness of Small-and 
Medium-sized Dairy, Livestock, Crop, and Other Commodity Operations 
($18,900,000). Funds available for each priority area are targets. The 
number and quality of applications, as well as the need to reach 
programmatic goals, may necessitate the movement of funds between 
priority areas.
    Funds will be made available to small or mid-sized academic 
institutions that have not been previously successful in obtaining 
competitive grants under the National Research Initiative Competitive 
Grants Research Program.
    The program areas described herein were developed within the 
context of the authorized purposes of both USDA research, extension, 
and education (7 U.S.C. 3101) and IFAFS (7 U.S.C. 401), within the 
framework of the CSREES Strategic Plan (Available at www.usda.gov/ocfo/strat/ree.pdf) and based on stakeholder input.

C. Definitions

    For the purpose of awarding grants under this program, the 
following definitions are applicable:
    (1) Administrator means the Administrator of the Cooperative State 
Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and any other 
officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority involved 
may be delegated.
    (2) Authorized departmental officer means the Secretary or any 
employee of the Department who has the authority to issue or modify 
grant instruments on behalf of the Secretary.
    (3) Authorized organizational representative means the president or 
chief executive officer of the applicant organization or the official, 
designated by the president or chief executive officer of the applicant 
organization, who has the authority to commit the resources of the 
organization.
    (4) Budget period means the interval of time (usually 12 months) 
into which the project period is divided for budgetary and reporting 
purposes.
    (5) Cash contributions means the applicant's cash outlay, including 
the outlay of money contributed to the applicant by non-Federal third 
parties.
    (6) Department or USDA means the United States Department of 
Agriculture.
    (7) Education activity means an act or process that imparts 
knowledge or skills through formal or informal schooling.
    (8) Extension activity means an act or process that delivers 
research-based knowledge and educational programs to people, enabling 
them to make practical decisions.
    (9) Grant means the award by the Secretary of funds to an eligible 
organization or individual to assist in meeting the costs of 
conducting, for the benefit of the public, an identified project which 
is intended and designed to accomplish the purpose of the program as 
identified in these guidelines.
    (10) Grantee means the organization designated in the grant award 
document as the responsible legal entity to which a grant is awarded.
    (11) Integrated means to bring together the three components of the 
agricultural knowledge system (research, education and extension) 
together around a problem area or activity.
    (12) Matching means that portion of allowable project costs not 
borne by the Federal Government, including the value of in-kind 
contributions.
    (13) National laboratories include Federal laboratories that are 
government-owned contractor-operated or government-owned government-
operated.
    (14) Peer review is an evaluation of a proposed project for 
scientific or technical quality and relevance performed by experts with 
the scientific knowledge and technical skills to conduct the proposed 
work or to give expert advice on the merits of a proposal.
    (15) Principal Investigator/Project director means the single 
individual designated by the grantee in the grant application and 
approved by the Secretary who is responsible for the direction and 
management of the project.
    (16) Prior approval means written approval evidencing prior consent 
by an authorized departmental officer as defined in (2) above.
    (17) Private research organization with an established and 
demonstrated capacity to perform research or technology transfer means 
any non-governmental corporation, partnership, proprietorship, trust, 
or other organization that (1) conducts any systematic study directed 
toward new or fuller knowledge and understanding of the subject 
studied, or (2) systematically relates or applies the findings of

[[Page 11840]]

research or scientific experimentation to the application of new 
approaches to problem solving, technologies, or management practices; 
and (3) has facilities, qualified personnel, independent funding, and 
prior projects and accomplishments in research or technology transfer.
    (18) Project means the particular activity within the scope of the 
program supported by a grant award.
    (19) Project period means the period, as stated in the award 
document and modifications thereto, if any, during which Federal 
sponsorship begins and ends.
    (20) Research activity means a scientific investigation or inquiry 
that results in the generation of knowledge.
    (21) Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture and any other 
officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority involved 
may be delegated.
    (22) Small and Mid-Sized Institutions means academic institutions 
having an enrollment of 15,000 or fewer (including part-time students), 
and that are no higher than the 50th percentile of academic 
institutions funded by the National Research Initiative Competitive 
Grants Program in the past three years and are not within the top 100 
Federally funded institutions. (See Appendix A.)
    (23) Third party in-kind contributions means non-cash contributions 
of property or services provided by non-Federal third parties, 
including real property, equipment, supplies and other expendable 
property, directly benefitting and specifically identifiable to a 
funded project or program.

D. Eligibility

    Proposals may be submitted by Federal research agencies, national 
laboratories, colleges or universities or research foundations 
maintained by a college or university, or private research organization 
with an established and demonstrated capacity to perform research or 
technology transfer. Eligible applicants may subcontract to 
organizations not eligible under these requirements.

E. Matching Requirements

    If a grant provides for applied research that is commodity specific 
and not of national scope, the grant recipient is required to provide 
funds or in-kind support to match the amount of Federal grant funds 
provided.

F. Restrictions on Use of Funds

1. Funds for Buildings and Facilities
    IFAFS funds may not be used for the renovation or refurbishment of 
research spaces; the purchase or installation of fixed equipment in 
such spaces; or the planning, repair, rehabilitation, acquisition, or 
construction of buildings or facilities.
2. Funds for Human Cloning
    In accordance with the President's Memorandum of March 4, 1997, 
regarding the use of Federal funds for the cloning of human beings (33 
Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 278), IFAFS funds shall not be used to support, 
fund, or undertake any cloning activity that could lead to the creation 
of a new human being with genetic material identical to that of another 
human being, including research related directly thereto. The 
prohibition on use of grant funds to ``support'' human cloning activity 
includes using, or making available for use, grant-funded equipment for 
use in connection with human cloning. This ban does not restrict 
research into the cloning of plants, animals, or individual human cells 
that cannot develop into a new human being.

Part II--Program Description

A. Types of Projects to be Supported

1. Consortia
    Dependent on the merits of proposals received, no less than thirty 
percent of the total available IFAFS funds will be used for support of 
consortia. Consortia are entities that may involve multiple states and/
or institutions that conduct research; synthesize previous, ongoing and 
future research; develop curricula and build educational and research 
capacity; and transfer information to producers, end users, and the 
public. All IFAFS consortia will be expected to address the needs of 
agricultural research, extension and education that cannot be addressed 
through the funding of separate efforts. It is the intent of CSREES to 
promote collaboration, open communication, exchange of information and 
resources, and integration of activities among individuals, 
institutions, states or regions. Consortia should minimize isolation 
and over-competitiveness, reduce duplication of efforts, and provide an 
accessible source of expert information, technology, and education upon 
which the public can draw.
    Consortia may be organized around a particular topic or they can be 
geographically based. Geographically-defined consortia applicants must 
address the interaction of the problems most relevant to a particular 
region using a systems-oriented, landscape-scale approach. In contrast, 
topic-based consortia should focus on a single issue (e.g., minority 
land ownership or functional foods) that may be of nationwide or 
regional interest. For either consortium type, an explanation also must 
be provided for why such an entity has more potential for success than 
several smaller grants. Requested funds for individual consortia 
proposals can range between $1-5 million for the total duration of four 
years. CSREES expects that relatively few grants will be supported at 
the higher end of this range. The amount requested must be commensurate 
with the activities proposed.
    A designated lead institution of each consortium will administer 
funds and be responsible for overall management of activities. The 
proposal must include how the administration of the grant within the 
consortium will be achieved and monitored. Plans for how each 
consortium will be maintained and monitored for progress during and 
beyond the duration of the grant should also be included in the 
proposal. Consortia proposals will be evaluated on both administrative 
and monitoring procedures as well as on the merit and likelihood of 
success of the overall project.
2. Standard
    Dependent on the merits of proposals received, no less than thirty 
percent of the total available funds will be used for standard grants. 
Standard projects are expected to address research, extension and 
education in a focused project. Requested funds for individual standard 
proposals cannot exceed a total request of $1 million for a duration of 
four years. The amount requested must be commensurate with the 
activities proposed; support for very large requests of funds will be 
highly competitive. Standard projects will be encouraged to coordinate 
with IFAFS-funded consortia pertinent to their project focus.
    Dependent on the merits of proposals received, CSREES will ensure 
that a portion of either consortia or standard grants will be awarded 
to proposals in which the lead institution (recipient of the Federal 
funds) is a small- or mid-sized institution (as defined in Part I., C. 
Definitions). Other institutions or organizations involved in small- 
and mid-sized institution eligible projects need not meet the criteria 
described in the definition of a small and mid-sized institution.

[[Page 11841]]

B. Program Area Description

1. Agricultural Genomics (Program Area 10.0)
    The IFAFS seeks to sponsor integrated research, education and 
extension programs in plant, animal and microbe genomics and the 
development of bioinformatic tools with specific applications to 
agricultural challenges.
    A more complete understanding of the entire complement of genes in 
agriculturally relevant plants, animals and microbes is imperative. 
More knowledge in this area will have a major impact on the ability of 
the United States to produce nutritious and safe food, while preserving 
the environment and sustaining the economic stability of the 
agricultural enterprise. Greater efforts aimed at identifying, mapping 
and understanding the function and control of genes responsible for 
economically important traits in agriculturally important species of 
plants, animals and microbes are needed. Such efforts will lead to the 
development of new genetic technologies for improvements in yield, pest 
and pathogen resistance, and the composition, quality, and safety of 
U.S. agricultural products.
    New bioinformatic and computational biology tools are needed to 
analyze, interpret and utilize the vast amounts of data that will be 
generated by genomic research in agriculturally important species. 
CSREES expects that bioinformatics will be an integral component of any 
project funded under this Agricultural Genomics program. CSREES is also 
interested in funding integrated projects primarily dedicated to the 
research and development of bioinformatics tools and education 
programs, hence a separate sub-area in bioinformatics. Prospective 
applicants who are primarily interested in working on a particular 
plant, animal or microbial system should address their projects to the 
relevant section. Those primarily interested in developing 
bioinformatics tools, software, and training programs should address 
their proposal to the sub-area on Bioinformatics.
    All agricultural genomics grant recipients are strongly encouraged 
to attend or present at an annual grantee workshop that will occur at a 
date and time to be determined.
    Investigators are expected to explain clearly how the ownership of 
information and research materials and their public release will be 
handled. Rapid and unrestricted sharing of genomic sequence data is 
essential for advancing research on agriculturally important species. 
Early release of unfinished sequence has already proven useful in 
accelerating the pace of experimental discovery in non-agricultural 
fields, such as human health, energy production and bioremediation. At 
the same time, CSREES recognizes that it also is necessary to allow 
investigators time to verify the accuracy of their data and to 
accomplish the goals proposed in their application, which often 
includes the assembly and annotation of the sequence data.
    In addition to the general data release procedures above, 
applications for support of genome sequencing projects must include a 
detailed description of the data release plan. Timely release is 
strongly encouraged in recognition of the benefits to the broader 
research community. Release should be accompanied by appropriate 
information on the reliability of the data (e.g., level of coverage and 
extent of assembly, extent of contamination with vector and other 
sequences, statistical measures of accuracy). At a minimum, it is 
anticipated that sequence data will be released within one month after 
3X coverage of the genome (or chromosome for eukaryotic organisms) is 
achieved. The released data should be provided as assemblies of equal 
to, or greater than, one kilobase contigs. Subsequent releases of 
assembled sequences should be provided at least on a monthly basis.
    In the view of some, raw genomic sequences, in the absence of 
additional demonstrated biological information, lack demonstrated 
utility and therefore are inappropriate for patent filing. Patent 
applications on large blocks of primary genomic sequence could stifle 
future research and the development of future inventions of useful 
products. However, according to the Bayh-Dole Act, the grantees have 
the right to elect to retain title to subject inventions and are free 
to choose to apply for patents should additional biological experiments 
reveal convincing evidence of utility. CSREES grantees are reminded 
that the grantee institution is required to disclose each subject 
invention to CSREES within two months after the inventor discloses it 
in writing to grantee institution personnel responsible for patent 
matters.
    10.1 Plant Genome. (For clarification on this sub-area, contact the 
Program Director, Liang-Shiou Lin, at 202-401-5042, e-mail: 
[email protected] or Gail Mclean, at 202-401-6060, e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    Research in plant genomics has advanced rapidly in the past few 
years, and the entire genomic sequences of Arabidopsis and rice will be 
determined and annotated in the near future. Knowledge of these 
sequences will provide basic information on the genes in a flowering 
plant species. While genomic tools and resources are currently 
available for plant research, they will need to be improved and 
expanded. Additionally, genomic resources will need to be developed for 
other economically important plant species. Furthermore, if genomic 
information is to be applied to plant improvement, more research is 
needed to determine the function of gene sequences.
    The IFAFS Plant Genome Program sub-area will support projects that 
advance our knowledge of the structure, organization and function of 
agriculturally important plant genomes. The investment in plant 
genomics will expand the efforts of the National Plant Genome 
Initiative (NPGI) coordinated under the National Science and Technology 
Committee (NSTC) Plant Genome Program. Participating research agencies 
of the NSTC effort include USDA, the Department of Energy (DOE), the 
National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the National Science 
Foundation (NSF).
    Examples of education and extension components pertinent to this 
sub-area include training of graduate and undergraduate students, 
postdoctoral associates, and/or colleagues (through classes, seminars, 
workshops, sabbaticals) in the use of genomic resources or outreach to 
the community through informational seminars and classes on the 
benefits and methods of genomic research. Wherever appropriate, 
investigators are encouraged to develop national and international 
collaborations with research groups already working on the species of 
interest to maximize the use of structural and functional genomic 
resources. Collaborations with private industry that have made a 
significant investment in the species are also encouraged to avoid 
unnecessary duplication of effort.
    Proposals must address one of the two specific topic areas below:
    (a) Development of genomic tools and resources for plant species 
important to agriculture or forestry. Collaborative large-scale 
structural genomics projects are now underway for plants of national 
and international interest including barley, canola, corn, cotton, 
lettuce, loblolly pine, peach, potato, poplar, rice, sorghum, soybean, 
sunflower, tomato, and wheat. Some of these projects have already 
provided or will soon provide the agricultural research community with 
genetic and physical maps, ESTs, libraries, and mutant populations. In 
contrast, genomic tools

[[Page 11842]]

and resources for most horticultural crops and forest tree species have 
not been developed to a comparable extent. Thus, high throughput 
genomic approaches to understand genome structure and organization of 
economically important horticultural, (including fruit and vegetable 
crop species and ornamental plants relevant to U.S. agriculture), and 
forest plants, will be given high priority, particularly those plants 
that have not been the focus of major study. However, proposals that 
extend or complement ongoing research on agricultural plants already 
under study will be considered; potential research areas include 
characterization of gene-rich regions of complex cereal genomes, 
synteny of cereal genomes with rice, and mapping and sequencing under-
methylated regions in combination with EST sequencing.
    (b) Functional analysis of the rice genome. The US is a participant 
in the international project to sequence the genome of rice. The rice 
sequence will provide an understanding of genes important to plant 
growth and productivity, such as those coding for disease and stress 
resistance, seed development, grain-quality traits, carbon allocation, 
flowering time, biomass production, and synthesis of compounds valuable 
for production of fuels and other useful chemicals. Rice is a model 
system to study because it has a relatively small genome (est 430 Mb), 
is diploid, is readily transformable and has tractable genetics that 
include diverse germplasm. These studies in rice will also provide a 
set of molecular tools to leverage sequence in syntenic species such as 
maize, wheat, barley, oats, sorghum, and sugarcane. These attributes, 
in addition to its role as a major food source for the majority of the 
worlds population, makes rice a model for cereal crop genomics.
    To build on the sequencing effort now underway, this program area 
will support rice functional genomic studies that seek to uncover the 
function of all genes by relating a mutant phenotype with sequence 
information. Examples of approaches include gene tagging, proteomics, 
microarrays, and development of knockout lines. Projects are encouraged 
to be multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary and include 
collaborations with researchers who can recognize gene mutations 
affecting the plant life cycle, such as molecular biologists, 
bioinformaticians, geneticists, pathologists, and physiologists. 
Collaborations with international programs is appropriate but the lead 
institution must be from the US. In addition, this program will also 
support projects in rice to produce and make publicly available, 
informative strains and sequences of rice to the international research 
community; and to develop a public database to consolidate information 
on mutagenized populations and phenotypic information about mutants 
characterized.
    10.2 Animal Genome. (For clarification on this sub-area, please 
contact the Program Director, Peter Brayton, at 202-401-5044, e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    There have been substantial efforts in gene mapping of 
agriculturally important animal species during the past few years. This 
effort, coupled with recent advances in gene discovery, defining 
molecular sites on the chromosomes (such as microsatellites), and the 
development of more sophisticated bioinformatics, has resulted in gene 
maps with varying density for animal species. Generally, the gene maps 
have advanced sufficiently that they can begin to be used for marker-
assisted selection of progeny and to begin the process of defining 
genes that control complex traits of economic importance, such as milk 
production, growth, litter size and disease resistance; however, map 
densities for some species are far below what is considered optimal for 
practical application.
    This program will emphasize: defining and mapping functional genes 
through analysis of ESTs, the development of high density comparative 
gene maps across animal species, identification and mapping of genes 
affecting traits of economic importance, and development of strategies 
to effectively use genomic information to enhance genetic improvement 
of agriculturally important animal species. A considerable degree of 
linearity in gene order and chromosomal synteny occurs across species. 
Consequently, the soon-to-be-completed sequencing of the human and 
mouse genomes will allow reasonable predictions about gene location and 
relative order without sequencing entire genomes of agricultural animal 
species. By emphasizing the functional genomics of agriculturally 
important traits, this program will use information already obtained 
from other genomic efforts to advance U.S. agriculture in the most 
cost-effective and expedient manner. Education programs are also 
needed, not only to apply genomic information effectively, but also to 
promote understanding of the genomic technologies to all sections of 
the population, including producers and agricultural professionals.
    Proposals are solicited that address one or more of the following 
areas in animal genomics: (a) develop high density comparative gene 
maps, which include human and mouse, across agricultural animal species 
(cattle, sheep, swine, horses, poultry species and aquaculture 
species); (b) develop high throughput methods for monitoring gene 
expression in response to environmental stimuli; (c) conduct 
quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis and marker assisted selection on 
large populations of agricultural animals, which may include detailed 
mapping and sequencing of those loci controlling or having a major 
effect on economically important traits; (d) develop bioinformatic 
software to facilitate comparative gene mapping; and (e) develop 
education programs on new developments in agricultural animal genome 
research for outreach to producers and students.
    10.3  Microbe Genomics. (For clarification of this sub-area, 
contact the Program Director, Ann Lichens-Park, at (202)-401-6466; e-
mail: [email protected].)
    Microorganisms dominate the planet in terms of total mass, species 
diversity, and metabolic range. They include not only pathogens, but 
also microbes that are beneficial to higher organisms. Many are of 
enormous present and future economic value. Although genomic 
information in itself is only a sequence of bases, it provides a 
framework for understanding how the organism functions and lives. This 
knowledge can be used to understand why an organism may be pathogenic 
or beneficial to a plant or animal, or how its properties might be 
exploited in metabolic engineering, bioremediation, development of 
sensitive and specific diagnostic tools, improved treatments and 
preventatives, or more effective vaccines. Knowledge of the genomes of 
microorganisms is expected to be the driving force for research in the 
life sciences, including agriculture, forestry, and food safety, over 
the next quarter century.
    This program is designed primarily to encourage competitive 
research grant applications in support of high-throughput sequencing of 
genomes of microorganisms (including bacteria, fungi, mollicutes, and 
protozoa) that are important to the productivity and sustainability of 
agriculture and forestry, and to the safety and quality of the nation's 
food supply. This integrated program will provide whole genome sequence 
data and mapping information on microorganisms that have an impact on 
agriculture, and extension and education programs to apply this

[[Page 11843]]

knowledge to agricultural challenges. Sequencing proposals also should 
incorporate an education or extension component within the scope of the 
project to provide a more holistic approach to the problem. Education 
or extension components may focus on genomics technology or on 
computational biology and informatics.
    It is recognized that complete genome coverage with no gaps is the 
most desirable end-point for whole genome sequencing. However, 
agriculturally relevant microbes encompass a sizable number of 
microorganisms relevant to animals, plants, and natural resources. To 
date, very few agricultural microbes have been, or are in the process 
of being, sequenced. Consequently, agriculture lags far behind other 
fields, such as human health and energy production, with respect to 
microbial genomics. For this reason, this program encourages 
investigators to attempt lower level (e.g., 3X--5X) coverage to provide 
data on multiple organisms. In this manner, the amount of information 
will be maximized, the program jump-started, and the funds spread 
across several areas relevant to agriculture. A larger community of 
agricultural researchers will be able to benefit quickly from the data 
that are produced.
    As a longer term goal, the program will likely request full genome 
coverage of several (or all) of these organisms. Therefore, to the 
extent consistent with the Bayh-Dole Act, investigators must plan to 
make available to the scientific community, upon request, the strains 
or isolates used, high quality genomic DNA from the organism, and an 
appropriate set of verified clones developed during the course of the 
sequencing project. Either a cost-recovery system or use of a 
commercial repository is permissible, provided that the plan is 
outlined in the proposal, with an appropriate budget. These reagents 
should be made available for a minimum of five years.
    Note, however, that for smaller genomes, or genomes that may 
already be sequenced with low coverage, it is acceptable to propose 
sequencing with high level coverage (e.g. 10X) as long as the total 
budget is within the limits outlined in the awards subsection.
    Choices of organism will be open to those whose sequences are not 
already being made publicly available. Examples might include high 
priority pathogens of animals (e.g., Mycobacterium paratuberculosis, 
Pasteurella haemolytica, Lawsonia intracellularis, Eimeria spp.), 
plants (e.g., Pseudomonas syringae, Erwinia spp., Clavibacter spp., 
Aspergillus spp.), or of food-borne origin (e.g., Yersinia 
enterocolitica). Choices might also include beneficial/useful organisms 
such as ones from soil (e.g., Rhizobium spp., Methylobacterium 
extorquens, Pseudomonas spp.) or rumen (e.g., Fibrobacter succinogenes, 
Ruminococcus albus). Microorganisms relevant to aquaculture species and 
horses are included, along with microorganisms of animals raised for 
food and fiber. By the time this solicitation is released, it is 
possible that the sequencing of one or more of these example organisms 
may already be funded for the public domain; inclusion here does not 
automatically guarantee a high priority for sequencing.
    Clearly, a large number of microorganisms fit this broad criterion 
of relevance, and in this solicitation it is not the intention of 
CSREES to dictate which organisms should be sequenced. Rather, the 
choice of organism(s) will be left to the applicant(s) who must justify 
selection(s) and address all of the following criteria:
    (a) Economic importance and relevance to U.S. agriculture;
    (b) Avoidance of organism strains whose sequences are already being 
targeted by others, unless this information will not be in the public 
domain. To help assess the current sequencing status for particular 
microorganisms, applicants are strongly encouraged to visit websites 
that summarize completed and on-going sequencing projects. For example, 
the following URL sites may prove useful:

http://www.tigr.org/tdb/mdb/mdb.html;
 http://www.doe.gov/production/ober/EPER/mig__cont.html;
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/dmid/genomes/default.htm;
http://www.sanger.ac.uk/Projects/;
http://www.genome.wisc.edu;
http://www.genome.wustl.edu/gsc/index.shtml;

    (c) Unique biological or environmental features;
    (d) Broad interest to a significantly sized community of scientists 
or agriculturalists;
    (e) Genetic tractability, i.e. the ease with which genetic studies, 
such as crosses, genome modifications etc. can be performed;
    Two additional criteria (position in the taxonomic tree and 
evolutionary significance) might also be addressed if these are 
considered relevant to the choice of organism. Also, it is realized 
that some organisms may be of profound agricultural importance but not 
easily cultured or subjected to genetic analysis, and therefore are 
strong candidates for sequencing.
    Protozoa, fungi and some bacteria have relatively large genomes, 
not easily completed under the support of a single grant. Therefore, 
requests for partial funding of a genome are allowable as long as 
future plans for completing the work are outlined. In these instances, 
investigators are encouraged to seek partners, in either the form of 
consortia or support from other sources, so that the sequence can be 
completed in a reasonable time-frame. As long as the goals and limits 
of the individual projects are clearly addressed and relevant to 
agriculture, such cooperative projects are encouraged, as are 
international collaborations. The expected outcome of the project will 
be a high quality sequence, much or all of it contiguous, with 
annotation of open reading frames and deposit in a publicly accessible 
data base. Additionally, for eukaryotic organisms, applications may 
propose large-scale EST projects. For these larger genomes, applicants 
should indicate the status of efforts supported by other funding 
agencies and how these efforts would be coordinated with a USDA-funded 
activity.
    Investigators are to provide detailed information on the 
organism(s) chosen, the method of library preparation and all other 
pertinent methodological information. Mechanisms to assess validity and 
accuracy of the data must be described in the proposal. All cloning and 
sequencing technologies/strategies, particularly ones that are novel, 
should be described and must be applicable to future efforts to expand 
coverage. In judging the merits of a proposal, the speed, level of 
accuracy, and cost effectiveness of the proposed work will be important 
issues and considered one of the evaluation criteria under this 
program. The number of bases to be sequenced per unit time and an 
estimate of the dollars required to produce a specific amount of base 
sequence must be calculated. The latter value should include the costs 
of generating clones, assembly of sequence and annotation, as well as 
true sequencing costs.
    10.4 Bioinformatics. (For clarification of this topic area, contact 
the Program Director, Gail Mclean, at 202-401-6060, e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    The vast amounts of data being generated by genomic research only 
will be of use to plant, animal and microbial improvement and 
protection if technologies are developed to efficiently utilize genomic 
sequence, gene maps and gene function information. In addition, new 
cadres of scientists must be trained in the use of these technologies. 
The science of bioinformatics and computational biology, which includes 
the methods by which genomic data can be sorted,

[[Page 11844]]

categorized, and used most effectively, must be improved. Because of 
the interdisciplinary nature of genomic science, bioinformatic research 
provides an ideal opportunity for a range of scientists, including 
engineers, computer scientists, chemists, and biologists, to work 
together in a collaborative environment. This program seeks to support 
proposals to develop new bioinformatics technologies, to apply existing 
technology from the human genome and other genomic projects to 
agricultural genomics, and to provide training for the enhancement of 
future human capital with expertise in bioinformatics and computational 
biology.
    This sub-area will help to develop new bioinformatic tools with 
specific application to agricultural systems and to train scientists in 
the theory, computational implementation and biological application of 
the information sciences (including computer science, statistics and 
mathematics) for the improvement of animal, plant and microbial species 
of agricultural importance.
    Successful applicants to this program will develop an 
interdisciplinary program which combines research and education or 
extension activities. Projects may involve experts in computer science, 
software engineering, genomics, genetics, plant, animal, or microbial 
improvement, or related sciences as well as individuals with an 
interest in the development of education and training programs in 
bioinformatics and computational biology.
    Applicants to this program should address technological and 
knowledge gaps in the development of bioinformatics tools specifically 
related to plant, animal or microbial genomic data. Research should 
include but is not limited to the development of: (a) software, 
algorithms, and database management techniques for the rapid cataloging 
and access of genomic data, including improved content and utility, 
improved communication among databases and greater linkages between 
genomic and phenotypic data; (b) analytical computation tools for the 
analysis of genomic sequence data for predicted gene function, modeling 
of biochemical pathways in plant and animal systems, map generation, 
and statistical techniques for the identification of genes of traits 
needed to improve the productivity of agriculturally important plant 
and animal species; and (c) computational applications for capturing, 
displaying and analyzing information about sequence variation, which 
will allow for greater accessibility of plant, animal and microbial 
genomic data for improvement and protection.
    Successful proposals will also include a strong focus on 
bioinformatics training. Training programs should address the current 
gap in the availability of professionals trained in both plant, animal, 
and microbe improvement and bioinformatics. Evidence of infrastructure 
which encourages or enables the interaction of biologists and 
computational scientists must be evident in the proposal. Approaches to 
training may include, but are not limited to: (a) the development of 
courses at the undergraduate and graduate level in bioinformatics/
computational biology; (b) programs which include summer institutes, 
short courses, sabbaticals or training centers designed to educate and 
train faculty and or graduate students in bioinformatics; (c) 
development of training modules for agricultural professionals, such as 
certified crop advisors, farm managers, etc., in the use of genomic 
data in plant and animal improvement; or (d) development of secondary 
education science teaching modules to introduce young students to the 
bioinformatic/computational biological sciences.
2. Agricultural Biotechnology (Program Area 11.0)
    The application of biotechnology to agriculture has great potential 
for supplying the world with food and fiber in a sustainable manner. 
This technology is expected to increase productivity of existing 
farmlands while reducing the negative environmental effects of 
traditional production methods by reducing the need for antibiotics, 
fertilizers, herbicides, hormones, and pesticides. Biotechnology may 
also facilitate development of products with improved nutritional and 
economic benefits, or products with novel food, agricultural, or 
industrial uses.
    Successful application of this technology to food and agriculture 
requires a sufficient level of consumer acceptance of biotechnology-
derived products to provide economic incentive to product developers. 
Consumer acceptance is currently affected by doubts about biotechnology 
in food and agriculture. Research and education focusing on reducing 
present and predicted risks associated with agricultural biotechnology 
will aid in alleviating public concerns. Mechanisms for increasing 
public awareness of the benefits, as well as the risks, of 
biotechnology-derived products are needed to provide consumers and 
policymakers with the facts they need to make informed decisions about 
production and trade of biotechnology-derived foods and products.
    This program area will support research, extension, and education 
activities that address public questions and concerns about 
agricultural biotechnology. High priority will be given to projects 
that integrate these three activities. Supported activities will 
advance this goal by assessing and reducing present and anticipated 
risks associated with products derived through biotechnology, and by 
maximizing knowledge and understanding of both risks and benefits 
accrued to the public by these products.
    11.1 Effects Agricultural Biotechnology on Human, Animal and Plant 
Health. (For clarification of this program area, contact the Program 
Directors, Dan Jones at (202) 401-6854; email: [email protected]; or 
Deborah Sheely at (202) 401-1924, e-mail: [email protected].)
    Research, extension, and education activities regarding the effects 
of genetically modified (GM) food on human, animal, and plant health, 
include but are not limited to: (a) approaches for anticipating, 
detecting, and managing allergenicity in new GM products; (b) the role 
of GM products in the development of antibiotic resistance; (c) 
secondary metabolite formation and how this may affect food and feed; 
(d) changes in bioavailability of essential nutrients; (e) development 
of new and enhanced testing and evaluation methods of biologically 
modified products that ensure human and animal safety; (f) techniques 
to minimize movement of transgenes to non-target organisms or to 
prevent expression of transgenes in non-target organisms; (g) 
management systems to slow the evolution of resistance to transgenic 
protection against pests and diseases; (h) development of experiential 
learning opportunities for students, academics, and agricultural 
professionals to study the effects of GM food and feed on humans and 
animals; (i) development of outreach programs to explain the risks and 
benefits of GM food and feed on human and animal health.
    Proposals involving genetically modified functional foods should 
direct their proposals to section 12.2 (Nutritional Impact of 
Functional Foods).
    11.2 Social and Economic Aspects of Agricultural Biotechnology. 
(For clarification of this program area, contact the Program Directors, 
Dan Jones at (202) 401-6854; email: [email protected]; or Deborah 
Sheely at (202) 401-1924, e-mail: [email protected].)

[[Page 11845]]

    Agricultural biotechnology has sparked debate on a variety of 
topics, including: food safety; the environment; trade, business, and 
economics; industry structure and consolidation; regulatory 
sufficiency; product labeling; and diverse value systems. Proposals 
should draw on these debates.
    Projects/programs that address the objective and perceived benefits 
and risks associated with biotechnology faced by producers, 
distributors, consumers, and the general public are encouraged. 
Possible topics include, but are not limited to: (a) effects of 
biotechnology on market structure and concentration; (b) social and 
economic consequences of limited germplasm access; (c) consumer 
acceptance of biologically modified food and feed; and (d) family, 
community and other contextual effects on biotechnology-related 
practices of producers, distributors, and consumers.
    Proposals in these areas may include research, extension, and 
education efforts for producers, consumers, opinion leaders, and others 
on the full range of challenges and opportunities associated with 
modern agricultural biotechnology. Such efforts should be designed and 
conducted through collaboration with partners such as government, 
industry, universities, public interest and consumer groups. In 
addition, proposals appropriate to this section may include education 
programs for students on the history and development of biotechnology 
in agriculture, including crop breeding to modern gene insertion 
techniques. These programs should include curricula that cover the 
ethics(social and environmental) behind biotechnology as well as the 
potential benefits and costs of genetically modified organisms and any 
social and institutional safeguards that exist or are needed to protect 
the public interest.
3. Food Safety and the Role of Nutrition in Health (Program Area 12.0)
    This program area concentrates resources on two critical areas in 
nutrition: factors affecting food and nutrition behavior of consumers; 
and the nutritional impact of functional and designer foods. A third 
program area will fund research, extension and education programs to 
help producers implement good agricultural practices for reducing 
microbial contamination on raw agricultural commodities. A key 
anticipated benefit of this initiative will be to strengthen campus-
based educational programs and to promote the internationalization of 
research, teaching, and extension/outreach activities related to 
nutrition and food safety.
    12.1 Factors Affecting Food and Nutrition Behavior of Consumers. 
(For clarification of this sub-area, contact the Program Director, Etta 
Saltos, at (202) 401-5178; e-mail: [email protected].)
    The most fundamental knowledge gap in nutrition research is in 
understanding why people choose what they choose to eat. Although USDA 
has issued dietary guidance for consumers for over a century and, 
together with the Department of Health and Human Services, has 
formulated Federal nutrition policy in the form of the Dietary 
Guidelines for Americans for 20 years, we know that many consumers are 
not following this guidance. According to the Department's 1996 Healthy 
Eating Index, a measure of how Americans' diets fare in meeting the 
recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines, only 12 percent of Americans 
have diets that can be classified as ``good;'' 71 percent have diets 
that are considered to ``need improvement'' and 17 percent are 
classified as having ``poor'' diets. Additionally, the prevalence of 
obesity in the United States increased from 12 percent in 1991 to 18 
percent in 1998. USDA researchers have found that in children the risk 
of becoming obese increases as family income decreases. Community-based 
research on food systems has demonstrated limited food choices in low-
income communities as insufficient resources limit grocery retail 
establishments in economically deprived areas. Food intake of low-
income individuals is dramatically affected by environmental 
availability of food, especially fruits and vegetables. Food stamp 
recipients sometimes have difficulty stretching food dollars through 
the month, creating an atmosphere of food insecurity late in the month, 
affecting food choices.
    Food choice behavior is influenced by a variety of factors ranging 
from available income to physiologic need to societal standards. 
Knowledge of how these factors interact to affect food choices is 
limited. Nutrition experts agree that for nutrition interventions to be 
successful, they should be behaviorally-based, but the gaps in 
knowledge of consumer dietary behavior limits development of such 
interventions. When behaviorally-based nutrition interventions have 
been implemented, evaluation of the outcomes of such interventions has 
been limited, primarily due to lack of funds.
    The goal of this program is to fund projects that produce models of 
food and nutrition behavior, especially in at-risk populations such as 
older adults, low income individuals and overweight individuals, and to 
use such models to produce behaviorally-based nutrition intervention 
programs.
    This program invites innovative projects on consumer food and 
nutrition behavior, including: (a) Research on factors influencing 
dietary behaviors of at-risk populations, including children and 
adolescents (at home, in school, and in child care and after-school 
settings), ethnic minorities, low-income individuals, overweight 
individuals, and older adults; (b) research on behavioral factors that 
may contribute to the development of obesity; (c) exploration and 
analysis of the impact of insecure food systems in low-income 
communities and prevalence of obesity, unhealthy food choices, and 
related food behaviors; (d) longitudinal studies and studies that use 
non-self-report methods to measure changes in dietary behavior; (e) 
multi-disciplinary studies to examine current theory-based models of 
behavior change; (f) development of intervention(s) at either the 
individual or community level based on one or a combination of these 
models; (g) use of a social marketing approach to target nutrition and 
health messages that lead to behavior changes; and (h) development of 
innovative cross-training programs in nutrition and the social 
sciences.
    Proposals dealing with health or consumer acceptance of genetically 
modified organisms/biotechnology should be directed to Program Area 
11.1 (Effects of Agricultural Biotechnology on Human, Animal and Plant 
Health) or 11.2 (Social and Economic Aspects of Agricultural 
Biotechnology); proposals dealing with the health aspects of functional 
foods should be directed to Program Area 12.2 (Nutritional Impact of 
Functional Foods); proposals dealing with consumer food handling 
behaviors should be directed to existing CSREES programs.
    12.2 Nutritional Impact of Functional Foods. (For clarification of 
this sub-area, please contact the Program Directors, Ram Rao at (202) 
401-4929 or Melvin Mathias at (202) 720-4124; e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    Functional foods are fresh or processed foods containing 
significant levels of biologically active components that might provide 
health benefits or desirable physiological effects beyond basic 
nutrition. Functional food markets are growing markedly, reaching the 
billions of dollars level and consumers are increasingly willing to 
include functional foods in their diets. Considerable scientific 
information demonstrates that some food components have the potential 
health

[[Page 11846]]

benefits to prevent disease. Additional research is necessary to 
substantiate the claims of health benefits of the food components and 
functional foods. Advances in food technology through both traditional 
processing methodologies, and genetic engineering of foods, have 
provided the consumer with ever increasing food choices that claim to 
offer increased health benefits due to selection in favor of certain 
components.
    The goal of this program is to foster research and outreach to 
improve functional foods from agriculturally important materials. 
Collaborative international activities, which may lead to the discovery 
and development of new functional foods, or which improve the prospects 
for such foods through enhanced production or commercialization, thus 
improving the prospects for U.S. agricultural products, are encouraged. 
Activities that fully integrate and encompass the design of 
commercially feasible functional foods, characterization of bioactive 
components, measurement of health benefits, and consumer outreach 
programs will be given priority. Integration should include a holistic 
approach to developing functional foods, including an analysis of 
impact on the food system and on health. Applicants are strongly 
encouraged to seek industry collaboration.
    Examples of potential research, extension and education activities 
include, but are not limited to: (a) creation of foods that have 
increased amounts of the beneficial components found in fruits, 
vegetables, grains and animal products; (b) interactive effects of the 
bioactive components as consumed in the food; (c) improved processes to 
enhance stability and bioavailability of bioactive components; (d) the 
design of foods with acceptable sensory attributes; (e) the development 
of methods to monitor the effectiveness of functional foods on 
improving health and preventing diseases; (f) analysis to support the 
issuance of regulatory guidelines to ensure the safety and efficacy of 
functional food products; and (g) provide information usable by and 
readily available to health professionals and consumers.
    Proposals dealing with genetically modified foods that do not fit 
under the definition of functional foods described in this section 
should be directed to Program Area 11.1 (Effects of Agricultural 
Biotechnology on Human, Animal and Plant Health) or 11.2 (Social and 
Economic Aspects of Agricultural Biotechnology); proposals dealing with 
consumer choices of functional foods for health should be directed to 
Program Area 12.1 (Factors Affecting Food and Nutrition Behavior of 
Consumers).
    12.3 Reduction of Microbial Hazards on Raw Agricultural 
Commodities. (For clarification of this sub-area, contact the Program 
Director, Robin Huettel, at (202)401-5804; e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    Under the President's ``Initiative to Ensure the Safety of Imported 
and Domestic Foods,'' October 1997, guidelines were developed to aid in 
the reduction of microbial food safety hazards through good 
agricultural practices, including growing, harvesting, washing, 
sorting, packing, and transporting of fruit and vegetables that are 
generally consumed raw. A ``Guide to Minimize Microbial Food Safety 
Hazards for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables'' was issued by the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 
October 1998. In order to help the growers and producers implement 
these good agriculture practices, specific areas for research, 
education and extension programs are needed for on-farm food safety for 
reducing microbial contamination of raw agricultural commodities.
    The goal of this program is to support projects that address 
minimizing microbial hazards during all aspects of pre-harvest 
production. Activities that integrate research, extension, and 
education activities that will eventually aid the grower/producer by 
providing management strategies for microbial hazards in raw or 
minimally processed fruits and vegetables will be given priority. The 
research needs are necessary for the development of education programs, 
materials, and resources for education and outreach to growers and 
producers of raw or minimally processed fruits and vegetables. 
Information and practical skills related to the appropriate management 
strategies must be transferred to growers and producers through 
effective food safety education and outreach for the implementation of 
good agricultural practices.
    Examples of potential research, extension, and education activities 
include but are not limited to: (a) Research on the macro and micro 
environments that microbes inhabit, such as biofilm formation and 
pathogen attachment; (b) breeding of resistant cultivars that would 
reduce the likelihood of contamination by pathogens by changing surface 
conditions; (c) understanding the competitiveness, antagonistic, and 
symbiotic interactions between pathogens and natural flora on produce; 
(d) investigation of efficacy of rinse and wash procedures to reduce 
pathogens in surface treatments; (e) determination of bacterial stress 
responses to stimuli, such as cold, heat, pH and disinfectants; (f) 
reduction or elimination of pathogens from compost, prevention of re-
contamination of properly treated compost; (g) defining physiological 
or genetic mechanisms that microbes utilize to become resistant to 
traditional food safety barriers, including development, amplification, 
and maintenance of resistance; (h) understanding mechanisms to reduce 
or prevent pathogen contamination during transport such as the use of 
controlled atmospheres and temperature control; (i) development of a 
higher education program that would provide the knowledge needed by 
crop consultants and other professionals in recognizing potential 
microbial hazards in grower/production fields, developing mitigation 
strategies for reduction of microbial hazards in field and processing, 
and designing handling and processing technologies to prevent 
contaminants in raw or minimally processed agriculture commodities; (j) 
educational research focusing on the development of education 
methodologies that promote on-farm adoption and use of safe management 
strategies for minimizing microbial hazards associated with raw or 
minimally processed agricultural commodities; (k) educational research 
focusing on the development and implementation of education and 
outreach programs incorporating safe management strategies for domestic 
and international growers and producers of raw or minimally processed 
agricultural commodities.
    Proposals on the pathogens associated with animal manure and 
transport of contaminants associated with animal manure should be 
directed to Program Area 14.3 (Animal Manure Management).
4. New Uses for Agricultural Products (Program Area 13.0)
    (For clarification of this program area, contact the Program 
Director, Carmella Bailey, at (202)-401-6443; e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    The goal of this program area is to provide for research, 
extension, and education activities that enhance the competitive value, 
find new uses for, or establish entirely new non-food agricultural and 
forestry products, primarily biomass fuel sources and biobased 
industrial products that can replace petroleum-based fuels and 
products. Renewable carbon from plants to replace limited fossil-based 
carbon from petroleum has the potential to

[[Page 11847]]

provide additional farm income for producers, and enhance conservation 
benefits on marginal land. This program area is intended to support 
Executive Order 13134, Promoting Biobased Products and Bioenergy, which 
calls for expanded public investment in research and development for 
biomass production and conversion for energy and chemicals, and 
Executive Order 13101, Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and Waste 
Prevention, which creates a market pull for bioenergy and biobased 
products. Further, these efforts address the issues of resource 
depletion and environmental degradation, while building new markets for 
agriculture.
    A systems-based approach is required to accomplish the goals of 
this program area, which encompasses: (a) the development of crop 
varieties for biomass fuel uses and for raw materials for industrial 
products; (b) management techniques for incorporating industrial crops 
into existing cropping systems; (c) processing biomass; (d) product 
development; (e) test and evaluation; (f) demonstration of final 
product(s); (g) life cycle cost evaluation of final product(s); and (h) 
establishing marketing networks. Accordingly, integration of these 
activities to the maximum extent practicable, are strongly encouraged. 
A systems-based approach is expected to accelerate research and 
development and to result in measurable outcomes, i.e. increased 
production and use of biofuels and biobased products.
    In addition, this initiative strongly encourages research, 
extension and education activities that explicitly recognize, account 
for, and enhance the interaction among growers, processors, 
manufacturers, markets and the community. To increase profitability at 
the farm gate, applicants are encouraged to develop proposals which 
include post-harvest processing and manufacturing activities at the 
local level. To facilitate technology transfer and marketing of 
products, the product demonstration phase should be of sufficient size 
to generate data for the proposer to conduct a life cycle cost 
evaluation that includes product performance data, environmental 
attributes, as described in EPA's Guidelines for Environmentally 
Preferable Purchasing, and social impacts as appropriate (e.g. impact 
on economic development in the community).
    To the extent possible, proposers are encouraged to incorporate 
instruction or other classroom-associated activities which strengthen 
students' knowledge and skill in the discovery, production and/or 
commercialization phases of new and alternative use systems. Similarly, 
proposers are encouraged to incorporate collaborative international 
activities which may lead to the discovery of new or alternative uses, 
or which improve the prospects for those uses through enhanced 
production or commercialization, thus improving the prospects for U.S. 
farmers in the global market.
5. Natural Resource Management, Including Precision Agriculture 
(Program Area 14.0)
    Successful management of natural resources in an agricultural 
landscape should address environmental integrity, quality of life, and 
economic viability. Unfortunately, the interaction of these three 
conflicting concepts often does not result in an overall sustainable 
system. The purpose of this program area is to address how best to 
integrate the needs of production agriculture, the environment, and 
society, such that an acceptable sustainable system results.
    This program area will focus on key environmental problems that are 
best addressed using a holistic systems approach. Priority will be 
given to proposals that explicitly address the interaction among 
production, the environment, and the well-being of producers and the 
general public. Preference will also be given to multi-state, multi-
institutional, and multi-disciplinary projects. The emerging 
agricultural and natural resource issues to be addressed include: 
system-wide management of natural resources, particulary involving 
small and mid-sized tracts of privately owned land within a defined 
geographic area (watershed or eco-region); encroachment and subsequent 
environmental impact of invasive native and non-native species (all 
taxa); conservation of biodiversity; animal waste management; and 
development and evaluation of precision technologies for efficient and 
sustainable production and harvesting of agricultural and natural 
resources.
    14.1  Alternative Natural Resource Management Practices for Private 
Lands. (For further information concerning this program sub-area, 
contact the Program Director, Larry Biles, at (202) 401-4926; e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    As the world's population increases, the demands for delivery of 
natural resource goods and services will also increase. In addition, 
there is an increasing demand for diversity in the commodities being 
produced and an increased recognition that such production changes must 
be accomplished without adversely impacting our capacity to ensure the 
delivery of goods, services and a healthy environment to future 
generations.
    This program will support integrated projects on the development of 
natural resource management systems (including forest, range, aquatic 
and wildlife) that improve our capacity to support natural resources. 
Proposals should present a scientific framework that qualitatively and 
quantitatively links production practices, societal preferences, 
demographics, and economic needs to the impacts on natural resources. 
Preference will be given to proposals that demonstrate the active 
participation of the user community that is expected to benefit. 
Proposals should include a plan for coordination among scientists, 
state and federal agencies, commodity organizations, environmental 
groups, and producers to deal with the integrated ecological, 
technological, economic, social and environmental issues in a specified 
geographic region.
    This sub-area of the initiative is intended to provide the 
research, extension and education information needed to support the 
management needs of the small and mid-sized aquatic, range, wildlife, 
and forest systems owners and managers. Projects should address 
management practices and technologies that will increase the 
opportunities for the small to mid-sized manager to operate profitable 
enterprises that respond to the demands for: (a) Alternative natural 
resources production, (b) sustainable forestry certification, (c) 
agroforestry, (d) invasive species management across multiple 
ownerships, (e) wildlife control and management, (f) nutrient 
management, (g) maintaining or enhancing biodiversity and ecosystem 
integrity, including restoration of species and ecosystems, (h) coping 
with the demands imposed by environmental and regulatory requirements 
within the increasingly mixed distribution of urban, rural, and 
wildlands management systems, (i) development and enhancement of 
decision support tools linking regional databases with remote sensing 
technologies (with suitable resolution for use by the targeted user 
communities) and management options; and (j) training programs to 
enhance success and adoption of regionally-appropriate practices.
    Proposals submitted to this sub-area will enhance our capacity to 
integrate regionally appropriate data and information to increase long-
term, site-specific, and whole system efficiencies and profitability 
while both minimizing unintended impacts on natural

[[Page 11848]]

resources and enhancing environmental integrity. Proposals are 
encouraged that use a whole systems approach (economic, environmental, 
social and community development) to evaluate the practices most 
conducive to sustaining small and mid-sized land management systems in 
the U.S. Partnerships with existing regional and/or long-term projects 
(including those associated with public lands) also are strongly 
encouraged.
    Proposals should contain a clear plan for technology transfer and 
adoption. Proposals should clearly describe the type (size and 
distribution) of the system being evaluated and should include 
provisions that demonstrate an interdisciplinary problem-solving 
approach to maintain natural resources sustainability and 
profitability.
    Proposals focusing on the financial security and quality of life of 
small to mid-sized family-owned pastures should be submitted to Program 
Area 15.0 (Farm Efficiency and Profitability).
    14.2  Invasive Species. (For clarification on this sub-area, 
contact the Program Director, John Obrycki, at (202) 401-4201; e-mail: 
[email protected].)
    The spread of invasive non-native pest species is one of the 
greatest threats to the long-term health and biological diversity of 
rural and urban areas. For this program, invasive species are defined 
as alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic 
or environmental harm. The invasion of plant, animal, and microbial 
pests is an issue of critical importance to the nation's land and water 
resources. No land or water regime is immune and the nation is both 
losing income and incurring expenses to address these problems. 
Invasive species have reached the level of national concern because of 
adverse economic impacts and long-term threats to ecosystem 
sustainability. In addition, invasive species threaten the 
effectiveness of established pest management systems.
    The invasive species sub-area is in part a response to the 
President's Executive Order (EO 13 112) on Invasive Species of February 
3, 1999. The goal of the Executive Order is to increase coordination of 
Federal agencies to prevent introductions, provide for control, 
monitoring and study, and to restore native species and habitats in 
areas degraded by invasive species. A goal of this program is to 
coordinate and integrate research, education, and outreach aspects of 
invasive species problems.
    This sub-area will emphasize application of fundamental knowledge 
to reduce societal losses due to invasive species. It is critical that 
proposals take a problem-solving approach to management of invasive 
species. This program will consider projects that address aspects of 
invasive species from discovery of novel means to detect, monitor, and 
manage invasive species to outreach and education activities that 
promote public awareness of invasive species. Proposals may address the 
prevention of introductions, as well as, the detection, monitoring, or 
management of existing invasive species. Proposals that develop 
mitigation plans to restore the biodiversity of native species and 
habitats negatively affected by invasive species are also encouraged. A 
high priority will be placed on proposals that include (a) multiple 
states, multiple disciplines and multiple institutions, (b) research, 
extension, or education components, or (c) both. Proposals will be 
considered that include partnerships with state and local organizations 
to address extension and educational needs for regional invasive 
species problems. One of the key elements of the proposal should 
consider how the approaches taken address the problem of a specific 
invasive species or group of species.
    Taxa of invasive species that are considered in this program 
include animal, plant, and microbial species that affect the 
biodiversity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, in agricultural, 
urban, or forest systems. Proposals submitted to this program could 
include, but are not limited to, projects that: (a) develop planning 
and communication strategies to encourage action on invasive species 
(these activities could be at several levels ranging from local to 
national scales); (b) evaluate and communicate the risks associated 
with invasive species introductions; (c) formulate strategies to 
prevent the introduction of invasive species; (d) develop and implement 
management systems to facilitate the early detection, monitoring, 
eradication, containment, or control of invasive species (particularly 
those cropping systems impacted by implementation of the Food Quality 
and Protection Act); or (e) provide and implement strategies to restore 
biodiversity of native species and habitat condition.
    Proposals addressing restoration of specific habitats, communities, 
and ecosystems associated with privately-owned small-midsized forests, 
grasslands, wetlands, or riparian areas should submit to Program Area 
14.1 (Alternative Natural Resource Management Practices for Private 
Lands).
    14.3  Animal Manure Management. (For further information on this 
program sub-area, contact the Program Director, Richard Hegg at (202) 
401-6550; e-mail: [email protected].)
    There is a great deal of public pressure to prevent the degradation 
of air, soil, and water resources by food animal production systems and 
to protect the ecological integrity of forest, rangeland, cropland, 
aquatic, estuarine, and marine systems. Proper management of manure 
resulting from these production systems is one of the most critical 
issues facing the food animal industry. Animal feeding operations vary 
by region, species, size and management system, so that each operation 
is site-specific and must be managed accordingly. Physical, chemical 
and/or biological treatment techniques may be used to reduce the 
pollution potential of animal manure. Regulation of animal feeding 
operations at the local, state and federal level is undergoing rapid 
change.
    Proposals for this section will support integrated research, 
education and extension on regional systems that will ultimately reduce 
adverse environmental and human health impacts of animal manure. 
Proposals will be considered that develop and evaluate manure 
management practices using soils, wetlands, riparian zones, and 
treatment systems for the protection of natural resources. Proposals 
taking a watershed, landscape-scale approach are encouraged and could 
include the transport and fate of nutrients and/or pathogens from 
animal manure through air, water and soil. The incorporation of 
comprehensive nutrient management planning in educational programs is 
encouraged, as is the development of partnerships with already 
established waste management centers (e.g., the National Center for 
Manure and Animal Waste Management).
    Topic areas that this program sub-area will consider include: (a) 
Development of rates and methods of land application of manure that are 
most suitable for a given watershed; (b) determination of the effects 
of animal nutrition on manure content and quality, and extension of 
this knowledge to producers who may in turn modify their feed; (c) 
determination and prediction of odor, gas and particulate matter 
impacts on the atmosphere and society, and development of management 
strategies to alleviate such impacts; (d) understanding and predicting 
source, delivery and fate of pathogens as well as transferring this 
information to the general public to address concerns or inform them of 
potential health hazards; (e) resolving community and regulatory

[[Page 11849]]

concerns about siting, health and economic issues; (f) determination of 
water quality impacts of nutrients, pathogens, and other waste 
products, and the development of strategies to reduce such impacts, and 
the development of programs to educate the public on such water quality 
issues; (g) development and implementation of alternative waste 
treatment technologies; (h) development and marketing of value-added 
products from animal waste; (i) determination of the transport of 
antibiotics and/or endocrine disruptors (hormones) in the environment 
and their potential effects on the environment; and (j) development of 
alternative animal production systems.
    Proposals should address one or more of the following animal 
groups: swine, dairy, beef, poultry or aquaculture.
    14.4  Application of Precision Technologies. (For further 
information on this Program Area, contact the Program Directors, 
Preston Jones at (202) 401-1990; e-mail: [email protected]; or 
Maurice Horton at (202) 401-4504; e-mail: [email protected]).
    Precision technologies can be valuable tools if their applicability 
to agriculture and natural resource management can be demonstrated and 
then adopted. Precision technologies range from defining simple field 
management zones to complex integration of multiple datasets with the 
goal of making production and harvesting more efficient and 
sustainable. Field-scale management using precision technologies is 
needed to address spatial and temporal variability that limits the 
efficient use of inputs. Farmers, ranchers, and natural resource 
managers need tools like decision support systems and sensors in their 
work places that quantify complex interactions between profitability 
and the natural resource base. Multidisciplinary partnerships with 
industry, producers, and the research/education community are 
encouraged because of the lack of understanding in the decision-making 
process and the high cost of doing field-scale research. Partnerships 
with other Federal agencies, such as NASA, and partnerships addressing 
the needs of small and medium-sized farms, are encouraged.
    Proposals submitted to this section will enhance the Nation's 
capacity to integrate site-specific and whole system efficiency and 
profitability while minimizing deleterious impacts on natural resources 
and the environment. Proposals are solicited from, but not limited to, 
the following areas: (a) Site-specific yield prediction and resource 
management based on an improved understanding of how soils, water, 
nutrients, climate, landscapes, crops and other natural resources 
interact to influence productivity; (b) decision support systems for 
complex soil, crop, pest, landscape, irrigation and natural resource 
management interactions that integrate spatial and temporal 
variability; (c) Assessment of user needs and development of scientific 
capabilities, economic and environmental cost-benefit analysis, and 
documentation of adoption of precision technologies by the user 
community; (d) sensing of natural resource properties, using both 
ground-based and remote technologies, and other precision technology 
applications based on user needs; and (e) training of competent and 
skilled professionals to transfer precision technology to the user 
community.
    Each proposal should clearly indicate the scope of the management 
system for which applications are being developed and evaluated. 
Decision support proposals should include a clear plan for evaluating 
the suitability (feasibility, efficacy, profitability, required 
infrastructure, and adoption strategies) of technologies proposed for 
operations of specified scope. Proposals should include a plan for the 
propagation of the databases developed or for the maintenance and 
training necessary for sensor and decision support tool use.
5. Farm Efficiency and Profitability (Program Area 15.0)
    (For clarification of this program area, contact the Program 
Director, Don West, at (202) 720-5633; e-mail: [email protected]; or 
Denis Ebodaghe, at (202) 401-4385; e-mail: [email protected].)
    Dramatic changes in the global agricultural environment and in 
domestic farm programs have created new challenges for U.S. farmers as 
they strive to maintain the efficiency and profitability of their 
operations and the financial viability of their families and 
communities. This program emphasizes the use of existing data and 
emerging information to synthesize and deliver knowledge that improves 
profitability for families operating small and medium-sized farms. 
Proposals that address the concerns of family-owned farms with limited 
financial resources will be given priority. Proposals should indicate 
how target audiences will benefit from the proposed programs/projects.
    All proposals submitted to this program area will undergo a peer 
review in which the efficiency and profitability of small and medium-
sized farms is the most important criterion. New partnerships and new 
administrative mechanisms that involve universities, industry, profit/
non-profit organizations and/or community colleges are also important 
criteria. Consideration will be given to system approaches useful in 
meeting the production, marketing, capital and human resource needs 
associated with dairy, livestock, crop and other commodity operations. 
This priority area recognizes linkages with natural resources and 
environmental issues and the importance of strengthening the financial 
viability of farm operations, families, and communities. Such proposals 
should provide information on the connections between the 
sustainability of small and medium-sized farms and the viability of 
their communities as well as linkages with natural resources and 
environmental issues.
    Projects that utilize a systems approach and are national or 
regional in scope are encouraged as are those that incorporate 
research, extension, and educational functions. Proposals that 
incorporate farmer input in problem identification and have high 
scientific merit in project design, methodology and analytical 
procedures will be given priority. Appropriate innovative methodologies 
are encouraged, including those that make use of electronic technology 
in delivery of extension and formal education programs. Applicants with 
a strong track record of working with owners and managers of small and 
medium-sized farms are encouraged to apply.
    Applicants are encouraged to submit research, extension, or 
education proposals that address one or more of the following areas: 
(a) development of management (e.g., pest, crop, animal, nutrient, 
economic) and marketing systems that improve efficiency and 
profitability, including the reduction of capital and input costs or 
the diversification of crop and livestock enterprises; (b) development 
of effective marketing programs, including the use of farmers' markets, 
community-supported agriculture, marketing to restaurants and schools, 
cooperative approaches to use of inputs and marketing, organic 
production and marketing, Internet marketing, global markets, and 
agritourism; (c) development of farm-based value-added processing and 
new high-return production and marketing niches; (d) development of 
improved methods of managing risks faced by farmers and ranchers, 
including production risks (enterprise diversification, crop insurance, 
contract production,

[[Page 11850]]

cropping systems at risk from implementation of the Food Quality and 
Protection Act, and new management systems), marketing risks (marketing 
plans and tools), financial risk (financial and investment analysis, 
family living costs and financial security), legal issues (contracts 
and environmental liability), and human resource issues (labor 
availability, occupational health and safety, managing people, and 
estate planning); (e) development of programs/projects that improve 
access to knowledge and decision-making tools. Examples include 
production decision tools, formal and informal education in 
entrepreneurship, business planning and marketing for new or modified 
enterprises, and farm and family financial planning and management. 
Access should allow producers to increase options for farm efficiency 
and profitability in regional and local economies, including planning 
and building community support; (f) development of programs/projects 
that improve access to and management of financial resources, including 
physical and production capital, financial services, innovative 
investment capital strategies, human capital (including availability 
and effective management of labor), and infrastructure and social 
capital (community resources and institutions); and (g) development of 
programs/projects that improve access to and management of 
environmental resources, including maintenance of environmental quality 
and conservation issues.

Part III--Preparation of a Proposal

A. Program Application Materials

    Program application materials are available at our website 
(www.reeusda.gov/IFAFS). If you do not have access to our web page or 
have trouble downloading material, you may contact the Proposal 
Services Unit, Office of Extramural Programs, USDA/CSREES at (202) 401-
5048. When calling the Proposal Services Unit, please indicate that you 
are requesting forms for IFAFS. These materials may also be requested 
via Internet by sending a message with your name, mailing address (not 
e-mail) and phone number to [email protected]. State that you want a copy 
of the Program Description and application materials (orange book) for 
the Fiscal Year 2000 Initiative on Future Agriculture and Food Systems 
(IFAFS).

B. Content of Proposals

1. General
    The proposal should follow these guidelines, enabling reviewers to 
more easily evaluate the merits of each proposal in a systematic, 
consistent fashion:
    (a) The proposal should be prepared on only one side of the page 
using standard size (8\1/2\" x 11") white paper, one inch margins, 
typed or word processed using no type smaller than 12 point font, and 
single or double spaced. Use an easily readable font face (e.g., 
Geneva, Helvetica, Times Roman).
    (b) Each page of the proposal, including the Project Summary, 
budget pages, required forms, and any appendices, should be numbered 
sequentially.
    (c) The proposal should be stapled in the upper left-hand corner. 
Do not bind. An original and 14 copies (15 total) must be submitted in 
one package, along with 10 copies of the ``Project Summary'' as a 
separate attachment.
    (d) If applicable, proposals should include original illustrations 
(photographs, color prints, etc.) in all copies of the proposal to 
prevent loss of meaning through poor quality reproduction.
    Small or mid-sized institutions: An academic institution is 
eligible as small or mid-sized if the institution is under 15,000 in 
total enrollment (including part-time students) and is not listed in 
Appendix A (Most successful Universities and Colleges for Receiving 
Federal and/or National Research Initiative Funds.)
2. Cover Page
    Each copy of each grant proposal must contain an ``Application for 
Funding'', Form CSREES-661. One copy of the application, preferably the 
original, must contain the pen-and-ink signature(s) of the proposing 
principal investigator(s)/project director(s)(PI/PD) and the authorized 
organizational representative who possesses the necessary authority to 
commit the organization's time and other relevant resources to the 
project. Any proposed PI/PD or co-PI/PD whose signature does not appear 
on Form CSREES-661 will not be listed on any resulting grant award. 
Complete both signature blocks located at the bottom of the 
``Application for Funding'' form.
    Form CSREES-661 serves as a source document for the CSREES grant 
database; it is therefore important that it be completed accurately. 
The following items are highlighted as having a high potential for 
errors or misinterpretations:
    (a) Title of Project (Block 6). The title of the project must be 
brief (80-character maximum), yet represent the major thrust of the 
effort being proposed. Project titles are read by a variety of 
nonscientific people; therefore, highly technical words or phraseology 
should be avoided where possible. In addition, introductory phrases 
such as ``investigation of,'' ``research on,'' ``education for,'' or 
``outreach that'' should not be used.
    (b) Program to Which You Are Applying (Block 7). ``IFAFS''.
    (c) Program Area and Number (Block 8). The name of the program 
component, e.g. Plant Genome, 10.1 or Behavior of Food Choice, 12.1. 
should be inserted in this block.
    (d) Type of Award Request (Block 13). Check the block for ``new.''
    (e) Principal Investigator(s)/Project Director(s) (PI/PD) (Block 
15). The designation of excessive numbers of co-PI/PD's creates 
problems during final review and award processing. Listing multiple co-
PI/PDs, beyond those required for genuine collaboration, is therefore 
discouraged. Note that providing a Social Security Number is voluntary, 
but is an integral part of the CSREES information system and will 
assist in the processing of the proposal.
    (f) Type of Performing Organization (Block 18). A check should be 
placed in the box beside the type of organization which actually will 
carry out the effort. For example, if the proposal is being submitted 
by an 1862 Land-Grant institution but the work will be performed in a 
department, laboratory, or other organizational unit of an agricultural 
experiment station, box ``03'' should be checked. If portions of the 
effort are to be performed in several departments, check the box that 
applies to the individual listed as PI/PD #1 in Block 15.a.
    (g) Other Possible Sponsors (Block 22). List the names or acronyms 
of all other public or private sponsors including other agencies within 
USDA and other programs funded by CSREES to whom your application has 
been or might be sent. In the event you decide to send your application 
to another organization or agency at a later date, you must inform the 
identified CSREES Program Director as soon as practicable. Submitting 
your proposal to other potential sponsors will not prejudice its review 
by CSREES; however, duplicate support for the same project will not be 
provided. Complete the ``Application for Funding,'' Form CSREES-661, in 
its entirety.
    (h) One copy of the ``Application for Funding'' form must contain 
the signatures (in ink) of the PI/PDs and authorized organizational 
representative for the applicant organization.

[[Page 11851]]

3. Table of Contents
    For consistency and ease in locating information, each proposal 
must contain a detailed Table of Contents just after the cover page. 
The Table of Contents should contain page numbers for each component of 
the proposal. Page numbers should begin with the first page of the 
Project Description.
4. Project Summary
    The proposal must contain a Project Summary of 250 words or less on 
a separate page which should be placed immediately after the Table of 
Contents and should not be numbered. The names and institutions of all 
PI/PDs and co-PI/PDs should be listed on this form, in addition to the 
title of the project. The summary should be a self-contained, specific 
description of the activity to be undertaken and should focus on: 
overall project goal(s) and supporting objectives; plans to accomplish 
the project goal(s); and relevance of the project to IFAFS goals and to 
U.S. agriculture. The importance of a concise, informative Project 
Summary cannot be overemphasized. If the lead institution is eligible 
as a small or mid-sized institution as defined in Part I C., 
Definitions, of this document, include a separate sentence on the 
Project Summary page indicating that the institution is ``eligible for 
small and mid-sized consideration.''
5. Project Description
    The written text may not exceed 15 single- or double spaced pages 
of written text for standard proposals and 20 single- or double-spaced 
pages for Consortia proposals including figures and tables, but 
excluding citations.
    Standard Proposals. Each standard proposal's Project Description 
should contain the following:
    a. Introduction--A clear statement of the long-term goal(s) and 
supporting objectives of the proposed activities should be included. 
Summarize the body of knowledge which substantiates the need for the 
proposed project. Describe ongoing or recently completed significant 
activities related to the proposed project including the work of key 
project personnel. Preliminary data/information pertinent to the 
proposed project should be included;
    b. Relevance and significance--The objectives' specific 
relationship to the goals of the IFAFS and to the particular program 
area should be stated. Include a description of the significance of the 
activity and its value in improving agriculture through research, 
education and extension. Clearly describe the potential impact of the 
project.
    c. Approach--The activities proposed or problems being addressed 
must be clearly stated and the approaches being applied clearly 
described. The following should be included: (1) A description of the 
activities proposed; (2) methods to be used in carrying out the 
project, including the feasibility of the methods; (3) expected 
outcomes; (4) means by which results will be analyzed, assessed, or 
interpreted; and (5) how results or products will be used.
    d. Time Table--Provide an expected time line for completing the 
project in the requested duration.
    e. Evaluation and Monitoring--Provide a plan for assessing and 
evaluating the accomplishments of the stated proposal objectives during 
the project and describe ways to determine the effectiveness of the end 
results during and upon termination of the project.
    f. Collaborative Arrangements--Identify collaborations and provide 
a full explanation of the nature of the collaborations.
    Consortia Proposals. Each Consortia Proposal should include all the 
above items required for a Standard Proposal, but should also include 
the following:
    a. Substantiate the need for a Consortium as opposed to a single 
project approach including how the consortia will add value over 
funding of separate efforts.
    b. Management Plan--It is expected that Consortia projects will 
require more extensive and complicated coordination and collaboration 
than is typically proposed for Standard Projects. Therefore, explain 
how the Consortia will be managed to ensure efficient administration of 
the grant and how activities will be integrated most effectively. Place 
this description after the Project Description.
    c. Evaluation and Monitoring of Project Administration.--In 
addition to the evaluation and monitoring of accomplishments associated 
with the Consortium, evaluation and monitoring of the administration of 
the Consortium must also be included. This description should include 
how funds and resources will be allocated so that collaborative 
participation of all parties throughout the duration of the project is 
ensured. This description should be placed after the Evaluation and 
Monitoring Section described above under Standard Proposals.
6. Appendices to Project Description
    Appendices to the Project Description are allowed if they are 
directly germane to the proposed project and are limited to a total of 
two of the following: reprints (papers that have been published in peer 
reviewed journals) and preprints (manuscripts in press for a peer 
reviewed journal; these must be accompanied by a letter of acceptance 
from the publishing journal).
7. Key Personnel
    All senior personnel who are expected to be involved in the effort 
should be clearly identified. For each person the following should be 
included:
    a. The roles and responsibilities of each PI/PD should be 
described;
    b. An estimate of time commitment for each PI/PD; and
    c. Vitae of each PI/PD, senior associate and other professional 
personnel. This section should include vitae of all key persons who are 
expected to work on the project, whether or not CSREES funds are sought 
for their support. The vitae should be limited to two (2) pages in 
length, excluding publication lists. A chronological list of all 
publications in refereed journals during the past four (4) years, 
including those in press, must be provided for each project member for 
which a curriculum vitae is provided. Also list those non-refereed 
technical publications which have relevance to the proposed project. 
All authors should be listed in the same order as they appear on each 
paper cited, along with the title and complete reference as these 
usually appear in journals.
8. Conflict-of-Interest List
    A Conflict-of-Interest List must be provided for all individuals 
involved in the project (identified as key personnel). Each list should 
be on a separate page and include alphabetically the full names of the 
individuals in the following categories: (a) All collaborators on 
projects within the past four years, including current and planned 
collaborations; (b) all co-authors on publications within the past four 
years, including pending publications and submissions; (c) all persons 
in your field with whom you have had a consulting or financial 
arrangement within the past four years who stand to gain by seeing the 
project funded; and (d) all thesis or postdoctoral advisees/advisors 
within the past four years (some may wish to call these life-time 
conflicts). This form is necessary to assist program staff in excluding 
from proposal review those individuals who have conflicts-of-interest 
with the personnel in the grant proposal. The Program Director, under 
the specific area or sub-area, must be informed of any additional 
conflicts-of-interest that arise after the proposal is submitted.

[[Page 11852]]

9. Collaborative and/or Subcontractual Arrangements
    If it will be necessary to enter into formal consulting or 
collaborative arrangements with others, such arrangements should be 
fully explained and justified. In addition, evidence should be provided 
that the collaborators involved have agreed to render these services. 
If the need for consultant services is anticipated, the proposal 
narrative should provide a justification for the use of such services, 
a statement of work to be performed, and a resume or curriculum vita 
for each consultant. For purposes of proposal development, informal 
day-to-day contacts between key project personnel and outside experts 
are not considered to be collaborative arrangements and thus do not 
need to be detailed.
    All anticipated subcontractual arrangements also should be 
explained and justified in this section. A proposed statement of work 
and a budget for each arrangement involving the transfer of substantive 
programmatic work or the providing of financial assistance to a third 
party must be provided. Agreements between departments or other units 
of your own institution and minor arrangements with entities outside of 
your institution (e.g., requests for outside laboratory analyses) are 
excluded from this requirement.
    If you expect to enter into subcontractual arrangements, please 
note that the provisions contained in 7 CFR Part 3019, USDA Uniform 
Administrative Requirements for Grant and Other Agreements with 
Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit 
Organizations, and the general provisions contained in 7 CFR Part 
3015.205, USDA Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations, flow down to 
subrecipients. In addition, required clauses from Sections 40--48 
(``Procurement Standards'') and Appendix A (``Contract Provisions'') to 
7 CFR Part 3019 should be included in final contractual documents, and 
it is necessary for the subawardee to make a certification relating to 
debarment/suspension.
10. Budget
    a. Budget Form--Prepare the budget, Form CSREES-55, in accordance 
with instructions provided. A budget form is required for each year of 
requested support. In addition, a cumulative budget is required 
detailing the requested total support for the overall project period. 
The budget form may be reproduced as needed by applicants. Funds may be 
requested under any of the categories listed on the form, provided that 
the item or service for which support is requested is allowable under 
the authorizing legislation, the applicable Federal cost principles, 
and these program guidelines, and can be justified as necessary for the 
successful conduct of the proposed project. Applicants must also 
include a Budget Narrative to justify their budgets (see section 11 
below.)
    The following guidelines should be used in developing your proposal 
budget(s):
    1. Salaries and Wages. Salaries and wages are allowable charges and 
may be requested for personnel who will be working on the project in 
proportion to the time such personnel will devote to the project. If 
salary funds are requested, the number of Senior and Other Personnel 
and the number of CSREES-Funded Work Months must be shown in the spaces 
provided. Grant funds may not be used to augment the total salary or 
rate of salary of project personnel or to reimburse them for time in 
addition to a regular full-time salary covering the same general period 
of employment. Salary funds requested must be consistent with the 
normal policies of the institution.
    2. Fringe Benefits. Funds may be requested for fringe benefit costs 
if the usual accounting practices of your organization provide that 
organizational contributions to employee benefits (social security, 
retirement, etc.) be treated as direct costs. Fringe benefit costs may 
be included only for those personnel whose salaries are charged as a 
direct cost to the project.
    3. Nonexpendable Equipment. Nonexpendable equipment means tangible 
nonexpendable personal property including exempt property charged 
directly to the award having a useful life of more than one year and an 
acquisition cost of $5,000 (or lower, depending on institutional 
policy) or more per unit. As such, items of necessary instrumentation 
or other nonexpendable equipment should be listed individually by 
description and estimated cost in the Budget Narrative. This applies to 
revised budgets as well, as the equipment item(s) and amount(s) may 
change.
    4. Materials and Supplies. The types of expendable materials and 
supplies which are required to carry out the project should be 
indicated in general terms with estimated costs in the Budget 
Narrative.
    5. Travel. The type and extent of travel and its relationship to 
project objectives should be described briefly and justified. If 
foreign travel is proposed, the country to be visited, the specific 
purpose of the travel, a brief itinerary, inclusive dates of travel, 
and estimated cost must be provided for each trip. Airfare allowances 
normally will not exceed round-trip jet economy air accommodations. 
U.S. flag carriers must be used when available. See 7 CFR Part 
3015.205(b)(4) for further guidance.
    6. Publication Costs/Page Charges. Include anticipated costs 
associated with publications in a journal (preparing and publishing 
results including page charges, necessary illustrations, and the cost 
of a reasonable number of coverless reprints) and audio-visual 
materials that will be produced. Photocopying and printing brochure, 
etc., should be shown in Section I., ``All Other Direct Costs'' of Form 
CSREES-55.
    7. Computer (ADPE) Costs. Reimbursement for the costs of using 
specialized facilities (such as a university- or department-controlled 
computer mainframe or data processing center) may be requested if such 
services are required for completion of the work.
    8. All Other Direct Costs. Anticipated direct project charges not 
included in other budget categories must be itemized with estimated 
costs and justified in the Budget Narrative. This also applies to 
revised budgets, as the item(s) and dollar amount(s) may change. 
Examples may include space rental at remote locations, subcontractual 
costs, and charges for consulting services, telephone, facsimile, 
shipping costs, and fees necessary for laboratory analyses. You are 
encouraged to consult the ``Instructions for Completing Form CSREES-55, 
Budget,'' of the Application Kit for detailed guidance relating to this 
budget category. Form AD-1048 must be completed by each subcontractor 
or consultant and retained by the grantee.
    9. Indirect Costs--Section 1462 of the National Agricultural 
Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3310) 
limits indirect costs for this program to 19 percent of total Federal 
funds provided under each award. Therefore, the recovery of indirect 
costs under this program may not exceed the lesser of the institution's 
official negotiated indirect cost rate or the equivalent of 19 percent 
of total Federal funds awarded. If no rate has been negotiated, a 
reasonable dollar amount (equivalent to less than 19 percent of total 
Federal funds requested) in lieu of indirect costs may be requested, 
subject to approval by USDA.
    b. Budget Narrative--All budget categories, with the exception of 
Indirect Costs for which support is

[[Page 11853]]

requested, must be individually listed (with costs) and justified on a 
separate sheet of paper and placed immediately behind the Budget Form. 
Explanations of matching funds or lack thereof on commodity-specific 
projects also are to be included in this section.
    c. Matching Funds--If an applicant concludes that matching funds 
are not required as specified in Part I (e), a justification should be 
included in the Budget Narrative. CSREES will consider this 
justification when ascertaining final matching requirements. CSREES 
retains the right to make final determinations regarding matching 
requirements.
    For those grants requiring matching funds as specified in Part I 
(e), proposals should include written verification of commitments of 
matching support (including both cash and in-kind contributions) from 
third parties. Written verification means:
    (a) For any third party cash contributions, a separate pledge 
agreement for each donation, signed by the authorized organizational 
representatives of the donor organization and the applicant 
organization, which must include: (1) The name, address, and telephone 
number of the donor; (2) the name of the applicant organization; (3) 
the title of the project for which the donation is made; (4) the dollar 
amount of the cash donation; and (5) a statement that the donor will 
pay the cash contribution during the grant period; and
    (b) For any third party in-kind contributions, a separate pledge 
agreement for each contribution, signed by the authorized 
organizational representatives of the donor organization and the 
applicant organization, which must include: (1) The name, address, and 
telephone number of the donor; (2) the name of the applicant 
organization; (3) the title of the project for which the donation is 
made; (4) a good faith estimate of the current fair market value of the 
third party in-kind contribution; and (5) a statement that the donor 
will make the contribution during the grant period.
    The sources and amount of all matching support from outside the 
applicant institution should be summarized on a separate page and 
placed in the proposal immediately following the Budget Narrative. All 
pledge agreements must be placed in the proposal immediately following 
the summary of matching support.
    The value of applicant contributions to the project shall be 
established in accordance with applicable cost principles. Applicants 
should refer to OMB Circulars A-21, Cost Principles for Educational 
Institutions, A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Tribal 
Governments, A-122, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations, and 
for for-profit organizations, the cost principles in the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation at 48 CFR Subpart 31.2 (see 7 CFR 3015.194).
11. Current and Pending Support
    All proposals must contain Form CSREES-663 listing other current 
public or private support (including in-house support) to which key 
personnel identified in the proposal have committed portions of their 
time, whether or not salary support for person(s) involved is included 
in the budget. Analogous information must be provided for any pending 
proposals that are being considered by, or that will be submitted in 
the near future to, other possible sponsors, including other USDA 
Programs or agencies. Concurrent submission of identical or similar 
proposals to the possible sponsors will not prejudice proposal review 
or evaluation by the CSREES for this purpose. However, a proposal that 
duplicates or overlaps substantially with a proposal already reviewed 
and funded (or to be funded) by another organization or agency will not 
be funded under this program. Note that the project being proposed 
should be included in the pending section of the form.
12. Assurance Statement(s), (Form CSREES-662)
    A number of situations encountered in the conduct of projects 
require special assurances, supporting documentation, etc., before 
funding can be approved for the project. In addition to any other 
situation that may exist with regard to a particular project, it is 
expected that some applications submitted in response to these 
guidelines will involve the following:
    a. Recombinant DNA or RNA Research
    As stated in 7 CFR Part 3015.205 (b)(3), all key personnel 
identified in the proposal and all endorsing officials of the proposing 
organization are required to comply with the guidelines established by 
the National Institutes of Health entitled, ``Guidelines for Research 
Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules,'' as revised. If your project 
proposes to use recombinant DNA or RNA techniques, you must so indicate 
by checking the ``yes'' box in Block 19 of Form CSREES-661 (the Cover 
Page) and by completing Section A of Form CSREES-662. For applicable 
proposals recommended for funding, Institutional Biosafety Committee 
approval is required before CSREES funds will be released.
    b. Animal Care. Responsibility for the humane care and treatment of 
live vertebrate animals used in any grant project supported with funds 
provided by CSREES rests with the performing organization. Where a 
project involves the use of living vertebrate animals for experimental 
purposes, all key project personnel identified in a proposal and all 
endorsing officials of the proposing organization are required to 
comply with the applicable provisions of the Animal Welfare Act of 
1966, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) and the regulations 
promulgated thereunder by the Secretary in 9 CFR Parts 1,2, 3, and 4 
pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of these animals. If 
your project will involve these animals, you should check ``yes'' on 
block 20 of CSREES-661 and complete Section B of Form CSREES-662. In 
the event a project involving the use of live vertebrate animals 
results in a grant award, funds will be released only after the 
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee has approved the project.
    c. Protection of Human Subjects--Responsibility for safeguarding 
the rights and welfare of human subjects used in any grant project 
supported with funds provided by CSREES rests with the performing 
organization. Guidance on this issue is contained in the National 
Research Act, Pub. L. No. 93-348, as amended, and implementing 
regulations promulgated by the Department under 7 CFR Part 1c. If you 
propose to use human subjects for experimental purposes in your 
project, you should check the ``yes'' box in Block 21 of Form CSREES-
661 and complete Section C of Form CSREES-662. In the event a project 
involving human subjects results in a grant award, funds will be 
released only after the appropriate Institutional Review Board has 
approved the project.
13. Certifications
    Note that by signing Form CSREES-661 the applicant is providing 
certifications required by 7 CFR Part 3017, as amended, regarding 
Debarment and Suspension and Drug Free Workplace, and 7 CFR Part 3018, 
regarding Lobbying. The certification forms are included in the 
application package for informational purposes only. These forms should 
not be submitted with the proposal since by signing form CSREES-661 
your organization is providing the required certifications. If the 
project will involve a subcontractor or consultant, the subcontractor/
consultant should submit a form AD-1048 to the grantee

[[Page 11854]]

organization for retention in their records. This form should not be 
submitted to USDA.
14. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Form 
CSREES-1234
    As outlined in 7 CFR Part 3407 (the Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service regulations implementing NEPA), the 
environmental data for any proposed project is to be provided to CSREES 
so that CSREES may determine whether any further action is needed. In 
some cases, however, the preparation of environmental data may not be 
required. Certain categories of actions are excluded from the 
requirements of NEPA.
    In order for CSREES to determine whether any further action is 
needed with respect to NEPA, pertinent information regarding the 
possible environmental impacts of a particular project is necessary; 
therefore, Form CSREES-1234, ``NEPA Exclusions Form,'' must be included 
in the proposal indicating whether the applicant is of the opinion that 
the project falls within a categorical exclusion and the reasons 
therefore. If it is the applicant's opinion that the proposed project 
falls within the categorical exclusions, the specific exclusion must be 
identified. Form CSREES-1234 and supporting documentation should be 
included as the last page of this proposal.
    Even though a project may fall within the categorical exclusions, 
CSREES may determine that an Environmental Assessment or an 
Environmental Impact Statement is necessary for an activity, if 
substantial controversy on environmental grounds exists or if other 
extraordinary conditions or circumstances are present which may cause 
such activity to have a significant environmental effect.

D. Submission of Proposals

1. When to Submit (Deadline Date)
    Proposals must be transmitted by May 8, 2000, as indicated by 
postmark or date of courier bill of lading. Proposals transmitted after 
this date will not be considered for funding.
2. What to Submit
    An original and 14 copies must be submitted. In addition submit 10 
copies of the proposal's Project Summary. All copies of the proposals 
and the Project Summaries must be submitted in one package.
3. Where to Submit
    Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit completed proposals 
via overnight mail or delivery service to ensure timely receipt by the 
USDA. The address for hand-delivered proposals or proposals submitted 
using an express mail or overnight courier service is: Initiative for 
Future Agriculture and Food Systems; c/o Proposal Services Unit; 
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service; U.S. 
Department of Agriculture; Room 303, Aerospace Center; 901 D Street, 
S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20024.
    Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the 
following address: Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems; 
c/o Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; STOP 2245; 1400 
Independence Avenue, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20250-2245.

C. Acknowledgment of Proposals

    The receipt of proposals will be acknowledged by e-mail. Therefore, 
applicants are encouraged to provide e-mail addresses, where 
designated, on the Form CSREES-661. If the applicant's e-mail address 
is not indicated, CSREES will acknowledge receipt of the proposal by 
letter.
    Once the proposal has been assigned an identification number, 
please cite that number on all future correspondence. If the applicant 
does not receive an acknowledgment within 60 days of the submission 
deadline, please contact the Program Director.

Part IV--Review Process

A. General

    All proposals, including standard and consortia projects (as well 
as small and mid-sized designated projects), will be reviewed together 
by a panel in the pertinent program area. Prior to technical 
examination, a preliminary review will be made for responsiveness to 
the program area. Proposals that do not fall within the guidelines as 
stated in the Program Area Description will be eliminated from program 
competition and will be returned to the applicant.
    Individual written comments and in-depth discussions will be 
provided by a peer review panel prior to recommending applications for 
funding. Peer review panel members will be selected based upon their 
training and experience in relevant scientific, extension, or education 
fields taking into account the following factors: (a) The level of 
formal scientific, technical education, and extension experience of the 
individual, as well as the extent to which an individual is engaged in 
relevant research, education or extension activities; (b) the need to 
include as peer reviewers experts from various areas of specialization 
within relevant scientific, education, and extension fields; (c) the 
need to include as reviewers other experts (producers, range or forest 
managers/operators, consumers, etc.) who can assess relevance of the 
proposals to targeted audiences and to program needs; (d) the need to 
include as peer reviewers experts from a variety of organizational 
types (e.g., colleges, universities, industry, state and Federal 
agencies, private profit and non-profit organizations), and geographic 
locations; (e) the need to maintain a balanced composition of peer 
review groups with regard to minority and female representation and an 
equitable age distribution; and (f) the need to include members that 
can judge the effective usefulness to producers and the general public 
of each proposal.

B. Evaluation Factors

    Priority will be given to projects that are multistate, multi-
institutional, or multidisciplinary or projects that integrate 
agricultural research, education and extension.
    The following evaluation factors apply to all proposals.
1. Relevance
    All proposals will be judged as to their relevance to critical 
emerging agricultural issues related to future food production; 
environmental quality, and natural resource management; or farm income. 
Further factors include:
    (a) Documentation that the research, extension and education 
activities are directed towards current or likely future problems or 
problems identified in this document;
    (b) Evident linkage of research, extension and education functions.
    (c) Evidence of involvement of stakeholders and/or communities of 
interest.
2. Merit
    All proposals will be judged on their scientific, extension, or 
education merit including:
    (a) Novelty, innovation, uniqueness, and originality;
    (b) Conceptual adequacy of the research, extension and education 
components;
    (c) Clarity and delineation of objectives;
    (d) Adequacy of the description of the undertaking and suitability 
and feasibility of methodology;

[[Page 11855]]

    (e) Demonstration of feasibility;
    (f) Probability of success of the project;
3. Quality
    All proposals will be judged on their quality including:
    (a) Selection of most appropriate and qualified individuals to 
address the problem;
    (b) Training and demonstrated awareness of previous and alternative 
approaches to the problem identified in the proposal, and performance 
record or potential for future accomplishments;
    (c) Time allocated for systematic attainment of objectives;
    (d) Institutional experience and competence in subject area;
    (e) Adequacy of available or obtainable support personnel, 
facilities, and instrumentation;
    (f) Adequacy of plans for reporting, assessing and monitoring of 
results of the project over its duration.
    Consortia: In addition to the evaluation factors listed above the 
consortia proposals will be judged on the adequacy of: The planned 
administration of the consortium and its maintenance, partnerships, 
collaborative efforts, evaluation and monitoring efforts, and the 
planned dissemination of information over the duration of the project.

C. Conflicts-of-Interest and Confidentiality

    During the peer evaluation process, extreme care will be taken to 
prevent any actual or perceived conflicts-of-interest that may impact 
review or evaluation. For the purpose of determining conflicts-of-
interest, the academic and administrative autonomy of an institution 
shall be determined by reference to the January 1998 issue of the 
Codebook for Compatible Statistical Reporting of Federal Support to 
Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions, prepared by Quantum 
Research Corporation for the National Science Foundation.
    Names of submitting institutions and individuals, as well as 
proposal content and peer evaluations, will be kept confidential, 
except to those involved in the review process, to the extent permitted 
by law. In addition, the identities of peer reviewers will remain 
confidential throughout the entire review process. Therefore, the names 
of reviewers will not be released to applicants. At the end of the 
fiscal year, names of panelists will be made available in such a way 
that the panelists cannot be identified with the review of any 
particular proposal.

Part V--Additional Information

A. Access To Review Information

    Copies of summary reviews, not including the identify of reviewers, 
will be sent to the applicant PI/PD after the review process has been 
completed.

B. Grant Awards

(1) General
    Within the limit of funds available for such purpose, the awarding 
official of CSREES shall make grants to those responsible, eligible 
applicants whose proposals are judged most meritorious under the 
procedures set forth in this RFP. The date specified by the 
Administrator as the effective date of the grant shall be no later than 
September 30. It should be noted that the project need not be initiated 
on the grant effective date, but as soon thereafter as practical so 
that project goals may be attained within the funded project period. 
All funds granted by CSREES under this RFP shall be expended solely for 
the purpose for which the funds are granted in accordance with the 
approved application and budget, the regulations, the terms and 
conditions of the award, the applicable Federal cost principles, and 
the Department's assistance regulations (parts 3015, 3016, and 3019 of 
7 CFR).
(2) Organizational Management Information
    Specific management information relating to an applicant shall be 
submitted on a one-time basis as part of the responsibility 
determination prior to the award of a grant identified under this RFP, 
if such information has not been provided previously under this or 
another CSREES program. CSREES will provide copies of forms recommended 
for use in fulfilling these requirements as part of the preaward 
process.
(3) Grant Award Document and Notice of Grant Award
    The grant award document shall include at a minimum the following:
    (a) Legal name and address of performing organization or 
institution to whom the Administrator has awarded a grant under the 
terms of this request for proposals;
    (b) Title of project;
    (c) Name(s) and address(es) of principal investigator(s) chosen to 
direct and control approved activities;
    (d) Identifying grant number assigned by the Department;
    (e) Project period, specifying the amount of time the Department 
intends to support the project without requiring recompetition for 
funds;
    (f) Total amount of Departmental financial assistance approved by 
the Administrator during the project period;
    (g) Legal authority(ies) under which the grant is awarded;
    (h) Approved budget plan for categorizing allocable project funds 
to accomplish the stated purpose of the grant award; and
    (i) Other information or provisions deemed necessary by CSREES to 
carry out its respective granting activities or to accomplish the 
purpose of a particular grant.
    The notice of grant award, in the form of a letter, will be 
prepared and will provide pertinent instructions or information to the 
grantee that is not included in the grant award document.
    All grants awarded under this program will be awarded using a 
funding mechanism whereby CSREES agrees to support a specified level of 
effort for a predetermined time period without additional support at a 
future date.

C. Use of Funds; Changes

(1) Delegation of Fiscal Responsibility
    Unless the terms and conditions of the grant state otherwise, the 
grantee may not in whole or in part delegate or transfer to another 
person, institution, or organization the responsibility for use or 
expenditure of grant funds.
(2) Changes in Project Plans
    (a) The permissible changes by the grantee, PI/PD(s), or other key 
project personnel in the approved project grant shall be limited to 
changes in methodology, techniques, or other aspects of the project to 
expedite achievement of the project's approved goals. If the grantee 
and/or the PI/PD(s) are uncertain as to whether a change complies with 
this provision, the question must be referred to the CSREES Authorized 
Departmental Officer (ADO) for a final determination.
    (b) Changes in approved goals or objectives shall be requested by 
the grantee and approved in writing by the CSREES ADO prior to 
effecting such changes. In no event shall requests for such changes be 
approved which are outside the scope of the original approved project.
    (c) Changes in approved project leadership or the replacement or 
reassignment of other key project personnel shall be requested by the 
grantee and approved in writing by the awarding official of CSREES 
prior to effecting such changes.
    (d) Transfers of actual performance of the substantive programmatic 
work in whole or in part and provisions for

[[Page 11856]]

payment of funds, whether or not Federal funds are involved, shall be 
requested by the grantee and approved in writing by the ADO prior to 
effecting such transfers, unless prescribed otherwise in the terms and 
conditions of the grant.
    (e) Changes in Project Period: The project period may be extended 
by CSREES without additional financial support, for such additional 
period(s) as the ADO determines may be necessary to complete or fulfill 
the purposes of an approved project. Any extension of time shall be 
conditioned upon prior request by the grantee and approval in writing 
by the ADO, unless prescribed otherwise in the terms and conditions of 
a grant, but in no case shall a grant period of performance exceed 5 
years.
    (f) Changes in Approved Budget: Changes in an approved budget must 
be requested by the grantee and approved in writing by the ADO prior to 
instituting such changes if the revision will involve transfers or 
expenditures of amounts requiring prior approval as set forth in the 
applicable Federal cost principles, Departmental regulations, or in the 
grant award.

D. Applicable Federal Statutes and Regulations

    Several other Federal statutes and regulations apply to grant 
proposals considered for review and to project grants awarded under 
this program. These include, but are not limited to:
    7 CFR Part 1.1--USDA implementation of the Freedom of Information 
Act.
    7 CFR Part 3--USDA implementation of OMB Circular No. A-129 
regarding debt collection.
    7 CFR Part 15, subpart A--USDA implementation of Title VI of the 
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
    7 CFR Part 3015--USDA Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations, 
implementing OMB directives (i.e., Circular Nos. A-21 and A-122) and 
incorporating provisions of 31 U.S.C. 6301-6308 (formerly the Federal 
Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, Pub. L. No. 95-224), as 
well as general policy requirements applicable to recipients of 
Departmental financial assistance.
    7 CFR Part 3016--Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and 
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.
    7 CFR Part 3017--USDA implementation of Governmentwide Debarment 
and Suspension (Nonprocurement) and Governmentwide Requirements for 
Drug-Free Workplace (Grants).
    7 CFR Part 3018--USDA implementation of Restrictions on Lobbying. 
Imposes prohibitions and requirements for disclosure and certification 
related to lobbying on recipients of Federal contracts, grants, 
cooperative agreements, and loans.
    7 CFR Part 3019--USDA implementation of OMB Circular A-110, Uniform 
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements With 
Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit 
Organizations.
    7 CFR Part 3052--USDA implementation of OMB Circular No. A-133, 
Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-profit Organizations.
    7 CFR Part 3407--CSREES procedures to implement the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
    29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973) and 7 CFR 
Part 15d (USDA implementation of statute)--prohibiting discrimination 
based upon physical or mental handicap in Federally assisted programs.
    35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.--Bayh-Dole Act, controlling allocation of 
rights to inventions made by employees of small business firms and 
domestic nonprofit organizations, including universities, in Federally 
assisted programs (implementing regulations are contained in 37 CFR 
Part 401).

E. Confidential Aspects of Proposals and Awards

    When a proposal results in a grant, it becomes a part of the record 
of CSREES transactions, available to the public upon specific request. 
Information that the Secretary determines to be of a confidential, 
privileged, or proprietary nature will be held in confidence to the 
extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant 
wishes to have considered as confidential, privileged, or proprietary 
should be clearly marked within the proposal. The original copy of a 
proposal that does not result in a grant will be retained by the CSREES 
for a period of one year. Other copies will be destroyed. Such a 
proposal will be released only with the consent of the applicant or to 
the extent required by law. A proposal may be withdrawn at any time 
prior to the final action thereon.

F. Regulatory Information

    For the reasons set forth in the final Rule-related Notice to 7 CFR 
part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), this program is 
excluded from the scope of the Executive Order 12372 which requires 
intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. Under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as amended (44 
U.S.C. chapter 35), the collection of information requirements 
contained in this Notice have been approved under OMB Document No. 
0524-0022.

    Done at Washington, D.C., this 1st day of March 2000.
Charles W. Laughlin,
Administrator Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service.

APPENDIX A--Most Successful Universities and Colleges for Receiving 
Federal and/or National Research Initiative Funds \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Based on data from the table Federal obligations for science 
and engineering research and development to the 100 universities and 
colleges receiving the largest amounts, ranked by total amount 
received: in fiscal year 1997 of Federal Science and Engineering 
Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions 
(National Science Foundation, accessible through the Internet at 
www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf99331/).
    *Annotated institutions are not in the list for the most 
successful Federally funded, but were among the top 50th percentile 
of those funded by the National Research Initiative (Competitive, 
Special, and Facilities Research Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)) over 
the past three years (1997-1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baylor College of Medicine
Boston University
Brown University
California Institute of Technology
Carnegie-Mellon University
Case Western Reserve University
Colorado State University
Columbia University
Cornell University
CUNY Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Emory University
Florida State University
Georgetown University
Georgia Institute of Technology
Harvard University
Indiana University
Iowa State University of Science and Technology
Johns Hopkins University
*Kansas State University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Medical College of Wisconsin
Michigan State University
New York University
North Carolina State University
Northwestern University
Ohio State University

[[Page 11857]]

Oregon Health Sciences University
Oregon State University
Pennsylvania State University
Princeton University
Purdue University
Rockefeller University
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Scripps Research Institute
Stanford University
State University of New York at Stony Brook
State University of New York at Buffalo
Texas A&M University, College Park
Thomas Jefferson University
Tufts University
Tulane University
University of Alabama Birmingham
University of Arizona
University of California Berkeley
University of California Davis
University of California Irvine
University of California Los Angeles
*University of California Riverside
University of California San Francisco
University of California Santa Barbara
University of Chicago
University of Cincinnati
University of Colorado
University of Florida
University of Georgia
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
University of Illinois Chicago
University of Iowa
University of Kansas
University of Maryland Baltimore Prof Sch
University of Maryland College Park
University of Massachusetts Amherst
University of Massachusetts Medical School Worcester
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
University of Miami
University of Michigan Ann Arbor
University of Minnesota Twin Cities
University of Missouri Columbia
*University of Nebraska--Lincoln
University of New Mexico
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
University of Pennsylvania
University of Pittsburgh
University of Rochester
University of South Carolina
University of Southern California
University of Texas at Austin
University of Texas Health Science Center Houston
University of Texas Health Sci. Center San Antonio
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston
University of Texas SW Medical Center Dallas
University of Utah
University of Virginia
University of Washington
University of Wisconsin Madison
*Utah State University
Vanderbilt University
Virginia Commonwealth University
Wake Forest University
Washington University
*Washington State University
Wayne State University
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Yale University
Yeshiva University, New York
[FR Doc. 00-5349 Filed 3-1-00; 3:24 pm]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P