[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19344-19354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-9197]



[[Page 19343]]

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

Part IV





Department of Agriculture





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



Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service



 Request for Proposals (RFP): Agriculture Risk Management Education 
Competitive Grants Program, FY 2001; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2001 / 
Notices  

[[Page 19344]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service


Request for Proposals (RFP): Agricultural Risk Management 
Education Competitive Grants Program, FY 2001

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 Agricultural Risk Management Education Competitive 
Grants Program in fiscal year (FY) 2001. The program will focus on 
comprehensive risk management education (RME) for agricultural 
producers in the United States. It will address national, regional and 
local risk management issues and encourage partnering in program 
delivery. The amount available for this program in FY 2001 is 
approximately $4,800,000.
    This notice sets out the objectives for projects, the eligibility 
criteria for projects and applicants, the application procedures, and 
the set of instructions needed to apply for an Agricultural Risk 
Management Education Competitive grant under this authority.
    By this notice, CSREES is also soliciting comments regarding this 
Request for Proposals (RFP) from any interested party. These comments 
will be considered in the development of future RFP's for the program. 
Comments should be submitted as provided for in the Addresses and Dates 
portions of this notice.

DATES: Proposals must be received by COB on June 1, 2001 (5:00 p.m. 
EST). Proposals received 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: 
Agricultural Risk Management Education Competitive Grant Program; c/o 
Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Room 1307 Waterfront 
Center; 800 9th Street, SW.; Washington, DC 20024.
    Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the 
following address: Agricultural Risk Management Education Competitive 
Grant Program; c/o Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, 
Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; STOP 
2245; 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC 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, SW.; Washington, DC 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 CONTACT: Applicants and other interested 
parties are encouraged to contact: Dr. Donald A. West; National Program 
Leader, Farm Business Management; Economic and Community Systems Unit; 
Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service; U.S. 
Department of Agriculture; STOP 2215; 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.; 
Washington, DC 20250-2215; Telephone: (202) 720-7166; Fax: (202) 690-
3162; e-mail address: [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. Restrictions on Use of Funds
Part II--Program Description
    A. Project Types
    B. Program 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 Criteria
    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 Statutes and Regulations
    E. Confidential Aspects of Proposals and Awards
    F. Regulatory Information

Stakeholder Input

    Stakeholder input for this RFP was obtained through listening 
sessions held in: Raleigh, North Carolina; Boise, Idaho; and Kansas 
City, Missouri in September 2000. Input was obtained from: producers; 
representatives of commodity organizations; representatives of colleges 
and universities (e.g., faculty, extension educators, and 
administrators); and representatives from the private sector. Written 
and oral testimony at those sessions has been used extensively in the 
development of this RFP. Transcripts of these sessions are available on 
the national AgRisk Electronic Library/Website. The address is http://www.agrisk.umn.edu.
    In addition, 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 her 
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 10.500, Agricultural Risk Management Education 
Competitive Grant Program.

Part I--General Information

A. Legislative Authority and Background

    Section 133 of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, Pub. 
L. 106-224, amended the Federal Crop Insurance Act to add section 
524(a)(3), which requires the Secretary, acting through the Cooperative 
State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), to establish 
a competitive grants program for the purpose of educating agricultural 
producers about the full range of risk management activities. These 
activities include futures, options, agricultural trade options, crop 
insurance, cash forward contracting, debt reduction, production 
diversification, farm resources risk reduction and other risk 
management strategies.

[[Page 19345]]

    Approximately $4,800,000 will be available for funding in FY 2001.
    The RME program will bring the existing knowledge base to bear on 
risk management issues faced by agricultural producers and expand the 
program throughout the nation. Applicants are encouraged to recognize 
the risk management education (RME) needs of all producers, including 
small-scale and minority producers and women, while giving special 
consideration to educational needs of producers who have had limited 
exposure to risk management concepts, tools and strategies.
    Subject to the availability of funds, organizations eligible to 
apply for and receive grant awards are land-grant colleges or 
universities, cooperative extension services, other colleges or 
universities, and other qualified public and private entities with a 
demonstrated capacity to develop and carry out educational programs for 
agricultural producers.

B. Purpose, Priorities and Fund Availability

    The program will support a wide range of extension education 
activities in risk management for agricultural producers. The primary 
purpose is to provide U.S. agricultural producers with the knowledge, 
skills and tools needed to make informed risk management decisions for 
their operations. Applicant activities should include: the use of 
existing and the formation of new educational networks focused on 
agricultural producers; the development of agricultural risk management 
curricula and materials; the delivery of agricultural RME to producers 
using one or more of the wide range of delivery methods; and the 
verification of program impacts.
    Priority will be given to projects that recognize and document the 
RME needs of producers as they exist at regional, state and local 
levels, and propose effective educational programs that address those 
needs. Regionally based programs should be flexible while addressing 
special needs as determined by: producer audiences; commodity mixes; 
types of risks associated with production, marketing, financial, legal 
and human resource conditions; and/or other factors that hold the 
greatest potential for assisting producers.
    There is no commitment by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
to fund any particular proposal or to make a specific number of awards.

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 is 
delegated.
    (2) Agricultural Risk Management means the informed use, as 
appropriate, of the full range of agricultural risk management 
activities, including futures, options, agricultural trade options, 
crop insurance, cash forward contracting, debt reduction, production 
diversification, farm resources risk reduction and other risk 
management strategies, by agricultural producers. It includes those 
risks encountered in the production, marketing, financial, legal, and 
human resource(s) aspects of farm and ranch operations.
    (3) 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.
    (4) Authorized organizational representative means the president, 
director, chief executive officer, or other designated official of the 
applicant organization, who has the authority to commit the resources 
of the organization.
    (5) Budget period means the interval of time (usually 12 months) 
into which the project period is divided for budgetary and reporting 
purposes.
    (6) Cash contributions means the applicant's cash outlay, including 
the outlay of money contributed to the applicant by non-Federal third 
parties.
    (7) Department or USDA means the United States Department of 
Agriculture.
    (8) Education activity means formal classroom instruction, 
laboratory instruction, and practicum experience in the food and 
agricultural sciences and other related matters such as faculty 
development, student recruitment and services, curriculum development, 
instructional materials and equipment, and innovative teaching 
methodologies.
    (9) Extension activity means an act or process that delivers 
science-based knowledge and informal educational programs to people, 
enabling them to make practical decisions.
    (10) 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.
    (11) Grantee means the organization designated in the grant award 
document as the responsible legal entity to which a grant is awarded.
    (12) Matching means that portion of allowable project costs not 
borne by the Federal Government, including the value of in-kind 
contributions.
    (13) Partnering means a joint effort among two or more 
institutions, organizations and/or other entities with the capacity to 
conduct projects intended and designed to accomplish the purpose of the 
program.
    (14) Peer review means 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) Peer review panel means a group of experts qualified by 
training and/or experience in particular fields to evaluate eligible 
proposals in those fields submitted under this RFP.
    (16) Performance target means expected measurable accomplishments 
that can be used to document the extent of change brought about by the 
project.
    (17) Principal investigator/Project director means the single 
individual designated in the grant application and approved by the 
Secretary who is responsible for the direction and management of the 
project.
    (18) Prior approval means written approval evidencing prior consent 
by an authorized departmental officer as defined in (3) above.
    (19) Producers means individuals, families, or other entities in 
the U.S. engaged in the business of agricultural production and 
marketing before the farm gate.
    (20) Project means the particular activity within the scope of the 
program supported by a grant award.
    (21) Project period means the period, as stated in the award 
document, during which Federal sponsorship begins and ends.
    (22) Qualified Public and Private Entities means public or private 
groups, organizations, or institutions that have established and 
demonstrated capacities to conduct projects that accomplish the 
purposes of the program as designated in these guidelines.
    (23) Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture and any other 
officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority involved is 
delegated.
    (24) Third party in-kind contributions means non-cash contributions 
of property or services provided by non-

[[Page 19346]]

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 are invited from qualified public and private entities. 
This includes all colleges and universities, Federal, State, and local 
agencies, nonprofit and for-profit private organizations or 
corporations, and other entities.
    Although an applicant may be eligible to compete for an award based 
on its status as an eligible entity, other factors may exclude an 
applicant from receiving Federal assistance under this program (e.g., 
debarment and suspension, a determination of non-responsibility based 
on the information submitted).

E. Restrictions on Use of Funds

    Program 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.

Part II--Program Description

A. Project Types

1. Regional Centers
    RME Centers will be supported/established in the Northeastern, 
Southern, North Central and Western Regions of the United States. The 
Regional RME Centers will be initially supported at a level of up to 
$1.25 million for approximately one year at levels reflective of the 
activities proposed. The extent of Center's proposed activities and the 
amount of the award is expected to vary in accordance to the number of 
producers in the region, the number of public and private institutions 
and other partners involved, the types of agricultural risks that 
prevail, the range of commodities and specialty crops involved and 
other relevant factors. A Regional Centers proposal may call for the 
establishment of a satellite center to meet the needs of specially 
targeted audiences. The budget request should be at levels reflective 
of the scope of the proposed activity, recognizing the program 
complexity and the numbers and characteristics of targeted producers.
    The Regional Centers are expected to conduct projects within their 
region. These projects are to be solicited and selected for funding by 
the RME Center recipient through a competitive process. The Centers may 
also support special projects for training, coordination and 
communication networks that are developed, with stakeholder input, and 
conducted by the Centers.
    Receipt of a Regional Center grant under this RFP is not a 
guarantee of receipt of future grant funds under this program. 
Applications for continuation grants under this program in future years 
will be subject to competition.
2. Standard Projects
    Approximately $960,000 is available for proposals for national or 
multi-regional grants in FY 2001. Proposals can be up to three years in 
length with a budget of not more than $300,000 for the full period 
proposed.

B. Program Description

    Proposals should build on effective programs on agricultural risk 
management that have been developed within the Land Grant College and 
University System and/or have evolved within the past three years with 
support from the Risk Management Agency of USDA and involvement of 
partners in the private sector. A national AgRisk Electronic Library 
(Website: http://www.agrisk.umn.edu) established in 1998, provides 
ready access to materials documenting these programs. The applicant 
should focus on providing RME to producers, building on the educational 
base and networks that have been established. This expanded program 
will take place through the four Regional Centers and the series of 
projects funded at the national, multi-state or state levels through 
Standard Project grants.
Regional Risk Management Education Centers
    The USDA, using stakeholder input, has placed a high priority on 
the establishment of Regional RME Centers as a means of meeting the 
specific risk management education needs that exist within regions. The 
Centers will assist the USDA and its other partners to conduct a 
national RME program to address regional, state and local needs. The 
process to develop the Regional Centers will begin in FY 2001 with the 
formation of four geographically based Regional Centers with one each 
in the Northeastern, Southern, North Central and Western Regions of the 
United States. The establishment of Regional Centers should address 
specific regional risk management education needs, diverse audiences, 
commodity and enterprise mixes, and other conditions that exist at the 
regional, state and local levels. Educational programs will cover the 
full range of risk management activities, including futures, options, 
agricultural trade options, crop insurance, cash forward contracting, 
debt reduction, production diversification, farm resources risk 
reduction, and other risk management strategies.
    Development and delivery of effective RME programs must take into 
account regional, state and local issues affecting producers as well as 
common RME components that exist across the nation. The Centers should 
facilitate rapid feedback from producers and other stakeholders within 
the region, and tailor the RME program to meet specific and emerging 
needs.
    Regional RME Centers will have primary responsibility for 
development and implementation of agricultural RME programs within 
their respective regions. However, smaller satellite centers, 
coordinating with the Regional Center, may be established to meet the 
needs of specially targeted audiences. Regional RME Centers will be the 
locus for building partnerships among pubic and private entities. The 
Centers will solicit and select regional projects through a competitive 
process taking into consideration stakeholder input. The Centers should 
promote collaboration that includes the exchange of materials and 
information, open communication, and integration of activities around 
RME issues within the region. Centers should bring together the 
expertise and knowledge needed to address RME issues, drawing from 
regional sources and from national or multi-regional projects that 
provide broad or specialized knowledge for a particular situation.
    The four Regional RME Centers will be the primary vehicle for 
delivering RME to agricultural producers recognizing the special needs, 
audiences, commodities, production and marketing conditions and other 
regional factors that must be considered in developing and delivering 
effective RME programs. They will be expected to verify activities and 
report program results on a continuing basis.
    Applicants for the four Regional RME Centers should present plans 
that demonstrate their program and administrative capacity to solicit, 
select and support a set of RME projects that address the RME 
priorities within their region. These plans should indicate how RME 
coverage will be provided to all producers within the region and should 
recognize the role of women in risk management decision-making. They 
should give special consideration to targeted producer audiences, 
including small-scale and minority producers that have special RME 
needs.

[[Page 19347]]

    Proposals will be expected to meet the following objectives:
    1. Provide regional RME program leadership and coordination, 
including a plan for reaching agricultural producers with RME programs. 
This includes developing and implementing mechanisms that identify 
agricultural RME needs that are specific to producers within the 
region. Applicants should recognize the importance of specialty crops 
within the region and risks associated with them. An emphasis should be 
placed on the development and implementation of programs to reach 
producers with little or no prior exposure to RME, and that recognizes 
minority producers and the role of women, spouses and the family in 
decision-making.
    2. Give attention to RME needs of specially targeted audiences 
including small-scale and minority producers and to specific types of 
risks, commodities and other conditions that exist within the region. 
This may involve the development of satellite center(s) within the 
region to provide more direct focus for associated programs. Focus on 
specially targeted audiences will include the development and/or 
acquisition of relevant materials and curricula, and providing updates 
on changes in crop insurance and other risk management programs in 
formats that communicate with these audiences.
    3. Establish an entity, such as an Advisory Council, that 
represents stakeholders and will ensure that planning, project 
selection and funding determined at the regional level occurs with a 
broad base of support consistent with stakeholder needs. Plans should 
include procedures for regional representation on a national 
coordinating body.
    4. Develop and implement a competitive process for selection of 
regional projects and allocation of regional funds. This process must 
be consistent with the requirements and guidelines established for the 
entire RME program.
    5. Promote partnering among public and private entities within the 
region.
    6. Conduct regional training workshops on existing or emerging risk 
management topics, as needed.
    7. Establish a regionally-based RME program verification system and 
communication network that will document program results and promote 
communication within and across regions, and nationally.
    Proposed budgets for the Regional RME Center grants may include 
funding for the Center Director and support staff. Additional funding 
may be used to support Center activities including needs assessment, 
stakeholder input and guidance, regional competitive processes, 
regional training efforts and materials development and other necessary 
activities conducted by the Center.
Standard Projects
    Approximately $960,000 has been allocated to support Standard RME 
Projects. These projects must have nationwide or multi-state 
applicability and complement the entire Agricultural RME Competitive 
Grants program. Requested funds for a single proposal for a national 
project cannot exceed a total of $300,000 for a duration of up to three 
years. The amount requested must be commensurate with the activities 
proposed. These projects are expected to address special and emerging 
issues, foster nationwide exchanges of RME information and materials, 
enhance verification and reporting of results, and promote coordination 
across regional programs while avoiding duplication of efforts. 
Standard Projects will be encouraged to coordinate with the regional 
projects and complement cross-regional activities. Proposals that build 
on existing information networks and offer innovative or expanded 
activities are encouraged.
    Standard Project proposals will be expected to meet one or more of 
the following objectives:
    1. Meet a specialized RME need that is either national, multi-
regional, or multi-state in scope, e.g. educational programs focused on 
legal or human resource risks that occur in non-contiguous regions or 
states and that have common characteristics that can be addressed in a 
single project;
    2. Identify emerging agricultural risk management issues with 
nationwide implications and develop innovative approaches and 
educational materials to assist producers in managing them;
    3. Provide a national source of RME information, materials and 
software that may be readily accessed nationally and internationally 
through electronic media;
    4. Develop and maintain a national database that compiles results 
from Regional RME Centers and other projects, including verification of 
accomplishments, and compile reports that can be used to inform 
stakeholders;
    5. Conduct national conferences and/or workshops that enhance 
sharing of regional RME program results, promote program coordination 
and train educators on new risk management tools and strategies.

C. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements

    Funded projects will be expected to verify program accomplishments. 
Accomplishments can include expanded awareness of the importance of 
risk management and greater knowledge of risk management tools and 
strategies among program participants. Evidence of actual or intended 
beneficial changes in their risk management behavior is particularly 
desirable, in addition to documentation of producer involvement in 
program activities. The evidence is expected to include participants' 
assessment of the value of program materials and instruction, and 
suggestions for addition or deletion of topics and instructional 
materials.
    Grantees must prepare semi-annual reports that document significant 
activities or events that show movement toward achieving goals and 
objectives of the project. The reports should specify performance 
targets for that period and contain evidence that verifies the extent 
to which these targets have been met. Regional projects should 
contribute regularly to a national database which shows the combined 
impact of the program.

Part III--Preparation of a Proposal

A. Program Application Material

    Program application materials are available at the CSREES website 
(www.reeusda.gov/RME). 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 the Fiscal Year 2001 Agricultural Risk 
Management Education Competitive Grants Program. 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 2001 Agricultural Risk 
Management Education Competitive Grants Program.

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

[[Page 19348]]

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.
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) Legal Name of Organization (Block 1). Be sure to indicate the 
full name of the submitting organization, e.g. University of (state), 
Cooperative Extension Service.
    (b) 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.
    (c) Program to Which You Are Applying (Block 7). ``RME'' or Risk 
Management Education Competitive Grants Program.
    (d) Program Area and Number (Block 8). Leave blank.
    (e) Type of Award Request (Block 13). Check the block for ``new.''
    (f) 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.
    (g) 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.
    (h) 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.
    (i) One copy of the ``Application for Funding'' form must contain 
the original signatures (in ink) of the PI/PD(s) and authorized 
organizational representative for the applicant organization.
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 the Agricultural 
Risk Management Education Competitive Grants Program. The importance of 
a concise, informative Project Summary cannot be overemphasized.
5. Project Description
    The written text may not exceed 15 single-or double-spaced pages of 
written text for Standard Project grant proposals and 20 single- or 
double-spaced pages for Regional Centers proposals including figures 
and tables, but excluding citations.
Standard Projects
    Each Standard Project 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 RME program should be stated. Include 
a description of the significance of the activity and its value in 
improving agriculture. 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. Project Timetable--The proposal should outline all important 
phases as

[[Page 19349]]

a function of time, year by year, for the entire project, including 
periods beyond the grant funding period.
    e. Verification and Monitoring--Provide a plan for assessing and 
verifying 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.
    g. Cooperation and Institutional Units Involved--Cooperative, 
multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary applications are encouraged. 
Identify each institutional unit contributing to the project and 
designate the lead institution or institutional unit. When appropriate, 
the project should be coordinated with the efforts of other State, 
Regional and/or national programs. Clearly define the roles and 
responsibilities of each institutional partner of the project team.
    h. Facilities and Equipment--All facilities which are available for 
use or assignment to the project during the requested period of support 
should be reported and described briefly. All items of major equipment 
or instrumentation available for use or assignment to the proposed 
project should be itemized. In addition, items of nonexpendable 
equipment needed to conduct and bring the project to a successful 
conclusion should be listed, including dollar amounts and, if funds are 
requested for their acquisition, justified.
Regional RME Centers
    Each Regional RME Center proposal should include all the above 
items required for a Standard Project proposal, but should also include 
the following:
    a. Substantiate the need for a Regional Center 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 centers projects will 
require more extensive and complicated coordination and collaboration 
than is typically proposed for Standard Projects. Therefore, explain 
how the Center will be managed to ensure efficient administration of 
the grant and how activities will be integrated most effectively. The 
Management Plan should be inserted as the last part of the Project 
Description.
    c. Evaluation and Monitoring of Project Administration--In addition 
to the verification and monitoring of accomplishments associated with 
the Center, evaluation and monitoring of the administration of the 
Center 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 Verification and Monitoring 
Section described above under Standard Projects.
6. Appendices to Project Description
    Appendices to the Project Description are allowed if they are 
directly germane to the proposed project (e.g. documentation of 
previous related program impacts, widely distributed materials, or 
other brief indicators of previous program effectiveness.)
7. Key Personnel
    The following should be included, as applicable:
    a. The roles and responsibilities of each PI/PD and/or collaborator 
should be described;
    b. An estimate of time commitment for each PI/PD and/or 
collaborator including current and pending projects; 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. List only those technical 
publications that 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 (i.e., each individual submitting a vitae in 
response to item 7.(c) of this part). 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 must be informed of any 
additional conflicts-of-interest that arise after the proposal is 
submitted.
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, the rate of pay, 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. 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. In addition, Form AD-1048 must be completed by 
each subcontractor or consultant and retained by the grantee.

[[Page 19350]]

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 b 
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 (e.g. social security 
and retirement) 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 travel 
is proposed, the destination, 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 brochures, 
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.
    9. Indirect Costs. If available, the current rate negotiated with 
the cognizant Federal negotiating agency should be used. Indirect costs 
may not exceed the negotiated rate. If a negotiated rate is used, the 
percentage and base should be indicated in the space allotted under 
item K. on the Budget Form. If no rate has been negotiated, a 
reasonable dollar amount for indirect costs may be requested, which 
will be subject to approval by USDA. In the latter case, if a proposal 
is recommended for funding, an indirect cost rate proposal must be 
submitted prior to award to support the amount of indirect costs 
requested. CSREES will request an indirect cost rate proposal and 
provide instructions, as necessary.
    A proposer may elect not to charge indirect costs and, instead, 
charge only direct costs to grant funds. Grantees electing this 
alternative, however, will not be allowed to charge, as direct costs, 
indirect costs that otherwise would be in the grantee's indirect cost 
pool under the applicable Office of Management and Budget cost 
principles. If indirect costs are not charged, the phrase ``None 
requested'' should be written in this space. Having requested no 
indirect costs, a grantee will not be permitted at a later date to 
revise its budget to allow for indirect costs.
    b. Budget Narrative--All budget categories, with the exception of 
Indirect Costs for which support is requested, must be individually 
listed (with costs) and justified on a separate sheet of paper and 
placed immediately behind the Budget Form. Explanations of project 
matching, including in-kind contributions, are to be included in this 
section.
    c. Matching Funds--Matching under this program is encouraged but 
not required. Applicants proposing to provide matching support should 
show the sources and amount of all matching from outside the applicant 
organization. This should be summarized on a separate page and placed 
in the proposal immediately following the Budget Narrative. All pledge 
arrangements must be placed in the proposal immediately following the 
summary of the 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 Regulations 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

[[Page 19351]]

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. 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 organization for 
retention in their records. This form should not be submitted to USDA.
14. Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
    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.

C. Submission of Proposals

1. When To Submit (Deadline Date)
    Proposals must be received by COB on June 1, 2001 (5:00 p.m. EST). 
Proposals received 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: Agricultural 
Risk Management Education Competitive Grants Program; c/o Proposal 
Services Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 
Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Room 1307, Waterfront Centre; 
800 9th Street, S.W.; Washington, D.C. 20024.
    Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the 
following address: Agricultural Risk Management Education Competitive 
Grants Program; 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.

D. 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

    Each proposal will be evaluated using a two-part process. First, 
each proposal will be screened to ensure that it meets the 
administrative requirements as set forth in this request for proposals. 
Second, a panel will consider the relevance, technical merits and 
management/delivery capacity identified in the proposal.
    Priority consideration will be given to recipients providing 
matching, either cash or in-kind, that is commensurate with the 
project's scope and the organization's resources.
    The peer review panel will be comprised of representatives from 
USDA and other federal agencies, agricultural producers and/or 
commodity organizations, experts from colleges and universities, and 
others representing public and private entities as needed.

[[Page 19352]]

    Overall, peer review panel members will be selected based upon 
their training and experience in relevant education or extension fields 
taking into account the following factors: (a) The level of formal 
scientific, technical education, and/or extension experience of the 
individual, as well as the extent to which an individual is engaged in 
relevant education and/or extension activities; (b) the need to include 
as peer reviewers experts from various areas of specialization within 
relevant education, and extension fields; (c) the need to include as 
reviewers other experts (e.g. producers and operators of related 
agribusinesses) who can assess relevance and efficacy 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 Criteria

1. Regional RME Education Center Proposals
    Proposals for RME Centers will be evaluated based on the criteria 
described below.
a. Focused Development and Delivery of Relevant Risk Management 
Education Programs to Agricultural Producers--40 points
     Focus on Producers.
    Factors include demonstrated understanding of agricultural RME 
needs including use of feedback mechanisms that identify emerging needs 
of producers and indicate program relevance and effectiveness.
     Programs targeted to Regional Agricultural Risk Management 
Education Needs.
    Proposals should identify how RME programming will address 
regional, state and local risk management issues recognizing 
educational needs associated with specially targeted audiences, 
including minorities, women and other family members, and with types of 
agricultural risks associated with specialty crops and climatic 
conditions.
     Use of RME Materials Appropriate for Regional Educational 
Needs.
    Factors to be considered will include ready access to existing RME 
materials that apply to regional risk management issues and the ability 
to develop additional materials as needed.
     Demonstrated Ability to Effectively Deliver Nonformal RME 
Programs To End-Users.
    Successful applicants will exhibit a strong track record of 
attracting end-users to educational offerings and evidence of effective 
communication and interaction with participants.
b. Management Capacity To Develop and Maintain a Regional Risk 
Management Center With Networks To Deliver RME Programs--30 points
     Documentation of how Producer RME needs will be identified 
and addressed.
    Suggested approaches may include the use of surveys and feedback 
mechanisms to identify RME needs and the formation of Advisory Councils 
to provide guidance for competitive processes that solicit and select 
projects at the regional level. Factors that will be considered include 
the balanced representation of stakeholders within the Region and a 
defined role for advisory groups in the decision-making processes for 
Center activities.
     Use of a Competitive Process to Select Projects at the 
Regional Level.
    This process should ensure that public and private entities have 
equal access to opportunities to submit proposals for regional RME 
projects, that regional RME objectives are clearly identified, and that 
partnering and joint efforts are encouraged.
     Development of a Regional RME Delivery Network.
    This process should ensure that public and private entities 
involved in RME participate in an institutional/organizational 
framework that can coordinate delivery of RME programs to agricultural 
producers.
     Expertise and Institutional/Organizational Support.
    Center staff should possess adequate training, experience and the 
capacity to develop and manage regional RME programs, conduct training, 
and participate in national coordination activities. Institutional/
organizational support including facilities should be available.
c. Verification of Program Impacts--15 points
     Definition of Performance Targets.
    Performance targets should be closely related to program objectives 
and expected outcomes; and should focus on change in the knowledge and 
behavior of program participants. Indicators may include participant 
assessments of improved knowledge and stated intentions to alter 
behavior that improves their management of risks.
     Regular and Accurate Reporting of RME Program Activities 
and Impacts.
    The process should include the formation of an accountability and 
reporting system integrated with program objectives and focus on 
performance, and its use for semi-annual and/or requested reporting at 
regional and national levels.
d. Effective Regional Communication Networks and Linkage to a National 
Network--15 points
     Capacity to Provide Effective RME Communication at Intra- 
and Inter-regional levels.
    This includes use of media outlets and the distribution of regional 
RME materials that have nationwide application.
     Establishment of a Regional Communication Source.
    This source should be readily accessible by regional project 
directors and should be linked to the national Agriculture Risk Library 
(Website).
     Participation in National Conferences and Workshops.
    This activity should promote program coordination and sharing of 
materials. Priority will be given to projects that are multistate, 
multi-institutional, multidisciplinary or projects that integrate 
agricultural research, education and extension.
2. Standard Project Proposals
    Proposals for Agricultural Risk Management Education national 
projects will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
a. Addresses a Nationwide or Multi-State RME (Special) Need--40 points
     Identifies Nationwide RME Special Needs and Proposes 
Actions To Meet Them.
    Successful proposals will address a special or emerging need that 
has nationwide applicability and/or cannot effectively or efficiently 
be addressed within a single region. Suggested topics may include 
education on risks associated with use of agricultural labor that 
prevail in noncontiguous states or regions; legal risks that are common 
across regions, and agricultural risks associated with new 
technologies. Proposals that complement regional efforts such as 
maintenance/expansion of a national AgRisk electronic library, design 
and conduct of national training conferences, formation of a national 
project verification and reporting system, and development of distance 
learning techniques applicable to RME audiences will be welcomed.

[[Page 19353]]

     Addressing Emerging RME Issues.
    Proposals should indicate how the RME issue can be addressed, 
solutions proposed and results/materials be made available nationwide 
within the time and funding limits set for Standard Projects.
b. Program Complementarity and Innovative Characteristics--20 points
     Complements the Total RME Program.
    Factors to be considered include the extent to which the proposal 
indicates how the purpose and objectives complement the total RME 
program in an effective manner.
     Adopts Innovative Approaches and Methods.
    Consideration will be given to those proposals which identify 
innovative approaches and methods that can lead to more effective and 
efficient delivery of RME.
c. Capacity To Conduct Projects and Verify Results--40 points
     Expertise and Support.
    Entities submitting successful proposals will employ, or have 
access to, personnel with knowledge and experience in agricultural RME 
and who are able to communicate effectively with other RME projects 
across the nation. Necessary support personnel and infrastructure are 
required. Ready access and familiarity with existing RME databases and 
the ability to use them appropriately to achieve project results is 
desirable.
     Verification of Impacts and Distribution of Results.
    Demonstrated capacity to assemble, summarize, and present data that 
verify RME program impacts and to deliver project materials and results 
to stakeholders and other RME project leaders with the ability to 
communicate effectively with a wide range of stakeholders.

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 1999 issue of the Code 
Book for Compatible Statistical Reporting of Federal Science and 
Engineering Support to Colleges, Universities, 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 identity 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 PI/PD(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.

[[Page 19354]]

    (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 CSREES ADO prior to effecting 
such changes.
    (d) Transfers of actual performance of the substantive programmatic 
work in whole or in part and provisions for 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 15b (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 9th day of April 2001.
K. Jane Coulter,
Acting Administrator, Cooperative State Research, Education, and 
Extension Service.
[FR Doc. 01-9197 Filed 4-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P