[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 71 (Thursday, April 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19831-19836]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-7510]



[[Page 19831]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5050]


Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Request for 
Grant Proposal for Study of the U.S. Institute on U.S. National 
Security: U.S. National Security Policymaking in a Post 9/11 World

    Announcement Type: New Cooperative Agreement.
    Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/A/E/USS-05-10-NS.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 19.418.
    Key Dates: Application Deadline: June 6, 2005.
    Executive Summary: The Branch for the Study of the U.S., Office of 
Academic Exchange Programs, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs 
(ECA/A/E/USS), announces an open competition for public and private 
non-profit organizations to develop and implement the Study of the 
United States Institute on U.S. National Security: U.S. National 
Security Policymaking in a Post 9/11 World. This institute, for a 
multinational group of 18 experienced foreign university educators and 
other professionals, is intended to provide participants with a deeper 
understanding of U.S. approaches to national security policymaking, 
past and present, in order to strengthen curricula and to improve the 
quality of teaching about the United States at universities and other 
institutions abroad. The institute should be designed as intensive, 
academically rigorous seminars for scholars and other professionals 
from outside the United States and should have a strong central theme 
and focus. It should also have a strong contemporary component.
    It is anticipated that this grant will be awarded on or about 
August 1, 2005 and program activities should begin shortly thereafter. 
The program, which should be six weeks in length, will be conducted 
during the winter of 2006 and must include an academic residency 
segment of at least four weeks duration at a U.S. college or university 
campus (or other appropriate U.S. location) and a study tour segment of 
not more than two weeks that should complement the learning gained 
during the academic residency segment. The study tour segment must 
include a visit to Washington involving substantive briefings by high-
ranking national security policy professionals from the Department of 
State, other relevant U.S. government agencies and private 
institutions.

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Authority: Overall grant making authority for this program is 
contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, 
Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. 
The purpose of the Act is ``to enable the Government of the United 
States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the 
United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen 
the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the 
educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of 
the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to 
assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful 
relations between the United States and the other countries of the 
world.'' The funding authority for this institute is provided through 
legislation.
    Purpose: The Bureau is seeking a detailed proposal for a Study of 
the United States (U.S.) Institute on U.S. National Security issues 
from colleges, universities, consortia of colleges and universities, 
and other not-for-profit academic organizations that have an 
established reputation in one or more of the following fields: 
political science, international relations, law, military science, and/
or other disciplines or sub-disciplines related to the program themes.
    This Study of the U.S. Institute should provide a multinational 
group of up to 18 experienced foreign university faculty and other 
professionals with a deeper understanding of the process of U.S. 
national security policymaking. The institute should be organized 
around a central theme or themes in U.S. national security policy 
planning and formulation and should have a strong contemporary 
component. Through a combination of traditional, multi-disciplinary and 
interdisciplinary approaches, program content should be imaginatively 
integrated in order to elucidate the history and evolution of U.S. 
institutions and values, broadly defined. The program should also serve 
to illuminate contemporary political, social, and economic debates in 
American society.
    The institute is intended to offer foreign scholars and other 
professionals whose professional work focuses in whole or in 
substantial part on the United States the opportunity to deepen their 
understanding of American society, culture and institutions. Their 
ultimate goal is to strengthen curricula, to improve the quality of 
teaching, and to broaden understanding of U.S. national security 
policymaking in universities and other institutions of influence 
abroad.
    The project director or one of the key program staff responsible 
for the academic program must have an advanced degree in one of the 
following fields: political science, international relations, law, 
military science, and/or other disciplines or sub-disciplines related 
to the program themes. Staff escorts traveling under the cooperative 
agreement must have demonstrated qualifications to perform this 
service. The program must conform with Bureau requirements and 
guidelines outlined in the Solicitation Package. Bureau programs are 
subject to the availability of funds.
    The institute should be designed as intensive, academically 
rigorous seminars intended for an experienced group of fellow scholars 
from outside the United States. The institute should be organized 
through an integrated series of lectures, readings, seminar 
discussions, regional travel and site visits, and should also include 
some opportunity for limited but well-directed independent research. 
Applicants are encouraged to design a thematically coherent program in 
ways that draw upon the particular strengths, faculty and resources of 
their institutions as well as upon the nationally recognized expertise 
of scholars and other experts throughout the United States.
    This Study of the United States Institute program should seek to:
    1. Provide participants with a survey of contemporary scholarship 
within the institute's governing academic discipline, delineating the 
current scholarly debate within the field. In this regard the seminar 
should indicate how prevailing academic practice in the discipline 
represents both a continuation of and a departure from past scholarly 
trends and practices. It is expected that presenters from other 
institutions will be brought in, as appropriate. Please note that the 
ways these alternative schools of thought will be presented should be 
clearly described in the proposal;
    2. Bring an interdisciplinary or multi-disciplinary focus to bear 
on the program content;
    3. Give participants a multi-dimensional examination of U.S. 
society and institutions that reflects a broad and balanced range of 
perspectives and responsible views. The program should include the 
views not only of scholars, but also those of other professionals such 
as government officials, private practitioners and others who can 
substantively contribute to the topics at issue; and,

[[Page 19832]]

    4. Ensure access to library and material resources that will enable 
grantees to continue their research, study and curriculum development 
upon returning to their home institutions.

Program Description

(1) Study of the U.S. Institute on U.S. National Security: U.S. 
National Security Policymaking in a Post 9/11 World
    This Institute should provide a multinational group of 18 
experienced foreign university faculty and other professionals with an 
opportunity to increase their understanding of the foundations and 
formulation of U.S. national security policy, with specific reference 
to U.S. views on what constitutes basic U.S. national security and 
defense requirements and how those views have evolved in the post-Cold 
War era and in the ongoing global fight against terror. The program 
should be multi-disciplinary in approach and should examine various 
historical, political, geographic, and economic factors in involved in 
the making of U.S. national security policy.
    Participants: As specified in the Project Objectives, Goals and 
Implementation (POGI) guidelines in the solicitation package, the 
program should be designed for highly-motivated and experienced 
multinational groups of 18 post-secondary educators and other 
professionals, and, in some cases, government officials. Participants 
will be interested in taking part in an intensive seminar on aspects of 
U.S. approaches to national security policymaking as a means to develop 
or improve courses and teaching about the United States at their home 
institutions.
    Participants will be diverse in terms of age, professional 
position, and travel experience abroad. Participants can be expected to 
come from educational institutions where the study of the U.S. is 
relatively well-developed as well as from institutions that are just 
beginning to introduce courses and programs focusing on the United 
States. While participants may not have in-depth knowledge of the 
particular institute program theme, they will likely have had exposure 
to the relevant discipline and some experience teaching about the 
United States.
    Participants will be drawn from all regions of the world and will 
be fluent or proficient in the English language.
    Participants will be nominated by Fulbright Commissions and by U.S. 
Embassies abroad. A final list of participants will be sent to the 
grantee institution. The grantee institutions will participate in the 
selection of participants.
    Program Dates: It is anticipated that this grant will be awarded on 
or about August 1, 2005 and program activities should begin shortly 
thereafter. Ideally, the institute should be 44 days in length 
(including participant arrival and departure days) and should begin in 
early January and end in mid- or late February 2006.
    Program Guidelines: It is critically important that proposals 
provide a full, detailed and comprehensive narrative describing the 
objectives of the institute; the title, scope and content of each 
session; and, how each session relates to the overall institute theme. 
A syllabus must therefore indicate the subject matter for each lecture 
or panel discussion, confirm or provisionally identify proposed 
lecturers and discussants, and clearly show how assigned readings will 
support each session. A calendar of all activities for the program must 
also be included. In addition to the individual review criteria 
referenced in Section V.1., proposals will be reviewed on the basis of 
their fullness, coherence, clarity, and attention to detail.

    Note: In a cooperative agreement, ECA/A/E/USS is substantially 
involved in program activities above and beyond routine grant 
monitoring. ECA/A/E/USS activities and responsibilities for this 
program are as follows: ECA/A/E/USS will participate in the 
selection of participants, will exercise oversight with one or more 
site visits, will coordinate and arrange briefings by officials from 
the Department of State, and will debrief participants. ECA/A/E/USS 
may also require changes in the content of the program as well as 
the activities proposed either before or after the grant is awarded.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement. ECA's level of involvement in 
this program is listed under number I above.
    Fiscal Year Funds: FY-05.
    Approximate Total Funding: $260,000.
    Number of Awards: 1.
    Approximate Average Award: $260,000.
    Floor of Award Range: $220,000.
    Ceiling of Award Range: $260,000.
    Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, August 1, 
2005.
    Anticipated Project Completion Date: March 30, 2006.
    Additional Information: Pending successful implementation of this 
program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is 
ECA's intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal years, 
before openly competing it again.

III. Eligibility Information

III.1. Eligible Applicants

    Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit 
organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code 
section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3).

III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds

    There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this 
competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide 
maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs.
    When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the 
applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its 
proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost 
sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For 
accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs 
which are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by 
the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis 
for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in 
accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), subpart C.23--Cost 
Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum 
amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's 
contribution will be reduced in like proportion.

III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements

    (a) Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less 
than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be 
limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding one 
grant, in an amount up to approximately $260,000 to support program and 
administrative costs required to implement this exchange program. 
Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in 
conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this 
competition. The Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels 
of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs.
    (b) Technical Eligibility: All proposals must comply with the 
following: The project director or one of the key program staff 
responsible for the academic program must have an advanced degree in 
one of the following fields: Political science, international 
relations, law, military science, and/or other disciplines or sub-
disciplines related to the program themes.
    Failure to meet these criteria will result in your proposal being 
declared

[[Page 19833]]

technically ineligible and given no further consideration in the review 
process.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    Note: Please read the complete Federal Register announcement 
before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP 
deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition 
with applicants until the proposal review process has been 
completed.

IV.1. Contact Information to Request an Application Package

    Please contact the Branch for the Study of the U.S., ECA/A/E/USS, 
Room Number 252, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20547, telephone number (202) 453-8532 and fax number 
(202) 453-8533, e-mail [email protected] to request a Solicitation 
Package. Please refer to the correct Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/A/
E/USS-05-10-NS) located on the first page of this announcement when 
making your request.
    The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission 
Instruction (PSI) document which consists of required application 
forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation.
    It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation 
(POGI) document, which provides specific information, award criteria 
and budget instructions tailored to this competition.
    Please specify Program Officer Brian Gibson at [email protected] 
on all other inquiries and correspondence.

IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet

    The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's 
Web site at http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm. Please 
read all information before downloading.

IV.3. Content and Form of Submission

    Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation 
Package. The original and thirteen (13) copies of the application 
should be sent per the instructions under IV.3e. ``Submission Dates and 
Times section'' below.
    IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal 
Numbering System (DUNS) number to apply for a grant or cooperative 
agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit 
identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. 
Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a 
DUNS number, access http://www.dunandbradstreet.com or call 1-866-705-
5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the 
appropriate box of the SF-424 which is part of the formal application 
package.
    IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal 
narrative and budget.
    Please refer to the solicitation package. It contains the mandatory 
Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) document and the Project 
Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document for additional 
formatting and technical requirements.
    IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of 
application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not 
received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three 
years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS 
within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation 
to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to 
do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible.
    IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information 
when preparing your proposal narrative:
IV.3d.1. Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa
    The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is placing renewed 
emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J 
visa) Programs and adherence by grantees and sponsors to all 
regulations governing the J visa. Therefore, proposals should 
demonstrate the applicant's capacity to meet all requirements governing 
the administration of the Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 
CFR part 62, including the oversight of Responsible Officers and 
Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program 
participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to 
participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and 
security of forms, recordkeeping, reporting and other requirements. ECA 
will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this 
program.
    A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of 
Exchange Visitor (J) programs is available at http://exchanges.state.gov or from: United States Department of State, Office 
of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD--SA-44, Room 734, 
301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone: (202) 401-9810, 
FAX: (202) 401-9809.
    Please refer to Solicitation Package for further information.
IV.3d.2. Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines
    Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must 
maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and 
representative of the diversity of American political, social, and 
cultural life. ``Diversity'' should be interpreted in the broadest 
sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to 
ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic 
status, and disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere 
to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and 
in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the 
``Support for Diversity'' section for specific suggestions on 
incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides 
that ``in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in 
countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,'' the 
Bureau ``shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for 
participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of 
such countries.'' Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of 
the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in 
the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these 
goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible.
IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation
    Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's 
success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. 
The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey 
questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to 
use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects 
that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to 
respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the 
program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a 
result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions 
(institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The 
evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual 
understanding as well as substantive knowledge.
    Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting 
clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation 
plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your 
anticipated project outcomes, and

[[Page 19834]]

how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance 
indicators). The more that outcomes are ``smart'' (specific, 
measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable 
time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You 
should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the 
program described in this RFGP.
    Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish 
between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services 
delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important 
to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot 
substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the 
results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people 
trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, 
represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is 
usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and 
outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes.
    We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, 
as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in 
increasing order of importance):
    1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange 
experience.
    2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, 
skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both 
substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding.
    3. Participant professional development, concrete actions to apply 
knowledge in work or community; greater participation and 
responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation 
of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between 
participants, community members, and others.
    4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and 
partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational 
improvements.

    Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate 
timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, 
satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas 
behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-
term outcomes.

    Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be 
judged on how well it: (1) Specifies intended outcomes; (2) gives clear 
descriptions of how each outcome will be measured; (3) identifies when 
particular outcomes will be measured; and (4) provides a clear 
description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., 
surveys, interviews, or focus groups).

    Please note: Because the cooperative agreement prospectively to 
be awarded under the terms of the present RFGP is likely to be of 
less than one year's duration, host institutions will not be 
expected to be able to demonstrate significant specific results in 
terms of participant behavior or institutional changes during the 
agreement period. Applicant institutions' monitoring and evaluation 
plans should, therefore, focus primarily on the first and more 
particularly the second level of outcomes (learning). ECA/A/E/USS 
will assume principal responsibility for developing performance 
indicators and conducting post-institute evaluations to measure 
changes in participant behavior as a result of the program(s), and 
effect of the program(s) on institutions, over time.

    Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their 
evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All 
data collected, including survey responses and contact information, 
must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the 
Bureau upon request.
IV.3d.4. Describe Your Plans for Overall Program Management, Staffing, 
and Coordination With ECA/A/E/USS
    ECA/A/E/USS considers program management, staffing and coordination 
with the Department of State essential elements of your program. Please 
be sure to give sufficient attention to these elements in your 
proposal. Please refer to the Technical Eligibility Requirements and 
the POGI in the Solicitation package for specific guidelines.
    IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration 
when preparing your budget:
IV.3e.1. Applicants Must Submit a Comprehensive Budget for the Entire 
Program
    Awards should be up to approximately $260,000. There must be a 
summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and 
program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each 
program component, phase, location, or activity to provide 
clarification.
    Based on a group of 18 participants, the total Bureau-funded budget 
(program and administrative) for this program should be up to 
approximately $260,000, and Bureau-funded administrative costs as 
defined in the budget details section of the solicitation package may 
be up to approximately $110,000.
    Justifications for any costs above these amounts must be clearly 
indicated in the proposal submission. Proposals should try to maximize 
cost-sharing in all facets of the program and to stimulate U.S. private 
sector, including foundation and corporate, support. The Bureau 
reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in 
accordance with the needs of the program, and availability of U.S. 
government funding.
    Please refer to the ``POGI'' in the Solicitation Package for 
complete institute budget guidelines and formatting instructions.
IV.3e.2. Allowable Costs for the Program Include the Following
    (1) Institute staff salary and benefits.
    (2) Honoraria for Guest speakers.
    (3) Participant per diem.
    Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget 
guidelines and formatting instructions.
    IV.3f. Submission Dates and Times: Application Deadline Date: June 
6, 2005.
    Explanation of Deadlines: Due to heightened security measures, 
proposal submissions must be sent via a nationally recognized overnight 
delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or 
U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be shipped no 
later than the above deadline. The delivery services used by applicants 
must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking 
systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who 
are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. 
Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA 
more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further 
consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the 
established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this 
competition. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each 
package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm 
delivery to ECA via the Internet. ECA will not notify you upon receipt 
of application. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local 
courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will 
not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above 
will be considered. Applications may not be submitted electronically at 
this time.
    Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation 
Package.

    Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure 
to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and

[[Page 19835]]

place it in an envelope addressed to ``ECA/EX/PM''.

    The original and thirteen (13) copies of the application should be 
sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/A/E/USS-05-10-NS, Program Management, ECA/
EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547.
    Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above 
Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory 
Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) of the solicitation document.
    IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 
12372 does not apply to this program.
    Applicants are also requested to submit the ``Executive Summary'' 
and ``Proposal Narrative'' sections of the proposal in text (.txt) 
format on a PC-formatted disk.

V. Application Review Information

V.1. Review Process

    The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. 
Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the 
guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible 
proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public 
Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. The Branch for the Study 
of the U.S. may also retain outside independent consultants to review 
proposals in their particular field(s) of expertise. The feedback or 
input of any such consultants will be advisory only. Eligible proposals 
will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and 
guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. 
Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by 
other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the 
discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for 
Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for 
assistance awards (cooperative agreements) resides with the Bureau's 
Grants Officer.

Review Criteria

    Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed 
according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank 
ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation:
    1. Quality of Program Idea/Plan: The proposal narrative and 
appendices should demonstrate the complete integration of the two 
program modules (academic and experiential) into a single program. 
Applicants should clearly explain how/why site visits, consultations, 
reading lists etc. were chosen and how they complement the academic 
module and the program as a whole. The program should offer a balanced 
presentation of the subjects/issues covered, reflecting both the 
continuity of the American experience as well diversity and dynamism 
inherent in it.
    2. Academic Residency Program Planning and Administration: 
Proposals should demonstrate careful planning. The organization and 
structure of the academic residency component should be clearly 
delineated. A program syllabus, noting specific sessions and topical 
readings supporting each academic unit, should be included. The 
expectation is that this institute will be conducted as an intensive 
graduate-level seminar. Plans for the academic residency segment 
should, therefore, avoid undue reliance on the ``lecture followed by 
question-and-answer session'' format, and should incorporate panel 
presentations, working group assignments, group debates and other 
modalities designed to foster and encourage active learning and 
participation by all institute participants.
    3. Study Tour Planning and Administration: The study tour travel 
component should not simply be a tour, but rather an integral and 
substantive part of the program, reinforcing and complementing the 
academic component. The proposal should explain how the site visits and 
presentations included in the study tour program relate to the 
Institute's learning objectives. Consideration should be given to 
assigning lighter readings during the study tour (e.g., short articles, 
newspaper selections, etc.) related to planned study tour travel 
sessions. While visits to cultural institutions may be included, the 
emphasis should be on meetings with scholars and other relevant 
professionals such as (e.g.) government officials, journalists, and 
national security policy practitioners who can substantively contribute 
to deepening the participants' understanding of issues and topics 
pertinent to the Institute's theme(s).
    4. Ability to Achieve overall program objectives: Due to the 
academic nature of this program, overall objectives can only be met if 
proposals exhibit originality and substance consonant with the highest 
standards of American teaching and scholarship. Program design should 
reflect the main currents as well as the debates within the subject 
disciplines of the institute. A variety of presenters reflecting 
diverse backgrounds and viewpoints should be invited to discuss their 
specific areas of expertise with the participants. Assigned readings 
likewise should expose participants to diverse, responsible 
perspectives on the topics and issues to be explored.
    5. Support for Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive 
support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. ``Diversity'' should be 
interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, 
but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic 
location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. Applicants are 
strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both 
in program administration and in program content. Applicants should 
highlight instances of diversity in their proposal.
    6. Evaluation and Follow-Up: Proposals should include a plan to 
evaluate an activity's success, both as it unfolds and at the end of 
the program. A draft survey questionnaire or other technique, plus 
description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original 
project objectives are recommended. Proposals should discuss provisions 
made for follow-up with returned grantees as a means of establishing 
longer-term individual and institutional linkages.
    7. Cost-effectiveness/Cost Sharing: The overhead and administrative 
components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be 
kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and 
appropriate.
    8. Institutional Capacity: Proposals should provide evidence of 
continuous administrative and managerial capacity as well as the means 
by which program activities and logistical matters will be implemented. 
Proposed personnel, including faculty and administrative staff as well 
as outside presenters, should be fully qualified to achieve the 
project's goals. Library and meeting facilities, housing, meals, 
transportation and other logistical arrangements should fully meet the 
needs of participants.
    9. Institutional Track Record/Ability: Proposals should demonstrate 
an institutional record of successful exchange program activities, 
indicating the experience that the organization and its professional 
staff have had working with foreign educators. The Bureau will consider 
the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential 
of new applicants.

[[Page 19836]]

VI. Award Administration Information

VI.1. Award Notices

    Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by 
Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. 
Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document (AAD) 
from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant 
proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the 
only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. 
Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and 
mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the 
application.
    Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of 
the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this 
competition.

VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements 
include the following:

Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, ``Cost Principles for 
Nonprofit Organizations.''
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, ``Cost Principles for 
Educational Institutions.''
OMB Circular A-87, ``Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian 
Governments''.
OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements 
for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, 
Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations.
OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-
in-Aid to State and Local Governments.
OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-
profit Organizations.

    Please reference the following Web sites for additional 
information:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.
http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI.

VI.3. Reporting Requirements

    You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus two copies of 
the following reports:
    Mandatory: (1) A final program and financial report no more than 90 
days after the expiration of the award;
    Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their 
evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. 
(Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) 
above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.
    All data collected, including survey responses and contact 
information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and 
provided to the Bureau upon request.
    All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program 
Officer listed in the final assistance award document.

VII. Agency Contacts

    For questions about this announcement, contact: Branch for the 
Study of the U.S., ECA/A/E/USS, Room Number 252, U.S. Department of 
State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, telephone 
number (202) 453-8532 and fax number (202) 453-8533, Robert Schmidt, 
[email protected] or Brian Gibson, [email protected] based on the 
funding opportunity number.
    All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should 
reference the appropriate Funding Opportunity Number given at the 
beginning of this RFGP and referenced again in section ``IV.1 Contact 
Information to Request an Application Package'' of this announcement.
    Please read the complete Federal Register announcement before 
sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has 
passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants 
until the proposal review process has been completed.

VIII. Other Information

    Notice: The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding 
and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory 
information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language 
will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award 
commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right 
to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the 
needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be 
subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section 
VI.3 above.

    Dated: April 6, 2005.
C. Miller Crouch,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 05-7510 Filed 4-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P