Federal Register, Volume 78 Issue 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2013)

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13062-13067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04383]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

[CFDA numbers 93.581, 93.587, 93.612]

Request for Public Comment on the Proposed Adoption of
Administration for Native Americans Program Policies and Procedures

AGENCY: Administration for Native Americans, ACF, HHS.

ACTION: Notice for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 814 of the Native American Programs Act of
1974 (NAPA), as amended, the Administration for Native Americans (ANA)
is required to provide members of the public an opportunity to comment
on proposed changes in interpretive rules, general statements of
policy, and rules of agency procedure or practice, and to give notice
of the final adoption of such changes at least 30 days before the
changes become effective. In accordance with notice requirements of
NAPA, ANA herein describes its proposed interpretive rules, general
statements of policy, and rules of agency procedure or practice as they
relate to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 Funding Opportunity Announcements
(FOA) for the following programs: (1) Social and Economic Development
Strategies (hereinafter referred to as SEDS); (2) Native Asset Building
Initiative (hereinafter referred to as NABI); (3) Sustainable
Employment and Economic Development Strategies (hereinafter referred to
as SEEDS); (4) Native Language Preservation and Maintenance
(hereinafter referred to as Language Preservation); (5) Native Language
Preservation and Maintenance--Esther Martinez Initiative (hereinafter
referred to as Language--EMI); and 6) Environmental Regulatory
Enhancement (hereinafter referred to as ERE). This notice of public
comment also provides additional information about ANA's plan for
administering the programs.

DATES: The deadline for receipt of comments is 30 days from the date of
publication in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments in response to this notice should be addressed to
Lillian A. Sparks, Commissioner, Administration for Native Americans,
370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., Mail Stop: Aerospace 2--West, Washington,
DC 20447. Delays may occur in mail delivery to federal offices;
therefore, a copy of comments should be faxed to (202) 690-7441.
Comments will be available for inspection by members of the public at
the Administration for Native Americans, 901 D Street SW., Washington,
DC 20447.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmelia Strickland, Director,
Division of Program Operations, ANA (877) 922-9262.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 814 of NAPA, as amended, requires
ANA to provide notice of its proposed interpretive rules, general
statements of policy, and rules of agency organization, procedure, or
practice. The proposed clarifications, modifications, and new text will
appear in the six FY 2013 FOAs: SEDS, NABI, SEEDS, Language

[[Page 13063]]

Preservation, Language--EMI, and ERE. This notice serves to fulfill
this requirement.
A. Funding Opportunity Announcements: For information on the types
of projects funded by ANA, please refer to ANA's Web site for
information on our program areas and funding opportunity announcements:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ana.
The following changes will be made to ANA's FOAs this year:
1. In FY 2013, ANA proposes discontinuing the practice of
publishing a separate SEDS--Tribal Governance FOA (HHS-2012-ACF-ANA-NG-
0278) and, instead, incorporating the Tribal Governance program areas
of interest into the annual SEDS FOA. Also, ANA proposes adding
responsible fatherhood as a program area of interest under the annual
SEDS FOA.
Additionally, ANA proposes adding two new program areas of interest
to the annual SEDS FOA focused on suicide prevention and on human
trafficking. Based on information gathered during tribal consultation
sessions and at other meetings, the ANA Commissioner has been asked to
address the issues related to suicide with which many Native
communities are grappling, as well as with issues related to human
trafficking that can occur on remote, isolated lands, and among
vulnerable populations.
Under SEDS, ANA proposes to move the following four sub-program
areas of interest out of Economic Development: (1) Emergency
preparedness, (2) economic competitiveness, (3) agriculture, and (4)
commercial trade. Emergency preparedness will be included under the
governance program area of interest under the SEDS FOA. Economic
competitiveness, agriculture and commercial trade will move to a
proposed new FOA that is to be known as Sustainable Employment and
Economic Development Strategies (SEEDS) (HHS-2013-ACF-ANA-NE-0588),
which is part of the SEDS program (see proposal 2 in this
section). For additional information on this proposed FOA, you may also
refer to the concept paper located at the following link: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ana/resource/proposed-seeds-foa-concept-paper.
(Legal authority: Section 803(a) of NAPA, as amended).
2. In FY 2013, ANA will introduce the SEEDS FOA that will focus on
developing employment opportunities and business creation in Native
communities. These types of projects were formerly funded under the
SEDS FOA. ANA will expand funding for new, community-based projects
that will foster economic development through the creation of small
businesses and sustainable job growth, which will be funded under the
same Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number as SEDS. The
current economic climate has increased ANA's focus on developing
employment opportunities and business creation in native communities,
resulting in this special funding initiative to promote SEEDS. In an
effort to reduce unemployment and stimulate local economies, ANA will
make $5,000,000 available for SEEDS funding in FY 2013 for new,
community-based projects that will foster economic development through
the creation of small businesses and sustainable job growth. Applicants
eligible for the SEEDS FOA are the same as those identified as eligible
for SEDS though current SEDS grantees with grants that will go beyond
the start date of the possible new award are not eligible for funding
under SEEDS.
Four priorities that ANA will promote through the SEEDS initiative
are: (1) Creation of sustainable employment opportunities; (2)
professional training and skill development that increases
participants' employability and earning potential; (3) creation and
development of small businesses and entrepreneurial activities, and;
(4) demonstrated strategy and commitment to keeping the jobs and
revenues generated by project activities within the native communities
being served. Improving access to employment opportunities and
supporting small businesses will enhance local economies, enable more
tribal members to acquire and maintain gainful employment, and improve
the long-term financial health of tribal members and their families.
ANA has identified the following program areas of interest for the
SEEDS FOA, however funding is not restricted to those listed below:
(a) Agriculture: Creating, developing, or enhancing agricultural
enterprise and sustainable farming projects with a focus on
distribution at local and commercial markets.
(b) Career Pathways: Using multi-sector partnerships with entities
such as Tribal Colleges, workforce development agencies, social service
providers, and employers to develop workforce training programs that
respond to local employers' hiring needs.
(c) Commercial Trade: Strengthening local economies by increasing
the demand for locally produced goods and services.
(d) Economic Competitiveness: Creating, expanding, and retaining
businesses to reflect distinct economies operating in rural and urban
areas, in both mature and emergent sectors.
(e) Economic Infrastructure: Addressing economic infrastructure
needs that will strengthen business development and job creation in
native communities.
(f) Entrepreneurship and Microbusiness: Promoting entrepreneurial
development through business incubators and other activities that
support businesses and market the availability of local products or
services. (Microbusiness loans will not be available under such
projects.)
(g) Local Sourcing and Technology: Using new technologies to
enhance distribution channels for locally produced goods and services.
(h) Professional Development: Providing professional training,
skill development (including soft skills, basic skills, or technical
skills) or certification that will enhance participants' employment and
earning prospects.
(i) Interoperability/Integration (partnering with ACF programs and
clients): Helping ACF clients such as youth aging out of foster care,
TANF or TANF eligible individuals, or noncustodial parents with child
support agreements to obtain employment.
(j) Place-based Strategies: Using a tribe or community's local or
regional assets and resources and collaborating with multiple
stakeholders to address economic development barriers.
3. The program areas of interest will remain the same for the
following ANA FOAs: Native American Language Preservation and
Maintenance (HHS-2011-ACF-ANA-NL-0139); Native American Language
Preservation and Maintenance--Esther Martinez Initiative (HHS-2011-ACF-
ANA-NL-0140); Environmental Regulatory Enhancement (HHS-2011-ACF-ANA-
NR-0142), and Native Asset Building Initiative (HHS-2013-ACF-ANA-NO-
0587).
B. Administrative Policies: ANA proposes revising all funding
opportunity announcements to include three new administrative policies,
remove one administrative policy used in prior years, and will clarify
another administrative policy, as follows:
1. Proposal: All applicants must submit documentation, such as a
resolution, demonstrating that the governing body of the organization
approves the application's submission to ANA for the current grant
competition period. In addition, if the applicant is a tribally-
authorized component or division, the applicant must also include a
resolution demonstrating that the governing body of the tribe approves
the application's submission to ANA for the current competition period.
All resolutions must be signed by an official of the

[[Page 13064]]

governing body and dated. In lieu of a resolution, meeting minutes from
the governing body and/or a letter from the current tribal leader may
be acceptable forms of documentation if that is more appropriate to
that tribal government structure. The documentation should be included
with the application's submission to ANA. Project funds will not be
awarded without ANA's receipt of signed and dated documentation prior
to the start of the project period.
Rationale: The NAPA requires that a governing body ``has not
disapproved'' the project ``within 30 days of its submission'' to the
governing body (42 U.S.C. 299f(1)). Therefore, ANA's administrative
policy is included to ensure that funded applications are supported by
the governing body of the tribe or organization. In previous FOAs, lack
of such resolutions as part of the application submission has been a
disqualification factor that resulted in the elimination of many
applications from the competitive review process. The requirement for
evidence that the governing body has either affirmatively approved or
not disapproved the project remains the same; however, it is no longer
required by the due date of the FOA in which an application was
submitted. In lieu of a resolution, meeting minutes from the governing
body and/or a letter from the current tribal leader may be acceptable
forms of documentation if that is more appropriate to that tribal
government structure. It is important that the tribal leadership is
aware of its fiscal responsibility and potential for financial
liabilities in administering the ANA program. The change of
administrative policy is recommended in order to increase the number of
applications that are eligible for the competitive review process. If
an application is ranked within funding range but does not include a
governing body's resolution, ANA staff will require this documentation
in advance of making a grant award.
2. Proposal: Grantees will be required to attend Post Award
Training during the first year of their ANA award, and to attend an
annual ANA Grantee Meeting during each year of their ANA award.
Therefore, applicants will be required to include an appropriate amount
for travel costs to attend Post Award Training in the first year of the
proposed project budget, and travel costs to attend the annual ANA
Grantee meeting for each year of the proposed project's budget. Also,
participation and attendance at Post Award Training and the ANA Grantee
Meeting should be included activities within each year of the project's
Objective Work Plan (OWP). See Section IV.2. Content and Form of
Application Submission, Project Budget and Budget Description, for
specific travel costs that should be included to attend Post Award
Training, to be held in the grantee's region, and the ANA Grantee
Meeting, which is usually held in Washington, DC.
Rationale: This policy is added to ensure that applicants
understand the mandatory training meeting and budgetary requirements
for an ANA grant. By including this under the administrative policies
instead of evaluation criteria, ANA believes confusion by panel
reviewers will be eliminated thus ensuring panel reviewers do not score
an application based on the inclusion or omission of these trainings in
their budget and OWP.
3. Proposal: Under the standard terms and conditions for
discretionary HHS awards (Grants Policy Statement, page II-7 at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/terms-and-conditions), grant recipients are
required to establish safeguards to prevent employees, consultants,
members of governing bodies, and others who may be involved in grant-
supported activities from using their positions for purposes that are,
or give the appearance of being, motivated by a desire for private
financial gain for themselves or others, such as those with whom they
have family, business, or other ties. Therefore, staff employed through
an ANA-funded project cannot also serve as a member of the governing
body for the applicant organization. During the award negotiation
phase, ANA will ask the prospective recipient to modify project
personnel if a proposed staff member is also a member of the applicant
organization's governing body. In addition, there should be a
separation of duties from staff and the governing bodies within an
organization to ensure the integrity of internal controls and to
minimize disruptions in the continuity of operations.
Rationale: This policy has been added to remind applicants of the
requirement to establish safeguards that prohibit employees from using
their positions for a purpose that presents a conflict of interest or
the appearance of a conflict of interest. An applicant organization
must also have auditable internal controls in place to ensure the
integrity of the management of federal funds. In recent years, ANA has
seen challenges arise with grantees in which individuals are dually
serving as paid staff and also as a member of the recipient
organization's Board of Directors.
Additionally, ANA proposes to eliminate the administrative policy
previously stated in Section I, Funding Opportunity Description,
Administrative Policies, which requires the submission of a business
plan. However, submission of a business plan will remain a requirement
for the submission of certain economic development projects as stated
in Section IV.2, The Project Description.
C. Disqualification Factors: ANA proposes revising the
disqualification factors that are specific to applications submitted
for ANA funding. ANA will remove a previously identified
disqualification factor, clarify an existing factor, and add a new
disqualification factor. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and 814 of
NAPA, as amended).

1. Board Resolution

All applicants must submit a resolution demonstrating that the
applicant's official governing body approves the application
submission to ANA for the current grant competition period. In
addition, if the applicant is a tribally authorized component or
division, the application must also include a resolution
demonstrating that the governing body of the Tribe approves the
application submission to ANA for the current competition period.
Applicants that do not include this documentation will be considered
non-responsive, and the application will not be considered for
competition.

ANA proposes removing the disqualification factor associated with
the submission of an approved board resolution. ANA will still require
that this documentation be submitted but it will now be designated as
an administrative policy (see administrative policies above for
additional clarification). All applicants must submit documentation,
such as a resolution, demonstrating that the governing body of the
organization approves the application's submission to ANA for the
current grant competition period. In addition, if the applicant is a
tribally-authorized component or division, the applicant must also
include a resolution demonstrating that the governing body of the tribe
approves the application's submission to ANA for the current
competition period. All resolutions must be signed by an official of
the governing body and dated. Project funds will not be awarded without
the submission of signed and dated documentation prior to the start of
the project period. Applications received without the required
governing body's resolution will no longer be disqualified from
competitive review.

[[Page 13065]]

2. Governing Body Documentation

This disqualification factor applies only to applicants that are
not Tribes or Native Alaska villages. Organizations applying for
funding must show that a majority of board members approving the
project proposal are representative of the community to be served.
The applicant should submit documentation that identifies each board
member by name and indicate their affiliation or relationship to at
least one of the four categories of representation listed in the
factor. ANA revised the categories of representatives of the
community to be served to include: (1) members of Federally or State
recognized Tribes; (2) persons eligible to be a participant or
beneficiary to the project to be funded; (3) persons who are
recognized by the eligible community to be served as having a
cultural relationship with the community to be served; or (4)
persons considered to be Native American as defined in 45 CFR
1336.10 and Native American Pacific Islanders as defined in the
Native American Programs Act. Applicants that do not include this
documentation will be considered non-responsive, and the application
will not be considered for competition.

This disqualification factor will remain in effect but is
clarified. ANA proposes to add clarification to this disqualification
factor to indicate that the documentation that must be submitted
identifies each board member by name and indicates their relationship
to at least one of the four categories of representation listed in the
factor. Applications that are submitted without this documentation will
be considered non-responsive to the FOA and will not be considered for
competition. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and 814 of NAPA, as
amended.)

3. Only One Active Award per CFDA

This disqualification factor applies to all types of eligible
applicants. Organizations can have no more than one active award per
CFDA number for an ANA program at any given time. Therefore,
organizations that have a current ANA grant that is eligible for a
Non Competing Continuation (NCC) award which: A) will go beyond the
start date of the possible new award, and B) was awarded under the
same CFDA number as this FOA, will not have their applications
considered for the competition. This disqualification factor is
based on the administrative policy that prohibits grantees from
having more than one active grant per CFDA number. This
disqualification factor does not apply to organizations eligible for
an NCC award for the continuation of an ANA grant made under a
different CFDA number (funding opportunity announcement).

Under the Administrative Policies, ``Grantees can have only one
active grant award per Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
number.'' ANA is proposing that this policy should also become a
disqualification factor that will apply to all applicants. The limit of
one active award per CFDA number has been a long-standing ANA policy
that was implemented to ensure a wider distribution of ANA's federal
funding. ANA strongly believes in maximizing the beneficial use of its
limited funding for the greatest number of people in the targeted
communities. By including this administrative policy as a
disqualification factor, ANA will screen-out from competition those
applications submitted by an applicant that would be ineligible for
funding because the organization has an ongoing ANA award funded by the
same CFDA number that will continue past the start date of the new
award.
Previously, ANA has had to expend its limited resources to review
all grant applications, even if the applicant was likely not to receive
an award based on the administrative policy. If the application was
found to be within the funding range, the application was ultimately
not funded. Under the disqualification factor, applications from
existing grantees with an award that has the same CFDA number will be
screened out of competition and the application will not be reviewed.
Therefore, applicants should be cautioned to not apply for a new grant
that has the same CFDA number if they have a concurrent ANA award. For
example, applicants with a current ANA grant that is eligible for a
Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) award that will extend beyond the
start date of the new award offered under the FOA, and was awarded
under the same CFDA number as that of the current FOA, will be
disqualified from the competitive review. This disqualification factor
is based on the administrative policy that prohibits grantees from
having more than one active grant per CFDA number. See Section I.
Funding Opportunity Description, Administrative Policies.
D. Definitions: ANA is adding a definition for ``impact indicator''
in all FY 2013 FOAs. (Legal authority: Section 803(b) and 814 of NAPA,
as amended and 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2991b-3(b)(7)(C).
1. Impact Indicator: A quantitative measure used to monitor a
project's progress in achieving its intended outcomes and impact. An
impact indicator should identify the extent to which a project's
overall desired outcome was achieved and should describe how the
conditions discussed in the Need for Assistance were changed as a
result of the project. For example, a project focused on healthy
relationships would likely use the community's divorce rate as an
impact indicator.
E. Do Not Fund: ANA will add the following five project types that
it will not fund to Section V.2. Review and Selection Process. These
projects will not be disqualified from competitive review but ANA
reserves the right not to fund them regardless of the outcome of panel
review.
1. Projects that do not demonstrate that the proposed staff or
organization has the required expertise, or organizational capacity, to
fulfill the project approach or to achieve the stated objectives or
outcomes of the application.
ANA applicants should provide evidence that the applicant
organization, and any partnering organizations, have relevant
experience and expertise with administration, development,
implementation, and management of programs similar to that proposed in
order to fulfill the project's approach. ANA has received some
applications that scored within the funding range but did not
demonstrate that the organization had sufficient capacity or staffing
expertise to implement the proposed project, nor had the applicant
identified partnerships that would assist them in achieving the
project's objectives. Funding these types of applications would not be
the best use of ANA's limited resources or taxpayer dollars.
2. Projects with the potential to cause unintended harm or that
could negatively impact the safety, or privacy, of individuals.
This ``Do Not Fund'' is added to ensure that projects funded by ANA
will not cause harm or impact the safety, or privacy, of individuals.
ANA has received several applications proposing activities that could
cause harm, including the use of inaccurate medical information in
health counseling, purchasing surveillance equipment to monitor tribal
citizens, or proposing potentially dangerous activities involving
youth. One of ANA's goals is to safeguard the health and well-being of
Native children and families; therefore, ANA reserves the right to not
award federal funds for activities that may adversely impact the safety
or well-being of Native people in their communities.
3. Applications for proposed projects that are not written
specifically in response to an ANA FOA. These applications may have
been submitted to another funding agency and are not tailored to ANA's
goals as specified in an ANA FOA.
This ``Do Not Fund'' will be added to ensure that proposed projects
are specific to ANA's funding goals and that they are strongly
supported by the community. ANA has previously received applications
that include

[[Page 13066]]

letters of support that were written to other funding agencies and are
not specific to the project proposed for ANA funding. This does not
demonstrate a strong commitment towards fulfilling the purpose of ANA's
goals and is not specific to the requirements of ANA's FOAs.
4. Projects that do not demonstrate a current need or recent
community support for the proposed project.
This ``Do Not Fund'' area is to ensure that the applicant has
worked with its community within the last three years (or sooner) to
identify the need for the project and to obtain their input or
involvement in the planning for the proposed project. Based on internal
reviews of grantees' impact evaluations, ANA has discerned that strong
community support for projects in advance of funding, and throughout
the project's implementation, is integral to the success of an ANA-
funded project. For example, if an applicant proposes to address a need
that was identified as part of a tribe's 10-year strategic plan, which
was completed 7 years ago, the applicant should demonstrate that the
need still remains and that more recent interactions and input from the
community have been part of the project's planned approach.
5. Projects that may be used for the purpose of providing loan
capital. Federal funds awarded under this FOA may not be used for the
purpose of providing loan capital. This is not related to loan capital
authorized under Sec. 803A of NAPA [42 U.S.C. 2991b-1(a)(1)] for the
purpose of the Hawaiian Revolving Loan fund.
This ``Do Not Fund'' will be added to clarify ANA's interpretation
of the NAPA on the use of ANA funding for loan capital purposes. ANA
will not fund projects which propose activities that include the use of
grant funds as loans.
F. Page Limits: In Section IV.2. Content and Form of Application
Submission, Formatting ACF Applications, ANA will implement a maximum
page limit for all applications for FY 2013.
1. Total application: ANA will implement a total page limit of 150
pages for applications submitted in response to the FOA for SEDS,
Language Preservation, Language--EMI, and ERE programs, and a 200 page
limit for applications submitted in response to the NABI and SEEDS
programs. Additional pages will be allowed for NABI applications due to
a required five-year project period and the submission of two budgets
and two budget justifications. Additional pages will be allowed for
SEEDS applications due to project periods lasting up to five years. The
page limitation excludes a Business Plan (if applicable) or mandatory
grant forms (Standard Forms and ANA's Objective Work Plan form).
Applications that exceed the page limits will have excess pages removed
prior to the application's panel review.
G. Project Description: ANA will make modifications to the project
description narrative.
1. Letters of Support: ANA has added Letters of Support as a
requirement. Applicants should provide statements from community,
public, and commercial leaders that support the project proposed for
funding. All submissions must be included in the application package.
2. Third-party agreements: ANA has added third-party agreements as
a requirement. Third-party agreements include Memoranda of
Understanding (MOU) aka Letters of Commitment. General letters of
support are not considered to be third-party agreements. Third-party
agreements must clearly describe the project activities and support to
which the third party is committing. Third-party agreements must be
signed by the person in the third-party organization with the authority
to make such commitments on behalf of their organization. Applicants
should provide written and signed agreements between grantees and
subgrantees, or subcontractors, or other cooperating entities. These
agreements must detail the scope of work to be performed, work
schedules, remuneration, and other terms and conditions that structure
or define the relationship.
3. Budget and Budget Justification:
Travel: Text will be added requiring applicants to include costs in
their budget for mandatory post-award travel for training and the ANA
Grantee Meeting. Additional information will be provided within the FOA
on estimated costs based on applicant's regional location.
H. ANA Application Evaluation Criteria: ANA will revise the
evaluation criteria for the SEDS, Language Preservation, Language--EMI,
and ERE FOAs to allow greater flexibility in applicants' proposals. The
evaluation criteria will be revised to include clearer explanations of
how ANA will assess the information provided in the applications.
(Legal authority: Section 803(c) of NAPA, as amended.) The evaluation
criteria for NABI will not be changed.
1. Titles and Assigned Weight: In FY 2013, ANA will increase the
number of evaluation criteria from four to five and adjust the weighted
scores to focus on those elements that are important to project success
and project monitoring. Weighted sub-criteria scores are identified for
the ``Project Approach'' criterion only.
For SEDS, Language Preservation, Language--EMI, and ERE FOAs
published in FY 2013, the criteria will be weighted as follows:

Project Integration--10 points;
Objectives and Need for Assistance--10 points;
Project Approach--50 points;
Sub criterion--Project Strategy--30 points
Sub criterion--Objective Work Plan--20 points
Outcomes Expected--20 points
Budget and Budget Justification--10 points
2. ANA Evaluation Criteria: Included here is a summary of the
changes made to the criteria.
(a) Project Integration: ANA will add a new criterion entitled,
``Project Integration,'' that will score how well the application ties
together the proposed project through the other four criteria. The
overall point value for this section will be 10 points. To score the
Project Integration criterion, reviewers will consider the extent to
which all the application criteria elements are aligned, i.e., how
effectively the Objectives and Need for Assistance, Project Approach,
Budget, and Outcomes Expected complement one another into a cohesive
and carefully planned project. For example, if the application's
proposed project description was a jigsaw puzzle, how well do the
puzzle pieces fit together? This criterion does not measure any element
of the application in isolation and does not respond to a specific
information request concerning project integration.
(b) Objectives and Need for Assistance: The overall point value has
been decreased to 10 points due to the addition of the project
integration criterion.
(c) Outcomes Expected: The overall point value for this section has
been increased to 20 points to emphasize the importance of applicants
connecting their proposed project's goal, objectives, and activities to
the intended results, benefits, and impacts produced by the project.
(d) Budget and Budget Justification: The overall point value for
this section has decreased to 10 points due to the addition of the
project integration criterion.
The changes to the content of evaluation criteria, and the
complementary changes to the project

[[Page 13067]]

description section of the FOA, will more effectively guide applicants
and panel reviewers on what ANA believes are critical components of a
project's application. (Legal authority: Section 803(c) of NAPA, as
amended.)
I. Objective Review and Results: ANA's FOA currently states
``Results of the competitive objective review are taken into
consideration by ACF in the selection of projects for funding; however,
objective review scores and rankings are not binding. They are one
element in the decision-making process.'' ANA will clarify the scoring
process in this section by stating that ANA will have the discretion to
Use either the actual ``raw'' score or a normalized score in order to
determine the ranking of applications after the panel review has been
completed. The raw score is the average of the actual scores given by
the three panelists that served as peer reviewers for the application.
A normalized score is a statistical method that accounts for the
variability and relative nature of individual reviewers' scoring
tendencies. Normalized scores are used to counteract any possible
predisposition or scoring biases of individual reviewers and panels in
order to make the outcome fairer for all applications. The use of a
normalized score is allowable and authorized by HHS grants
administration policy.

Lillian A. Sparks,
Commissioner, Administration for Native American.
[FR Doc. 2013-04383 Filed 2-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-34-P