[Federal Register: March 13, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 49)]
[Notices]
[Page 14773-14786]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13mr01-132]
[[Page 14773]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Agriculture
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants
Program--Water Quality: Request for Proposals, and Request for Input;
Notice
[[Page 14774]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants
Program--Water Quality: Request for Proposals and Request for Input
AGENCY: Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service,
USDA.
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 Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program--Water Quality for fiscal year (FY) 2001 to
support integrated, multifunctional agricultural research, extension,
and education activities that address water quality priorities in
United States agriculture, which can most properly be addressed by
multifunctional and multidisciplinary projects incorporating research,
extension, and education activities. The amount available for support
of this program in FY 2001 is approximately $12,400,000. Approximately,
$9,000,000 will be used to fund proposals solicited under this Request
for Proposals (RFP). The remaining funds (approximately $3,000,000)
will be used to fund proposals solicited under a joint RFP with the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This joint RFP
will solicit proposals that integrate research and extension activities
aimed at addressing nutrient management issues at the watershed scale.
This joint RFP will be announced in the Federal Register at a later
date.
This notice sets out the objectives for Water Quality projects, the
eligibility criteria for projects and applicants, the application
procedures, and the set of instructions needed to apply for a Water
Quality grant under this authority.
By this notice, CSREES additionally solicits stakeholder input from
any interested party regarding the FY 2001 Integrated Research,
Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program--Water Quality for
use in the development of any future RFP's for this program.
DATES: Proposals must be received by close of business (COB) on May 14,
2001 (5:00 p.m. EST). Proposals received after this date will not be
considered for funding. Comments regarding this RFP 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:
Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants
Program--Water Quality; c/o Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of
Agriculture; Waterfront Centre, room 1307; 800 9th Street, SW.;
Washington, DC 20024.
Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the
following address: Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program--Water Quality; 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 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: RFP-OEP@reeusda.gov. 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. Michael P. O'Neill; National
Program Leader for Water Quality; Natural Resources and Environment
Unit; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service;
U.S. Department of Agriculture; STOP 2210; 1400 Independence Avenue,
SW.; Washington, DC 20250-2210; Telephone: (202) 205-5952; Fax: (202)
401-1706; e-mail: moneill@reeusda.gov.
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. Types of Proposals
F. Matching Requirements
G. Funding Restrictions
Part II--Program Description
A. Project Types
B. Program Area Description
Part III--Preparation of a Proposal
A. Program Application Materials
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--Grant Awards
A. General
B. Funding Mechanisms
C. Organizational Management Information
D. Grant Award Document and Notice of Grant Award
Part VI--Additional Information
A. Access to Review Information
B. Use of Funds; Changes
C. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements
D. Applicable Federal Statutes and Regulations
E. Confidential Aspects of Proposals and Awards
F. Regulatory Information
Stakeholder Input
CSREES is soliciting comments regarding this RFP from any
interested party. These comments will be considered in the development
of any future RFP for the program. Such comments will be used to meet
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 RFP's for
competitive programs. Comments should be submitted as provided for in
the ADDRESSES and DATES portions of this Notice.
The FY 2000 RFP for Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program--Water Quality which was published in the
Federal Register on April 7, 2000 [65 FR 18852-18863] solicited
comments on the RFP from any interested party to be used in the
development of future RFP's. No comments were received on this RFP.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
This program is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under 10.303, Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program.
Part I--General Information
A. Legislative Authority and Background
Section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education
Reform Act of 1998 (AREERA) (7 U.S.C. 7626) authorized the Secretary of
Agriculture to establish a research,
[[Page 14775]]
education, and extension competitive grants program to provide funding
for integrated, multifunctional agricultural research, extension, and
education activities. Subject to the availability of appropriations to
carry out this program, the Secretary may award grants to colleges and
universities (as defined by 1404 of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA) (7 U.S.C. 3103))
on a competitive basis for integrated research, education, and
extension projects. Grants are to be awarded to address priorities in
United States agriculture that involve integrated research, education,
and extension activities as determined by the Secretary in consultation
with the National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and
Economics Advisory Board.
On November 19, 1999, the Secretary published in the Federal
Register [64 FR 63560] a notice that the administration of this grant
program had been delegated to the Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). This notice also solicited
public comment from persons who use or conduct research, extension, or
education regarding the priorities to be addressed by this new program.
In addition, this notice announced a public meeting to obtain comments
to use in developing the proposed rule and RFP's for this new grant
program. The public meeting was held on December 6, 1999.
All the comments and the official transcript of the meeting were
made available for review on the CSREES web page. The comments and
testimonies from the December 6, 1999, public meeting were considered
in the formulation of the FY 2000 RFP and FY 2001 RFP. Both RFP's were
developed in consultation with the Advisory Board.
The entire Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program is funded in FY 2001 at $39,838,535 (after
deduction for administrative expenses) for the following integrated
activities: Water Quality ($12,348,773), Food Safety ($14,247,128),
Pesticide Impact Assessment ($4,313,522), Crops at Risk from Food
Quality and Protection Act (FQPA) Implementation ($1,424,858), FQPA
Risk Mitigation Program for Major Food Crop Systems ($4,654,537),
Methyl Bromide Transition Program ($2,374,764), and Organic Transition
($474,953). There will be four RFP's for this program. The Water
Quality and Food Safety Programs will each have a separate RFP, while
the latter five programs will be announced as one RFP. In addition,
there will also be a joint RFP with EPA on Water Quality. This notice
announces and describes the Water Quality component of the Program.
CSREES will administer the Integrated Research, Education, and
Extension Competitive Grants Program by determining priorities in
United States agriculture through Agency stakeholder input processes
and in consultation with the National Agricultural Research, Extension,
Education, and Economics Advisory Board. Each RFP for the different
program areas (i.e., Water Quality, Food Safety) will be developed each
fiscal year based on these established priorities and the resulting
approaches to solving these critical agricultural issues. Although this
overall grant program seeks to solve critical agricultural issues
through an integration of research, education, and extension
activities, a component of a RFP, depending on the priority being
addressed and/or the stage at which the priority is being addressed,
may request proposals that are research, education, or extension only,
or a combination thereof. However, the overall overarching approach to
solving the critical agricultural issue, priority, or problem will be
through an integration of research, education, and extension activities
within each individual program area.
B. Purpose, Priorities, and Fund Availability
The CSREES Water Quality Program is enhanced by the establishment
of a water quality program authorized under section 406 of AREERA for
an Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants
Program. This program brings university scientists, instructors, and
extension educators into more effective and efficient partnerships with
Federal interagency priority programs in addressing water quality
issues in U.S. agriculture. This program also provides the flexibility
necessary for CSREES to bring the resources of researchers,
instructors, and extension educators to national initiatives and
programmatic partnerships that target evolving water quality needs.
The Water Quality Program is targeted directly to the
identification and resolution of agriculturally-related degradation of
water quality. Proposals are sought that will provide watershed-based
information that can be used to: assess sources of water quality
impairment in targeted watersheds; develop and/or recommend options for
continued improvement of water quality in targeted watersheds; and
evaluate the relative costs and benefits associated with cleanup from
all responsible sectors (e.g., farming, processing, urban runoff, and
municipal waste treatment). The program will favor proposals that have
a clear problem statement and that are ``place-based.'' ``Place-based''
means that the proposers have identified a specific location where the
work is to be conducted so that the results and implications of the
work conducted can be associated with a specific, geo-referenced
location. Categories of water quality needs that have been identified,
both individually by USDA and in partnership with other Federal
programs, include:
--Development and implementation of voluntary approaches that will
enable producers to comply with newly developing Federal and State
Total Maximum Daily Load regulations for non-point source pollutants.
--Coordination of targeted research, education, and extension
activities to minimize any adverse impacts that agricultural, forest,
and range management practices; food and agricultural product
processing; and/or livestock production systems may have on the
Nation's water quality.
--Applied research evaluating the efficacy of currently recommended
management practices and strategies to improve water quality.
--Evaluation and error assessment of currently available data sets
being used for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) based decision-
support models for watershed management.
--Projects supporting the pilot activities of the National Science and
Technology Council's National Environmental Monitoring Initiative. This
initiative seeks to integrate the Nation's environmental monitoring and
related research networks and programs. For more information, see
(http://www.epa.gov/cludygxb/Pubs/factsheet.html).
--Development and validation of cost-effective means to reduce the
contribution of agriculture to the development of harmful algal blooms
and hypoxic conditions in coastal systems.
--Development and validation of cost-effective means to reduce the
contribution of animal and food processing wastes to water quality
degradation.
--Documenting the coincident status and trends of multiple resources
and related water quality, demographic, and socioeconomic condition;
relating status and trends to human and natural causes and
consequences; predicting future trajectories and rates
[[Page 14776]]
of change; assessing associated uncertainties; and identifying data,
information and research needed to reduce future uncertainties.
--Evaluation of the efficacy of USDA conservation programs'
implementation.
The goal of the CSREES Water Quality Program is to fund appropriate
research, extension, and education efforts necessary to protect or
improve the quality of water resources throughout the United States and
its territories, particularly in agriculturally managed watersheds.
CSREES seeks proposals to address this goal at the national, regional,
state and local level. Agricultural water resource issues addressed in
this program reflect the broader spectrum of international water
quality issues. This program encourages international partnerships,
linkages, and exchanges so long as a clear explanation is provided as
to how such international activities, as part of the proposed project,
will contribute to addressing U.S. national water quality issues.
However, investigators should recognize that such international
partnerships, linkages, and exchanges are expected to be a small
proportion of the total funding provided through this program.
There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular proposal or
to make a specific number of awards. Approximately $9 million will be
available to fund proposals in FY 2001 under this RFP. As mentioned
previously, the remaining funds (approximately $3 million) will be used
to fund proposals solicited under a joint RFP with EPA. As stated
above, this RFP will be published in the Federal Register at a later
date. However, should this joint effort not occur, these funds will be
used to support proposals solicited under this RFP. Proposals are being
solicited under this RFP in each of four component areas: National
Facilitation proposals, Regional Water Quality Coordination proposals,
Extension Education proposals, and Integrated Research, Education, and
Extension proposals.
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) Authorized departmental officer means the Secretary or any
employee of the Department who has the authority to issue or modify
grant instruments on behalf of the Secretary.
(3) Authorized organizational representative means the president,
director, or chief executive officer or other designated official of
the applicant organization who has the authority to commit the
resources of the organization.
(4) Budget period means the interval of time (usually 12 months)
into which the project period is divided for budgetary and reporting
purposes.
(5) Cash contributions means the applicant's cash outlay, including
the outlay of money contributed to the applicant by non-Federal third
parties.
(6) Department or USDA means the United States Department of
Agriculture.
(7) Education activity means 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.
(8) Extension activity means an act or process that delivers
science-based knowledge and informal educational programs to people,
enabling them to make practical decisions.
(9) Grant means the award by the Secretary of funds to an eligible
organization or individual to assist in meeting the costs of
conducting, for the benefit of the public, an identified project which
is intended and designed to accomplish the purpose of the program as
identified in these guidelines.
(10) Grantee means an organization designated in the grant award
document as the responsible legal entity to which a grant is awarded.
(11) Integrated means to bring the three components of the
agricultural knowledge system (research, education, and extension)
together around a problem area or activity.
(12) Matching means that portion of allowable project costs not
borne by the Federal Government, including the value of in-kind
contributions.
(13) 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.
(14) 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.
(15) Prior approval means written approval evidencing prior consent
by an authorized departmental officer as defined in (2) above.
(16) Project means the particular activity within the scope of the
program supported by a grant award.
(17) Project period means the period, as stated in the award
document, during which Federal sponsorship begins and ends.
(18) Research activity means a scientific investigation or inquiry
that results in the generation of knowledge.
(19) Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture and any other
officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority involved is
delegated.
(20) Third party in-kind contributions means non-cash contributions
of property or services provided by non-Federal third parties,
including real property, equipment, supplies and other expendable
property, directly benefitting and specifically identifiable to a
funded project or program.
(21) Total integrated, multifunctional research, education, and
extension approach means that the combination of grants (although the
individual grants may involve only research, education, or extension
activities or a combination thereof) awarded under the fiscal year's
program components will work together to address the priorities in
United States agriculture as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture
in consultation with the Advisory Board, that involve integrated
research, extension, and education activities.
D. Eligibility
Proposals may be submitted by colleges and universities as defined
in section 1404 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and
Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (NARETPA). The terms ``college'' and
``university'' mean an educational institution in any State which (1)
admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of
graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the
recognized equivalent of such a certificate, (2) is legally authorized
within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary
education, (3) provides an educational program for which a bachelor's
degree or any other higher degree is awarded, (4) is a public or other
nonprofit institution, and (5) is accredited by a nationally recognized
accrediting agency or association. Although an applicant may be
eligible based on its status as one of these entities, there are
factors which may exclude an applicant
[[Page 14777]]
from receiving Federal financial and nonfinancial assistance and
benefits under this program (e.g., debarment or suspension of an
individual involved or a determination that an applicant is not
responsible based on submitted organizational management information).
Eligible applicants may subcontract to organizations not eligible under
these requirements.
Please note that a research foundation maintained by a college or
university is not eligible to receive an award under this program.
Proposals received from research foundations will not be considered for
funding.
E. Types of Proposals
In FY 2001, projects under the Integrated Research, Education, and
Extension Competitive Grants Program authority may be submitted as one
of the two types of proposals described below:
(1) New proposal. This is a project proposal that has not been
previously submitted to the Integrated Research, Education, and
Extension Competitive Grants Program. All new proposals will be
reviewed competitively using the selection process and evaluation
criteria described in Part IV--Review Process.
(2) Resubmitted proposal. This is a proposal that had previously
been submitted to the Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program but not funded. The resubmitted proposal
should clearly indicate the changes that have been made in the project
proposal. Further, a clear statement acknowledging comments from the
previous reviewers, indicating revisions, rebuttals, etc., can
positively influence the review of the proposal. Therefore, for
resubmitted proposals, the investigator(s) must respond to the previous
panel summary on no more than one page, titled ``RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS
REVIEW,'' which is to be placed directly after the Project Summary as
described in Part III--Preparation of a Proposal. Resubmitted proposals
will be reviewed competitively using the selection process and
evaluation criteria described in Part IV--Review Process.
F. Matching Requirements
1. General Requirement
If a grant provides a particular benefit to a specific agricultural
commodity, the grant recipient is required to provide funds or in-kind
support to match the amount of the grant funds provided. See section
12. c. on ``Matching Funds'' under Part III, B, ``Content of
Proposals'' for more details.
2. Waiver
CSREES may waive the matching funds requirement specified in the
above paragraph for a grant if CSREES determines that (a) The results
of the project, while of particular benefit to a specific agricultural
commodity, are likely to be applicable to agricultural commodities
generally; or (b) the project involves a minor commodity, the project
deals with scientifically important research, and the grant recipient
is unable to satisfy the matching funds requirement.
G. Funding Restrictions
CSREES has determined that grant funds awarded under this authority
may not be used for the renovation or refurbishment of research,
education, or extension space; the purchase or installation of fixed
equipment in such space; or the planning, repair, rehabilitation,
acquisition, or construction of buildings or facilities.
Part II--Program Description
A. Project Types
Approximately $1,000,000 is available for National Facilitation
proposals. The maximum total award is $400,000, with an annual funding
limitation of $100,000. The project period may be one to four years in
duration. It is anticipated that three to five grants will be awarded
in this program component.
Approximately $2,000,000 is available for Regional Water Quality
Coordination proposals. Projects will be supported at expected levels
of up to $650,000 per year/per region for up to three years. Projects
involving more than one region may be considered for larger funding.
CSREES expects that some regions will request less funding due to a
smaller number of states within the region. It is anticipated that four
grants will be awarded in this program component.
Approximately $2,000,000 is available for Extension Education
proposals. The maximum total award is $300,000, with an annual funding
limitation of $100,000. The project period may be one to three years in
duration. It is anticipated that 10-15 grants will be awarded in this
program component.
Approximately $3,500,000 is available for Integrated Research,
Education and Extension proposals. The maximum total award is $600,000,
with an annual funding limitation of $200,000. The project period may
be one to three years in duration. It is anticipated that 6-10 grants
will be awarded in this program component.
Applications received in any of the aforementioned program areas
should include budgets commensurate with the activities proposed.
Grants awarded under the Program Area Descriptions of National
Facilitation, Extension Education, and Integrated Research, Education,
and Extension (as described in this RFP) will be awarded as ``Standard
Grants.'' Grants awarded under the Program Area Description of Regional
Water Quality Coordination (as described in this RFP) may be awarded as
``Continuation Grants.''
B. Program Area Description
The CSREES Water Quality Program has identified seven topical
themes for research, education, and extension projects. These themes
are: Animal Waste Management, Drinking Water and Human Health,
Environmental Restoration, Nutrient and Pesticide Management, Pollution
Assessment and Prevention, Watershed Management, and Water Conservation
and Agricultural Water Management. In each of the four program areas--
National Facilitation Grants, Regional Water Quality Coordination
Grants, Extension Education Grants, and Integrated Research, Education,
and Extension Grants, priority will be given to those proposals that
address one or more of the seven themes listed above.
1. National Facilitation Proposals (Program Area 110.A) (Maximum award:
$100,000/year for up to four years).
Proposals are invited for projects that develop and initiate
nationally coordinated programs that will contribute to an increase in
public understanding and involvement in community decision-making and
that facilitate the development of public policy on water resources
issues. Applicants are encouraged to address one or more of the seven
themes listed above. All proposals are required to include specific,
measurable accomplishments for each project year and a projected time-
line. While it is not required that projects be fully independent
within the 4-year project period, it is expected that the timeline will
culminate in the establishment of an independently supported national
coordination effort.
This component of the CSREES Water Quality Program seeks to provide
a common base of knowledge in support of individuals and communities
grappling to formulate public policy and management strategies that
will allow growth and increased profitability while protecting the
water resource. Projects will be supported that facilitate the
appropriate application of tools and techniques (i.e., Geographic
Information Systems, decision support systems, remote sensing, economic
analysis, and
[[Page 14778]]
world wide web technologies) to strengthen awareness of the water
quality impacts of current and proposed land use activities by both
community decision-makers and individual property owners. These tools
can also be used to target specific problems and locations in need of
additional attention. Projects should contribute to an increase in
community partnerships and networks that develop solutions to
particular concerns identified through the projects and in response to
increased citizen awareness of local issues. The result will be more
citizen involvement, wider dispersal of information, and more rational
analysis of environmental decisions in the community and the nation.
Metadata and accomplishment reports should be delivered annually to the
appropriate regional coordination group (see Regional Water Quality
Coordination Proposals below).
2. Regional Water Quality Coordination Proposals (Program Area 110.B)
(Maximum award: $650,000 per year/per region for up to three years.
Projects involving more than one region may be considered for larger
funding. CSREES expects that some regions will request less funding due
to a smaller number of states within the region).
CSREES invites proposals to ensure the integration of water quality
efforts within the jurisdiction of each of the ten regions established
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In FY 2000, funding
was provided to support coordination within six of the ten EPA Regions.
For FY 2001, proposals are requested to provide regional coordination
activities in the remaining four EPA Regions. The EPA Regions are:
Region 2--New Jersey, New York, and the territories of Puerto Rico
and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Region 3--Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West
Virginia, and the District of Columbia.
Region 7--Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
Region 9--Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, and the territories
of Guam and American Samoa.
Proposals may be submitted for one or any combination of regions.
This component of the CSREES Water Quality Program is designed to
make research, education, and extension resources of the university
system more accessible to Federal, State, and local water quality
improvement efforts, thus enhancing opportunities for agricultural
producers and agriculturally impacted communities to adopt voluntary
approaches for the improvement of water quality. Grantees are expected
to facilitate the conceptualization and implementation of multi-partner
efforts that minimize duplication of effort and that leverage multiple
funding sources into a common collaborative effort. As such, it is
expected that coordination grantees will initiate partnership
activities with key water quality efforts in their region.
Investigators should clearly identify the water quality issues and
education, extension, and research efforts that are common to the
region. Applicants also are encouraged to address one or more of the
seven themes listed in Part II. B. A plan should be presented that
establishes the approaches to be employed for regional resource
sharing, communication, priority setting, and outreach. The proposal
should also discuss Federal and State water quality activities in the
region and present a strategy for establishing partnerships with
appropriate programs.
Each proposal must include provision for a regional coordination
mechanism (whether an individual, a committee, or an office) and for a
Water Quality Research, Education, and Extension Coordinator in each
State or Territory in the Region. Regional coordinators will be
expected to work with CSREES National Program Leaders to provide
liaison among Federal activities (e.g., U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Regional Offices, U.S. Geological Survey National Water
Quality Assessment Program (USGS NAWQA) Coordination Offices, USDA
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Regional Offices, USDA Forest
Service (FS) Regional Offices, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), Bureau of Land Management (BLM)), State environmental
organizations, and the State Water Quality Research, Education, and
Extension Coordinators within the Region. Successful projects will
provide more efficient development, evaluation, and dissemination of
information on animal waste management, drinking water and human
health, environmental restoration, nutrient and pesticide management,
pollution assessment and prevention, watershed management, and water
conservation and agricultural water management. Provision should be
included in the budget request for the regional coordinator to
participate in monthly conference calls as well as a national
coordination meeting to be held annually in the Washington, D.C. area.
Each regional project must include a plan for the development and
maintenance of a geo-referenced, watershed-based reporting system. This
reporting system will serve as the primary vehicle for reporting
progress and accomplishments of the CSREES Water Quality Program.
Regional projects are expected: (1) To serve as the repository for the
reporting of all projects funded on an ad hoc basis by other components
of the CSREES Water Quality Program; (2) to collaborate in the linkage
of their databases and reporting systems to other funded regions; (3)
to periodically conduct water quality needs assessments for the region
and report on partnerships and progress in water quality improvement;
(4) to facilitate the incorporation of relevant projects that may
become funded in the region through CSREES programs (including other
sections of the Water Quality Program, the National Research
Initiative, the Animal Waste Center, the Initiative for Future
Agriculture and Food Systems) or through other federal and state
programs (e.g., EPA 319, EPA National Center for Environmental Research
and Quality Assurance (NCERQA), National Science Foundation (NSF), and
NOAA); and (5) to be compatible with related information sources (e.g.,
USGS NAWQA Program, EPA Know Your Watershed, CSREES Integrated Pest
Management Program, and the CSREES Pesticide Impact Assessment
Program).
3. Extension Education Proposals (Program Area 110.C) (Maximum award:
$100,000/year for one to three years).
Proposals are invited for Extension Education projects to address
water quality issues of State or local importance. One mission of the
CSREES Water Quality Program is to provide leadership in extension
education that will enable individuals, industry, and government to
effect changes enhancing and protecting the Nation's water resources
for the public good. The vision is to be recognized as an important and
effective partnership providing leadership for water quality education
to help people, industry, and governments prevent and solve current and
emerging water quality problems. Proposals for this program are
expected to address one or more of the seven strategic extension
priorities of the Water Quality Program (see http://www.reeusda.gov/
nre/water/strategi.htm). The seven areas of emphasis for the education
program are under-served audiences, watersheds and aquifers, surface
water systems, public policy, individual actions, volunteerism, and
partnerships. Applicants are encouraged to develop extension education
projects that
[[Page 14779]]
address one or more of the seven theme areas listed in Part II. B. All
proposals are required to include specific, measureable accomplishments
for each project year. Metadata and accomplishments reports will be
delivered annually to the appropriate regional coordination group. See
``Regional Water Quality Coordination Proposals'' above.
4. Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Proposals (Program
Area 110.D) (Maximum award: $200,000/year up to three years).
Proposals are invited that integrate water quality research,
education, and extension to solve water quality problems at the whole
watershed. Proposals should: (a) Identify the cause of water quality
degradation; (b) conduct research filling the gaps that are critical to
the development of water improvement practices and programs; (c)
implement watershed-scale improvement programs; (d) evaluate and
monitor the efficacy of the improvement programs implemented; (e)
assess the costs and benefits of water quality management practices
that are developed; and (f) conduct evaluations closing the loop and
improving our understanding of the drivers of water quality
degradation. Each proposal is expected to present a fully integrated
research, education, and extension approach to accomplish the
objectives listed in (a) through (f) above. CSREES also encourages the
inclusion of a curriculum development component that takes advantage of
the integrated watershed activities to enhance environmental education
at all levels. The proposing investigators are expected to justify
watershed selection (e.g., the level of water quality degradation--
chemical, physical, and biological; the relative distribution of
agricultural, range or forestry land uses within the watershed; and/or
proximity to coastal resources) and to demonstrate capacities for
establishing and/or maintaining watershed-wide partnerships for the
project's implementation. Preference will be given to proposals that:
(1) Demonstrate a substantial potential to contribute long term
information, existing opportunities for leveraging support and cost
sharing, and active public and private sector participation; (2) take
advantage of the participatory educational and extension opportunities
engendered by the watershed's restoration and by its continued
management; and/or (3) focus on watersheds where the project will
better inform policy makers in developing the most equitable multistate
and/or regional strategies for water quality improvement. Applicants
are encouraged to address one or more of the seven theme areas
identified in Part II. B. All proposals are required to include
specific, measurable accomplishments each project year. Metadata and
accomplishments reports will be delivered annually to the appropriate
regional coordination groups. See ``Regional Water Quality Coordination
Proposals'' above.
5. Other Funding Opportunities
It is anticipated the a joint RFP with EPA will be published in the
Federal Register at a later date. This RFP will solicit proposals that
integrate research and extension activities aimed at addressing
nutrient management issues at the watershed scale. The amount of CSREES
funding for this purpose is approximately $3,000,000. After
publication, this joint RFP will be made available at the web sites of
both agencies (i.e., CSREES: http://www.reeusda.gov/
integrated/ and EPA: http://www.epa.gov). Should this effort not
succeed, these funds will be used to support proposals solicited under
this RFP.
Part III--Preparation of a Proposal
A. Program Application Materials
Program application materials are available at the Integrated
Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program website
(http://www.reeusda.gov/integrated/). 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 FY 2001 Integrated
Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program--Water
Quality. These materials may also be requested via Internet by sending
a message with your name, mailing address (not e-mail) and phone number
to psb@reeusda.gov. State that you want a copy of the Program
Description and application materials (orange book) for the Fiscal Year
2001 Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants
Program--Water Quality.
B. Content of Proposals
1. General
The proposal should follow these guidelines, enabling reviewers to
more easily evaluate the merits of each proposal in a systematic,
consistent fashion:
(a) The proposal should be prepared on only one side of the page
using standard size (8\1/2\" x 11") white paper, one inch margins,
typed or word processed using no type smaller than 12 point font, and
single or double spaced. Use an easily readable font face (e.g.,
Geneva, Helvetica, Times Roman).
(b) Each page of the proposal, including the Project Summary,
budget pages, required forms, and any appendices, should be numbered
sequentially.
(c) The proposal should be stapled in the upper left-hand corner.
Do not bind. An original and 14 copies (15 total) must be submitted in
one package, along with 10 copies of the ``Project Summary'' as a
separate attachment.
(d) If applicable, proposals should include original illustrations
(photographs, color prints, etc.) in all copies of the proposal to
prevent loss of meaning through poor quality reproduction.
2. Cover Page (Form CSREES-661)
Each copy of each grant proposal must contain an ``Application for
Funding'', Form CSREES-661. One copy of the application, preferably the
original, must contain the pen-and-ink signature(s) of the proposing
principal investigator(s)/project director(s)(PI/PD) and the authorized
organizational representative who possesses the necessary authority to
commit the organization's time and other relevant resources to the
project. Any proposed PI/PD or co-PI/PD whose signature does not appear
on Form CSREES-661 will not be listed on any resulting grant award.
Complete both signature blocks located at the bottom of the
``Application for Funding'' form.
Form CSREES-661 serves as a source document for the CSREES grant
database; it is therefore important that it be completed accurately.
The following items are highlighted as having a high potential for
errors or misinterpretations:
(a) Title of Project (Block 6). The title of the project must be
brief (80-character maximum), yet represent the major thrust of the
effort being proposed. Project titles are read by a variety of
nonscientific people; therefore, highly technical words or phraseology
should be avoided where possible. In addition, introductory phrases
such as ``investigation of,'' ``research on,'' ``education for,'' or
``outreach that'' should not be used.
(b) Program to Which You Are Applying (Block 7). ``Integrated
Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program--Water
Quality.''
[[Page 14780]]
(c) Program Area and Number (Block 8). The name of the program
component (e.g., National Facilitation Proposal, 110.A or Regional
Water Quality Coordination, 110.B) should be inserted in this block.
(d) Type of Award Request (Block 13). Check the block for ``new''
or ``resubmission.''
(e) Principal Investigator(s)/Project Director(s) (PI/PD) (Block
15). The designation of excessive numbers of co-PI/PD's creates
problems during final review and award processing. Listing multiple co-
PI/PD's, beyond those required for genuine collaboration, is therefore
discouraged. Note that providing a Social Security Number is voluntary,
but is an integral part of the CSREES information system and will
assist in the processing of the proposal.
(f) Type of Performing Organization (Block 18). A check should be
placed in the box beside the type of organization which actually will
carry out the effort. For example, if the proposal is being submitted
by an 1862 Land-Grant Institution but the work will be performed in a
department, laboratory, or other organizational unit of an agricultural
experiment station, box ``03'' should be checked. If portions of the
effort are to be performed in several departments, check the box that
applies to the individual listed as PI/PD #1 in Block 15.a.
(g) Other Possible Sponsors (Block 22). List the names or acronyms
of all other public or private sponsors including other agencies within
USDA and other programs funded by CSREES to whom your application has
been or might be sent. In the event you decide to send your application
to another organization or agency at a later date, you must inform the
identified CSREES Program Director as soon as practicable. Submitting
your proposal to other potential sponsors will not prejudice its review
by CSREES; however, duplicate support for the same project will not be
provided. Complete the ``Application for Funding,'' Form CSREES-661, in
its entirety.
(h) One copy of the ``Application for Funding'' form must contain
the signatures 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 affiliated
organizations of all PI/PD's and co-PI/PD's 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 project goal(s); and relevance of the project to
regional, State, or local water quality efforts and/or list of CSREES
Water Quality Program Priorities listed above. The importance of a
concise, informative Project Summary cannot be overemphasized.
Summaries for Regional Water Quality Coordination proposals should also
indicate all organizations participating in the effort, the
organization that will house the database effort, and the mechanism
that will be used to coordinate between organizations.
5. Response to Previous Review
This requirement only applies to ``Resubmitted Proposals'' as
described under Part I, E, ``Types of Proposals.'' For these proposals,
the investigator(s) must respond to the previous panel summary on no
more than one page, titled ``RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS REVIEW,'' which is to
be placed directly after the Project Summary. If desired, additional
comments and responses to the previous panel summary may be included in
the text of the Project Description, subject to the page limitation.
6. Project Description
Please Note: For Regional Water Quality Coordination and for
Integrated Research, Education, and Extension proposals, the project
description may not exceed 15 single- or double-spaced pages of written
text and may not exceed a total of 20 pages after inclusion of figures
and tables.
For National Facilitation and for Extension Education proposals,
the project description may not exceed 8 single- or double-spaced pages
of written text and may not exceed a total of ten pages after inclusion
of figures and tables. This maximum has been established to ensure fair
and equitable competition. The Project Description must include all of
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 or other past activities which
substantiate 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. In
addition, this section should include in-depth information on the
following, when applicable:
(1) Estimates of the magnitude of the issues and their relevance to
stakeholders and to ongoing State-Federal food and agricultural
research, education and extension programs.
(2) Role of the stakeholders in problem identification, planning,
and implementation and evaluation as appropriate.
(3) Reasons for having the work performed at the proposing
institution.
b. Objectives: Clear, concise, complete, and logically arranged
statement(s) of specific aims of the proposed effort must be included
in all proposals.
c. Methods: The procedures or methodology to be applied to the
proposed effort should be explicitly stated. This section should
include but not necessarily be limited to:
(1) A description of stakeholder involvement in problem
identification, planning, implementation and evaluation;
(2) A description of the proposed project activities in the
sequence in which it is planned to carry them out;
(3) Techniques to be employed, including their feasibility and
rationale for their use in this project;
(4) Kinds of results expected;
(5) Means by which extension and education activities will be
evaluated;
(6) Means by which data will be analyzed or interpreted;
(7) Details of plans to communicate results to stakeholders and the
public;
(8) Pitfalls that might be encountered; and
(9) Limitations to proposed procedures.
d. 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 and/
or national programs. Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of
each institutional partner of the project team.
e. Facilities and Equipment: All facilities which are available for
use or
[[Page 14781]]
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.
f. Project Timetable: The proposal should outline all important
phases as a function of time, year by year, for the entire project,
including periods beyond the grant funding period.
In addition to the above, the National Facilitation and Regional
Water Quality Coordination proposals should describe the roles and
responsibilities of central coordinators and should present a
management plan for the administration of the project including
facilitation of communication, planning, and annual report preparation.
7. References
All references cited should be complete, including titles and all
co-authors, and should conform to an accepted journal format.
8. Appendices to Project Description
Appendices to the Project Description are allowed if they are
directly germane to the proposed project and are limited to a total of
two of the following: reprints (papers that have been published in peer
reviewed journals) and preprints (manuscripts in press for a peer
reviewed journal; these must be accompanied by a letter of acceptance
from the publishing journal).
9. Key Personnel
The following should be included, as applicable:
(a) The roles and responsibilities of each PI/PD and/or
collaborator should be clearly described;
(b) An estimate of the time commitment involved 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 each in
length, excluding publications listings. A chronological list of all
publications in refereed journals during the past four (4) years,
including those in press, must be provided for each professional
project member for whom a curriculum vitae is provided. Also list only
those non-refereed 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.
10. 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 9.(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.
11. 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, a resume or curriculum vita for
each consultant, and rate of pay for each consultant. For purposes of
proposal development, informal day-to-day contacts between key project
personnel and outside experts are not considered to be collaborative
arrangements and thus do not need to be detailed.
All anticipated subcontractual arrangements also should be
explained and justified in this section. A proposed statement of work
and a budget for each arrangement involving the transfer of substantive
programmatic work or the providing of financial assistance to a third
party must be provided. Agreements between departments or other units
of your own institution and minor arrangements with entities outside of
your institution (e.g., requests for outside laboratory analyses) are
excluded from this requirement.
If you expect to enter into subcontractual arrangements, please
note that the provisions contained in 7 CFR part 3019, USDA Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grant and Other Agreements with
Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit
Organizations, and the general provisions contained in 7 CFR part
3015.205, USDA Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations, flow down to
subrecipients. In addition, required clauses from Sections 40-48
(``Procurement Standards'') and Appendix A (``Contract Provisions'') to
7 CFR part 3019 should be included in final contractual documents, and
it is necessary for the subawardee to make a certification relating to
debarment/suspension.
12. Budget (Form CSREES-55)
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.
[[Page 14782]]
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 brochure,
etc., should be shown in Section I., ``All Other Direct Costs'' of Form
CSREES-55.
7. Computer (ADPE) Costs. Reimbursement for the costs of using
specialized facilities (such as a university-or department-controlled
computer mainframe or data processing center) may be requested if such
services are required for completion of the work.
8. All Other Direct Costs. Anticipated direct project charges not
included in other budget categories must be itemized with estimated
costs and justified in the budget narrative. This also applies to
revised budgets, as the item(s) and dollar amount(s) may change.
Examples may include space rental at remote locations, subcontractual
costs, and charges for consulting services, telephone, facsimile,
shipping costs, and fees necessary for laboratory analyses. You are
encouraged to consult the ``Instructions for Completing Form CSREES-55,
Budget,'' of the Application Kit for detailed guidance relating to this
budget category. Form AD-1048 must be completed by each subcontractor
or consultant and retained by the grantee.
9. Indirect Costs. Section 1462 of the National Agricultural
Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3310)
limits indirect costs for this program to 19 percent of total Federal
funds provided under each award. Therefore the recovery of indirect
costs under this program may not exceed the lesser of the institution's
official negotiated indirect cost rate or the equivalent of 19 percent
of total Federal funds awarded. Another method of calculating the
maximum allowable is 23.456 percent of the total direct costs. If no
rate has been negotiated, a reasonable dollar amount (equivalent to or
less than 19 percent of total Federal funds requested) in lieu of
indirect costs may be requested, subject to approval by USDA.
b. Budget Narrative. All budget categories, excluding Indirect
Costs, for which support is requested, must be individually listed
(with costs) in the same order as the budget and justified on a
separate sheet of paper and placed immediately behind the Budget Form.
Explanations of matching funds or lack there of on commodity-specific
projects also are to be included in this section.
c. Matching Funds. If an applicant concludes that matching funds
are not required as specified under Part I, F, ``Matching
Requirements,'' a justification should be included in the budget
narrative. CSREES will consider this justification when ascertaining
final matching requirements or in determining if required matching can
be waived. CSREES retains the right to make final determinations
regarding matching requirements.
For those grants requiring matching funds as specified under Part
I, F, proposals should include written verification of commitments of
matching support (including both cash and in-kind contributions) from
third parties. Written verification means:
(a) For any third party cash contributions, a separate pledge
agreement for each donation, signed by the authorized organizational
representatives of the donor organization and the applicant
organization, which must include: (1) The name, address, and telephone
number of the donor; (2) the name of the applicant organization; (3)
the title of the project for which the donation is made; (4) the dollar
amount of the cash donation; and (5) a statement that the donor will
pay the cash contribution during the grant period; and
(b) For any third party in-kind contributions, a separate pledge
agreement for each contribution, signed by the authorized
organizational representatives of the donor organization and the
applicant organization, which must include: (1) The name, address, and
telephone number of the donor; (2) the name of the applicant
organization; (3) the title of the project for which the donation is
made; (4) a good faith estimate of the current fair market value of the
third party in-kind contribution; and (5) a statement that the donor
will make the contribution during the grant period.
The sources and amount of all matching support from outside the
applicant institution should be summarized on a separate page and
placed in the proposal immediately following the budget narrative. All
pledge agreements must be placed in the proposal immediately following
the summary of matching support.
The value of applicant contributions to the project shall be
established in accordance with applicable cost principles. Applicants
should refer to OMB Circular A-21, Cost Principles for Educational
Institutions, for further guidance and other requirements relating to
matching and allowable costs.
13. Current and Pending Support (Form CSREES-663)
All proposals must contain Form CSREES-663 listing other current
public or private support (including in-house support) to which
personnel (i.e., individuals submitting a vitae in response to 9.(c) of
this part) identified in the proposal have committed portions of their
time, whether or not salary support for person(s) involved is included
in the budget. Analogous information must be provided for any pending
proposals that are being considered by, or that will be submitted in
the near future to, other possible sponsors, including other USDA
[[Page 14783]]
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.
14. Assurance Statement(s), (Form CSREES-662)
A number of situations encountered in the conduct of projects
require special assurances, supporting documentation, etc., before
funding can be approved for the project. In addition to any other
situation that may exist with regard to a particular project, it is
expected that some applications submitted in response to these
guidelines will involve the following:
a. Recombinant DNA or RNA Research. As stated in 7 CFR Part
3015.205 (b)(3), all key personnel identified in the proposal and all
endorsing officials of the proposing organization are required to
comply with the guidelines established by the National Institutes of
Health entitled, ``Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA
Molecules,'' as revised. If your project proposes to use recombinant
DNA or RNA techniques, you must so indicate by checking the ``yes'' box
in Block 19 of Form CSREES-661 (the Cover Page) and by completing
Section A of Form CSREES-662. For applicable proposals recommended for
funding, Institutional Biosafety Committee approval is required before
CSREES funds will be released.
b. Animal Care. Responsibility for the humane care and treatment of
live vertebrate animals used in any grant project supported with funds
provided by CSREES rests with the performing organization. Where a
project involves the use of living vertebrate animals for experimental
purposes, all key project personnel identified in a proposal and all
endorsing officials of the proposing organization are required to
comply with the applicable provisions of the Animal Welfare Act of
1966, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) and the regulations
promulgated thereunder by the Secretary in 9 CFR Parts 1, 2, 3, and 4
pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of these animals. If
your project will involve these animals, you should check ``yes'' in
block 20 of Form CSREES-661 and complete Section B of Form CSREES-662.
In the event a project involving the use of live vertebrate animals
results in a grant award, funds will be released only after the
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee has approved the project.
c. Protection of Human Subjects. Responsibility for safeguarding
the rights and welfare of human subjects used in any grant project
supported with funds provided by CSREES rests with the performing
organization. Guidance on this issue is contained in the National
Research Act, Pub. L. No. 93-348, as amended, and implementing
regulations promulgated by the Department under 7 CFR Part 1c. If you
propose to use human subjects for experimental purposes in your
project, you should check the ``yes'' box in Block 21 of Form CSREES-
661 and complete Section C of Form CSREES-662. In the event a project
involving human subjects results in a grant award, funds will be
released only after the appropriate Institutional Review Board has
approved the project.
15. Certifications
Note that by signing Form CSREES-661 the applicant is providing the
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.
16. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (Form
CSREES-1234)
As outlined in 7 CFR part 3407 (i.e., 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 May 14, 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: Integrated
Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program--Water
Quality; c/o Proposal Services Unit; Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service; U.S. Department of Agriculture;
Waterfront Center, Room 1307; 800 9th Street, SW.; Washington, DC
20024.
Proposals sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be sent to the
following address: Integrated Research, Education, and Extension
Competitive Grants Program--Water Quality; 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.
[[Page 14784]]
D. Acknowledgment of Proposals
The receipt of all proposals will be acknowledged by e-mail.
Therefore, applicants are strongly 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
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 in a 2-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,
proposals that meet these requirements will be technically evaluated by
a peer review panel.
Peer review panel members will be selected based upon their
training and experience in relevant scientific, education or extension
fields taking into account the following factors: (a) The level of
formal scientific, technical education, and extension experience of the
individual, as well as the extent to which an individual is engaged in
relevant research, education and/or extension activities; (b) the need
to include as peer reviewers experts from various areas of
specialization within relevant scientific, education, and extension
fields; (c) the need to include as reviewers other experts (e.g.,
producers, range or forest managers/operators, and consumers) who can
assess relevance of the proposals to targeted audiences and to program
needs; (d) the need to include as peer reviewers experts from a variety
of organizational types (e.g., colleges, universities, industry, state
and Federal agencies, private profit and non-profit organizations), and
geographic locations; (e) the need to maintain a balanced composition
of peer review groups with regard to minority and female representation
and an equitable age distribution; and (f) the need to include members
that can judge the effective usefulness to producers and the general
public of each proposal.
B. Evaluation Criteria
Technical merit, relevance to program goals and potential impact
will be evaluated for each proposal. Proposals must show evidence of
strength in all of these areas to be rated highly for funding. Specific
criteria for these proposal attributes are listed below.
(1) Technical merit of all aspects of the proposal, including
research, education and extension components.
(a) Conceptual adequacy of overall approach;
(b) Extent to which proposed work addresses identified stakeholder
needs;
(c) Conceptual adequacy of hypothesis or hypotheses on which plan
is based;
(d) Suitability and feasibility of the methodology for conducting
the work;
(e) Time allocated for attainment of objectives;
(f) Qualifications of project personnel;
(g) Institutional experience and competence in the identified area
of work;
(h) Adequacy of available support personnel, equipment, and
facilities;
(i) Extent to which proposed work integrates research, education
and extension; and
(j) Suitability and feasibility of the methodology for evaluating
extension and education activities.
(2) Relevancy to Program Goals and Potential Impact.
(a) Relationship of project objectives to national issues and
objectives;
(b) Regional or national magnitude of problem addressed;
(c) Evidence of partnerships with other disciplines and
institutions;
(d) Extent to which end users are involved in problem
identification, planning, implementation and evaluation;
(e) Probability of success of the project; and
(f) Extent to which potential impact can be documented.
The National Facilitation proposals and Regional Water Quality
Coordination proposals will also be judged on the quality of the
management plan that is proposed.
Priority will be given for integrated, multifunctional research,
education, and extension projects.
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 2000 Higher Education
Directory, published by Higher Education Publications, Inc., 6400
Arlington Boulevard, Suite 648, Falls Church, Virginia 22042. Phone:
(703) 532-2305.
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 the 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--Grant Awards
A. 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 awarding
official of CSREES as the effective date of the grant shall be no later
than September 30 of the Federal fiscal year in which the project is
approved for support and funds are appropriated for such purpose,
unless otherwise permitted by law. 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 and 3019 of 7 CFR).
B. Funding Mechanisms
The two mechanisms by which grants may be awarded are as follows:
(1) Standard grant. This is a funding mechanism whereby the
Department agrees to support a specified level of effort for a
predetermined time period without the announced intention of providing
additional support at a future date.
(2) Continuation grant. This is a funding mechanism whereby the
Department agrees to support a specified level of effort for a
predetermined period of time with a statement of intention to provide
additional support at a future date, provided that performance has been
satisfactory, appropriations are available for this purpose, and
continued support
[[Page 14785]]
will be in the best interests of the Federal government and the public.
This kind of mechanism normally will be awarded for an initial one-year
period, and any subsequent continuation project grants will be awarded
in one-year increments. The award of a continuation project grant to
fund an initial or succeeding budget period does not constitute an
obligation to fund any subsequent budget period. Unless prescribed
otherwise by CSREES, a grantee must submit a separate application for
continued support for each subsequent fiscal year. Requests for such
continued support must be submitted in duplicate at least three months
prior to the expiration date of the budget period currently being
funded. Decisions regarding continued support and the actual funding
levels of such support in future years usually will be made
administratively after consideration of such factors as the grantee's
progress and management practices and the availability of funds. Since
initial peer reviews are based upon the full term and scope of the
original application, additional evaluations of this type generally are
not required prior to successive years' support. However, in unusual
cases (e.g., when the nature of the project or key personnel change or
when the amount of future support requested substantially exceeds the
grant application originally reviewed and approved), additional reviews
may be required prior to approving continued funding.
C. 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.
D. Grant Award Document and Notice of Grant Award
The grant award document shall include at a minimum the following:
(1) 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;
(2) Title of project;
(3) Name(s) and address(es) of PI/PD's chosen to direct and control
approved activities;
(4) Identifying grant number assigned by the Department;
(5) Project period, specifying the amount of time the Department
intends to support the project without requiring recompetition for
funds;
(6) Total amount of Departmental financial assistance approved by
the Administrator during the project period;
(7) Legal authority(ies) under which the grant is awarded;
(8) Approved budget plan for categorizing allocable project funds
to accomplish the stated purpose of the grant award; and
(9) 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.
Part VI--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. Use of Funds; Changes
(1) Delegation of Fiscal Responsibility
Unless the terms and conditions of the grant state otherwise, the
grantee may not in whole or in part delegate or transfer to another
person, institution, or organization the responsibility for use or
expenditure of grant funds.
(2) Changes in Project Plans
(a) The permissible changes by the grantee, PI/PD(s), or other key
project personnel in the approved project grant shall be limited to
changes in methodology, techniques, or other aspects of the project to
expedite achievement of the project's approved goals. If the grantee
and/or the PI/PD(s) are uncertain as to whether a change complies with
this provision, the question must be referred to the CSREES Authorized
Departmental Officer (ADO) for a final determination.
(b) Changes in approved goals or objectives shall be requested by
the grantee and approved in writing by the ADO prior to effecting such
changes. In no event shall requests for such changes be approved which
are outside the scope of the original approved project.
(c) Changes in approved project leadership or the replacement or
reassignment of other key project personnel shall be requested by the
grantee and approved in writing by the awarding official of CSREES
prior to effecting such changes.
(d) Transfers of actual performance of the substantive programmatic
work in whole or in part and provisions for 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, but in no case shall the total
project period exceed five years. 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.
(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.
C. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements
It is expected that outputs from successful projects will include:
the development of watershed management partnerships, increased
involvement of community and business sectors in watershed restoration
and management, enhanced understanding of regionally-appropriate
watershed management practices, increased coordination and partnership
between universities and other Federal research and management
agencies, and the establishment and maintenance of monitoring and
assessment activities related to the agricultural-water quality
interface.
Successful projects should describe how they will measure specific
improvements in the overall quality of water resources. Additionally,
projects should describe all measureable outcomes and results and where
appropriate, how they will evaluate the effectiveness of extension and
education programs.
All projects selected for award will be required to deliver
metadata and annual reports, a final summary report, a bibliography of
publications and training materials resulting from support, and an
impacts analysis. All reports will be geo-referenced to the
[[Page 14786]]
watersheds where activities were performed. The final summary report
must include total funding (Federal, matching and other) and a listing
of students who worked on the project (report graduate degrees awarded
and undergraduates trained).
The grantee must prepare an annual report that details all
significant activities towards achieving the goals and objectives of
the project. The narrative should be succinct and be no longer than 10
pages, using 12-point, single-spaced type. A budget summary should be
attached to this report, which will provide an overview of all monies
spent during the reporting period.
D. Applicable Federal Statutes and Regulations
Several 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., OMB Circular Nos. A-21 and A-122)
and incorporating provisions of 31 U.S.C. 6301-6308 (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 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 Agency
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, DC, this 7th day of March 2001.
Colien Hefferan,
Administrator, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-6180 Filed 3-12-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-22-P
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 2001/03/14 EST