**RIPM**

**Regional Integrated Pest Management Competitive Grants Program**

**Southern Region**

***[FY 2009 Request for Applications]{.underline}***

**APPLICATION DEADLINE: November 17, 2008**

![](media/image1.png)

#  U.S. Department of Agriculture

![](media/image2.png){width="0.47708333333333336in"
height="0.5923611111111111in"} **Cooperative State Research, Education,
and Extension Service**

**COOPERATIVE STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Regional Integrated Pest Management Competitive Grants Program --
Southern Region**

**INITIAL ANNOUNCEMENT**

**CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE:** Projects awarded under
Section 3(d) of the Smith-Lever Act of May 8, 1914, ch. 79, 38 Stat.
372, 7 U.S.C. 341 *et seq*. can be found in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance under 10.500. Projects awarded under Section
2(c)(1)(B) of the Act of August 4, 1965, Public Law No. 89-106, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 450i (c)(1)(B)) can be found in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance under 10.200.

**DATES:** Applications must be received by close of business (COB) on
**November 17, 2008** (5:00 p.m. Eastern Time). Applications received
after this deadline will normally not be considered for funding.
Comments regarding this request for applications (RFA) are requested
within six months from the issuance of this notice. Comments received
after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

**STAKEHOLDER INPUT:** The Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service (CSREES) is requesting comments regarding this RFA
from any interested party. These comments will be considered in the
development of the next RFA for the program, if applicable, and 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 RFA from persons who conduct or use agricultural
research, education and extension for use in formulating future RFAs for
competitive programs. Written stakeholder comments on this RFA should be
submitted in accordance with the deadline set forth in the DATES portion
of this Notice.

Written stakeholder comments should be submitted by mail to: Policy &
Oversight Branch; Office of Extramural Programs; Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service; USDA; STOP 2299; 1400
Independence Avenue, SW; Washington, DC 20250-2299; or via e-mail to:
[RFP-<OEP@csrees.usda.gov>]{.underline}. (This e-mail address is
intended only for receiving comments regarding this RFA and not
requesting information or forms.) In your comments, please state that
you are responding to the Regional Integrated Pest Management
Competitive Grants Program -- Southern Region RFA.

**EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:** CSREES anticipates the availability of grant
funds and requests applications for the Regional Integrated Pest
Management Competitive Grants Program -- Southern Region (S -- RIPM) for
fiscal year (FY) 2009 to help achieve National IPM goals by increasing
the supply and dissemination of IPM knowledge and by enhancing
collaboration among stakeholders. The amount available for support of
this program in FY 2009 is approximately \$ 827,000.

This notice identifies the objectives for S -- RIPM projects, the
eligibility criteria for projects and applicants, and the application
forms and associated instructions needed to apply for a S -- RIPM grant.
CSREES additionally requests stakeholder input from any interested party
for use in the development of the next RFA for this program.

**Table of Contents**

[PART I---FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION
5](#__RefHeading___Toc209839775)

[A. Legislative Authority and Background
5](#__RefHeading___Toc209839776)

[B. Purpose and Priorities 5](#__RefHeading___Toc209839777)

[C. Program Area Description 8](#__RefHeading___Toc209839778)

[PART II---AWARD INFORMATION 12](#__RefHeading___Toc209839779)

[A. Available Funding 12](#__RefHeading___Toc209839780)

[B. Types of Applications 12](#__RefHeading___Toc209839781)

[PART III---ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION 13](#__RefHeading___Toc209839782)

[A. Eligible Applicants 13](#__RefHeading___Toc209839783)

[B. Cost Sharing or Matching 13](#__RefHeading___Toc209839784)

[PART IV---APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION
14](#__RefHeading___Toc209839785)

[A. Electronic Application Package 14](#__RefHeading___Toc209839786)

[B. Content and Form of Application Submission
15](#__RefHeading___Toc209839787)

[C. Submission Dates and Times 19](#__RefHeading___Toc209839788)

[D. Funding Restrictions 20](#__RefHeading___Toc209839789)

[E. Other Submission Requirements 20](#__RefHeading___Toc209839790)

[PART V---APPLICATION REVIEW REQUIREMENTS
21](#__RefHeading___Toc209839791)

[A. General 21](#__RefHeading___Toc209839792)

[B. Evaluation Criteria 21](#__RefHeading___Toc209839793)

[C. Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality
25](#__RefHeading___Toc209839794)

[D. Organizational Management Information
25](#__RefHeading___Toc209839795)

[PART VI---AWARD ADMINISTRATION 26](#__RefHeading___Toc209839796)

[A. General 26](#__RefHeading___Toc209839797)

[B. Award Notice 26](#__RefHeading___Toc209839798)

[C. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
27](#__RefHeading___Toc209839799)

[D. Expected Program Outputs and Reporting Requirements
28](#__RefHeading___Toc209839800)

[PART VII---AGENCY CONTACT 29](#__RefHeading___Toc209839801)

[PART VIII---OTHER INFORMATION 30](#__RefHeading___Toc209839802)

[A. Access to Review Information 30](#__RefHeading___Toc209839803)

[B. Use of Funds; Changes 30](#__RefHeading___Toc209839804)

[C. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards
31](#__RefHeading___Toc209839805)

[D. Regulatory Information 31](#__RefHeading___Toc209839806)

[E. Definitions 31](#__RefHeading___Toc209839807)

[CHECKLIST 36](#__RefHeading___Toc209839808)

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839775 .anchor}**PART I---FUNDING OPPORTUNITY
DESCRIPTION**

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839776 .anchor}A. Legislative Authority and
Background

Authority for the funding of Research projects is contained in Section
2(c)(1)(B) of the Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research Grant
Act of August 4, 1965, Public Law No. 89-106, as amended (7 U.S.C. 450i
(c)(1)(B)). Authority for the funding of Extension projects is contained
in Section 3(d) of the Smith-Lever Act of May 8, 1914, ch. 79, 38 Stat.
372, 7 U.S.C. 341 *et seq*. For Joint Research-Extension applications
(see Part II, C., 3), separate awards will be executed for P.L. 89-106
and Smith‑Lever funds.

[Please note:]{.underline} Section 7403 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246) amended section 3(d) of the
Smith-Lever Act to require funds to be awarded competitively. In
addition, this amendment made the 1890 land-grant institutions eligible
to participate in Smith-Lever section 3(d) programs at any appropriated
level. Section 7417 of FCEA amended section 208 of the District of
Columbia Public Postsecondary Education Reorganization Act (P.L. No.
93-471; 88 Stat. 1428) to provide eligibility to the University of the
District of Columbia for programs authorized and appropriated under
Smith-Lever section 3(d). These new provisions will be implemented in FY
2009.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839777 .anchor}B. Purpose and Priorities

The purpose of the S-RIPM program is to help achieve National IPM goals
by increasing the supply and dissemination of IPM knowledge and by
enhancing collaboration among stakeholders.

**1. National IPM Goals**

The Technical Panel evaluates proposals for criteria under "National IPM
Goals". The Technical Panel sees all materials submitted except the
relevance statement (see Part IV.B.2.c. for more information on the
relevance statement). The goal of the RIPM program is to provide
knowledge and information needed for the implementation of the IPM Road
Map.

In FY 2009, the S-RIPM is soliciting proposals that address the
following priorities:

-   **Application of the IPM Road Map**: The National Road Map for
    Integrated Pest Management
    (<http://www.ipmcenters.org/IPMRoadMap.pdf>) identifies strategic
    directions for IPM research, implementation, and measurement for all
    pests, in all settings, throughout the nation. Proposals for all
    project types must explicitly address how the project relates to at
    least one point of intersection between a future direction and a
    focus area delineated in the Road Map.

> **IPM Road Map future directions for IPM programming are:**

-   Improve the cost/benefit relationship when adopting IPM practices;

-   Reduce potential human health risks from pests and related
    management strategies; and

-   Minimize adverse environmental effects from pest and related
    management strategies.

> **The IPM Road Map focus areas for IPM programming are:**

-   Production agriculture;

-   Natural resources and recreational environments; and

-   Residential and public areas.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Risk:** Research, Extension and Joint Research-Extension projects
    must have the potential to significantly improve risk avoidance or
    mitigation in pest management. The IPM Evaluation project must have
    the potential to document the impact of IPM approaches on risk
    and/or to contribute to the understanding of how IPM approaches can
    impact risk. For all project types, risk issues addressed may be
    environmental, economic, and/or human health-related.

-   **Innovation:** Innovative projects with strong potential to produce
    or develop successful new techniques, tools, and/or strategies for
    IPM or IPM evaluation are encouraged. In the area of IPM evaluation,
    proposals are sought that will produce new evaluation tools and/or
    develop new and effective ways to document the impact of IPM on
    societal risk. In particular, projects that have the potential to be
    useful across a diverse range of IPM settings and projects are
    encouraged.

-   **Near-term benefits:** This program seeks to develop IPM knowledge,
    approaches and/or products that will be useful in the practice of
    IPM in the near term -- i.e., within 1 - 3 years of project
    completion.

-   ***For IPM Evaluation project type only --* Compatibility** with
    other IPM evaluation efforts is a priority: One component of
    evaluating proposals of the IPM Evaluation project type is potential
    compatibility of project design and/or output with other regional or
    national IPM evaluation projects.

**2. Southern Region Priorities**

The Southern Region consists of 13 states and 2 territories. Projects
funded by S-RIPM must address pest management issues of importance to
the region. The Relevance Panel sees only the Relevance Statement. Other
items, including letters of support, may be cited in the Relevance
Statement but will not be provided to the Relevance Panel. The Relevance
Panel evaluates proposals for criteria listed in this section.

-   **Multi-state partnerships:** As a regional program, S-RIPM supports
    projects that enhance and promote collaboration across state and
    territorial boundaries. For all project types, proposals that
    clearly involve multi-state (or territory) attributes will score the
    highest in this criterion. Sharing of the work and the budget
    between two or more institutions in different states or territories,
    though not required, is the strongest indication of such
    collaboration. Other evidence includes indications of multi-state
    (or territory) involvement in planning, and/or indications of
    interest in project results from other states/territories. Formal
    arrangements such as subcontracts with other states are not
    necessarily required to indicate a positive multi-state aspect, but
    explicit documentation of informal relationships is encouraged.

-   **Integrated approaches:** This program encourages projects that
    enhance the integration of appropriate tactics (including, but not
    limited to, biological controls, host plant resistance, mechanical
    controls, cultural management, and appropriate pesticides) in a
    sustainable IPM system. Proposals that address only one tactic are
    acceptable if the work will contribute to strengthening the suite of
    tactics and approaches available for the system involved. Projects
    that promote a single tactic approach to pest management are not
    encouraged.

-   **Stakeholder-identified IPM priorities:** S-RIPM is committed to
    addressing the pest management needs expressed by diverse
    stakeholders. Applications should include explicit citations that
    document the stakeholder-identified needs addressed by the proposed
    project. Explicitly citing such sources demonstrates both that a
    project is important, and that the Project Directors (PDs) and the
    grants program are engaged with the community. This criterion does
    not apply to the IPM Evaluation project type. Sources of
    stakeholder-identified needs include, but are not limited to:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The Southern Region IPM Center (SRIPMC) priorities web page and
    database
    ([http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities/](http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities));

-   The database of Southern Region Pest Management Strategic Plans
    (PMSPs) (<http://www.sripmc.org/pmsp/pmsp_form.cfm>);

-   Plant and Pest Biology Stakeholder Workshop 2007. Examination of the
    needs, concerns, and planning for plant-related programs
    (<http://aspb.org/publicaffairs/stakeholders/2007/FinalStakeholdersReport2007.pdf>)

-   USDA-CSREES Stakeholder Input Sources: Plants and Plant Products
    (<http://www.csrees.usda.gov/business/reporting/stakeholder/pl_stakeholder.html>)

-   Citable recommendations, meeting minutes and reports from program
    advisory committees or similar stakeholder groups

-   Other documented needs assessment evaluations.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Letters of support will be accepted as attachments to the proposal
    in the R&R Other Project Information Form (Field 11 in the form and
    more fully described in the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide),
    but are not viewed by the Relevance Panel. Proposal evaluation
    relative to this criterion will be based on factors including the
    number and diversity of stakeholders represented, whether the
    documents are publicly available, to what extent the priority
    described exists independent of the proposed project, and timeliness
    of the priority. A more detailed discussion of such evaluation can
    be found in the document "Addressing Stakeholder-Identified
    Priorities" found online at
    <http://www.sripmc.org/fund/sripm/stakeholders.cfm>

-   **IPM issues important to the Southern Region:** For all project
    types, the relative importance of the IPM setting (e.g., a crop, a
    type of building) to the region will be used to rank proposals.
    Evidence of a setting's importance is often but not exclusively
    indicated by measures such as acreage, monetary value, and number of
    people involved (e.g., students in a school system). Within the
    setting, the relative importance of a pest or group of pests will be
    used to rank proposals. A project addressing the entire pest complex
    in a setting would be more highly rated than a project addressing an
    occasional pest that rarely causes significant loss.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839778 .anchor}C. Program Area Description

For purposes of S-RIPM applications the program code name is "**Southern
RIPM**" and the program code is "**QQ.S**".

Four types of project proposals can be submitted to the S- RIPM program
in FY 2009: Research, Extension, Joint Research-Extension, or IPM
Evaluation. Applicants must indicate the type of project they are
proposing on the Relevance Statement and on the Project Summary.

-   **Research**

This funding category develops the research base needed for the
construction of comprehensive pest management systems that have a strong
likelihood of contributing to ongoing IPM implementation efforts.
Projects may develop individual tactics needed for pest management
systems (e.g., biocontrol, cultural control, host resistance) or help
increase understanding of how interactions among tactics alter the
effectiveness of pest management within agricultural, forest, suburban,
and urban ecosystems. Where appropriate, the experimental approach
should emphasize field-scale experiments spanning multiple seasons or
locations. Practices should be designed to reduce initial pest
populations, lower the carrying capacity of the ecosystem for pests, or
increase tolerance of hosts to pest injury. Long-term fundamental
research is not appropriate for funding.

Research projects may have a duration of up to three years. Please note
that one- or two-year Research projects may be eligible for no-cost
extensions after years one and two, but that no carryover or extension
is permitted for these projects beyond three years. Unexpended funds are
lost.

Applications should clearly demonstrate how the tactic or IPM system,
once developed, can be incorporated into an existing production system.
Applications that focus solely on the development and/or evaluation of
pesticides will only be considered if they have extraordinary potential
to reduce environmental, economic or human health risk.

Research involving chemical pesticides should be designed to reduce the
risks associated with the amount, frequency, and selectivity of
pesticide use. Risks that may be addressed include environmental,
economic and human health issues as well as impact on beneficial
organisms and development of pest populations that are resistant to
pesticides.

The budget limit for research is defined only by the amount of funds
available for this project type, expected to be approximately \$457,000.
Project Directors are strongly encouraged to consider the recent history
of awards for research projects funded by this program, available at
<http://www.sripmc.org/ripm/rfa09/sripm_history.cfm>.

-   **Extension**

This funding category enhances outreach efforts that support the
wide-scale implementation of IPM methods. Projects should maximize
opportunities to build strategic alliances with industry and user groups
to expand their active participation in increasing the adoption of IPM
methods. Projects may develop educational materials and information
delivery systems needed for outreach efforts, conducting field-scale or
on-farm demonstrations, or delivering IPM education and training. A
research component is not a required element of Extension projects, but
the research base should be documented.

The budget limit for Extension projects is defined only by the amount of
funds available for this project type, expected to be approximately
\$70,000. Project directors are strongly encouraged to consider the
recent history of awards for Extension projects funded by this program,
available at
[http://www.sripmc.org/ripm/rfa09/sripm_history.cfm.](http://www.sripmc.org/ripm/rfa09/sripm_history.cfm.%0D)

Extension projects may have a duration of up to three years.

-   **Joint Research-Extension**

This funding category combines research and extension activities (as
described above). Joint Research-Extension projects validate pest
management systems, introduce new pest management tactics into local
production systems, and deliver these systems to producers and their
advisors through IPM education and training programs. The project team
should include both researchers and extension educators with
appointments in research and extension.

The budget limit for Joint Research-Extension projects is defined only
by the amount of funds available for this project type, expected to be
approximately \$200,000. Project Directors are strongly encouraged to
consider the recent history of awards for joint Research/Extension
projects funded by this program, available at
<http://www.sripmc.org/ripm/rfa09/sripm_history.cfm>.

Joint Research-Extension projects may have a duration of up to three
years. Please note that one- or two-year Joint Research-Extension
projects may be eligible for no-cost extensions after years one and two,
but that no carryover or extension is permitted for these projects
beyond three years. Unexpended funds may be lost.

-   **IPM Evaluation**

This funding category provides support for a single project with the
primary focus of IPM evaluation. An IPM Evaluation project may document
adoption of IPM approaches and practices over time, and/or develop new
methods or approaches for documenting changes in IPM adoption. In either
case, the project must address the issue of how IPM programs ultimately
impact economic, environmental or human health risks as perceived by
society. The project should have strong potential to address the "So
what?" question; that is, what benefits to society does IPM provide?
Such questions have often been addressed in terms of proxy indicators
such as "pesticides saved." An ideal IPM Evaluation project would
address terminal outcomes such as impact on measures of environmental
quality, human health, and/or economic well-being.

This program will fund no more than one IPM Evaluation project. The
budget limit for the IPM evaluation project is \$100,000.

IPM Evaluation projects may have a duration of up to three years. Please
note that one- or two-year IPM Evaluation projects may be eligible for
no-cost extensions after years one and two, but that no extension is
permitted for these projects beyond three years.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839779 .anchor}PART II---AWARD INFORMATION

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839780 .anchor}A. Available Funding

There is no commitment by USDA to fund any particular grant application
or to make a specific number of awards. It is anticipated that
approximately \$ 827,000 will be made available to fund applications in
FY 2009. Of this amount, approximately \$ 457,000 is expected to be
available for Research projects, \$ 70,000 for Extension projects and \$
200,000 for Joint Research-Extension projects. Up to \$ 100,000 is
available for a single IPM Evaluation Project. Project duration is up to
3 years, and size of awards depends on the project type and the degree
of collaboration among states/territories in the Southern region

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839781 .anchor}B. Types of Applications

Awards will be made as [standard grants]{.underline} which are
instruments by which CSREES agrees to support a specified level of
effort for a predetermined project period without any statement of
intention to provide additional support at a future date. In FY 2009,
applications may be submitted to the S -- RIPM Program as one of the
following types of requests:

**[(1) New application]{.underline}**. This is a project application
that has not been previously submitted to the S -- RIPM Program. All new
applications will be reviewed competitively using the selection process
and evaluation criteria described in Part V---Application Review
Requirements.

**[(2) Renewal application]{.underline}**. This is a project application
that requests additional funding for a project beyond the period that
was approved in an original or amended award. Applications for renewed
funding must contain the same information as required for new
applications, and additionally must contain a Progress Report (report
must be added to the Project Narrative, Part IV.B.2.b.(vi)). Renewal
applications must be received by the relevant due dates, will be
evaluated in competition with other pending applications in appropriate
area to which they are assigned, and will be reviewed according to the
same evaluation criteria as new applications.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839782 .anchor}PART III---ELIGIBILITY
INFORMATION

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839783 .anchor}A. Eligible Applicants

Organizations eligible to receive Research awards are: state
agricultural experiment stations, 1862 and 1890 land-grant colleges and
universities, including Tuskegee University and West Virginia State
University, 1994 land-grant colleges and universities, research
foundations established by land-grant colleges and universities,
colleges and universities receiving funds under the Act of October 10,
1962 (16 USC 582a *et seq*.), accredited schools or colleges of
veterinary medicine, and the University of the District of Columbia.

Organizations eligible to receive Extension awards are 1862 and 1890
land-grant colleges and universities, including Tuskegee University and
West Virginia State University, and the University of the District of
Columbia.

Research and Extension personnel from other USDA/IPM regions can
participate as members of project teams. **Applications will only be
accepted from Project Directors (PDs) in the Southern IPM Region.**

Award recipients may subcontract to organizations not eligible to apply
provided such organizations are necessary for the conduct of the
project. An applicant's failure to meet an eligibility criterion by the
time of an application deadline will result in CSREES returning the
application without review or, even though an application may be
reviewed, will preclude CSREES from making an award.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839784 .anchor}B. Cost Sharing or Matching

There are no matching requirements associated with the RIPM program and
matching resources will not be factored into the review process as
evaluation criteria.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839785 .anchor}PART IV---APPLICATION AND
SUBMISSION INFORMATION

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839786 .anchor}A. Electronic Application
Package

Only electronic applications may be submitted via Grants.gov to CSREES
in response to this RFA.

Prior to preparing an application, it is suggested that the PD/PI first
contact an Authorized Representative (AR)(also referred to as Authorized
Organizational Representative or AOR) to determine if the organization
is prepared to submit electronic applications through Grant.gov. If the
organization is not prepared, the AR should see
<http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp> for steps for
preparing to submit applications through Grants.gov.

The steps to access application materials are as follows:

1.  Download and install PureEdge Viewer, a small, free program that
    provides access to the grant application. See
    <http://www.grants.gov/resources/download_software.jsp#pureedge>.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  The application package must be obtained via Grants.gov, go to
    [http://www.grants.gov](http://www.grants.gov/), click on "Apply for
    Grants" in the left-hand column, click on "**Step 1:** [Download a
    Grant Application Package and
    Instructions](https://apply.grants.gov/forms_apps_idx.html)," enter
    the funding opportunity number **USDA-CSREES-RIPM-001828** in the
    appropriate box and click "Download Package." From the search
    results, click "Download" to access the application package.

> Contained within the application package is the "[CSREES Grants.gov
> Application Guide: A Guide for Preparation and Submission of CSREES
> Applications via
> Grants.gov.](http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/grant_forms/electronic_app_guide.pdf)"
> This Guide contains an introduction and general Grants.gov
> instructions, information about how to use a Grant Application Package
> in Grants.gov, and instructions on how to complete the application
> forms.
>
> **If assistance is needed to access the application package** (e.g.,
> downloading or navigating PureEdge forms, using PureEdge with a
> Macintosh computer), refer to resources available on the Grants.gov
> Web site first (<http://grants.gov/>). Grants.gov assistance is also
> available as follows:

-   Grants.gov customer support\
    Toll Free: 1-800-518-4726\
    Business Hours: Monday through Friday 7:00 am -- 9:00 pm Eastern
    Standard Time\
    Email: <support@grants.gov>

See <http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/electronic.html> for additional
resources for applying electronically.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839787 .anchor}B. Content and Form of
Application Submission

::: Definition-Term
Electronic applications should be prepared following Part V and VI of
the document entitled "[A Guide for Preparation and Submission of CSREES
Applications via
Grants.gov](http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/grant_forms/electronic_app_guide.pdf)."
This guide is part of the corresponding application package (see Section
A. of this Part). The following is **additional information** needed in
order to prepare an application in response to this RFA. If there is
discrepancy between the two documents, the information contained in this
RFA is overriding.
:::

**Note the attachment requirements (e.g., portable document format) in
Part III section 3. of the Guide. [Any proposals containing non-PDF
documents will be AT RISK OF BEING EXCLUDED FROM csrees
REVIEW.]{.underline} Partial applications will be excluded from CSREES
review. With documented prior approval, resubmitted applications will be
accepted until close of business on the closing date in the RFA.**

**If you do not own PDF-generating software, Grants.gov provides online
tools to assist applicants. Users will find a link to "Convert Documents
to PDF" on <http://grants.gov/assets/PDFConversion.pdf>.**

**1. [SF 424 R&R Cover Sheet]{.underline}**

Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in
detail in Part V, 2. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.

**2. [R&R Other Project Information Form]{.underline}**

Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in
detail in Part V, 3. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.

a\. Field 6. Project Summary/Abstract.

\(i\) Project Type (choose one): Research; Extension; Joint
Research-Extension; or IPM Evaluation.

\(ii\) Summary Statement. The first line of your summary should state
the type of project you are submitting, for example, "This is a Research
project" or "This is an Extension project." For Joint Research-Extension
projects, the summary statement must indicate how many dollars are being
requested from each respective source (Smith-Lever funds are for
extension activities, the Act of August 4, 1965 (P.L. 89-106) funds are
for research activities). 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 the purposes
and priorities of the S-RIPM program (see Part I.B.).

b\. Field 7. Project Narrative.

PLEASE NOTE: The Project Narrative shall not exceed 16 pages
single-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all sides and font no smaller than
12 point. No additional pages for figures and tables will be accepted.
This maximum of 16 pages of text, figures and tables has been
established to ensure fair and equitable competition.

Please note: A Relevance Statement, described in subsection c., is
required for any proposal for Research, Extension, or Joint
Research-Extension projects. Evaluation projects do not require a
Relevance Statement. The Relevance Statement, submitted separately as an
appendix, has its own page limit. Additionally, for renewal and
resubmitted renewal applications, requirements in subsection b.(vi)
'Progress Reports and Review Responses', shall not exceed three (3)
pages of written text in total. Pages used on the Relevance Statement
and the Progress Reports and Review Responses are not counted toward the
page limit for the Project Narrative.

Appendices to the Project Narrative are allowed if they are directly
germane to the proposed project. The addition of appendices should not
be used to circumvent the page limit.

The Project Narrative must include all of the following:

\(i\) Problem, Background and Justification

**Project type:** The initial sentence should state the project type
(Research, Extension, Joint Research/Extension, or Evaluation) and the
amount of the request. If the proposal is for a Joint Research/Extension
project, indicate the amount requested for the Research component and
the amount requested in the Extension component.

**Problem**: Describe, in simple terms, the problem. Consider including
the economic importance of the crop or problem, the importance of the
pest(s), and the reason for your study (e.g., conventional pest-control
strategies no longer work; beneficial insects are being harmed by
available pest-control options; there is a lack of training or
implementation of new IPM tactics).

**Background**: Address the specific need(s) identified by growers and
other stakeholders in the Southern Region. Cite at least one
needs-assessment evaluation used to formulate your project (sources
include but are not limited to Pest Management Strategic Plans at
<http://www.sripmc.org/pmsp/pmsp_form.cfm> and web page submissions at
[http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities/](http://www.sripmc.org/Policy/Priorities)).
Demonstrate that you are engaged with constituents on some level and
that your project addresses their needs.

Review ongoing or completed work (local/regional/national) that is
relevant to your project, and include references. Describe how previous
work funded by the Regional IPM Competitive Grants Program or other
sources might contribute to the proposed project.

**Justification**: Specify who in the Southern Region stands to benefit
from your project. Consider environmental, health, and/or economic
benefits.

Describe why current technologies and practices are inadequate, or
explain how the proposed approach will (1) help to improve or implement
existing pest management systems and (2) address the specific needs
identified in this solicitation.

Discuss the potential applicability of the proposed approach to other
production regions and the relevance of the project to the priorities of
the S-RIPM program (see Part I.B. of this RFA).

\(ii\) **Objectives and Anticipated Impacts.**

Provide clear, concise, and logically numbered statement(s) of the
specific aims of the proposed effort. **If you are writing a Joint
Research-Extension proposal, please separate the research and extension
objectives.**

Describe the anticipated impacts that could be associated with the
fulfillment of your objectives (you may do this in list or table
format). Both your objectives and your impacts should connect to the
goals of the National IPM Road Map, which are to advance the
implementation of IPM to safeguard human health, safeguard the
environment, and promote economic benefits.

\(iii\) **Approach and Procedures**:

Procedures should be numbered to correspond to Objectives. Describe how
each of the stated objectives will be reached. Include appropriate
experimental design and experimental units, reference methods to be
used, and appropriate statistical analysis. Include a timetable for the
start and completion of each phase of the project. For a Joint
Research-Extension application, describe how the project will be
managed, particularly how coordination between research and extension
components will be achieved and maintained.

\(iv\) **Evaluation Plans**.

Provide detailed plans for evaluation of the project and indicate how
successful impacts and outcomes will be measured. Include specific
evaluation objectives with specific impact indicators (e.g., adoption
rate, number of areas impacted, pesticide use, profitability) that will
be used to measure the success of the project.

-   Research Projects: Provide detailed plans for evaluation of the
    project, indicating how you will determine whether the anticipated
    impacts stated in "Objectives and Anticipated Impacts" above have
    been achieved. If measurement of these anticipated impacts will not
    be possible in the context of the proposed project, describe how the
    tactic or system you studied, once developed, might be incorporated
    into an existing crop management program on a large scale.

-   Extension Projects and Joint Research-Extension Projects: Provide
    detailed plans for evaluation of the project. Evaluation plans that
    include surveys should indicate survey expertise of investigators
    and/or describe the survey methodology that will be used.

-   IPM Evaluation Projects: Evaluation plans are not required for IPM
    Evaluation Projects.

\(v\) **Timetable or Timeline**.

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.

\(vi\) Progress Reports -- For renewal applications (as defined in Part
II.B.), a progress report must be included within the page limitation
set for the Project Narrative portion of the application.

c\. Relevance Statement (Field 11 on the form)

A Relevance Statement is required for Research, Extension, and Joint
Research-Extension Project types. No Relevance Statement is required for
IPM Evaluation project type. The Relevance Statement may be no more than
3 pages, with 1-inch margins on all sides and font no smaller than 12
point. **The Relevance Statement must be submitted with the full
application but as a separately attached PDF file under Field number 11.
Name the file "RELEVANCE \[PDs last name\].pdf."**

The Relevance Statement must describe the relevance of the project to
S-RIPM program priorities discussed in Part I.B.2, "Southern Region
Priorities". **NOTE: The Relevance Statement and the Project Summary
form are the only documents seen by the Relevance Panel.** Additional
documentation will NOT be shown to the Relevance Panel. PDs are
encouraged to quote from or otherwise refer to such supporting
documents, if appropriate.

The Relevance Statement should contain, in this order:

\(i\) Names and institutions of PDs and major cooperators;

\(ii\) Project title;

\(iii\) Project type (choose one): Research; Extension; or Joint
Research-Extension (Relevance Statement is not required for IPM
Evaluation project type);

\(iv\) Description of the problem, background, justification and an
overview the project approach;

\(v\) Anticipated outcomes and impacts. Describe the anticipated
outcomes and potential impacts that could be associated with the
fulfillment of your objectives (you may do this in table format).
Anticipated impacts should connect to the goals of the National IPM Road
Map, which are to advance the implementation of IPM to safeguard human
health, safeguard the environment and promote economic benefits. You do
not need to include a list of references, letters of support, budget, or
other forms with the Relevance Statement, and any materials included
beyond the 3-page limit will not be shown to the Relevance Panel; and

\(vi\) Describe how your project addresses each of the four regional
priorities outlined in Part I.B.2 "Southern Region Priorities" of this
RFA:

-   Level of multi-state involvement in the project and potential
    multi-state impacts resulting from the project;

-   Integration of appropriate tactics in a sustainable IPM system;

-   Link to priorities explicitly identified by stakeholders in the
    Southern Region as being of high priority for IPM research and/or
    extension. Cite at least one source to demonstrate that this project
    addresses such a priority. NOTE: The Relevance Panel will see only
    the 3-page Relevance Statement and the Project Summary. You are
    encouraged to cite, quote from, or otherwise refer to appropriate
    documents, any documentation you attach as an appendix will NOT be
    provided to this panel; and

-   Discuss why the IPM issue addressed by this project is important to
    the Southern Region by virtue of measures such as acreage, pesticide
    use, people affected, etc.

**3. [R&R Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded)]{.underline}**

Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in
detail in Part V, 4. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.

**4. [R&R Personal Data]{.underline}**

As noted in Part V, 5. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide, the
submission of this information is voluntary and is not a precondition of
award. If completing the information, **do not enter any data in the
field requesting the social security number.**

::: Definition-Term
**5. [R&R Budget]{.underline}**
:::

Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in
detail in Part V, 6. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide. Note:
Joint Research-Extension projects must show the proposed breakdown of
amounts requested from the Act of August 4, 1965 (P.L. 89-106)
"Research" funds and Smith-Lever "Extension" funds for each year of
funding being requested. **Include cumulative project costs over all
years, by cost category and funding source (Research and/or Extension)
in the budget justification (Field K on the form).**

6\. [Supplemental Information Form]{.underline}

Information related to the questions on this form is dealt with in
detail in Part VI, 1. of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.

a\. Field 2. Program Code. Enter the program code name "Southern RIPM"
and the program code "QQ.S".

b\. Field 8. Conflict of Interest List. A conflict of interest list is
required under this program.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839788 .anchor}C. Submission Dates and Times

**Instructions for submitting an application are included in Part IV,
Section 1.9 of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.**

Applications must be received by Grants.gov by COB on **November 17,
2008** (5:00 p.m. Eastern Time). Applications received after this
deadline will normally not be considered for funding.

Correspondence regarding submitted applications will be sent using
e-mail. Therefore, applicants are strongly encouraged to provide
accurate e-mail addresses, where designated, on the SF-424 R&R
Application for Federal Assistance.

If the AR has not received correspondence **from CSREES** regarding a
submitted application within 30 days of submission of the application,
please contact the Program Contact identified in Part VII of the
applicable RFA (for the Small Business Innovation Research program
(SBIR) the Program Contacts are specified under subsection 1.5 of the
SBIR Program Solicitation) and request the proposal number assigned to
the application. **Failure to do so may result in (for competitive
programs) the application not being considered for funding by the peer
review panel or (for non-competitive programs) a delay in the issuance
of an award.   Once the application has been assigned a proposal number,
this number should be cited on all future correspondence.**

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839789 .anchor}D. 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.

Pursuant to Section 1473 of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1997 (91 Stat. 981), indirect
costs and tuition remission are unallowable costs under Section
2(c)(1)(B) projects and Section 3(d) of the Smith-Lever Act, and no
funds will be approved for this purpose. Costs that are a part of the
institution's indirect cost pool may not be reclassified as direct costs
for the purpose of making them allowable.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839790 .anchor}E. Other Submission Requirements

The applicant should follow the submission requirements noted in the
document entitled "A Guide for Preparation and Submission of CSREES
Applications via Grants.gov."

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839791 .anchor}PART V---APPLICATION REVIEW
REQUIREMENTS

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839792 .anchor}A. General

Subsection (c)(5) of the Competitive, Special, and Facilities Research
Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(c)), as amended by Section 212 of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998, (7
U.S.C. 450i(c)(5)) requires grantees to arrange for scientific peer
review of their proposed research activities and merit review of their
proposed extension and education activities in accordance with
regulations promulgated by the Secretary prior to the Secretary making a
grant award under this authority. **The application review process
conducted by the S-RIPM Program fulfills the scientific peer review and
merit review requirements.**

Each application will be evaluated in a three-part process. First, each
application will be screened by CSREES to ensure that it meets the
administrative requirements as set forth in this RFA. Applications that
meet these requirements will be evaluated at the regional level by two
panels, one for relevancy and one for technical merit.

1\. [Relevance Review]{.underline}

The Relevance Review is conducted by a panel of eight to ten stakeholder
representatives. Panelists are usually growers, consultants,
environmental advocates, consumer advocates, government employees with
appropriate expertise, IPM administrators, researchers, and extension
educators. The Relevance Panel does not see the entire proposal;
panelists read only the Relevance Statement and the Project Summary.

2\. [Technical Review]{.underline}

A technical panel will review, evaluate, score, and rank all the
applications for technical merit. (They do not see the Relevance
Statement.) Reviewers will be selected based upon training and
experience in relevant scientific, extension, or education fields,
taking into account the following factors: (a) The level of relevant
formal scientific, technical education, or extension experience of the
individual, as well as the extent to which an individual is engaged in
relevant research, education, or extension activities; (b) the need to
include as reviewers experts from various areas of specialization within
relevant scientific, education, or 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
applications to targeted audiences and to program needs; (d) the need to
include as reviewers experts from a variety of organizational types
(e.g., colleges, universities, industry, state and Federal agencies,
private profit and non-profit organizations); (e) the need to maintain a
balanced composition of reviewers with regard to minority and female
representation and an equitable age distribution; and (f) the need to
include reviewers who can judge the effective usefulness to producers
and the general public of each application.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839793 .anchor}B. Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation criteria below will be used in reviewing applications
submitted in response to this RFA:

**Criteria common to evaluation of all project types:**

> Evaluation of all projects will include compliance with explicit
> format and content requirements of this RFA, quality of the project
> design and methodology, appropriateness of the budget, extent to which
> National IPM Road Map priorities are addressed, extent to which the
> project is innovative and might produce new tools and/or approaches,
> and extent to which the problem is important to the Southern Region.
>
> Project teams should be composed to ably address the issues entailed
> in the project. For instance, if the project includes a strong
> economic component, commensurate economic expertise should be
> represented in the project team.

**Criteria for Research, Extension, and Joint Research-Extension Project
Types:**

> Research, Extension, and joint Research-Extension projects will all be
> evaluated on potential for eventual broad adoption and application of
> results by practitioners in the field. The extent to which a proposal
> addresses issues identified as priorities by stakeholder groups and
> potential to have positive impact in multiple states and territories
> will also be evaluated.

**Criteria for IPM Evaluation Project Type:**

> In addition to other evaluation criteria, IPM Evaluation project types
> will be judged by the extent to which methods and/or outcomes are
> compatible with other IPM Evaluation efforts across the nation.
> Methods developed by the project should ideally be easily translatable
> to other locations and IPM settings. Evaluation data that results from
> the project should ideally be readily aggregated with data from other
> projects to enable more broadly applicable conclusions.

**For Research, Extension, and Joint Research-Extension Project Types:**

**[Criteria]{.underline}**

**[Scoring weight]{.underline}**

**Technical Merit (rated by Technical Panel)**

> Compliance with content and format requirements as
>
> specified by this RFA 5%
>
> Quality of project design and methodology 10%
>
> Project feasibility 10%
>
> Prospects for near-term implementation 5%
>
> Composition and competence of project team 5%
>
> Budget appropriate to the project 5%

**National Goals (rated by Technical Panel)**

> Explicitly addresses National IPM Road Map priorities 5%
>
> Has strong potential to improve risk avoidance
>
> or mitigation 10%
>
> Project is innovative 5%

**Southern Region Importance (rated by Relevance Panel)**

> Multi-state partnerships: The project involves two or more
>
> collaborators (either formal or informal) from two or more
>
> states or territories in the Southern Region. 10%
>
> Integrated approaches: The project enhances the integration of
>
> appropriate tactics in a sustainable IPM system. 10%
>
> Stakeholder-identified priorities: The project addresses issues
>
> that are explicitly identified by stakeholders in the Southern
>
> Region as being of high priority. 10%
>
> Regional importance: The project addresses issues that are
>
> important to the Southern Region by virtue of measures such
>
> as acreage, pesticide use, people affected, etc. 10%

**For IPM Evaluation Project Type (evaluated only by the Technical
Panel):**

**[Criteria]{.underline}** **[Scoring weight]{.underline}**

**Technical Merit**

> Compliance with content and format requirements as
>
> specified by this RFA 5%
>
> Quality of project design and methodology 20%
>
> Composition and competence of project team 10%
>
> Budget appropriate to the project 5%

**National Goals**

> Explicitly addresses IPM Road Map issues 5%
>
> Has strong potential to improve the understanding
>
> of the relationship between IPM adoption and risk 20%
>
> Compatibility with other IPM Evaluation projects 10%
>
> Innovative: Potential to produce new evaluation tools
>
> and/or new, useful ways of documenting IPM impacts
>
> on societal risk 15%

**Southern Region Importance**

> Addresses evaluation of IPM in settings and pest issues
>
> important to the Southern Region 10%

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839794 .anchor}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 current Higher Education
Directory, published by Higher Education Publications, Inc., 6400
Arlington Boulevard, Suite 648, Falls Church, Virginia 22042. Phone:
(703) 532-2300. Web site:
[[http://www.hepinc.com]{.underline}](http://www.hepinc.com/).

Names of submitting institutions and individuals, as well as application
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.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839795 .anchor}D. Organizational Management
Information

Specific management information relating to an applicant shall be
submitted on a one time basis, with updates on an as needed basis, as
part of the responsibility determination prior to the award of a grant
identified under this RFA, 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. Although an applicant may be eligible
based on its status as one of these entities, there are factors which
may exclude an applicant 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).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839796 .anchor}PART VI---AWARD ADMINISTRATION

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839797 .anchor}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 applications are judged most meritorious under the
procedures set forth in this RFA. 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 RFA 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).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839798 .anchor}B. Award Notice

The award document will provide pertinent instructions and information
including, at a minimum, the following:

\(1\) Legal name and address of performing organization or institution
to whom the Administrator has issued an award under the terms of this
request for applications;

\(2\) Title of project;

\(3\) Name(s) and institution(s) of PDs chosen to direct and control
approved activities;

\(4\) Identifying award 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 award is issued;

\(8\) Appropriate Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number;

\(9\) Applicable award terms and conditions (see
<http://www.csrees.usda.gov/business/awards/awardterms.html> to view
CSREES award terms and conditions);

\(10\) Approved budget plan for categorizing allocable project funds to
accomplish the stated purpose of the award; and

\(11\) Other information or provisions deemed necessary by CSREES to
carry out its respective awarding activities or to accomplish the
purpose of a particular award.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839799 .anchor}C. Administrative and National
Policy Requirements

Several Federal statutes and regulations apply to grant applications
considered for review and to project grants awarded under this program.
These include, but are not limited to:

2 CFR Part 215**---**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 1, subpart A**---**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 331 and 9 CFR Part 121**---**USDA implementation of the
Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002.

7 CFR Part 3015**---**USDA Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations,
implementing OMB directives (i.e., OMB Circular Nos. A-21 and A-122, now
codified at 2 CFR Parts 220 and 230) and incorporating provisions of 31
U.S.C. 6301-6308 (formerly the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement
Act of 1977, Pub. L. No. 95-224), as well as general policy requirements
applicable to recipients of Departmental financial assistance.

7 CFR Part 3017**---**USDA implementation of Governmentwide Debarment
and Suspension (Nonprocurement) and 7 CFR Part 3021**---**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 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.

7 CFR Part 3430 -- CSREES Competitive and Noncompetitive Nonformula
Grant Programs---General Grant Administrative Provisions

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).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839800 .anchor}D. Expected Program Outputs and
Reporting Requirements

Grantees are required to submit initial project information and annual
and summary reports to CSREES\' Current Research Information System
(CRIS). The CRIS database contains narrative project information,
progress/impact statements, and final technical reports that are made
available to the public. For applications recommended for funding,
instructions on preparation and submission of project documentation
will be provided to the applicant by the agency contact. Documentation
must be submitted to CRIS before CSREES funds will be released. Project
reports will be requested by the CRIS office when required. For more
information about CRIS, visit
[http://cris.csrees.usda.gov](http://cris.csrees.usda.gov/).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839801 .anchor}PART VII---AGENCY CONTACT

Applicants and other interested parties are encouraged to contact:

James R. VanKirk

Grants Manager, S-RIPM

Southern Region IPM Center

North Carolina State University

1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 110

Raleigh, NC 27606-2194

Telephone: 919-513-8179

Fax: 919-513-1114

E-mail: <jim@sripmc.org>

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839802 .anchor}PART VIII---OTHER INFORMATION

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839803 .anchor}A. Access to Review Information

Copies of reviews, not including the identity of reviewers, and a
summary of the panel comments will be sent to the applicant PD after the
review process has been completed.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839804 .anchor}B. Use of Funds; Changes

**1. [Delegation of Fiscal Responsibility]{.underline}**

Unless the terms and conditions of the award state otherwise, the
awardee may not in whole or in part delegate or transfer to another
person, institution, or organization the responsibility for use or
expenditure of award funds.

**2. [Changes in Project Plans]{.underline}**\
\
a. The permissible changes by the awardee, PD(s), or other key project
personnel in the approved project shall be limited to changes in
methodology, techniques, or other similar aspects of the project to
expedite achievement of the project\'s approved goals. If the awardee or
the PD(s) is uncertain as to whether a change complies with this
provision, the question must be referred to the Authorized Departmental
Officer (ADO) for a final determination. The ADO is the signatory of the
award document, not the program contact.

b\. Changes in approved goals or objectives shall be requested by the
awardee 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
awardee and approved in writing by the ADO prior to effecting such
changes.

d\. Transfers of actual performance of the substantive programmatic work
in whole or in part and provisions for payment of funds, whether or not
Federal funds are involved, shall be requested by the awardee and
approved in writing by the ADO prior to effecting such transfers, unless
prescribed otherwise in the terms and conditions of the award.

e\. 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 awardee and approval in writing by the ADO, unless prescribed
otherwise in the terms and conditions of award.

f\. Changes in Approved Budget: Unless stated otherwise in the terms and
conditions of award, changes in an approved budget must be requested by
the awardee 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 award.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839805 .anchor}C. Confidential Aspects of
Applications and Awards

When an application results in an award, 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 application. The original copy of an
application that does not result in an award will be retained by the
Agency for a period of three years. Other copies will be destroyed. Such
an application will be released only with the consent of the applicant
or to the extent required by law. An application may be withdrawn at any
time prior to the final action thereon.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839806 .anchor}D. Regulatory Information

For the reasons set forth in the final Rule related Notice to 7 CFR part
3015, subpart V (48 FR 29114, 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 (44 U.S.C. chapter
35), the collection of information requirements contained in this Notice
have been approved under OMB Document No. 0524-0039.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839807 .anchor}E. Definitions

For the purpose of this program, the following definitions are
applicable:

[1862 Land-Grant Institution]{.underline} means an institution eligible
to receive funds under the Act of July 2, 1862, as amended (7 U.S.C. 301
et seq.). Unless otherwise stated for a specific program, this term
includes a research foundation maintained by such an institution.

[1890 Land-Grant Institution]{.underline} means one of those
institutions eligible to receive funds under the Act of August 30, 1890,
as amended (7 U.S.C. 321 *et seq*.), including Tuskegee University and
West Virginia State University. Unless otherwise stated for a specific
program, this term includes a research foundation maintained by such an
institution.

[1994 Land-Grant Institution]{.underline} means one of those
institutions as defined in section 532 of the Equity in Educational
Land-Grant Status Act of 1994, as amended (7 U.S.C. 301 note). These
institutions are commonly referred to as Tribal Colleges or
Universities.

[Administrator]{.underline} means the Administrator of the Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and any other
officer or employee of the CSREES to whom the authority involved is
delegated.

[Advisory Board]{.underline} means the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board.

[Agricultural research]{.underline} means research in the food and
agricultural sciences.

[Applied research]{.underline} means research that includes expansion of
the findings of fundamental research to uncover practical ways in which
new knowledge can be advanced to benefit individuals and society.

[Authorized Departmental Officer or ADO]{.underline} means the Secretary
or any employee of the Department with delegated authority to issue or
modify grant instruments on behalf of the Secretary.

[Authorized Representative or AR]{.underline} means the President or
Chief Executive Officer of the applicant organization or the official,
designated by the President or Chief Executive Officer of the applicant
organization, who has the authority to commit the resources of the
organization to the project.

[Budget period]{.underline} means the interval of time (usually 12
months) into which the project period is divided for budgetary and
reporting purposes.

[Cash contributions]{.underline} means the recipient's cash outlay,
including the outlay of money contributed to the recipient by
non-Federal third parties.

[Citizen or national of the United States]{.underline} means a citizen
or native resident of a State; or, a person defined in the Immigration
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22), who, though not a citizen of
the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. When
eligibility is claimed solely on the basis of permanent allegiance,
documentary evidence from the Immigration and Naturalization Service as
to such eligibility must be made available to CSREES upon request.
College or university means, unless defined in a separate subpart, 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. Unless otherwise stated for a specific program, this term
includes a research foundation maintained by such an institution.

[Department]{.underline} means the United States Department of
Agriculture.

[Education activity or teaching activity]{.underline} 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.

[Established and demonstrated capacity]{.underline} means that an
organization has met the following criteria:

\(1\) Conducts any systematic study directed toward new or fuller
knowledge and understanding of the subject studied; or,

\(2\) Systematically relates or applies the findings of research or
scientific experimentation to the application of new approaches to
problem solving, technologies, or management practices; and

\(3\) Has facilities, qualified personnel, independent funding, and
prior projects and accomplishments in research or technology transfer.

[Extension]{.underline} means informal education program conducted in
the States in cooperation with the Unites States Department of
Agriculture.

[Extension activity]{.underline} means an act or process that delivers
science-based knowledge and informal educational programs to people,
enabling them to make practical decisions.

[Food and agricultural sciences]{.underline} The term ''food and
agricultural sciences'' means basic, applied, and developmental
research, extension, and teaching activities in food and fiber,
agricultural, renewable natural resources, forestry, and physical and
social sciences, including activities relating to the following:

\(1\) Animal health, production, and well-being.

\(2\) Plant health and production.

\(3\) Animal and plant germ plasm

collection and preservation.

\(4\) Aquaculture.

\(5\) Food safety.

\(6\) Soil and water conservation and improvement.

\(7\) Forestry, horticulture, and range management.

\(8\) Nutritional sciences and promotion.

\(9\) Farm enhancement, including financial management, input
efficiency, and profitability.

\(10\) Home economics.

\(11\) Rural human ecology.

\(12\) Youth development and agricultural education, including 4--H
clubs.

\(13\) Expansion of domestic and international markets for agricultural
commodities and products, including agricultural trade barrier
identification and analysis.

\(14\) Information management and technology transfer related to
agriculture.

\(15\) Biotechnology related to agriculture.

\(16\) The processing, distributing, marketing, and utilization of food
and agricultural products.

[Fundamental research]{.underline} means research that increases
knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and
has the potential for broad application, and has an effect on
agriculture, food, nutrition, or the environment.

[Graduate degree]{.underline} means a Master's or doctoral degree.

[Grant]{.underline} means the award by the Authorized Departmental
Officer of funds to an eligible grantee 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 the program solicitation or RFA.

[Grantee]{.underline} means the organization designated in the grant
award document as the responsible legal entity to which a grant is
awarded.

[Insular area]{.underline} means the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam,
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the
Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands,
the Republic of Palau, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.

[Integrated]{.underline} means to incorporate two or three components of
the agricultural knowledge system (research, education, and extension)
around a problem area or activity.

[Land-Grant Institutions]{.underline} means the 1862 Land-Grant
Institutions, 1890 Land-Grant Institutions, and 1994 Land- Grant
Institutions.

[Matching or cost sharing]{.underline} means that portion of allowable
project or program costs not borne by the Federal Government, including
the value of in kind contributions.

[Merit review]{.underline} means an evaluation of a proposed project or
elements of a proposed program whereby the technical quality and
relevance to regional or national goals are assessed.

[Merit reviewers]{.underline} means peers and other individuals with
expertise appropriate to conduct merit review of a proposed project.

[Methodology]{.underline} means the project approach to be followed.

[Mission-linked research]{.underline} means research on specifically
identified agricultural problems which, through a continuum of efforts,
provides information and technology that may be transferred to users and
may relate to a product, practice, or process.

[National laboratories]{.underline} include Federal laboratories that
are government-owned contractor-operated or government / owned
government-operated.

[Peer reviewers]{.underline} means experts or consultants qualified by
training and experience to give expert advice on the scientific and
technical merit of grant applications or the relevance of those
applications to one or more of the application evaluation criteria. Peer
reviewers may be adhoc or convened as a panel.

[Prior approval]{.underline} means written approval by an Authorized
Departmental Officer evidencing prior consent.

[Private research organization]{.underline} means any non-governmental
corporation, partnership, proprietorship, trust, or other organization.

[Private sector]{.underline} means all non-public entities, including
for-profit and nonprofit commercial and noncommercial entities, and
including private or independent educational associations.

[Program Officer]{.underline} means a CSREES individual who is
responsible for the technical oversight of the award on behalf of USDA.

[Project]{.underline} means the particular activity within the scope of
the program supported by a grant award.

[Project Director or PD]{.underline} means the single individual
designated by the grantee in the grant application and approved by the
Authorized Departmental Officer who is responsible for the direction and
management of the project, also known as a Principal Investigator (PI)
for research activities.

[Project period]{.underline} means the total length of time, as stated
in the award document and modifications thereto, if any, during which
Federal sponsorship begins and ends.

[Research]{.underline} means any systematic study directed toward new or
fuller knowledge and understanding of the subject studied.

[Scientific peer review]{.underline} is an evaluation of the technical
quality of a proposed project and its relevance to regional or national
goals, performed by experts with the scientific knowledge and technical
skills to conduct the proposed research work.

[Secretary means]{.underline} the Secretary of Agriculture and any other
officer or employee of the Department to whom the authority involved is
delegated.

[State]{.underline} means any one of the fifty States, the District of
Columbia, and the insular areas.

[Third party in-kind contributions]{.underline} means the value of
non-cash contributions of property or services provided by non-Federal
third parties, including real property, equipment, supplies and other
expendable property, directly benefiting and specifically identifiable
to a funded project or program.

[United States]{.underline} means the several States, the District of
Columbia, and the insular areas.

[Units of State government]{.underline} means all State institutions,
including the formal divisions of State government (i.e., the official
state agencies such as departments of transportation and education),
local government agencies (e.g., a county human services office), and
including state educational institutions (e.g., public colleges and
universities).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc209839808 .anchor}CHECKLIST

***(Disclaimer Note: This checklist is included for the sole purpose of
assisting the applicant in the self review process prior to submission.
Applicant should use the RFA as the instrument of instruction and the
Application Guide to complete the application process. This checklist is
NOT an official portion of the RFA and should in no way be considered a
replacement for the Application Guide or instructions contained within
the RFA.)***

## 

Only electronic applications may be submitted to CSREES via Grants.gov
in response to this RFA. All applications submitted under the Regional
IPM Competitive Grants Program (RIPM) must contain the applicable
elements outlined in these guidelines. The following checklist has been
prepared to assist in ensuring that the application is complete prior to
submission:

� Have all attachments been submitted in the portable document format
(PDF)? CSREES will return proposals w/non-PDF attachments unread. See
Part III of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide.

� Do all submitted PDF documents have one-inch margins and are typed or
word processed using no type smaller than 12 point regardless of line
spacing? Are all PDF documents numbered sequentially on each page of the
attachment? Are all page limitations for a given attachment followed?
Submitted proposals that do not meet these requirements for PDF
attachments will be returned without review.

� Have all six components of the Application Package been completed? Did
you use the "Check Package for Errors" feature of the PureEdge viewer
(see section 1.8 of the CSREES Grants.gov Application Guide)?

-   R&R Cover Sheet

-   R&R Other Project Information

-   R&R Senior/Key Person Profile

-   R&R Personal Data

-   R&R Budget

-   Supplemental Information Form

� **[R&R Cover Sheet]{.underline}**

-   Have all required fields been completed?

� [R&R Other Project Information]{.underline}

-   Have the fields describing project potential or actual environmental
    impact been properly completed? Refer to CSREES Grants.gov
    Application Guide for instructions.

-   [Project Summary/Abstract]{.underline}

> Has the Project Summary PDF been attached to this form in Field 6?
>
> Are the names and affiliated organizations of all Project Directors
> listed at the top of the page in addition to the title of the project?
>
> Has a RIPM goal been identified in the Project Summary?
>
> Does the Project Summary include research, and/or extension
> objectives, as appropriate?
>
> Note: a project summary/abstract summary template is available at the
> following CSREES website:
> [**http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/electronic.html**](http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/electronic.html),
> but will need to be converted to a PDF file before attaching to
> application.

-   [Project Narrative]{.underline}

> Has the Project Narrative PDF been attached to this form in Field 7?
>
> Is the project fully described?
>
> Does this section adhere to the format and page limitations?

-   [Bibliography & References Cited]{.underline}

> Has the Bibliography & References Cited PDF been attached to this form
> in Field 8?
>
> Are all references cited and are all citations referenced?
>
> Do all citations contain a title, the names of all authors, and are
> they in accepted journal format?

-   [Facilities & Other Resources]{.underline}

> Has the Facilities & Other Resources PDF been attached to this form in
> Field 9?
>
> Has a description of your facilities, sufficient to indicate that you
> will be able to carry out this project, been given?

-   [Equipment]{.underline}

> Has the Equipment PDF been attached to this form in Field 10?
>
> Is the description of your equipment sufficient to indicate that you
> will be able to carry out this project?

-   [Relevance Statement]{.underline}

> Has the Relevance PDF been attached to this form last in Field 11?
> Maximum length: 3 pages. Name the file "RELEVANCE \[PDs last
> name\].PDF".

-   [Appendices to Project Description]{.underline}

> Has the Appendices to Project Description PDF been attached to this
> form in Field 11?
>
> Are the reprints/preprints limited to 2 (as described in the
> instructions)?

-   [Collaborative Arrangements]{.underline}

> Has the Collaborative Arrangements PDF been attached to this form in
> Field 11?

� [R&R Senior/Key Person Profile]{.underline}

-   [Biographical Sketch]{.underline}

> Has the biographical sketch (vitae) PDF for the PD and each co-PD,
> senior associate, and other professional personnel been attached?

-   [Current and Pending Support]{.underline}

> Has the current and pending support PDF for PD and co-PD(s) been
> attached?
>
> Have all current and pending projects been listed and summarized,
> **including this proposal**?
>
> Note: a current and pending support template is available at the
> following CSREES website:
> <http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/electronic.html>, but will need to
> be converted to a PDF file before attaching to application.

� [R&R Personal Data (Voluntary)]{.underline}

-   Have all fields been completed?

� [R&R Budget]{.underline}

-   ::: Definition-Term
    Have all fields been completed for each PD and co-PD(s)?
    :::

-   Are annual and summary budgets included?

-   [Budget Justification]{.underline}

> Has the Budget Justification PDF been attached to this form in Field
> K?
>
> Are budget items individually justified and in the same order as they
> appear on the budget forms?
>
> For multi-institutional applications, has a budget justification been
> included for each institution involved?

� [Supplemental Information Form]{.underline}

-   Has Field 1 been pre-populated with the "Regional Integrated Pest
    Management Competitive Grants Program -- Western Region" under
    Funding Opportunity Name and USDA-CSREES Funding Opportunity Number?

-   Does Field 2 indicate the correct Program Code Name and Program Code
    to which you are applying?

-   [Conflict of Interest List]{.underline}

> Has the Conflict of Interest List for all individuals who have
> submitted a Biographical Sketch been attached to this form in one PDF
> file in Field 8? Note: a conflict of interest list template is
> available at the following CSREES website:
> <http://www.csrees.usda.gov/funding/electronic.html>.